--- FORWARD ---
From: Richard Wolfson, INTERNET:rwolfson@concentric.net
To: Patricia Dines, 73652,1202
To: richard@ottawa.com
Date: Sat, May 31, 1997, 2:05 PM
Subject: GE seed contamination
Enclosed is information from John Fagan regarding a recent incident a few=
months ago in which genetically engineered seeds had apparently been
contaminated in Canada:
"Seed Recall Raises Biosafety Questions"
Three weeks before the Intergovernmental Ad Hoc Working Group on=
Biosafety met in Montreal for a second round of negotiations on an
international biosafety protocol, Monsanto pulled two varieties of
genetically engineered canola seeds from the Canadian market. Both
varieties had been engineered to be tolerant to the Monsanto herbicide,
Round-Up.
This move came after testing revealed that at least one of the
patented herbicide-tolerant canola varieties contained an unexpected gene=
=2E
Apparently Monsanto Canada Inc. and Limagrain Canada Seeds Inc.
had been working with two (different?) gene constructs containing the
herbicide tolerant trait, but they decided to take only one of them,
RT-73, through the regulatory process, obtaining environmental, livestock=
feed, and human food clearance. However, the second, RT-200, had only
obtained environmental approval before it was shelved; nevertheless it
turned up in the seed.
Monsanto Canada Inc. and Limagrain Canada Seeds Inc. had already
sold 60,000 bags of the canola seed throughout Western Canada , as part o=
f
an ambitious plan to plant a million acres of its transgenic canola.
While Monsanto and Limagrain appeared to be forthcoming about the=
fact of the seed recall, it was unclear what prompted the recall. The
companys' statements failed to clarify what had happened to raise the ala=
rm
that the seed they had distributed -- and which had already been planted =
in
hundreds of acres -- was the wrong seed. What had caused the companies =
to
test for the shelved gene in the distributed seed? And further, what had
caused the companies to continue development of RT-73 and not RT-200?
Limagrain's Gary Bauman said tests will be conducted on the
seedstock but it will be difficult to trace exactly where in the process
the contamination happened because the seedstock available for testing no=
w
is only the progeny of the original line. "We may never know how it
happened," Bauman reportedly said.
It is very worrisome when companies of the stature of Monsanto an=
d
Limagrain appear to have lost or misplaced the parental lines of patente=
d
seed varieties of such obvious value. The whole 'seedy' incident raises
several disturbing possibilities:
(1) Something went wrong with the genetic engineering at the laboratory
level.
(2) Two major biotechnology companies are using shoddy laboratory
practices.
(3) Something adverse resulted from the distributed seed.
(4) There was some gene flow (of a worrisome trait ) during seed
production.
(5) The companies are hiding something.
Hopefully, both companies will continue to be forthcoming about t=
he
nature and results of their investigations and all the above concerns wil=
l
be addressed.
__________________________________________________________
Sources : Manitoba Co-Operator, 24/4/97, and The Ram's Horn, No. 147,
April, 1997.
Contributors to this article: Third World Network, Edmonds Institute,
Oeko-Institut E.V., German NGO Working Group on Biodiversity, Ecoropa
---------
_________________________________________________________
Richard Wolfson, PhD
Campaign to Ban Genetically Engineered Food
Natural Law Party
500 Wilbrod Street
Ottawa, ON Canada K1N 6N2
Tel. 613-565-8517 Fax. 613-565-6546
email: rwolfson@concentric.net
NLP Website: http://www.natural-law.ca
=2E
To receive regular news from the Campaign to Ban
Genetically Engineered Food, please sent an email
message to rwolfson@concentric.net, with the words
'subscribe GE' in the subject line. To remove yourself
from this list, please send the message 'unsubscribe GE'
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
-- FORWARD ---
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-- - Intellectual Property & Biodiversity News - Vol. 6, Number 7 May 28,=1997 -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-- -<snip> MYSTERY GENE FORCES RECALL OF CANOLA SEED Limagrain, the seed corporation licensed by Monsanto to multiply and sell=Roundup resistant canola, was forced to recall 60,000 bags of the seed du= e to genetic contamination. During a quality control test, Monsanto discovered that the canola variety contained a unlicensed gene. In addition, the gene which had been licensed was missing from the crop. Whe= n this error was discovered, the Canadian Government, in an unprecedented move, suspended the plant variety. Ray Mowling, Monsantos vice-president of government and public affairs, blames the breeding process for the mix-up and feels that the contamination occurred in the field, a conclusi= on denied by Limagrain.
The gene for Roundup resistance was isolated by Monsanto from a bacterium=
originally found in their waste stream.
Mary MacArthur "Canola Seed Recalled Because of Genetic Contamination," WESTERN PRODUCER, April 1997; Tracy Tjaden, "Canola is First Gene Suspension Case for Government," WESTERN PRODUCER, April 24, 1997; "The Year of the Triffids," THE ECONOMIST, April 26, 1997. -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-- - Produced by The Institute For Agriculture and Trade Policy, Mark Ritchie,=President. Editor: Shanaz Padamsee. Email versions are available free o= f charge. To subscribe, send email to: Majordomo@igc.apc.org. Leave the subject line blank. In the body of the message say: subscribe env-biotech= =2E IATP 2105 First Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 USA Voice 612.870.0453... Fax 612.870.4846