|
Site tour This page has been designed so as to give you an idea of the contents of this website. Differently from common "Site tours", requiring you to jump between pages, the "Tour" is all included on one page. To get a general idea, we suggest that you look it through without clicking on the links in the first round. In the end you find a list of good "Starting points". To save your time, we have classified the texts according to difficulty and put markings at the links so that you can easily see which are the difficult texts. The markings are as follows: Difficulty level of linked page: [EL] = elementary level. [ML] = medium level. [AL] = advanced level
Site Overview The website covers health hazards and environmental hazards with GE foods. "Global consequences" covers the global effects of applying food biotechnology to agriculture. The section "Safety assessment and labelling" may not sound so very exiting, but it contains some hot stuff about serious neglect of important facts on the part of regulatory bodies and their experts. Before each section, an illustrative quote representing the essence of the current status of the issue has been entered. Finally, a "Conclusion"sums up the facts presented at this website. Finally, with the message "To you who care about the future of the world" we invite you to help us with our campaign to stop the unnecessary and potentially dangerous exploitation of Genetically Engineered Foods. Below you find a presentation of the contents and the different sections of the site with some key texts. |
Contents of this site1. Introduction2. Health hazards 3. Environmental hazards 4. Global consequences 5. Safety assessment and labelling 6. CONCLUSION 7. To you who care about the future of the world 8. How to join our network 9. Links to related websites |
The sections of the site
Illustrative quotes
and overviews
Illustrative Quote
| "Up to now, living organisms have evolved
very slowly, and new forms have had plenty of time to settle in. Now whole
proteins will be trans-posed overnight into wholly new associations, with
consequences no one can foretell, either for the host organism, or their
neighbors.... ..going ahead in this direction may be not only unwise, but
dangerous.
Potentially, it could breed new animal and plant
diseases, new sources of cancer, novel epidemics."
|
|
Summary of scientific facts(This list is an exerpt that contains only the headings of each point.For the full list, click here) 1.Genetic engineering
is fundamentally different from breeding
[EL]
|
Illustrative Quote 1:
|
"Potentially disastrous effects
may come from undetected harmful substances in Genetically Modified Foods."
Dr Andrew Chesson, vice chairman of European Commission scientific committee on animal nutrition. Since long before this statement he has been known as an advocate for food biotechnology. (Daily Mail, UK, 13 Sept 1999). Illustrative Quote 2:"The fact is, it is virtually impossible to even conceive of a testing procedure to assess the health effects of genetically engineered foods when introduced into the food chain, nor is there any valid nutritional or public interest reason for their introduction." Professor Richard Lacey, microbiologist, medical doctor, and Professor of Food Safety at Leeds University, famous for his prediction of the dangers of "Mad cow disease" more than seven years ago. Recently he has spoken out strongly against the introduction of genetically engineered foods, because of 'the essentially unlimited health risks' |
|
Illustrative quote: "Our current knowledge does not provide us with the means to predict the ecological long-term effects of releasing organisms into the environment. So it is beyond the competence of the scientific system to answer such a question..." René von Schomberg. Contracted by STOA (Scientific and Technological Options Assessment) of the European Parliament. Quoted from: "Report on the release of Genetically Modified Organisms to the European Parliament", 2 Jan. 1998 (82 Kb).See also Comment on the EU policy concerning release of GE organisms [EL] |
Illustrative quote
|
"The recent expansion of international trade agreements to include intellectual property rights threatens the sustainability of local ecosystems, the rights of indigenous peoples, the ability of nations to provide food security, and protection of the global environment." |
| The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. |
|
Illustrative Quote 1
" The predominant philosophy behind current regulation can be summarized by the "No need - don't look - don't see" futile cycle .....this forms a self-reinforcing cycle, a motor for effectively passing with impunity any and every genetically engineered product to the public that the industry so wish. We repeat, the industry have been handed carte blanche to do as they please for maximum profitability, with the regulatory body acting to allay legitimate public fears and opposition." Professor Mae-Wan Ho, Biology Department, Open University,
Milton Keynes, UK.
Illustrative Quote 2 "Over the last fifteen years, I and other scientists have put the FDA on notice about the potential dangers of genetically engineered foods. Instead of responsible regulation we have seen bureaucratic bungling and obfuscation that have left public health and the environment at risk" Dr. Philip Regal, professor of Evolution, Ecology and
Behavior at the University of Minnesota and an internationally recognized
plant expert.
|
|
The Biotechnololgy industry has
been claiming that there is no fundamental difference between breeding
and genetic engineeering. Therefore, they say, if the engineered product
is "substantially equivalent" with its natural counterpart
it is harmless as its natural counterpart and can be treated as the latter
from a regulatory standpoint.
Articles in this section explain why there is a fundamental difference between breeding and genetic engineeering. For this and other reasons, the principle of substantial equivalence is useless as a basis for safety assessment, see (Inadequate GE food safety assessment, an "at a glance" summary [EL]. Still it has been used for approving GE foods in most countries. So it has not been reliably established that any of the approved GE foods are safe to eat nor that any crops are safe to the enviromnent. It has been a tradition in most countries that governments do not require that the producer proves that a new product is harmless, be it a chemical, a food additive or a genetically engineered food. The products are allowed to be released into nature and to be used by humans as long as there appears no evidence of their harmfulness. This is a major reason for the serious global problems with various kinds of pollution damaging the health of people and the environment. Now there is an increasing consensus that this policy should be abandoned and replaced by the precautionary principle, see "Introduction to the Precautionary Principle" [EL]. |
|
"The successful launch of genetically engineered foods with the aid of a useless safety assessment principle endorsed by leading scientists in national and international expert committees is a very serious warning for us all. It may indicate that we are already on the way towards a "new pseudo-scientific world order" where the short term interests of powerful industrial interests override global long term ecological and health safety considerations." Excerpt from "Dysfunctional science - Towards a "pseudoscientfic world order"? |
| We have formulated a letter demanding the withdrawal of all genetically engineered (GE) foods from the market unless they have undergone rigorous safety assessment. In practice this means that all foods on the market should be withdrawn. Scientists, physicians and students are invited to sign. See Open letter to governments. Translated to French and Spanish. |
|
Genetic engineering differs fundamentally from traditional breeding. The insertion of a gene may cause the generation of unexpected harmful substances detrimental to health. There are no fully reliable methods for detecting such substances. The effects on the environment are very incompletely known. They may be potentially serious and irreversible. There are no genetically engineered products today that may contribute to the solution of the world food supply problem. Science knows too little about DNA and the effects of genetic engineering to be able to predict reliably whether the technique will ever be able to yield really safe and valuable products of any kind at all. It may even turn out to be a blind alley. Consequently, there is no sound scientific justification for the rapid exploitation today of genetically engineered organisms for food production. Much research remains to be done before it can be judged whether release of genetically engineered organisms and the use of genetically engineered foods is safe enough to be justifiable. Until this has been done, PSRAST demands a global moratorium on the release of genetically engineered food products into the environment and on the use of them as food. |
To you who care about
the future of the world
|
We think that, after studying this website, you may have realized that the imminent avalanche of genetically engineered foods is not only unjustified and unnecessary, but a potentially serious threat to the health of mankind and to the global ecology. It is our resolve to bring this to a stop. You can contribute in importantly. To see what you can do, Click here |
Good starting points
|
Now that you have got an overview of the site, you might want to go deeper. You can either return to the beginning of this tour and look for links, but we think the best way is to use our list of selected starting points. This list is found at our Start
Page. From each starting point page you are linked to others pages at the site.
it to friends using our Website Announce Page.
Physicians and Scientists for Responsible
"Genetically Engineered Food - Safety Problems"
Siteguide Starting points Website search Site Map Home page |