Genetically
 Manipulated 


 

 
 
 Food


 News

21 July 2000

Table of Contents

Analysis: – GM Sugar Delay Raises Doubts On Prospects
GM food conference met by protest
No Patents On Biotechnology Products
More from the FOX BGH trial
GE Crop Rules Needed: Agriculture Ministers Say
Biotech backlash – Mainstream plunges into the struggle
Monsanto Sale May be Reconsidered
Canadaian Magazine: This story asks, what's the worry?
Brazil Ban on GM Foods Seen Firm as Divisions Fester
Planting The Seeds Of Destruction
EuropaBio GE congress cancelled
March against GM crops
Italian farm Minister calls for GM-free foods
Campbell, Others Targeted by Activists on Gene-Altered Foods
Suburban Genetics: Scientists Searching for a Perfect Lawn
GMOs: Anti-biotech activists take aim at Campbell's Soup
GM crops are pests, Tasmania declares
Watch: Superfish are no superfix for hunger
Green Groups Target Campbell Soup in GM Food Fight
BIOWATCH: Clinton Attacks Europe; GM Dangers
GM dangers / quote
FDA Taken To Court By Its Own Scientists
Kellogg's To Keep Using Genetically Mutated Grain
Genetically Engineered Spider Toxin Threatens Butterflies

Top NextFront Page
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 22:14:07 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.netGEN7-15

Analysis: – GM Sugar Delay Raises Doubts On Prospects

By Peter Blackburn, July 10, 2000, Reuters

LONDON – According to this story, long delays in marketing genetically modified (GM) sugar, due to resistance from environmental and consumer groups, raise questions about its future viability. The story says that GM sugar beet has been approved for growing in the United States but farmers are stalling because soft drinks, food and other industrial users are concerned about growing consumer doubts over its safety. Lindsay Jolly, an economist at the London-based International Sugar Organization (ISO) was quoted as saying, "U.S. (beet) farmers got cold feet just before the planting season last year."


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 22:14:07 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.netGEN7-15

GM food conference met by protest

WebPosted Tue Jul 11 10:00:19 2000 ET
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/NWview.cgi?/news/2000/07/10/gmfoo....

SASKATOON - Protesters gathered at a conference in Saskatoon on Monday. They made noise, confronted scientists and blocked buses . All to make their point - that genetically modified foods should be banned.

INDEPTH: Food Fight

They're against altered crops and vegetables, and they're just as alarmed that a group of scientists has genetically engineered salmon to grow faster –salmon the scientists say is safe to eat.

Atlantic salmon is being changed. Their genes are being altered to make them grow 33 per cent faster. The idea is to breed genetically modified salmon, using only the sterile ones in fish farms. That would prevent the salmon from escaping into the ocean and breeding with wild salmon.

Garth Fletcher is the head researcher with the team from Memorial University in St. John's. He will tell the conference that after 18 years of work he's ready to seek regulatory approval to breed and market the fish.

But there's concern from international scientists. Most of them specialize in genetically modified plants. Some say it's easier to control plants if a genetic project goes wrong, but animals are another matter. "If a gene escapes into the wild population it might be of harm," says Klaus Ammann from Berne University in Switzerland.

Worries like that are the reason the salmon researchers were invited to the conference.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 22:14:07 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.netGEN7-15

No Patents On Biotechnology Products

by FRANCK SEURET and ROBERT ALI BRAC DE LA PERRIERE
* Journalist http://www.multimania.com/pressepiges and consultant respectively, and joint authors of Plantes transgeniques, une menace pour les paysans du Sud,

Editions Charles Leopold Mayer, Paris, December 1999.
Le Monde diplomatique, July 2000
http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/en/2000/07/16patent

Africa defies licences for life

No country is self-sufficient in biodiversity. The WTO is seeking an appropriate legal framework to encourage trade. But appropriate for whom? There's the rub. The intellectual property system, which champions the breeders' interests, is becoming an instrument of neo-colonialism. The Organisation of African Unity, offering an alternative that is in the public interest as well as its own, has taken the lead in new thinking about the exploitation of life.

This is a story of sugar that leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. A story of patents and piracy. In 1995 the university of Wisconsin took out four patents on brazzein, an extremely sweet tasting protein that researchers had isolated from the berry of a plant growing in Gabon. The university has since granted licences to exploit the patents to several biotechnology companies that hope to introduce a brazzein-producing gene into fruit and vegetables to obtain products that taste sweet but are less rich in calories. There are big profits in this, though not for small farmers in Gabon. They know all about the plant, they have always used it and their way of life and farming practices have helped to ensure its survival. But they will get nothing at all out of the plans to exploit it.

The case of brazzein is by no means unusual. Every year, firms and universities in the countries of the North take out patents on plants grown or used in the countries of the South, without the consent of the parties concerned and without offering any financial consideration in return. To put an end to this biological piracy, the Scientific, Technical and Research Commission of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) has just produced model legislation for the recognition and protection of local communities, farmers and breeders, and for the regulation of access to genetic resources.

This legislation provides, inter alia, an appropriate system of access to biological and genetic resources and related community knowledge and technologies based upon the prior informed consent of the state and the local communities concerned, and appropriate mechanisms for a fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the commercial use of such resources.

The law breaks new ground in establishing a connection between resources and innovation, defining rules on access and farmers' rights, and devising a system to protect the intellectual property rights of breeders in the plant varieties they create. This is much less exclusive than the patent system and it grants extensive rights to the users of the protected plant varieties. The law is intended to provide a framework within which African states can harmonise their positions. It was adopted at Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, last November and a final version has just been ratified. It will serve as a basis for debate between states, regional organisations such as the African Intellectual Property Organisation and the African Biotechnology Agency, and non-governmental organisations.

With the rapid advances in biotechnology, the countries of the South have suddenly become a vast prospectors' paradise. Their land is a veritable treasure house of valuable genes that provide essential raw materials for American, European and Japanese firms. But not for African firms. Most of the valuable genetic resources are to be found in the South, but the technology, the genome platforms and the patents are produced in the North. Everything is conspiring to create the conditions for yet another unequal transaction. The OAU has drafted this model legislation in an attempt to redress the balance.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 22:14:07 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.netGEN7-15

More from the FOX BGH trial

Law suit for the case of Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, two reporters who were fired after they would not change a documentary on the hazards of BGH:

Jurors for the Fox/BGH trial have been selected and sworn. Opening statements are set for Monday morning and Jane Akre is expected to take the stand after lunch.

Details at:

http://www.foxBGHsuit.com/update.htm

Journalists Sue Fox

July 14, 2000

While an increasing number of Americans suspect mainstream news organizations sometimes twist the news, two veteran investigative journalists say they are ready to prove in court how Fox television managers and lawyers at WTVT Fox 13 in Tampa ordered them to deliberately distort news reports and then fired them for resisting those directives.

The landmark whistleblower lawsuit is believed to be the first time any journalist has ever filed a claim against his own news organization and offered evidence of behind-the-scenes manipulation of the news.

When the trial begins next Monday, reporters Jane Akre (pronounced Ay-cree) and Steve Wilson say they will show exactly how Fox hired them and advertised their reputations for hard-hitting investigations but then folded and pressured them to slant a story in favor of an advertiser who threatened "dire consequences" if their reports were broadcast.

CBS journalist Walter Cronkite and public interest advocate Ralph Nader are both on the plaintiffs' witness list, despite efforts by Fox attorneys who desperately sought to block their testimony.

The trial will pit the two fired journalists (with Wilson representing himself for more than two years in an effort to save money on legal fees, and Akre represented by a small Tampa firm) against the powerful Washington law firm of Williams & Connolly, the same lawyers who represent President Bill Clinton personally. To get their day in court, the plaintiffs have sold their home, spent their life savings battling the media giant, and say they have been branded as media traitors never likely to get another good job in the business again.

To the amazement of most legal observers, the reporters paved their way to court by defeating three Fox motions to summarily dismiss the case without a trial. Those victories were engineered by Akre's legal team led by John Chamblee and Tom Johnson.

At the heart of the dispute is a series of reports produced by Akre and Wilson revealing the widespread and virtually secret use of a synthetic hormone being injected into dairy cows throughout Florida and much of the U.S. The hormone causes cows to produce more milk.

The investigative reports that Fox abruptly pulled from its schedule in early 1997 would have revealed that without the consent or approval of milk drinkers and those who serve it daily to their children, use of the synthetic hormone has altered what used to be called “nature's most nearly perfect food.ö

The stories would have also disclosed for the first time that leading grocers now admit they quietly broke their 1994 promises not to buy milk from hormone-injected cows until the practice achieved widespread acceptance. Surveys have shown that the vast majority of consumers do not want artificial hormones in their milk and would avoid such milk if it were labeled. No dairy anywhere is known to label its milk as coming from cows injected with artificial hormones.

Although legal in America, the artificial bovine growth hormone (rBGH) has been banned in Canada, throughout Europe, and elsewhere due in large part to concern about health risks for milk drinkers. One of the chief concerns is that while the growth hormones do cause the cows to produce more milk, the milk is changed in a way that could promote breast, colon and prostate cancer.

“In wake of the two written threats1,2 from Monsanto to Fox News chief Roger Ailes, we were asked to put Fox's interest in its own bottom line ahead of the public interest,ö said plaintiff Steve Wilson. Monsanto is the multi-national chemical company that makes the genetically engineered hormone.

“When the president of Fox Television Stations saw those threats, that executive who controls more television stations than anyone in America simply ordered his lawyers to ‘take no risks' with the story,ö Wilson said. The executive's directive has been confirmed in sworn testimony from two Fox attorneys3,4 in the written notes of one them.5

And we have also discovered, in another handwritten note of one of the broadcaster's attorneys, that if they tried to kill the story and word leaked out, it would be "a major p-r problem for Fox'," said co-plaintiff Akre. "So they decided to eliminate their risk by pressuring us to placate Monsanto and essentially lie to the public. No decent journalist can ever do that."

The reporters will testify that Fox managers first threatened to fire them for insubordination, then offered them a six-figure deal to entice them to go along. When the pair refused, they say they were strung along for months re-writing the story 83 times in an effort to get it on the air before being suspended, locked out, and ultimately fired by Fox for what the broadcasting company claimed was "no cause."

The reporters will not be able to tell the jury about a second deal Fox offered to pay each reporter a whole year's salary for no-show jobs as "news consultants" in exchange for their leaving quietly and never disclosing to anyone what they learned regarding the milk or the quality of Fox journalism. The trial court ruled that the second six-figure deal was actually made to try and avoid a lawsuit. To encourage out-of-court settlements, such offers cannot be admitted into evidence when disputes cannot be settled without a trial.

The issue has drawn world-wide attention as a result of a website the journalists posted the day their lawsuit was filed. The reporters, who happen to be married to each other, have also traveled far and wide to accept invitations to speak about genetically engineered milk and their experiences with Fox. They have vowed not to personally benefit from their efforts to publicize the story Fox refused to tell.

Many of the documents from the suit are posted on the World Wide Web at http://www.foxBGHsuit.com

For further information or to arrange interviews:

Jane Akre or Steve Wilson (727) 796-6504 or wilson@citicom.com John Chamblee or Tom Johnson, Akre's Attorneys (813) 251-4542

Full details of the lawsuit and rBGH story available at http://www.foxBGHsuit.com

.....

World Environment News - July 13th, 2000 from Planet Ark

Click on the link below the headline to check out the full story.

Greece urges tighter EU controls on gene crops - GREECE http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=7437

France's Voynet questions motives of GMO seed firms - FRANCE http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=7439

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 it for research and educational purposes.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

GE Crop Rules Needed: Agriculture Ministers Say

CP Wire, July 7, 2000

FREDERICTON, Canada – Provincial agriculture ministers are, according to this story, warning there's growing confusion and concern over the place of genetically modified foods in Canada's farming future. The ministers were cited as saying Thursday they want Ottawa to move quickly to establish clear regulations for engineered crops, which, the story says, seem caught in a limbo of producer and consumer uncertainty. Ontario Agriculture Minister Ernie Hardeman, speaking at the conclusion of the annual meeting Farmers are and that farmers are concerned about planting genetically altered crops when the long-term outlook for markets is shaky.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

Biotech backlash – Mainstream plunges into the struggle

By Dale Kasler, Bee Staff Writer, June 25, 2000
http://www.sacbee.com/ib/tech/recent_bee/062500.html

SAN ANSELMO – Raised an Army brat, Cami Loft had never protested anything in her life. She was a conservative mother of two – an accountant, even -- living quietly in a beautiful home in this woodsy Marin County suburb.

Then she read in a magazine last fall that the formula she used to feed to her infant daughter contained genetically engineered soybeans. Overnight, she became an impassioned activist against biotechnology, marching in protests, distributing leaflets at supermarkets, buttonholing other moms at playgrounds.

"It's like a bear," said Loft, 38. "You don't mess with my children."

Until recently, the opposition to genetically engineered foods in America consisted mainly of a small cadre of environmentalists and liberal activists – a group grossly outnumbered by the formidable pro-biotech coalition of federal regulators, multinational corporations and most mainstream scientists.

Now Loft and her friends represent potentially powerful reinforcements for the anti-biotech movement – shock troops with babes in arms, ready to turn the fear of so-called "Frankenfoods" into a Main Street concern.

Biotech is "beginning to worry the broad population – the soccer moms and so forth," said Christine Bruhn, who researches consumer attitudes toward biotech at the University of California, Davis. "They're hearing, "There's something in your food and you don't know about it.'"

As grocery shelves fill up with genetically engineered foods – from infant formula to cheese to tortilla chips, totaling nearly 70 percent of all supermarket foods – the general public is becoming increasingly wary of the technology and the tangle of scientific, economic and ethical issues it embodies.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

Monsanto Sale May be Reconsidered

Farm News from Cropchoice, June 27, 2000
An alternative news service for American farmers http://www.cropchoice.com 6/27/00

(Cropchoice News - 27 June) – A report Monday in Corporate Financing Week suggests the future of the "new" Monsanto is in question. According to the story, the recently announced "initial public offering" sale of Monsanto stock may be delayed or the entire agriculture company may be sold instead.

Pharmacia, a Swedish pharmaceutical company, completed its buyout of Monsanto in March. Pharmacia took the pharmaceutical division of Monsanto (Searle) into its own operations; but left the agriculture operations as a stand-alone division. Pharmacia then filed government paperwork to sell a 20% stake in the "new" Monsanto (i.e. the agriculture part of the old company).

But Corporate Financing Week says big investors in Pharmacia now believe the plan to sell 20% of a agriculture-only Monsanto may go badly and should be reconsidered. The issues that are clouding the sale, which was to take place next month, are uncertainly about GMO crops (which makes Monsanto's value uncertain) and concerns about the company's profitability.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

Canadaian Magazine: This story asks, what's the worry?

Chatelaine (Hazards or Hokum section) August 2000
http://www.chatelaine.com/read/health/genetic.html

Canadian farmers now produce a host of genetically modified (GM) grains and vegetables such as canola, corn, soy and potatoes. At least 60 per cent of processed foods, including baby formulas, drink mixes, tortilla chips and veggie burgers, contain so-called "frankenfoods." But as consumption grows, many scientists are becoming concerned the products may be harmful to human health. ...

But, the story says, a legion of doctors and scientists, including the British Medical Association, editors of the medical journal The Lancet and Canadian science broadcaster and geneticist David Suzuki, say we don't yet know enough about genetics to safely start playing with genes in our food supply. One of the biggest concerns is that swapping genes across species could produce new proteins that are toxic. "Genes don't work independently, they work with other genes," says University of Western Ontario genetics professor Joe Cummins. "When we introduce a new gene, we don't have any idea how it affects the others."

There are also fears that since scientists must use an antibiotic-resistant "marker" gene to identify which new genes are successfully integrated, frankenfoods could spread antibiotic resistance. And scientists have raised concerns that life-threatening allergens might be introduced inadvertently. In the mid-1990s, researchers found that soybeans modified with the gene of a Brazil nut caused allergic reactions in some people. The soybeans were never marketed, but there is no mandatory testing to ensure an allergen will be detected before a GM food is sold to the public. The bottom line Despite their widespread availability, there is still little research that examines how GM foods affect humans.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

Brazil Ban on GM Foods Seen Firm as Divisions Fester

By Phil Stewart, Reuters, July 7, 2000

BRASILIA – Brazil, the hemisphere's last bastion against genetically-modified (GM) foods, is, according to government sources cited in this story on Friday, seen holding firm in its lonely stance, amid a flurry of court battles opposing scientific meddling in agriculture,. While GM crops take over fields in neighbouring Argentina and the United States, raking in hefty savings for farmers, Latin America's biggest agriculture producer has bucked the trend by maintaining a ban on so-called "Frankenstein foods." Brazil's isolation on the continent was reinforced by a federal court ruling late Thursday, which agreed with environmental and consumer rights groups who say not enough is known about gene-spliced crops to call them safe.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

Planting The Seeds Of Destruction

By Ingeborg Boyens, The Globe and Mail, July 4, 2000
http://www.globeandmail.com/gam/Commentary/20000704/COBOYENS.html

Boyens writes in this op-ed that the case of Percy Schmeiser, the Saskatchewan farmer who recently went toe-to-toe with the agribusiness giant Monsanto in a Saskatoon courtroom, was billed as a modern-day David and Goliath struggle, the story of the little guy against the capitalist giant or, in some versions, the freeloading peasant who snubbing his nose at big business. But, says Boyens, the subtext to that courtroom theatre is, can genes from genetically modified crops travel and cross-pollinate with other plants in unpredictable, possibly dangerous ways?

Boyens says there is ample evidence that genes from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can travel and do it well and this has potential long-term consequences not only for farmers but for the planet. Boyens goes on cite the case of the Alberta farmer who found his fields tainted with not one, but three different varieties of herbicide-resistant "volunteer" canola and says that figuring out what kind of pesticide to use without killing the crop itself is a mystery worthy of an agrarian Sherlock Holmes.

The ability of genetically modified traits to travel to other plants is having a direct commercial impact on Canadian business. When Advanta Seeds Canada, a Winnipeg-based subsidiary of a Dutch company, shipped canola seeds to Europe, it thought it was sending conventional, untainted canola to a marketplace that is undeniably hostile to GMOs. However, tests showed a tiny trace (.4 per cent) of the canola was genetically engineered. Even the strict isolation rules that apply to certified seed production were not enough to stop cross pollination. European farmers are now tearing up their canola fields and demanding compensation from Advanta.

Some of the world's biggest seed companies are now moving their operations to countries that are free of GM production. Boyens says that GMOs are transforming the rural landscape itself. From a passing car in early July, the prairie canola fields may blaze that familiar butter yellow. It's impossible to discern from a distance whether the crop is conventional canola, herbicide-resistant canola, or some unintended mixture of the two. But farmers will know. The technology that was supposed to make life simpler for them will demand they develop new skills in chemical management.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

Thanks to geno@zap.a2000.nl for posting this at ban-gef@lists.greenbuilder.com

EuropaBio GE congress cancelled

Europabio, the European biotechassociation, has cancelled its yearly international congress that was planned to take place in Scotland in october. The organisation "can't deny" that the fierce opposition in the UK, and the resulting lack of sponsors, are the reasons to cancel the congress. Europabio wants to give as little rumour about the cancellation as possible.

(Source: De Volkskrant, 15-7-2000)


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:10:02 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-17

March against GM crops

BBC News Scotland, Saturday, 15 July, 2000, 16:51 GMT 17:51 UK
http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid%5F83500....

Environmentalists staged a protest outside the Scottish farm which is undertaking a full-scale trial of genetically modified crops. The peaceful demonstration on Saturday, by around 35 people, followed the third attack within a week on New Craig Farm, near Daviot, Aberdeenshire.

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 it for research and educational purposes.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

Italian farm Minister calls for GM-free foods

ITALY : July 18, 2000

ROME - Farm Minister Alfonso Pecoraro Scanio has said Italy needs to market GM-free foods in order to succeed on the world market, but grain traders warned that GM animal feed imports were unavoidable.

"In Italy, most of the farmers, consumers, merchants and industry don't want to use genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," Pecoraro Scanio, a member of the Greens, told Reuters in an interview on Friday.

"I think it is right that we should take account of what the Italian people want - consumers and producers," he added.

Pecoraro Scanio, who took office in April in Giuliano Amato's centre-left government, has opposed the sowing of GM crops in open fields amid concerns over possible environmental and health risks from GMOs.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

Campbell, Others Targeted by Activists on Gene-Altered Foods

Bloomberg News, July 19 2000 10:20AM

Washington, July 19 (Bloomberg) – Campbell Soup Co., Kellogg Co. and other food makers are the targets of a national campaign by activists who want the industry and the U.S. government to require pre-market testing and labeling of genetically engineered food.

More than 200 chefs, religious leaders, doctors and scientists have endorsed a campaign organizing protests in 20 cities against an industry that is increasingly dependent on these crops for its profits, organizers of the effort said.

"This is the first time that consumer, health and environmental advocates have come together as a unified front in the United States to insist on safety testing and labeling of genetically engineered foods," said Brent Blackwelder, president of Friends of the Earth, in a statement.

.......

GM food accord hard to swallow at Japan summit - JAPAN http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=7525


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

This article shows where GE is going, and that it is not going to feed the world:

Suburban Genetics: Scientists Searching for a Perfect Lawn

By DAVID BARBOZA New York TImes, Sunday, July 8, 2000 ARYSVILLE, Ohio, July 7 --

Standing in long rows in Greenhouse No. 3 at the Scotts Company's research laboratory here are pots of grass that could be a suburbanite's dream come true.

The grass, which Scotts hopes will eventually carpet every lawn and golf course around the world, is genetically altered to withstand applications of the most potent weed killers and remain healthy and green.

Scotts, the world's largest maker of lawn and turf products, has other varieties in the works as well. One, nicknamed "low mow" by company scientists, has been designed to grow at a slower pace, thereby reducing the need for a lawn mower. Other strains could be drought-resistant, or bred to flourish in the winter.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

GMOs: Anti-biotech activists take aim at Campbell's Soup

By Charles H. Featherstone, BridgeNews, July 20, 2000

Washington – July 19 – Standing in front of a giant can of "Campbull's Experimental Soup," U.S. opponents of genetically modified foods vowed to mount a "European scale" campaign asking U.S food companies –eginning with the Campbell Soup Co.--to remove all biotech ingredients from their products. In addition they are seeking legislation that would require safety testing and labeling of all GMO foods in the United States.

* * *

"This is the beginning of the end for untested and unlabeled foods," Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, claimed.

The Center for Food Safety is just one of several organizations participating in GEFoodAlert coalition (www.gefoodalert.org), which is organizing opposition to biotech crops in the U.S.

Speaking for the coalition, National Environmental Trust President Philip Clapp said that the human health and environmental effects of genetically engineered crops have not yet been shown.

Biotech crops pose a risk of introducing people to new food toxins, lowered nutritional levels or increased resistance to antibiotics, Clapp said, and U.S. consumers demand "the precautionary principle" that no genetically altered crops enter the food supply until they are proven safe.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

GM crops are pests, Tasmania declares

By ANDREW DARBY and MARK METHERELL, Friday, July 21, 2000
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0007/21/national/national1.html

Tasmania has blocked a united national approach to genetically modified crops, declaring them a forbidden pest and imposing a one-year moratorium against their trial.

The State's Primary Industries Minister, Mr David Llewellyn, declared a safety-first policy on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), saying: "We need to be certain GMOs won't pose a risk to our health, or our environment, or our agriculture.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

Watch: Superfish are no superfix for hunger

By Jean-Michel Cousteau
http://www.enn.com/features/2000/07/07202000/superfish_13517.asp?....

Behold the "superfish," a salmon that grows six times as fast and twice as large as normal farmed Atlantic salmon but only consumes three-quarters as much feed before it is brought to market. Sound like science fiction? It's not. Some 100,000 of these fish already exist, produced by a Canadian company, and are awaiting the official sanction of federal food agencies in the United States, the world's main market for farmed fish.

Fish Farming Is No Panacea, Says Authority On Oceans

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/programs/oceans/bginterview.h....

Dr. Rebecca Goldburg, an expert on aquaculture, otherwise known as fish farming, recently co-authored an article in Nature magazine on this increasingly important source of seafood. Dr. Goldburg explains why aquaculture can create its own environmental problems.


Top PreviousNextFront Page
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 15:05:13 -0400
From: Richard Wolfson rwolfson@concentric.net GEN7-21

Green Groups Target Campbell Soup in GM Food Fight

By Julie Vorman, Wednesday July 19 4:17 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. consumer and environmental groups urged Campbell Soup Co. (NYSE:CPB - news) on Wednesday to stop using gene-spliced ingredients in its soups, breads, juices and other products as part of a new campaign targeting major food makers.

Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the Center for Food Safety and four other groups said they aimed to deluge the companies with thousands of letters, e-mails and telephone calls from American consumers worried about the lack of safety testing and labels on foods containing gene-altered crops.

......

US, EU aides clash over precautionary principle

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=7545

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 it for research and educational purposes.


Top PreviousNextFront Page

Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:35:46 +0200
From: "taynton" taynton@cdrive.co.za

BIOWATCH: Clinton Attacks Europe; GM Dangers

G8 MEETING: CLINTON ATTACKS EUROPE FOR MOVING TOO SLOWLY OVER 'SAFE' GM FOOD

By Richard Lloyd Parry, The Independent (London), July 24, 2000, Monday

PRESIDENT BILL Clinton criticised European leaders for moving too slowly on the promotion of genetically modified foods yesterday, after three days of talks among the Group of Eight leaders failed to overcome intense trans -Atlantic differences over the future of biotechnology.

"You know that I believe that," he said, when asked if he thought Europe is being too cautious on GM foods. "If we could get more of this golden rice, which is a genetically modified strain of rice, especially rich in vitamin A, out to the developing world, it could save 40,000 lives a day, people that are malnourished and dying."

"If it's safe - that's the big issue," he said, at a press conference with Tony Blair. "All the evidence that I've seen convinces me, based on what all the scientists know now, that it is."

Despite a determination to present a harmonious front at the end of the three -day summit of the G8 in the Japanese island of Okinawa, the leaders made little attempt to disguise their dispute over GM foods.

"There is the thesis supported by Jean Chretien (the Canadian Prime Minister) and Bill Clinton that GM foods aren't dangerous," said Jacques Chirac, the French President. "Then there is the other school, that of Europe and Japan, that considers the potential consequences for health and environment require precaution and scientific certitude."

Both France and the United States have powerful farming lobbies. Hundreds of US farmers who are growing GM crops, produced by companies such as Monsanto, have found their markets disappearing through a widespread refusal to buy them.

New US government figures show that the planting of GM corn and soya is decreasing, after years of rapid expansion, and even US shoppers are turning against the foods.

The European policy of "precaution," meanwhile, meansGM foods are assumed to be unsafe until proven otherwise. "You have all of Europe stressing the principle of precaution," the European Commission President Romano Prodi said after the summit.

Japan's Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori said the leaders were considering setting up an independent panel to promote further discussion of the issue. The leaders, however, did not immediately endorse such an organisation.

The final communique issued at the end of the summit made no direct mention of biotechnology as an area of concern, but referred to the "potential risks associated with food" in general.

Highlighting the different points of view expressed, it also called for helping the "capacity building (of developing countries) to harness the potentials of biotechnology," in a nod to the US position.

The statement said the G8 would explore how to "integrate the best scientific knowledge available into the global process of consensus building on biotechnology and other aspects of food and crop safety."

"This whole science of biotechnology is perhaps going to be for the first half of the 21st century what information technology was to the last half of the 20th century," said Mr Blair. "There are intensely held views on both sides, but the most important thing is that we get access to the best scientific evidence."

There was more consensus among the leaders concerning the nearly complete mapping of the human genome.

The communique praised the breakthrough as a "dramatic and welcome step" and urged fair intellectual property protection. On the genome, "there was no problem, no difficulty and no disagreement," Mr Chirac said.


Top PreviousNextFront Page

Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:35:46 +0200
From: "taynton" taynton@cdrive.co.za

***********************************************************************
Andrew Taynton, SAFE FOOD COALITION , P O Box 665, Linkhills, 3652,
KwaZulu-Natal, Republic of South Africa;
tel: 031-763 2634, Cell 083 662 0411, e-mail: taynton@cdrive.co.za
***********************************************************************

GM dangers / quote

"Animal feed derived from genetically modified plants presents unique animal and food safety concerns. These concerns arise partly because one crop field corn supplies 50 to 75% of the diet of most domestic animals, so small changes in nutrient levels from genetic engineering can have large effects on animal health. The antibiotic resistance marker genes contained in most crops would likely make animals resistant to some antibiotics, especially neomycin, which is used in animal feed.Furthermore, toxicant residues from transgenic crops could end up in meat and milk products and may pose human food safety problems".

Gerald B. Guest, the FDA official in charge of the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 1992.

REFERENCES ON GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS AND CROPS:

  1. GM crops will NOT solve world hunger say scientists: http://www.psrast.org/newgwohu.htm

  2. Will GM crops benefit farmers? The frequent poor physical and economic performance of GM crops: http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/gmagric.htm

  3. World scientists call on governments to immediately withdraw GM foods: http://www.psrast.org/psrlet.htm signed by 200 physicians/scientists.

  4. The South African health authorities use "substantial equivalence" as a standard to determine the "safety" of GM foods. They ignore scientific opinion that this is "unscientific and arbitrary": http://www.psrast.org/fao96.htm

  5. The world renowned scientist who lost his job when he warned about GE foods. The Pusztai case: http://www.psrast.org/pusztai.htm

  6. The Safety Of GE Foods. Reasons to expect hazards and the risk of their appearance: Dr M Antoniou, et al. http://www.psrast.org/defknfood.htm

  7. What you can do: Greenpeace http://www.truefoodnow.org/index.html?news

  8. Top US investigative journalists fired for exposing the link between genetically modified bovine growth hormone (BST or rBGH) used on dairy herds and cancer in humans drinking "GM milk". Follow their court cases: www.foxBGHsuit.com For more information on "GM milk" banned in over 100 countries but licenced for sale in SA see: http://www.psrast.org/bghcanad.htm
    http://www.psrast.org/bghcpc.htm
    http://www.psrast.org/bghsalmonella.htm

  9. Lawsuit. The United States government deception on GM foods. (the government contradicted its own experts in approving GM foods & misprepresented facts in order to promote the US biotech industry): http://www.bio-integrity.org/FDADeception.html

  10. Genetically Manipulated Food News: http://home.intekom.com/tm_info

*************************************************************************

WARNING !!!

Marketing organisations, backed by vested interests, promote GM foods and masquerade as being "science based". In the USA $ 50 million is spent anually promoting GM technology to the uninformed and unsuspecting consumer. The South African public are being targeted in the same manner.

"All policymakers must be vigilant to the possibility of research data being manipulated by corporate bodies and of scientific colleagues being seduced by the material charms of industry. Trust is no defence against an aggressively deceptive corporate sector,"

THE LANCET, April 2000


Top PreviousNextFront Page

Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:47:12 +0200
From: "ekogaia" ekogaia@iafrica.com
From: vlerner@interpac.net (Viviane Lerner)

ekogaia@iafrica.com
ekogaia@bigfoot.com

Greetings all, I am back after a short break so here is some news that you may or may not have. The first is relevant to the launch of the five year freeze.
All the best
Glenn.

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000
Subject: FDA SUED BY ITS OWN SCIENTISTS....LANDMARK CASE!!!

FDA Taken To Court By Its Own Scientists

Posted by ecott on Monday July 10, @10:20PM
Written 5:44 PM Jul 8, 2000 by ilena@san.rr.com in gc:sci.environmen
http://headlines.igc.apc.org:8080/enheadlines/963292830/index_htm....

In a landmark lawsuit filed against the US Food and Drug Administration, nine eminent scientists including some of the FDA's own Life scientists, Biologists and Advisers are taking the FDA to court to obtain mandatory safety testing and labeling of Genetically Engineered foods.

One of his moderators is Dr. Lane A. Highbarger, of the FDA although he never revealed his employer.

http://www.cfis.org/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000077.html

http://www.wefarm.net/board/Sustainable/messages/10017.shtml#0

"FDA taken to court by its own scientists"

Mon 3 Jul 03:52

In a landmark lawsuit filed against the US Food and Drug Administration, nine eminent scientists including some of the FDA's own Life scientists, Biologists and Advisers are taking the FDA to court to obtain mandatory safety testing and labeling of Genetically Engineered foods.

They have been joined by a whole host of consumer groups, religious organizations and concerned scientists. They claim that every genetically engineered food in the U.S. is on the market illegally and should be recalled for rigorous safety testing. The FDA has deliberately unleashed a host of potentially harmful foods onto American dinner tables in blatant violation of U.S. law.

The case is currently pending in the District of Colombia. The scientists have formed a coalition called the "Alliance for Bio-Integrity", their website:

http://www.biointegrity.org/index.html

9 eminent life scientists formed a coalition in order to emphasize the degree to which the FDA's policy is scientifically unsound and morally irresponsible. Now the FDA's own files confirm how well-founded are their concerns. They are required to deliver copies of these files, totaling over 44,000 pages, to the plaintiff's attorneys. False claims and a policy at odds with the FDA's records reveal that it declared genetically engineered foods to be safe in the face of broad disagreement from its own experts.

  1. Agency scientists repeatedly cautioned the FDA that products produced through recombinant DNA technology entail different risks than do their conventionally produced counterparts.

  2. The advice was consistently disregarded by the bureaucrats who crafted the agency's current policy, which treats bioengineered foods, the same as natural foods, contradicting the FDA's claims that its policy is science-based.

This evidence shows that the agency violated the U.S. Food, Drug and Cosmetic Safety Act, allowing genetically engineered foods to be marketed without testing on the premise that they are generally recognized as safe by qualified FDA scientists.

The FDA repeatedly ignored resistance from its own scientists who warned that gene splicing differs from conventional practices and entails a unique set of risks.

Numerous agency experts protested that the FDA was ignoring the recognized potential for bioengineering to produce unexpected toxins and allergens.

The suit demands that the agency bring its policy back in line with sound science and US law by requiring comprehensive safety testing on all genetically engineered foods.

Underscoring the fact that labeling is required not only to uphold the basic right of consumer choice but consumer freedom as well, 17 religious leaders have also joined this protest. They represent a wide variety of faiths, including 7 churches (including the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Protestant denominations from Episcopalian to Baptist). Conservative and reformed rabbis, Hindu and Buddhist organizations. They express religious reasons for distancing themselves from tampering with God's creation, the integrity of humanity's relationship with God.

Dr. Louis Priybl of the FDA Microbiology Group wrote, " There is a profound difference between the unexpected effects of traditional breeding and genetic engineering, which is glanced over in this document."

Dr. Linda Kahl, an FDA compliance officer, objected that the agency "was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole by trying to force an ultimate conclusion that there is no difference between foods modified and traditional."

Misrepresenting the facts in order to approve the foods, nonetheless, so strong was the FDA's desire to promote the biotech industry, that it not only disregarded the warnings of its own scientists, and the unique risks of gene-spliced foods, but actually took a public position that was the opposite. Its official policy asserts "the agency is not aware of any information showing that these new foods created by these new methods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way." Yet in 1991, within months of release, 37 people died and over 1,500 were disabled from the genetically engineered supplement L-Tryptophan forcing the FDA to recall the product from all stores nationwide.

Dr. Norman Ellstrand, professor of genetics, University of California: "The generation of genetically engineered plants and animals involves the random integration of artificial combinations of genetic material from unrelated species into the DNA of the host organism. This procedure results in the disruption of the genetic blueprint of the organism, with totally unpredictable consequences. The unexpected production of toxic substances has now been observed in genetically engineered bacteria, yeast, plants and animals, with the problem remaining undetected until a major health hazard has arisen."

Dr. Michael Antoniou, senior lecturer in molecular pathology, London, UK: "Recombinant DNA technology places in human hands the capacity to redesign living organisms, the products of some 3 billion years of evolution. We are now essentially creating new organisms, self-perpetuating and hence permanent. Once created, they cannot be recalled. Now whole proteins will be transposed overnight in wholly new associations, with consequences no one can fully tell, either for host organisms or their neighbors. Going ahead in this direction would not only be very unwise, it could be dangerous."

Dr. George Wald, Nobel laureate in medicine, 1967 Higgins Professor of Biology, Harvard University: "We are breeding new animal and plant diseases, new sources of cancer, novel epidemics."

The notice further describes unintended or pleiotropic effects that pose unknown safety concerns. It has always been the position that the sponsor (i.e. the biotech industry) needs to generate the appropriate scientific information to demonstrate product safety to humans, animals, and the environment.

Dr. Peter Wills, Auckland University, New Zealand: " Probably the greatest threat from genetically altered crops is the insertion of modified virus and insect virus genes in to crops. It has been shown in a laboratory that genetic recombination will create highly virulent new viruses from such construction. Modified viruses could cause famine by destroying crops, or cause human and animal diseases.

Dr. Richard Lacey, professor of food safety, Leeds University, UK: "Genetic engineering bypasses conventional breeding by using artificially constructed parasitic genetic elements, including viruses, as vectors to carry and smuggle genes into cells. Once inside cells, these vectors slot themselves into the host genome. The insertion of foreign genes into the host genome has long been known to have many harmful and fatal effects including cancer of the organism."

Professor Mae Wan-Ho, Department of Biology, Open University UK: "In 1983, hundreds of people in Spain died after consuming adulterated rapeseed oil. This rapeseed oil was not toxic to rats." Dr. Park warns that current testing procedures for genetically altered foods, including rodent tests, do not prove safety for humans.

Professor Dennis Parke, School of Biological Sciences, Surrey University UK, is calling for a moratorium on the release of genetically engineered organisms in foods and medicines. "Genes encode proteins involved in the control of virtually all biological processes. By transferring genes across species barriers which have existed for eons, between species like humans and sheep, we risk breaching natural thresholds against unexpected biological processes. For example, an incorrectly folded form of an ordinary cellular protein can under certain circumstances be replicative and give rise to infectious neurological disease.

Stephen Jones
9442 South Pleasant Avenue, Chicago, IL 60620 (tel): 773 233 5513

A crime is being committed by American Agribusiness on the people of the world and ESPECIALLY the American public, but who is going to tell? Searching through the archives of the National Dailies speaks volumes about which publications that print NOTHING in regard to Genetically Engineered Foodstuffs.
AND WHAT ABOUT HERE IN SOUTH AFRICA?????
Top PreviousNextFront Page

Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:47:12 +0200
From: "ekogaia" ekogaia@iafrica.com
From: vlerner@interpac.net (Viviane Lerner)

Kellogg's To Keep Using Genetically Mutated Grain

Kellogg Co. shareholders Friday overwhelmingly defeated a proposal to require the cereal maker to stop using genetically modified ingredients, despite its sponsors' claims that such use was unsafe and put the company at risk for lawsuits.

"It looks like it might be something in the future, but right now it's not an issue," said Tom Fisher, a retired Kellogg employee, who voted against the proposal, which was sponsored by two groups of Michigan nuns.

The 94 percent vote against the proposal was the world's leading cereal company's latest brush with the issue. In the last six months, Kellogg has twice been picketed by Greenpeace activists, who want Kellogg to adopt a commitment similar to that made by Gerber. The baby food maker says it won't use genetically altered products in its products.

Kellogg has removed or is in the process of removing genetically altered ingredients from its European and Australian products, but has declined to do so in the United States, citing a lack of consumer interest and insufficient scientific evidence. AND WHAT ABOUT HERE IN SOUTH AFRICA????


Top PreviousFront Page

Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:47:12 +0200
From: "ekogaia" ekogaia@iafrica.com
From: vlerner@interpac.net (Viviane Lerner)

Genetically Engineered Spider Toxin Threatens Butterflies

July 19, 20000

Can a deadly spider replace chemical pesticides? Could this be a threat to human livers and human health?

Viruses given a gene for a toxin from one of the world's deadliest spiders could replace chemical pesticides, say researchers in the US. They plan to carry out field trials, although there are fears about the wisdom of releasing such viruses.

Glenn King of the University of Connecticut Health Center in Farmington and his colleagues recently identified a unique family of toxins in the venom of a funnel-web spider. These neurotoxins are lethal when injected into insect tissues, yet have no effect if eaten by insects or other animals (Nature Structural Biology, vol 7, p 505).

King's team is now engineering the gene for one of these toxins into baculoviruses, common viruses that infect certain moths and butterflies, and have long been used as "biopesticides." When the modified baculovirus infects a butterfly or moth, the insect's cells should start to produce the toxin, killing it faster than wild viruses. Because the host butterfly or moth) dies quickly, before much virus can replicate, the modified virus shouldn't persist in the environment, say the researchers. Critics contend that the risk to butterfly and human populations and survival is not worth taking

"I welcome a potentially environmentally friendly pest control but it's abundantly clear we need to be more firm about risk issues," comments George McGavin, an entomologist at Oxford University. "If we are not 100 per cent sure, it shouldn't be in the field."

There have already been several field trials worldwide of baculoviruses given a gene for a scorpion toxin (New Scientist, 21 January 1995, p 6). However, most of the scorpion toxin made in infected insects fails to fold into the correct shape, says King. By contrast, tests in bacteria suggest that almost 100 per cent of the spider toxin should fold properly, making the virus deadlier.

King thinks engineering toxin genes into viruses is preferable to adding them to plants, such as Bt maize. Not only does it mean that people do not have to eat plants that produce insecticidal toxins, but only target insects will be affected, he says. "These viruses can be exquisitely specific, right down to infecting individual species," King claims. "This means that only the pest insects will be killed whilst beneficial insects such as bees remain unaffected."

However, critics fear that the virus will spread into the environment and affect other kinds of butterflies and moths. "A containment environment could not possibly hold a virus," says McGavin, who opposed trials of a scorpion toxin virus in Oxfordshire in the 1990s. "If you could get a specific baculovirus it would be great, but baculoviruses do pass on {to other species}."

"This is problem that really concerns us," said Alan Moore of the Butterfly Gardeners Association, a local group that advocates for the conservation of butterflies and their habits. This is at least the third time that Genetically Modified Organisms, GMOs have been targeted against butterflies.

Bt-corn has genes from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis spliced into the plant genes and its toxin is carried by wind-driven pollen to the leaves of milkweed where they can poison monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed. "I think this clearly shows transgenic corn could be a serious threat to monarchs," said Rebecca Goldburg, a senior scientist with the New York-based Environmental Defense Fund in a story published by the San Francisco Chronicle about Bt-corn . "I doubt if it would push them over the edge by itself, but it adds substantially to the other risks they face."

Moore makes the point that the industry states that Bt-corn alone could not push monarchs and other butterflies over the edge, but a combination of other Monsanto and industry innovations just might. "Now we have Roundup ready crops and spider poison enhanced butterfly pathogens to deal with. Roundup ready crops are a direct threat in that they target milkweed, the monarch's host plant, as well as a whole spectrum of annual and perennial weeds for elimination. Many of these weeds are host plants for other butterflies as well," says Moore

There are also fears that the toxin gene might be transferred to other viruses. "There is no instance of a toxin gene jumping from virus A to virus B," says Bruce Hammock of the University of California, Davis, who is also working on modified baculoviruses. "But if it jumped, the new virus would become less effective."

Jenny Cory of the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Oxford agrees transfer of the toxin gene is unlikely, but thinks further tests would be helpful. "It's a vicious circle," she says, "you have to do a risk assessment before you do the experiment but we don't know all the risks without doing field experiments in the first place."

"Soon after GM virus were developed for insect control it was found that baculovirus were capable of infecting human liver cells," says Joe Cummins, Prof. Emeritus at the University of Western Ontario. "For that reason baculovirus vectors were developed to treat liver disease. Interestingly, the fact that baculovirus can infect human liver cells seems to have been ignored by those developing the virus for commercial pest control. The following discussion will deal with the use of baculovirus vectors and their safety. I understand that there has been a great deal of pressure to hasten approval of the GM baculovirus for pest control."

"Ecological considerations for the impact of recombinant baculovirus insecticides have been studied extensively. Impact on non-target insects is extrapolated from insects of related phylogeny, a practice difficult to defend. The recombinant baculovirus were very persistent and capable of reshaping an ecosystem."

"Baculovirus is a circular DNA duplex, it replicates in the insect cell nucleus and replication is prone to the generation of defective genomes by deletion. The mode of virus replication seems to make the recombinant virus highly unpredictable and prone to generating potentially undesirable variants. This important finding has not yet influenced the risk analysis of recombinant baculovirus insecticides and gene therapy vectors."

"The most disconcerting finding is the one showing that replication of the baculovirus is inherently unpredictable, says Cummins. "There may be some who believe that we should all have unlabelled liver gene therapy with our salads.

"We need to educate the American consumer on the threats of GMOs to human health and butterflies, says Moore. That is why we have joined Bay Area Rage, Global Exchange, the Bay Area Seed Interchange Library, the Berkeley Ecology Center, and the Organic Consumers Association in bringing this issue before the public. That is why we are here today at this Market Street Safeway in San Francisco."

Prepared by New Scientist authors Mark Robins and Michael Le Page (New Scientist issue: 17th June 2000), Butterfly Gardeners director Alan Moore, and Prof. Joe Cummins of University of Western Ontario

For more information contact the New Scientist Washington office 202-452-1178 newscidc@idt.net http://www.newscientist.com

Alan Moore
Butterfly Gardeners Assoc. & Project Chrysalis/Director and founder 1563 Solano Ave. #477, Berkeley, CA 94707
510-528-7730    bflyspirit@aol.com
http://www.bashar.com/GSP/earth-proc.htm

Prof. Joe Cummins
University of Western Ontario
73 8 Wilkins St., Ontario N6C4Z9 Canada
(519) 681-5477      jcummins@julian.uwo.ca

"All policymakers must be vigilant to the possibility of research data being manipulated by corporate bodies and of scientific colleagues being seduced by the material charms of industry. Trust is no defence against an aggressively deceptive corporate sector,"

THE LANCET, April 2000

"When a butterfly flaps its wings in Africa, it can cause a hurricane in New York."

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 (USD for those outside Canada) for 12 months, payable to "BanGEF" and mailed to the above address. Or see website for details.