kate
> >>> INDEPENDENT (London)
> >>> May 2, 1999
> >>>
> >>> Genetic manipulation: consciousness-raising at work
> in UK.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> By GEOFFREY LEAN
> >>>
> >>> It was an extraordinary scene, a fitting start to
> the week that surely
> >>> marks the beginning of the end for genetically
> modified foods in Britain.
> >>> At nine o'clock last Monday morning two of the most
> powerful men in the
> >>> global food industry turned up at a pressure group's
> door.
> >>>
> >>> Richard Greenhalgh, chairman of Unilever UK, and
> Michel Ogrizek, the
> >>> international head of corporate affairs for the giant
> multinational - the
> >>> world's largest food manufacturing company - came to
> Greenpeace's offices
> >>> in Islington, north London, in what appears to have
> been a last-ditch
> >>> attempt to make peace. But next day the company had
> to admit defeat,
> >>> announcing that it would stop using GM ingredients in
> its products in
> >>> Britain.
> >>>
> >>> The announcement started a week-long stampede by
> leading companies, all
> >>> household names. The speed and suddenness of the
> flight from
> >>> "Frankenstein foods" has surprised everyone,
> humiliated the Government and
> >>> provided the most spectacular example to date of
> consumer power. Its
> >>> repercussions will reverberate far beyond this
> country: it could prove a
> >>> turning point in the battle over genetic modification
> worldwide.
> >>>
> >>> Unilever insists that Monday's visit was just "part
> of a general ongoing
> >>> discussion in regard to issues on genetically
> modified organisms". But
> >>> Greenpeace recounts how it received a call from Mr
> Greenhalgh's office
> >>> late the previous Friday, requesting an urgent
> meeting. It says that the
> >>> company was "trying to resist going GM-free".
> >>>
> >>> "Their suggestion was that some sort of full debate
> or discussion might
> >>> be valuable," says Peter Melchett, Greenpeace's
> executive director. "We
> >>> said that things had moved beyond that point."
> >>>
> >>> Up to then Unilever had been one of the most
> committed proponents of GM
> >>> foods - and even in defeat it insisted that its
> announcement did not
> >>> "change our long-held belief in the potential of
> modern technology,
> >>> including the genetic modification of food
> ingredients." It went on:
> >>> "This technology offers huge future benefit to
> customers, but the
> >>> realisation of this depends on winning full consumer
> trust and
> >>> confidence."
> >>>
> >>> It's right, at least, about the last part - as it
> knows only too well.
> >>> For the giant company was forced into its reluctant
> volte-face by an
> >>> unprecedented onslaught from its own customers.
> Bemused executives
> >>> describe helplines swamped by worried and angry
> consumers since early
> >>> this year. Worse, sales of its GM soya product,
> Beanfeast, have slumped
> >>> precipitously. Some industry sources calculate they
> have fallen by 80 per
> >>> cent; Unilever privately says it is "nearer 50 per
> cent". (The company
> >>> has now promised to make it GM-free within two
> months.)
> >>>
> >>> It is not suffering alone. Sainsbury will withdraw
> its GM tomato puree -
> >>> the first genetically modified product to be
> introduced in Britain - from
> >>> its shelves by June. Made from tomatoes modified to
> rot more slowly, it
> >>> used to outsell its GM-free rival by two to one:
> now, says the company,
> >>> "our customers do not want it".
> >>>
> >>> No wonder Unilever's surprise announcement opened
> the floodgates. The
> >>> next day Nestle, another of the world's biggest food
> companies, announced
> >>> that it was phasing out GM products as fast as
> possible. The day after,
> >>> Cadbury followed suit. Meanwhile Tesco, Britain's
> largest supermarket
> >>> chain, said it would remove GM ingredients from its
> own- brand foods,
> >>> joining Sainsbury, Safeway, Asda and Somerfield. And
> the Co-op will
> >>> tomorrow announce changes that will make its products
> GM free as well.
> >>>
> >>> When these phase-outs are complete, no major
> supermarket brands will
> >>> continue to contain GM ingredients and - after last
> week's Unilever,
> >>> Nestle and Cadbury announcements - many other foods
> will be free of them
> >>> too. It's an extraordinary reversal from the rapid,
> silent, expansion of
> >>> GM foods - from nothing to 60 per cent of the
> products on supermarket
> >>> shelves in less than three years. And it has put
> environmental activists
> >>> into the unfamiliar position of extolling market
> forces.
> >>>
> >>> Those same forces will spread the effects of last
> week's events
> >>> worldwide.
> >>>
> >>> For these enormously wealthy companies (Unilever's
> turnover alone is more
> >>> than #35bn) will now start scouring the world for
> GM-free soya and maize,
> >>> raising their prices and providing a powerful
> incentive to farmers to
> >>> plant them. This could tip the balance in the many
> countries that have
> >>> been facing a close-fought decision on whether to
> introduce GM crops:
> >>> some analysts expect that many farmers will now
> abandon them even in the
> >>> United States, their greatest stronghold.
> >>>
> >>> The speed of the reversal has taken everyone by
> surprise - even the
> >>> pressure groups which campaigned for many months
> before the issue caught
> >>> fire early this year. What made the difference, both
> they and the
> >>> industry say, was press coverage, including the
> Independent on Sunday's
> >>> campaign.
> >>>
> >>> And no one has been more surprised by the
> Government, which is now left -
> >>> together with Monsanto and other bioscience companies
> - as just about the
> >>> only supporter of GM foods. Last week's events are a
> major blow to its
> >>> credibility, and to the personal authority of the
> Prime Minister who went
> >>> out of his way, at the height of the controversy
> earlier this year, to
> >>> stress his confidence in them.
> >>>
> >>> This is the Government's greatest failure yet to
> read the public mood.
> >>> Right up until last week - and in some cases even now
> - senior ministers
> >>> were convinced that the GM foods controversy was, as
> Mr Blair privately
> >>> told Labour MPs, just "a flash in the pan". How
> could an administration
> >>> which is usually so successful at catching the tides
> of public opinion,
> >>> have got so out of step?
> >>>
> >>> The answer lies in Mr Blair's similarity to Tony
> Benn. In the 1960s Mr
> >>> Benn embodied the Wilson government's faith that the
> "white-heat of
> >>> technology" was the answer to Britain's economic
> problems. Mr Blair and
> >>> other modernisers, like Peter Mandelson,
> enthusiastically adopted this Old
> >>> Labour belief. They became convinced that the
> country's future depended
> >>> on knowledge-based industries, and equated
> biotechnology with them.
> >>>
> >>> Thus GM foods became integrated into the Blairite
> "project": to express
> >>> concerns about them was to doubt New Labour.
> Blinkered by this
> >>> conviction, the Government failed to spot the many
> early signs of
> >>> impending public revolt .
> >>>
> >>> It has been a damaging failure, for the episode has
> crystallised some of
> >>> the strongest popular concerns about the Government -
> that it is arrogant,
> >>> overinfluenced by big business and oversubservient to
> the United States.
> >>>
> >>> Ministers (with one or two honourable exceptions)
> have haughtily
> >>> dismissed concerns about the effects of the crops on
> health and on the
> >>> environment, parroting the reassurances of official
> scientific committees
> >>> who have a majority of members with links to the food
> and biotechnology
> >>> industries. And growing anti-Americanism and
> hostility to multinational
> >>> companies has been stoked by the US decision to mix
> GM and ordinary soya
> >>> (so that they could not be distinguished or
> separated) before shipping
> >>> them to Europe; by Monsanto's heavy-handedness; and
> by the evangelical
> >>> zeal with which the Clinton administration has been
> pushing GM foods.
> >>>
> >>> But even within the White House there are signs of
> concern, if not
> >>> change. A few days before the Unilever announcement,
> at the start of an
> >>> official lunch in New York, my neighbour - one of the
> Clinton
> >>> administration's most senior environmental
> policymakers - turned to me and
> >>> opened the conversation; "Tell me. How do we get out
> from under this GM
> >>> mess?"
> >>>
> >>> ===================
> >>> INDEPENDENT (London) May 2
> >>>
> >>> Ministers told to study GM food cancer risks
> >>>
> >>> By MARIE WOOLF
> >>>
> >>> THE COUNTRY'S most senior doctor has told ministers
> to set up a special
> >>> panel to examine whether eating genetically modified
> food could cause
> >>> birth defects, cancer or damage to the human immune
> system.
> >>>
> >>> In a confidential report to the Government, the
> Chief Medical Officer and
> >>> the Chief Scientific Adviser have recommended that
> ministers set up a GM
> >>> health monitoring unit, similar to the body of
> experts which discovered a
> >>> link between eating beef from BSE infected cows and
> human CJD.
> >>>
> >>> They believe not enough research has been done to
> determine whether
> >>> eating GM food could cause serious health problems in
> humans.
> >>>
> >>> The report, seen last month by the ministerial
> committee on genetic
> >>> modification, proposes "the creation of a new unit to
> monitor the health
> >>> effects of GMOs, similar to the unit monitoring CJD".
> It should examine
> >>> "potential health effects" including "foetal
> abnormalities, new cancers,
> >>> and effects on the human immune system".
> >>>
> >>> Professor Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer,
> and Sir Robert May,
> >>> the Government's Chief Scientific Adviser, concluded
> that "our
> >>> understanding [of the effect of GMOs on human health]
> is still
> >>> developing". While there is no conclusive evidence,
> their findings will
> >>> renew public concern that GM food could lead to
> unknown health
> >>> consequences.
> >>>
> >>> Scientists, including Dr Michael Antoniou of Guy's
> Hospital in London,
> >>> have warned that genetic engineering could lead to
> the creation of new
> >>> allergies, cancers and other illnesses in human
> beings because of "the
> >>> disruption of our natural genetic order".
> >>>
> >>> "The reasons why we can't be specific about the
> health consequences of GM
> >>> food is that we don't know enough," said Dr Antoniou.
> "Each genetic
> >>> engineering event holds its own dangers. You could
> have acute toxicity or
> >>> something that sneaks up over many years. Any of
> these things are
> >>> possible."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> INDEPENDENT (London) May 2
> >>>
> >>> GM Foods - Countdown to a consumer victory
> >>>
> >>> By GEOFFREY LEAN
> >>>
> >>> 7 February
> >>>
> >>> The Independent on Sunday launches its campaign to
> get a three-year
> >>> freeze on developing genetically modified crops, and
> for all products
> >>> containing modified food to be clearly labelled. More
> than 100 chefs and
> >>> food writers back opposition to GM food; thousands of
> readers back the
> >>> campaign.
> >>>
> >>> 12 February
> >>>
> >>> English Nature warns it cannot recommend safety of
> GM foods.
> >>>
> >>> 13 February
> >>>
> >>> Scientists stage Westminster news conference to
> demand that the findings
> >>> of Dr Arpad Pusztai are reinstated after an
> international panel of 20
> >>> experts endorse his work. He claimed laboratory rats
> fed with GM potatoes
> >>> had suffered damage to their immune systems and vital
> organs. Blair
> >>> rejects demand for moratorium on GM food. Labour's
> former chief
> >>> spokesman, David Hill, and Tony Blair's US pollster
> and strategist, Stan
> >>> Greenberg, are revealed as advisers to GM food giant
> Monsanto.
> >>>
> >>> 15 February
> >>>
> >>> Tony Blair gives personal assurance that GM is safe
> to eat. Lord
> >>> Sainsbury, science minister, revealed as owning a key
> GM gene that is used
> >>> to create most of the GM foods currently on the
> market, such as soya.
> >>>
> >>> 17 February
> >>>
> >>> Royal Society scientists to re-issue report on
> dangers of GM foods after
> >>> ministers ignored it for five months.
> >>>
> >>> 20 February
> >>>
> >>> Tony Blair warns that banning GM food would
> jeopardise Britain's bio-tech
> >>> industries. Pressure mounts on Lord Sainsbury.
> >>>
> >>> 21 February
> >>>
> >>> IoS/NOP poll shows 59 per cent unhappy with way
> Government has handled
> >>> issue; 68 per cent worried about eating GM food.
> >>>
> >>> 25 February
> >>>
> >>> Prime Minister tells Commons there will be no
> inquiry into Government's
> >>> handling of GM foods. Councils to ban GM food from
> schools, town halls and
> >>> old people's homes.
> >>>
> >>> 28 February
> >>>
> >>> Advertising Standards Authority criticises Monsanto
> for its misleading
> >>> campaign.
> >>>
> >>> 3 March
> >>>
> >>> Dr Jean Emberlin, director of National Pollen
> Research Unit at University
> >>> College, Worcester, says dangers of contamination by
> GM pollen may have
> >>> been seriously underestimated.
> >>>
> >>> 11 March
> >>>
> >>> English Nature scientists warn science and
> technology select committee
> >>> that GM crops pose a severe threat to wildlife and
> ecosystems.
> >>>
> >>> 15 March
> >>>
> >>> Marks & Spencer to remove all GM ingredients.
> Novartis, world's third
> >>> largest drug company, pans "hysteria" over GM. Lord
> Sainsbury says GM food
> >>> poses a risk, but benefits outweigh possible dangers.
> Ministers meanwhile
> >>> confident that they can persuade firms to back
> voluntary three-year freeze
> >>> on GM crops.
> >>>
> >>> 18 March
> >>>
> >>> Supermarkets Waitrose and the Co-op promise to make
> their own brands
> >>> GM-free.
> >>>
> >>> 19 March
> >>>
> >>> New laws on labelling of foods containing GM
> products come into force.
> >>> Shops and restaurants failing to do so face fines of
> up to #5,000.
> >>>
> >>> 29-30 March
> >>>
> >>> Protests against GM foods held across Britain,
> including demonstrations
> >>> at supermarkets and the ripping-up of oil seed rape
> plants at farms. Two
> >>> protesters cleared of criminal damage to #44,000
> worth of crops at a Devon
> >>> farm; Crown Prosecution Service says public opinion
> is one reason for not
> >>> pursuing the case.
> >>>
> >>> 21 April
> >>>
> >>> Britain's finest restaurants, including the Savoy
> and the River Cafe,
> >>> announce that they will ban all GM products.
> >>>
> >>> 27 April
> >>>
> >>> Tesco promises to remove GM foods from its shelves,
> wherever possible.
> >>> Unilever announces a ban on its products.
> >>>
> >>> 29 April
> >>>
> >>> Further rules governing the labelling of GM foods so
> that GM-free
> >>> products can be clearly identified are being
> considered by the Government.
> >>> Cadbury Schweppes announces that it is removing all
> GM ingredients from
> >>> its chocolate.
> >>> ==========================
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >__________________________________________
> >Ms. Renske van Staveren, Coordinator
> >International Forum on Food & Agriculture (IFA)
> >c/o Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP)
> >2105 First Avenue South
> >Minneapolis, MN, USA 55404-2505
> >ph: 612-870-3423 fax: 612-870-4846
> >rvanstaveren@iatp.org>
> >http://www.iffah.org
> >__________________________________________
> >"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth
> becomes a
> >revolutionary act." – George Orwell
> >
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
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