sanet-mg-digest Thursday, February 18 1999 Volume 01 : Number 833
In this issue:
" Thomas" No-Finds
Re: Master Plan for Mycoherbicides
Re: Malarial Mosquitoes
reference request
GE News; Fwd, (2-14 in 2 parts, part 2)
GE News; Fwd, (2-14 in 2 parts, part 1)
See the end of the digest for information about sanet-mg-digest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 18:11:56 EST
From: Sprinkraft@aol.com
Subject: " Thomas" No-Finds
Hello, and sorry to have mislead a few of you to that bin query result
masquerading as a webpage. I copied out the URL reference and pasted it in,
thinking that if you entered it the correct site would pop up.
I tried to back-track and re-enter, but no use. I got there by using
keywords
like " Thomas" and "US Government" on the search engine. Hope this is it
http://rs9.loc.gov/home/thomas.html
Then I had to peck at the site for the right departments, right congress,
right descriptors, and I think I found it under USDA.
Hope that works, these are pretty soggy breadcrumbs with which to find your
way "home".
Steve
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 21:21:23 -0500
From: Sharon Stevenson <ssteve@amauta.rcp.net.pe>
Subject: Re: Master Plan for Mycoherbicides
> Steve,
> Out of curiosity where did you get the Monsanto and Dow references? I had
read the bill before and seen
> no reference to them?
>
> In brief, Monsanto and Dow will develop a GMO fungus "designed" to kill
> target plant species. Section 303 is the kicker. Exactly how many sativas
are
> there in the world? By the way, last one out, turn out the lights. As we
stare
> up at gassy venus in the western sky at dusk, does anyone wonder if once
it
> was a planet blue as this, and in one brief flicker science reversed a
billion
> years of biology?
>
> Steve Sprinkel
>
Sharon Stevenson
Lima, Peru
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:57:29 +0530 (IST)
From: "d.parthasarathy" <dp@hss.iitb.ernet.in>
Subject: Re: Malarial Mosquitoes
Hello!
On Tue, 16 Feb 1999, Bob MacGregor wrote:
> Are there toxicological references on neem? If it has pesticidal
>properties (or repellant, at least?), I'd like to know it was fairly
>specific to the target species and didn't have broader effects on other
>ecosystem elements (like beneficial insects) or humans.
My knowledge is mainly from observations of farmers experiments in India's
semi-arid tropics. I have seen farmers experimenting with different neem
based solutions targeting pod borer (helicoverpa). As far as I have seen,
there are no side effects on pest predators. Neem most definitely has no
harmful effects on human beings. Neem is an essential ingredient os many
home remedies in India, and is a used for dental care in much of rural
India (neem twigs, neem leaf paste etc).
There is a good reference that I remember but can't find the full
reference. Will send it soon. Meanwhile here are some more references.
1.Genetic Improvement of Neem : Strategies for the Future : Proceedings of
an International Consultation, held at Kaselsart University, Bangkok,
Thailand
Michael D. Read, James H. French (Editor) / Paperback /
Paperback (September 1993)
Winrock Pubns Sales; ISBN: 0933595840
2. Neem : A Tree for Solving Global Problems
Paperback (April 1992)
National Academy Press; ISBN: 0309046866
3. Neem and Environment : Proceedings of the World Neem Conference, 1993,
Bangalore
R. P. Singh(Editor) / Hardcover (December 1996)
Science Pub; ISBN: 1886106320
4. The Neem Tree: Sources of Unique Natural Products for Integrated Pest
Management, and Medicinal, Industrial and Other Purposes
Heinrich Schmutterer(Editor) / Paperback - 696 pages (July 1995)
John Wiley & Sons; ISBN: 3527300546
5. Monograph on neem (Azadirachta indica A. juss.)
D. N. Tewari
ASIN: 8170891752
Regards
D.Parthasarathy
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:07:38 -0500 (EST)
From: dsc17@cornell.edu
Subject: reference request
Greetings
A few years ago, I saw someone cite an article stating that crop loss due
to pest damage has increased dramatically since the widespread use of
pesticides began. (We sanetters aren't surprised..kill the predators,
throw the ecosystem out of whack and, voila..)
I think this is a potent piece of evidence in our advocacy of
sustainable ag
If I recall, the article was in a meanstream publication like Science
or Nature, maybe from the 1970's(??)
Can anyone send me the citation?
thanks
David
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:55:38 -0400
From: Daniel Worley <dan.worley@mindless.com>
Subject: GE News; Fwd, (2-14 in 2 parts, part 2)
[Reposted with permission]
Part 2
Background from UK re: Dr. Arpad Pusztai For more information please
contact Luke Anderson on: 07957 188621
The intention of this briefing is to clarify some of the key points which
are being overlooked in the discussions centred on the research of Dr.
Arpad Pusztai:
1. Jack Cunningham has repeatedly said that "It is simply not sensible to
conclude that if a laboratory experiment with a known toxin added caused
damage to rats, that all other GM potatoes are therefore unsafe." He has
clearly not looked at the science, nor it seems have many of the other
so-called experts who have repeated the same argument. The potatoes which
had the snowdrop lectin (GNA) added to them did not affect the rats in the
same way as the potatoes genetically engineered with the snowdrop lectin
even though the lectin was present in equal concentrations in both. This
points to the process of genetic engineering itself.
2. The snowdrop lectin was used precisely because it was not thought to be
toxic to mammalian systems. Dr. Pusztai, the world authority on lectins,
had been working with the snowdrop lectin for seven years and had high
hopes for its potential use in food crops. Indeed, the snowdrop lectin has
been genetically engineered into a number of crops with a view to
commercialisation (e.g. rice and oilseed rape). Cabbages genetically
engineered with this lectin are being grown in trials this year in Holland.
3. Unlike the snowdrop lectin, ConA (the lectin taken from the Jackbean)
is known to be toxic to mammalian systems. For this reason it was never
seriously considered by Dr. Pusztai for use in food crops. This was a
source of much confusion last August when the Rowett Institute told the
press that these experiments had involved potatoes genetically engineered
with the jackbean lectin. Dr. Pusztai never suggested that he was using
potatoes genetically engineered with this lectin. Potatoes which had the
jackbean lectin added were used in the experiments to test the
responsiveness of the immune system precisely because, being toxic, they
stimulate it. Nor did Dr. Pusztai accept that he was muddled or confused
about the experiments. This is backed by the twenty one distinguished
scientists from twelve countries who looked in detail at the data. The
reason that Dr. Pusztai was not able to clear up this confusion at the time
was that he was sacked and threatened with legal action if he spoke out.
4. Lectins are used in genetically engineered food that we are eating in
the UK right now. Many crops, such as maize for example, have been
genetically engineered with the Bt toxin, now understood to be a form of
lectin. Genetically engineered Bt crops were grown last year on 7.7 million
hectares worldwide (mostly in the US). We are eating this Bt maize in the
UK, and it has not been tested to see if it has similar effects. In fact,
talk as it might about the long regulatory process that GM products need to
go through before they are approved, the government does not at present
require that GM foods undergo thorough feed trials.
5. This is based on a concept called ęsubstantial equivalenceĘ, which
effectively means that if a GM product is seen to be grossly similar to a
non-GM product, it does not need to be thoroughly tested (on the assumption
that it we be no more dangerous than its non GM equivalent). The GM
potatoes that were being tested by Pusztai were declared by the Rowett
Institute to be substantially equivalent therefore by the governmentĘs own
criteria they would not have been subject to the long-term trials carried
out by Pusztai and his team. The effect on the mammalian system would not
therefore have been discovered within the present regulatory framework.
6. Cunningham has also said that "The scientists who spoke out have not as
yet provided any evidence to our advisory groups, to our scientists. They
have been asked for it now for some considerable time. As soon as they do
make their findings available to us of course we shall examine them quickly
and comprehensively." This is not true. The scientists have not been asked
by the government to provide information this information is publicly
available now and the Scottish Office were given the report in October. The
government has had access to this information for months.
7. Dr. Pusztai is an internationally renowned expert in the field of
lectin research. He has published 280 scientific papers and written 3
books. If he, in an institute funded by taxpayersĘ money, can have his
reputation destroyed, his research suppressed, and be gagged under the
BBSRC code which applies to all publicly funded research scientists in the
country, what message does this give to other scientists who may have
controversial findings?
Comments from letters written to Dr. Pusztai in response to reading the
official Audit report made by the Rowett Research Institute and the
Alternative report written by Pusztai himself, as the coordinator of the
research team:
" I find Dr. PusztaiĘs conclusions to be entirely consistent with the data
presented in his alternative report. I find it deeply regretful that Dr.
PusztaiĘs conclusions were not presented by the Director of the Rowett
Research Institute to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science And
Technology as a minority report presenting evidence that there are grounds
for concern in the use of genetically engineered foods and a need for
further research into their effects on mammals. I regret that there has
been no attempt by the Rowett Research Institute to reestablish
Dr.PusztaiĘs high scientific credentials with the media after the damage
done to him by the Director in reporting publicly that Dr. Pusztai was
responsible for producing confusion and muddle about the results and
implications, a charge later withdrawn. This is the most serious damage
that any scientist can suffer and it requires rectification."
Professor Brian Goodwin, scholar in residence, Schumacher College
"I believe that the results obtained indicate major potential problems that
could amount to adverse affects tantamount to food hazard. The audit report
seriously underplays the hazards revealed by these experiments and diverts
the testing of food safety to unspecified regulatory procedures. Great
potential risk has been highlighted. Simple toxicity experiments would not
have revealed these dangers. Urgent attention must be given to
demonstrating that the vector used (in all GE food currently available in
the UK) does not cause analagous structural changes within the mammalian
gut. Careful study of this report leads me to conclude that essential data
concerning organ weights have been withheld. The missing data on organ
weights does raise the possibility of deliberate cover-up by the persons
collating the (audit) report data."
Dr. Stanley Ewen, consultant histopathologist at the University of Aberdeen
Medical School
"Caution in developing robust and exhaustive hazard assessments for
potentially irreversible changes to staple constituents of the human food
chain is essential. The final opinion of the audit committee that ęThe
existing data does not support any suggestion that the consumption by rats
of transgenic potatoes expressing GNA has an effect on growth organ
development or immune functionĘ is surprising. A major problem with the
(audit) report is that the authors have been selective with the data they
have included, which makes an objective appraisal of their conclusions
impossible from solely reading the audit report. I have the impression from
reading the audit report that it was hastily compiled and systematically
biased towards brushing aside your experimental findings. I feel that it is
urgent that the full data from these experiments should be brought into the
public arena and debated. The sequelae of your findings are of considerable
importance in the current debate on the safety and hazard assessment of
genetically modified foods."
Dr. Vyvyan Howard, Head of Research in Fetal and Infant Toxico-Pathology at
the
University of Liverpool
_________________________________________________________
Richard Wolfson, PhD
Consumer Right to Know Campaign,
for Mandatory Labelling and Long-term
Testing of all Genetically Engineered Foods,
500 Wilbrod Street
Ottawa, ON Canada K1N 6N2
tel. 613-565-8517 fax. 613-565-1596
email: rwolfson@concentric.net
Our website, http://www.natural-law.ca/genetic/geindex.html
contains more information on genetic engineering as well as
previous genetic engineering news items
Subscription fee to genetic engineering news is $35 for 12 months
See website for details.
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
End part 2
--Dan in Sunny Puerto Rico--
dan.worley@mindless.com
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:54:18 -0400
From: Daniel Worley <dan.worley@mindless.com>
Subject: GE News; Fwd, (2-14 in 2 parts, part 1)
[Reposted with permission]
Part 1
X-Sender: rwolfson@pop3.concentric.net
Message-Id: <l03130300b2eca2278c58@[206.173.215.59]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 17:14:06 -0500
To: info@natural-law.ca
From: Richard Wolfson <rwolfson@concentric.net>
Subject: GEN2-14
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by smv03.globecomm.net
id RAA20017
X-UIDL: 1f020735979ca4a47b0c0579574ebd13
Blair rules out block on new genetically modified crops
Guardian evidence reveals full extent of scientific research as Cabinet
tries to play down fears
By Tim Radford Science Editor
Guardian Saturday February 13, 1999
Tony Blair yesterday ruled out a moratorium on the introduction of new
genetically modified foods after the Guardian revealed evidence of danger
from laboratory experiments with staple crops. Research showing that rats
fed genetically modified (GM) potatoes suffered damage to their vital
organs and a weakened immune system was endorsed by an international group
of scientists, who yesterday warned of a potential doomsday scenario if
more independent research was not undertaken.
But the Government yesterday tried to play down mounting concern from
scientists, MPs and consumer groups as it committed Britain to a pro-GM
policy at an international conference in Colombia beginning tomorrow.
Cabinet minister Jack Cunningham repeatedly insisted that GM food was
safe. But today the Guardian publishes for the first time the evidence
showing that his reassurances are premature - photographs of the enlarged
stomach wall of a rat fed GM potatoes.
At a press conference in Westminster, Ronald Finn, a former president of
the British Society of Allergy and Environmental Medicine, gave warning
that the research by Arpad Pusztai last year had shown that GM potatoes
fed to rats had interfered with their immune systems. If they did the same
to humans, cancer cases could be expected to rise, and the nation could be
at prey from epidemic infection, in the way that BSE had posed a threat to
humans after cattle were fed animal carcases.
...........
FOOD GROUPS URGE HALT ON USE OF GENETIC CROPS PA 10.02.99 13:44
Copyright 1999 PA News.
By Helen William, PA News
The Government was today urged to stop the sale, import and manufacture of
genetically- engineered foods amid widespread concern over food safety.
Delegates from the Genetix Food Alert campaign, which represents more than
100 health food companies, presented a petition to Downing Street calling
for a moratorium on genetically- modified (GM) foods.
They are calling for a five-year ban on the use of GM soya, GM maize and on
the commercial growing of GM crops in the UK so that safety testing can be
carried out. Campaigner Lindsay Keenan of the Glasgow-based GreenCity
Wholefoods company said that allowing GM products into the food chain was
making the public part of a "dangerous genetic food experiment".
"The government must take action now to halt the use of genetic crops and
to ensure that we all have the freedom of choice to avoid eating food that
is inherently dangerous to us and our environment," he said.
Products containing GM soya and maize should be clearly labelled under
current legislation but many foods do not carry GM labels if these are
minor ingredients, campaigners warn. Mr Keenan added: "There is a strong
market for GM-free products. Customers are asking for information on the
issue.
...............
next 2 articles posted by MichaelP <papadop@peak.org>
Observer (London)
Sunday, February 14, 1999
Shops warning ordered on gene food
By Patrick Wintour, Antony Barnett and Robin McKie
Mandatory labelling of all genetically modified food sold in shops,
takeaways and restaurants is to be introduced next month in an attempt to
quell growing fear of the 'Frankenstein foods'. Firms breaking regulations
- -- to be policed by local authorities and government scientists -- will
face tough fines. 'We are going to be ruthless in enforcing this,' Food
Minister Jeff Rooker told The Observer yesterday.
But attempts to clean up the reputation of genetically modified (GM) foods
are likely to be undermined this week. Monsanto, the American firm
spearheading their production, is to admit illegally releasing modified
oil-seed rape into the environment. Campaigners fear such breaches could
lead to the creation of 'superweeds' resistant to herbicides.
They say the crop could pollinate nearby unmodified crops which might end
up in human food without the public knowing. A Monsanto spokesman said it
intended to plead guilty in a Lincolnshire court on Wednesday to breaking
environmental law. The company faces a fine of up to #20,000. The case
could not have come at worse moment for the GM food industry. Last week a
furore erupted over a controversial, unpublished study which, it was
claimed, links gene engineering practices to the development of immune
system problems in rats. Government scientists were accused of suppressing
the study, and the Government came under renewed pressure to introduce a
moratorium on the commercial growing of gene crops. Supermarkets attacked
Ministers for failing to create a system for labelling GM foods as fears of
a consumer boycott intensified. Apart from mandatory labelling, the Cabinet
Office -- under 'enforcer' Jack Cunningham -- will launch an urgent
Whitehall review of the biotechnology sector.
The review will be completed in three months and may lead to a new body to
advise on the environmental implications of GM foods. Ministers are also to
promote a list of 59 US and Canadian firms that produce unmodified soya and
maize to help shoppers make informed choices about the food they buy.
Rooker warned Monsanto and the other big GM firms that they were provoking
a consumer backlash by mixing the production of GM and non-GM products.
Ministers say they are determined not to bow to pressure from environmental
groups and some newspapers, but they are worried that the unrest could
undermine Britain's growing biotechnology industry. 'The Government is not
going to be forced into a complete volte-face because of this panic. We
just have to get our message across.'
Monsanto's alleged breach of the existing controls arose last June at a
Government-licensed trial site in Lincolnshire. A routine inspection
revealed that control measures, required to prevent pollen from
herbicide-resistant oil seed rape spreading to nearby crops, had been
partly removed. As a result the entire site had to be destroyed, and any
seeds harvested over the next two years within a 50-yard radius of the site
will be destroyed.
'It was found that the pollen barrier surrounding the trial . . . was only
two yards wide on the trial site, rather than the required six yards,' say
minutes of the Government's Advisory Committee on Releases to the
Environment. A Monsanto spokesman said: 'We don't have direct control over
these trials. A third party conducts them.'
..........
Observer (London)
Sunday, February 14, 1999
MIRACLE FOODS THAT THE PUBLIC WON'T SWALLOW Doubts about GM food are
tainting our dinner tables with fear. Science Editor Robin McKie asks how a
once tasty concept turned so sour?
It was supposed to be the food of tomorrow: a genetically engineered
ambrosia to feed Earth's hordes next century. But it has turned into a
political nightmare.
Last week unprecedentedly ferocious criticism fell upon the heads of those
responsible for making genetically modified (GM) foods in Britain - an
onslaught so fierce it is hard to see how their products can survive
commercially.
Far from being nutritional saviours, GM foods now look like the pariahs of
the European food industry.
But how did this PR calamity occur? How could such a wonder-food fail so
spectacularly in the eyes of the public? The answers have much to do with
misunderstanding the public's fear of science and failing to realise that
consumers become suspicious and vulnerable to fear when they are starved of
choice.
In particular, people worry that (GM) crops are dangerous to eat, that they
threaten the environment, and that they will allow a few big pharmaceutical
companies to monopolise agriculture.
In the first instance, there was little to upset consumers until the
Pusztai affair erupted last year. Dr Arpad Pusztai, of Aberdeen's Rowett
Research Institute, claimed that rats fed on GM food suffered immune
problems.
An external investigation subsequently criticised his experimental
procedures. He retired, and the matter seemed closed - until last week,
when a group of scientists (none of whom, it must be said, were noted
genetic engineers) signed a letter condemning Pusztai's employers for
mistreating him.
They claimed that his studies revealed possible dangers in genetic
engineering techniques. That is crucial. The group claims to have found a
danger so far unrecognised.
Pusztai was working with lectins - a group of chemicals which include
poisons found in some varieties of beans. He fed potatoes - some injected
with lectins and some modified to make their own - to rats, and they
suffered atrophy in various organs, including their livers.
The results caused a furore and the external inquiry was set up. Pusztai's
results were blamed on the simple fact that he was working with lectins,
which, it was argued, were the real cause of the atrophy.
But follow-up studies by one of Pusztai's colleagues, Dr Stanley Ewen of
Aberdeen University, suggests that these reassurances are misplaced. More
damage was done when the pototoes were modified than when they had simply
been spiked with lectins: in other words, there was something in the
process of genetic modification that was causing damage. 'We think we were
showing up something that nobody has spotted,' said Ewen.
Neither Pusztai's nor Ewen's research has been published or subjected to
peer review. 'This is the only study ever to claim there is something
damaging about the business of genetic modification, but we cannot evaluate
it because we cannot get access to their data,' said Professor Ray Baker,
head of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council.
That was because the Government has not asked for information, the group
retorted. Regardless of who is right, the Aberdeen work was seized upon
last week as a 'food scandal': a lone voice trying to raise a matter of
vital public concern was being silenced. In vain scientists tried to point
out there was no scandal: no food for human consumption was involved.
'This was a safety trial,' said Dr Bernard Dixon of the European
Biotechnology Forum. 'We have them all the time. New antibiotics are
constantly being found to have adverse effects, and as a result are never
marketed. No one suggests the fundamentals of antibiotics manufacture is
suspect, however.'
It was also claimed that Pusztai's work was the first to use GM food in
feeding trials, and that scientists were failing to carry out basic safety
tests: feeding GM food to rats to study the impact.
'But that is exactly what we do do,' said Professor Nigel Poole of Zeneca,
the manufacturers of one of the few modified foods on sale in supermarkets.
When we created puree made out of genetically modified tomatoes, the first
thing we did was to feed it to rats and then study the effects on their
bodies. It is utterly untrue to say we don't do such studies. People are
making up facts as they go along.'
Then there were the pictures of healthy rat stomachs and those damaged
because of GM food. 'Of course, they were damaged,' Poole said. 'They had
been eating lectins, which are poisonous. It's got nothing to do with
genetic modification.'
Unfortunately, the British public - distrustful of official assurances
after the mishandling of the BSE crisis - is in no mood to listen to
scientific 'reason'. Nor is the media. As far as most people are concerned,
Pusztai has been vindicated, all GM products are 'Frankenstein foods', and
there should be a moratorium on the growing of gene crops - as demanded by
the '20 international scientists' who have backed Pusztai.
In making this last claim, the group is, in a sense, wasting its breath.
Given the hysteria unleashed, there is absolutely no chance that modified
crops will be grown commercially in this country for many years - though
some small, experimental trials have begun.
'There is only one application currently in the pipeline - from AgrEvo,
which would like to grow oilseed rape that can resist the use of the
herbicide glufosinate,' said Dr Phil Dale of the John Innes Centre in
Norwich.
'It will take years before they satisfy the regulatory process and pass
safety trials - if the company decides it is worthwhile proceeding, that
is.'
This leads us to the public's second major fear: that GM crops fitted with
genes to resist pesticides and herbicides will devastate our countryside.
The insertion of such genes is supposed to benefit the environment by
making it easier to control weeds.
'So far, all studies show modified crops need less chemicals than standard
crops,' Dale said. But many people fear that pollen from these crops will
drift and be picked up by nearby weeds, which will then become resistant to
herbicides. Britain will be invaded by superweeds that will strangle our
fields.
'People forget that only weeds of species that are botanically similar to a
particular crop will pick up its pollen and form a hybrid,' said Dale, who
was one of the Government's advisers on the release of GM organisms. 'In
the case of modified oilseed rape, the principal candidate for commercial
planting in this country, there are no weeds with which it can hybridise in
Britain.' Critics of GM foods are unabashed. They point to the fact that
the industry refuses to release data from the trials of modified crops. The
public wants reassurance, and is simply not getting it. And the Green
movement - which has long disliked the intensive agricultural practices of
modern farming - has seized on these fields of crops, genetically modified
in some sinister way, as the battleground it has been lacking.
This takes us to the third great fear: that one or two GM companies are
attempting to monopolise crop production. In the case of Monsanto, the
world's biggest GM company, they have good grounds for concern. Much of the
present crisis can be blamed on its persistence in exporting mixed
consignments of modified and unmodified soya oil to Europe. Consumers could
not tell the difference. Europe objected and was threatened with a trade
war, and many GM foods appeared unmarked in supermarkets. Two years later,
we are reaping the harvest.
** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
**
........
End part 1
--Dan in Sunny Puerto Rico--
dan.worley@mindless.com
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
------------------------------
End of sanet-mg-digest V1 #833
******************************
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the comannd
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
7
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clara K. Cohen, AAAS Fellow
USAID/G/EGAD/AFS
RRB 2.11-102
Washington, D.C. 20523-2110
Phone: (202) 712-1116
Fax: (202) 216-3010
e-mail: ccohen@usaid.gov
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail