|
|
 
|
Terminator patent granted
(Friday, Oct. 28, 2005 -- CropChoice news) -- 1. EU will not accept tolerance levels 1. EU will not accept tolerance levels GM Watch An important test case involving a cereal manufacturer in Germany is
clarifying the EU GM labelling issue. At the moment, food manufacturers do
not have to label a product as containing GM ingredients if it contains
material of less than 0.9% content as long as it is "adventitious" or
"technically unavoidable". However, this case has established that if your product is tested by the
authorities and found to contain, say, 0.6-0.7% GM material, you must label
it as containing GM ingredients *unless* you can prove that the
contamination was truly adventitious or technically unavoidable. To prove this, you would have to demonstrate your efforts to avoid the use
of such material. And you must submit evidence proving that no equivalent
ingredient at less than 0.1% GM is available on the market. Knowingly
processing ingredients above 0.1% GM content does not meet the adventitious
criterion. Consequently, in such cases even GM content below 0.9% will
result in labeling. A "blending down" to a GM content below the 0.9% threshold can be no
solution to avoid labeling. The national legislation of Germany sanctions infringements with fines up to
50,000 euros ($61,000) and with prison terms.
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=5836
2. Terminator patent granted Press release Amsterdam, 25 October 2005 -- Greenpeace today exposed details that the
patent for the controversial "Terminator technology" was granted in
Europe on 5 October 2005. The Terminator patent (1) has been approved
for all plants that are genetically engineered so that their seeds will
not germinate. Further research by the "Ban Terminator Campaign", a
network of farmers' unions and environmental organisations revealed that
a patent was also granted in Canada on 11 October 2005. Plants created using Terminator technology will produce sterile seeds,
creating a monopoly and unnatural control of the seeds. Farmers will not
be able to use seeds from such plants for the following season's
cultivation. The seeds will rot in the soil without producing new
plants. If this technology is introduced in crops such as soya, wheat,
canola and cotton it will force farmers to buy new seeds every year from
the same company. "Farmers should be aware that corporations all over the world are ready
to take control of their seeds with genetic engineering (GE). These
corporations will control the entire food chain with the help of
monopoly patents and Terminator technology," said Christoph Then,
Greenpeace International GE campaigner. "We need a global ban on this
technology and on any patents on seeds. These corporate instruments will
disrupt the backbone of global food supply, making it impossible for the
farmers to reuse their own harvest for planting." So far, the market introduction of the Terminator technology -- which
was already developed about ten years ago -- was successfully prevented
through worldwide protest of several groups and stakeholders. But many
observers believe that the GE industry will drive towards the
legalisation of this technology at the meeting of the UN Convention on
Biological Diversity in March next year. The grant of the patent could
push even harder for market introduction. "These new patents confirm that corporations are once again actively
pursuing Terminator technology and an international ban on the
technology is urgently needed," said Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the
new global Ban Terminator Campaign, which involves farmers unions,
environmental and Indigenous peoples organisations (2). Although the GE industry claims that Terminator technology will help
contain the spread of GE contamination, Greenpeace believes otherwise.
"GE technology can not be controlled by Terminator seeds. On the
contrary, it is likely that farmers will find their harvest being
contaminated with this Terminator technology, if introduced. This is a
real threat for estimated 80% of the farmers all over the world who save
their seeds for cultivation." Greenpeace is an independent campaigning organisation that uses
non-violent creative confrontation to expose global environmental
problems to force solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful
future. Notes to editors: (1) The Terminator patent, EP 775212B, was granted to US-based Delta
& Pine and the United States of America, represented by the Secretary of
Agriculture. According to further data bank research the patent was
already granted in similar versions in USA, further applications were
filed in Australia, Brazil, China, Hong Kong, Japan, Turkey and South
Africa. Contact information:
3. Sustainable farming can feed the world swissinfo, October 16, 2005 On World Food Day, Swiss agricultural specialist Hans Rudolf Herren tells
swissinfo that hunger can be overcome if farming practices are improved. Herren, who won the World Food Prize in 1995 for helping to save cassava
crops throughout much of sub-Saharan Africa, says rich countries need to support
education and to do more research. The theme of this year's World Food Day, promoted by the United Nations Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO), is "Agriculture and intercultural
dialogue". The FAO says that the intercultural movement of crops and livestock breeds
revolutionized diets and reduced poverty. The organization adds that these
exchanges are still necessary to fight hunger and protect the environment. But this dialogue could be under threat with pressure on governments and
farmers to adopt technologies such as genetic manipulation to increase
productivity. Herren, however, says that agricultural specialists should step back and
consider all the options before taking the plunge. swissinfo: A large part of the world's population suffers from malnutrition.
Can intercultural exchanges as promoted by the FAO help alleviate hunger? Hans Rudolf Herren: I think it can help us understand better how hunger
works and help overcome this problem. Plenty of food is grown, but not always in
the right places. Those who overproduce actually make it difficult for those who underproduce
to increase their output and supply the food that is preferred and required
by the people who are going hungry. swissinfo: One of the UN Millennium Goals is to reduce hunger around the
world. Are rich countries like Switzerland doing enough? H.R.H.: Not enough is being done. Just the fact there are so many hungry
people proves my point. Enough is not being done to alleviate poverty and
provide jobs and income options for hungry people. They are hungry because they
don't have the money to buy food or there is not enough incentive for farmers to
produce. If there is a market, farmers can and will produce food. Dealing with poverty will help us deal with hunger and this is where
governments can do more. They don't have to give money away but can create options
and means for people to earn a living. There should be an emphasis by rich countries on developing capacities in
poor nations. Farmers need to be trained properly because there is no genetic
predisposition for being one. So more funding for education and research is
needed for sustainable agricultural systems. swissinfo: Do you feel the right economic or agricultural research is
already being done to deal with these issues? H.R.H.: What is needed is more research that is tailored to the different
needs of different regions. I don't think we need to do more research into how
to grow maize, for example, but we should consider diversifying our food base. Africa is a good example where there could be crops other than corn that
would grow better under precarious conditions such as limited rainfall. More research could help revive traditional crops that have been abandoned
and that would generate income for farmers. There's a lot of research to be
done in reviving and improving traditional crops, including vegetables, fruits
and nuts, and bringing them back into the mainstream. This would also help improve nutrition and health in developing countries. swissinfo: In Africa, some countries have accepted the introduction of
genetically-modified (GM) crop varieties, others haven't. Is this really an issue,
particularly in developing countries? H.R.H.: We need to see if there is real need for these crop varieties. We
already have plant varieties that can produce far more than they produce today. The real constraints are elsewhere, such as soil fertility or the agronomic
system. So what is really needed is more research in agronomy and sustainable
farming practices. An improved seed will not produce more unless it is planted in the right
conditions, and we seem to have forgotten that. So we need to promote agriculture in developing countries that helps
maintain a healthy soil rather than industrial farming that impoverishes it. If biotechnology is part of a more sustainable agricultural system, I don't
have a problem with that, but we have to resolve many other issues before we
spend millions on something that won't necessarily produce more food. swissinfo: So, does the adoption of GM technology in developing nations have
more to do with politics? H.R.H.: It has a lot to do with politics and economics. American companies
are pushing for the adoption of GM technology and there are lobbyists hard at
work in Africa and other continents. Maybe this technology does some good,
but there are alternatives that are much cheaper. We have done our research on this and have shown you can apply other
technologies that are far more farmer-friendly. African farmers can't afford GM
technology - they can't even afford fertiliser. So I don't think it is the right thing in the right place at the right time.
We need to address the needs of farmers, find solutions that actually help
and attain sustainable agricultural production as promoted by the FAO. swissinfo-interview: Scott Capper
4. Panelists urge biotech discussions Anne Fitzgerald Biotechnology can help combat hunger around the world, but there needs to be more public discussion of the pros and cons of genetically engineered crops, participants in the World Food Prize symposium said Thursday. Panelists representing some of the nation's largest agribusinesses promoted the benefits of the technology, such as reduced pesticide use because of crops engineered to thwart pests. They also cited the rapid and widespread adoption of biotech-based crops, especially in the United States. Farmers must employ the technology to produce enough food to feed a growing world with limited arable land, speakers said. The world's population of more than 6 billion people is expected to top 9 billion by 2050. Introduced to the marketplace a decade ago, genetically engineered seed was planted this year on 52 percent of U.S. corn acreage and 87 percent of soybean acres, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. In Iowa, engineered seeds were planted on 60 percent of corn acres and 91 percent of soybean acres. Robert Fraley, executive vice president and chief technology officer at Monsanto Co. in St. Louis, said he thought the "debate around biotechnology is over." Others at the event disagreed, citing concerns that biotech seed will be too costly for the developing world and could damage human health and the environment. Roselyn Makhumula of the Malawi embassy in Washington, D.C., was part of a delegation of officials from several African countries who met with Florence Wambugu, chief executive officer of Africa Harvest. "We welcome any technology for the benefit of the country, but we need to understand the pros and the cons," Makhumula said. Africa Harvest, a nonprofit organization, is leading an effort to use biotechnology to improve the nutritional qualities of sorghum, a staple crop in much of Africa. Des Moines-based Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc. is part of the project, which has received funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Wambugu supports the use of biotechnology to improve crops. "Africa was bypassed by the Green Revolution," she told the delegation. "We should not let this bypass us." All technology is "a two-edged sword," she said, but it is hard to see "how you cannot be part of this technology that is growing by 20 percent per year." She also said it is important that people understand the risks associated with biotechnology's applications in agriculture. "We can't just ignore the social concerns," Wambugu said. | |
