Re: ecological disruption by GMO
Bob MacGregor (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 04 Feb 1999 11:25:55 -0400
Actually, there is quite an active international discussion/negotiation going on right now on this topic. The official term is the "UN Biosafety Protocol". Basically, something like 155 countries are trying to reach acceptable wording for an international agreement on movement of living genetically-modified organisms (LMOs).
Somewhere in the hidden paragraphs of UN agreements is a clause about protection of biodiversity. This has provided the impetus for current negotiations. Some countries are striving for very streamlined and "transparent" (even superficial) restrictions. Others want to set up a structure that inhibits movement of these -- either for philosophical or international-trade reasons.
Many developing countries (which, for the most part, don't have capacity to produce LMOs), are concerned that this is just another move in the international agro-food domination game -- inevitably to their detriment. The recent "terminator" kerfuffle hasn't helped ease their concern in this regard.
Anyway, because of the big stake that US and Canadian producers have in open markets for LMOs, their negotiating position is toward the "free market" end of the scale. In any case, as far as I know, all countries agree that each will have the ultimate authority to scrutinize and approve/deny what commercial LMOs cross their borders.
This would not address processed products. Thus, raw GE soybeans or corn would fall under the protocol, but soybean meal or corn flakes would not.
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: