News archiveThe latest news | October-November 1999 | Before July 1999 July 5 to end of Sept 1999The news are ordered chronologically, the latest on top. [Added: 30/09 1999] Plastics from GE crops not profitableMonsanto has been developing GE crops capable of producing plastic materials. Recently the company released a story to the press in UK that biodegradable plastics could be developed this way. However British BBC noted that the yield of plastics from such crops is too low to be profitable. Scarlett Foster, spokeswoman for Monsanto, has since confirmed that this way of producing plastics is not economically viable. So Monsanto stopped this development project already in 1998. (Source: Reuters, Sept 28).
CommentOther reasons than economical may be more important for not developing such a product. Questions have been raised about potentially serious ecological effects from plastic containing plants. What might, for example, happen to animals, beneficial birds and insects eating parts of the plants? What might happen to the ecology if such genes got astray (which they tend to do) and spread uncontrollably in weeds and wild plants? Environmental complications would need careful interdisciplinary ecological long term investigations before release can be considered safe of plants producing plastics. Why did Monsanto bring out information about a GE product that they already found unprofitable in 1998? Was this another failed attempt to improve the scarred image of genetic engineering? [End] Cattle at some US farms reported to refuse to eat GE feedSome farmers in the US have, independently of each other, reported cases of cattle and other animals avoiding GE crops as food. In one case the cattle went through a field of Roundup ready corn, not touching it and broke through a fence and ate non-GE corn. In another case weight loss occurred in the cattle after switching to GE feed. An organic farmer says he had a great problem with deer eating his non-GE soy beans, while the field with Roundup Ready beans across the road was left untouched by them. Likewise raccoons did not touch any Bt corn but ate plenty of non-GE corn. These are just a few examples of similar reports from separate sources.After four months of collecting such anecdotal evidence from Kansas and Wisconsin, reporter Steven Sprinkel thinks it is time to make a more thorough investigation. (Source: US farmer, ACRES, USA Special Report, Steven Sprinkel, 19 September 1999.) CommentThis is anecdotal evidence, of course not proving the case. But concordant reports from different sources cannot just be dismissed. They deserve scientific verification. If the observations can be verified, the next question appears - is this behavior caused by just some impalatability or may it be that the animals are sensing unhealthy qualities of the GE crops? Animals are known to have a good ability to sense harmful qualities in their food. This highlights the great need for long term GE feeding studies as we have long been demanding. Would they reveal additional cases of such harmful effects as reported by Dr Pusztai in the long term study of rats eating GE potatoes? [End]Monsanto hints change of biotech policy - may abandon GE in UKMonsanto, has offered to help plant breeders create new varieties of crops using traditional cross-breeding techniques. It has a large gene databases of "genetic profiles" that they think could help traditional breeders develop crops suitable for specific soil, pest types and other environmental conditions. While formerly crossbreeding was time consuming, based on trial and error, this knowledge might contribute to more rapid and efficient breeding. Patrick Holden of the Soil Association participated at a meeting with Monsanto's senior executives, commented: "What was said has huge significance. It shows that Monsanto is thinking about reversing their whole strategy. We believe Monsanto is open to a full rethink of what it is doing."(Source: The Observer, UK, 26/9/99)
CommentThis news came 11 days after we suggested that Monsanto might be the next major company to change GE policy, see "Two major biotech companies consider pullout from GE business" from 16/09. However, it should be noted that this presently goes only for the UK as a response to the strong resistance to GE crops there. It cannot be taken as an indication that Monsanto is about to change its policy worldwide. As a compensation, the company might even consider increasing it present efforts to establish strongholds in developing countries. [End] [Added: 26/09 1999] Europe's leading pet food producer goes GE freeEurope's leading dry dog food producer, Royal Canin, vowed on the 15 th of Sept not to include GE ingredients in any of its pet food lines. The decision by the Paris-based firm comes after British pet food producer Pascoe's Group Plc launched the country's first wholly organic, non-GM dog food line last month. (Source: http://WWW.PLANETARK.ORG/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=3681, September 16 1999). [End] Leading British food wholesale company goes GE freeThe biggest distributor of frozen foods in Britain, Brake Bros., has now eliminated genetically engineered ingredients from all its products. The company is a leading supplier to hospitals, hotels, restaurants and schools. Brake Bros' chief executive, Ian Player, thinks this will give the company a competitive advantage especially on the health and education side. (Source: Electronic Telegraph, UK, Lauren Mills, Sept. 19 /99). [End] Important breakthrough for GE-labeling in the USGovernment agencies of the US intend to develop plans for labeling of products containing GE ingredients as a response to the resistance in the European market. According to consultant Charles Benbrook the decision was made at a meeting between representatives of the U.S. Agriculture Department, the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. (Source: Reuters 24/09/99) CommentThis decision represents a radical change in US policy. So far the United States has been strongly opposed to GE labeling and has been lobbying hard against it in international regulatory bodies. However, it has become more and more isolated internationally in this question, and is now apparently realizing the untenability of its position. Labeling is likely to greatly reduce the demand for GE products. [End] [Added: 25/09 1999] Australian Farmer Federation goes GE-freePolicy decision of the Western Australian Farmers Federation: "That the Federation oppose the release of 'Genetic Modification' of both livestock and other farm produce and that we continue to promote R&D of those products by natural means." (Source: Rural Press Report, September 15, 1999) [End] [Added: 24/09 1999]Large German retailer goes GE free after initially resisting itThe German retailer Edeka has joined other German companies in declaring that it will not use genetically modified (GM) ingredients in its products. Edeka joins other big German retailers like Tengelmann and Rewe, which after negotiations with Greenpeace, have recently declared that they will remove GM ingredients from own-brand products. Edeka had previously refused to join the initiative towards GM-free products. (Source: AgBiotecNet 15 Sept 1999). [End] [Added: 24/09 1999]Governmental expert commission in Paraguay recommends GE free national policyIn Paraguay, a Bio-Safety Commission of experts, citizen organizations and parliamentarians designated by the government recommended that the executive office declare the nation "free of genetically modified organisms." Soya is Paraguay's primary agricultural product and the commission's pronouncement would be a serious obstacle to the transnationals' plans for GM products, indicated the citizen organizations. (Source: AgBiotechNet Sept 15 1999) [End] [Added: 24/09 1999]GE soy production hits back on US agricultureAs a response to the greatly increased demand for GE free soy, European farmers are now planning to grow new hardy varieties of soy that are possible to grow in the European Climate. So far the United States has been the world leading source of soy which today is a used extensively by the food industry all over the world. The European Union countries have imported 15 million tonnes of soy annually, mainly from the US. Today a major part of US soy is genetically engineered and producers have difficulties in segregating GE and GE free soy. There are doubts whether GE free soy producing countries will be able to segregate the soy varieties in a reliable way. Therefore, the European food industry is expected to prefer buying from countries where no GE soy is grown. The European farmers expect a large demand in Europe for their GE free soy which will be competitive against the transatlantic sources also because of lower transportation costs. Because of considerable acreage surplus, there is plenty of farm land available. Already growing soy ha been more profitable in Europe than many other crops. Unlike many other special crops, soy is technically easy to grow, not requiring any special machinery or production modification. So it is easy for farmers to switch to soy production. Consequently, a great increase of European soy production can be expected. This threatens to result in a great loss to United States agriculture. (Source: Farming News 17 September 1999 "Hardy varieties put soya boom on the cards")[End]
[Added: 18/09 1999] Australian consortium establishes GE free certificationAn Australian consortium announced on August 11 that it had been formed so as to establish a label and certification process for GE ingredient free foods. The US firm "Genetic ID", a world leader in developing ultrasensitive methods for detecting unwanted GE genes in food, has been engaged for ensuring GE free status of the products.(Source: AP, 14/09 1999, CANBERRA, Australia).[End][Added: 16/09 1999] Two major biotech companies consider pullout from GE businessIn August this year AstraZeneca in UK indicated that it might sell its agrichemicals business including the section dealing with development of GE foods. Novartis in Switzerland, which is a another major biotech company, indicated on the 15th of September that it is considers to spin off its agribusiness division, which includes the GE section. Both companies are also leading drug producers. Analysts believe that involvement in GE food development may damage the image of the pharmaceutical business. But decreased sales due to increasing resistance to GE foods is probably the major factor contributing to the doubts about continued involvement in GE business. Because of this, Novartis already earlier this year announced a reduction by 1.100 jobs in its agricultural division. Now Novartis has announced that the job cuts will be even larger. (Source: Guardian, UK 16/09 1999)
CommentWhat company will be next to announce doubts about its future commitments to GE? - Monsanto in the US perhaps? It is the world's GE business leader. The company has experienced a fall of about 40% of its share price in one year (from 62 USD in September 1998 to 37 USD in the middle of September 1999). [End][Added: 15/09 1999] Reputed GE technology supporter warns about GE foods - a major blow to the GE industryDr Andrew Chesson, vice chairman of European Commission scientific committee on animal nutrition, is well known to have been a supporter of food biotechnology. Now he admits that current food safety tests are unreliable. Therefore he warns that potentially disastrous effects may come from undetected harmful substances in GE foods. (Source: Daily Mail, UK, 13 Sept 1999). CommentThrough this warning, Dr Chesson joins in with another internationally reputed food scientist, Dr Arpad Pusztai. However, when Pusztai expressed a very similar warning in August 1998, he was fired and became subject to strong attempts at destroying his credibility. Clear lies were used and flawed "evaluations" of his research were made, see World renowned scientist lost his job when he warned about GE foods - The Pusztai case. We can only hope that Chesson will not be another victim of the systematic endeavor of the biotech lobby to suppress the truth. PSRAST has long been warning for this hazard, pointing out the inadequacy of present testing (see Substantial equivalence versus scientific food safety assessment). We have been greatly worried about the refusal among leading scientists in the field to admit this in spite of the obvious reasons we have pointed out. We find it very satisfying that now a leading EU scientist agrees with us. It seems that the powerful biotechnology lobby begins to loose its censoring grip over leading scientists. The only way to avoid the potentially serious danger from GE foods is to immediately withdraw all of them from the market. This includes all the GE foods approved today in the US, Europe and elsewhere as there has not been adequate testing in any single case. [End] [Added: 15/09 1999] Addition to our conclusion in the overview article "Problems and Obstacles in Food Biotechnology" Now that it is becoming recognized that all presently approved GE foods are unsafe, because the test methods used are inadequate for detecting unexpected harmful substances, it should a matter or short time before they all have to be withdrawn for the market. [End] [Added: 14/9 1999]First case of insolvency due to investor pessimism about GE prospectsAxis Genetics, a producer in UK of vaccines from GE plants, has entered insolvency proceedings. The reason, according to the Chief executive Iain Cubitt is that investors are worried about the prospects of companies dealing with GE. (Source: PA News, September 7, 1999) [End] [Added: 11/09 1999] The European Union makes great cuts in GE crop research programmeGreat cuts in the research programme of the European Union to develop new genetically modified crops and plants are planned. The move reflects increasing political and public concern over genetic engineering of plants. Scientists believe it will make it impossible to realize the former European dreams of becoming a world leader in the biotechnology. The future now does not look bright for biotech researchers across Europe. The new program of EU has the emphasis more on research into health, environment and sustainable agriculture. (Source: The Times, UK, Monday September 6th 1999) [End] [Added: 11/09 1999] American company decides to segregate GE cropsArcher Daniels Midland Company (ADM) has decided to segregate their genetically altered crops from conventional crop. The American Corn Growers Association (ACGA) thinks that this sends a distinct signals to consumers in America, Europe and Asia that US farmers want to respect the wishes of consumers (Gary Goldberg, Chief Executive Officer of the ACGA in Sept 1999). ACGA questioned whether it would be in the best interest of US farmers to continue growing GE crops considering the resistance against GMOs in Europe, Asia and the United States. [End] [Added: 10/09 1999:]Leading Japanese food company tells US farmers it will not by GE soy and cornConsolidated Grain and Barge Company (CGB), the subsidiary of a leading agribusiness company in Japan, Itochu Corp, sent a message on Sept 1999 to US farmers that it will not buy GE corn and soy. They indicated that it will be profitable for farmers to segregate non GMO grains. Itochu Corp has substantial agri-food business interests in Thailand, China, Malaysia, Indonesia and the US. (Source: Reuters 1 Sept 1999).[End] [Added: 09/09 1999:] Connection between glyphosate (Roundup from Monsanto) and CancerA recent study by oncologists Dr. Lennart Hardell and Dr. Mikael Eriksson in Sweden, concluded that exposure to the herbicide glyphosate was associated with increased risk for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL), a kind of cancer. They stress that with the rapidly increasing use of glyphosate since the time the study was carried out, further epidemiological studies should be done.(15 March 1999 Journal of American Cancer Society). Plants resistant to Glyphosate represent a considerable portion of genetically engineered crops.[End] [Added: 08/09 1999:] European Union signals stricter application of the precautionary principleThe European Union's environment commissioner, Sweden's Margot Wallström said in a hearing at the European Parliament that legislation is required to guarantee that companies are liable for any environmental damage caused by the products they manufacture. She also told the environment committee of the Parliament that the burden should be on companies to prove that products they introduce are safe. She intends to push for a rapid implementation of comprehensive rules on liability. (Source: Reuters, Sept 2 1999) Comment
[Added: 27/08 1999:] Europé's biggest bank advises investors to sell biotech sharesIn August 1999, Deutsche Bank released a report saying that increasing negative feelings are creating problems for biotech companies including Monsanto and Novartis. It has been sent to thousands of the largest institutional investors in the world.The report notes that Monsanto spent over $1.5m in vain to in an attempt to win the English consumers. The bank finds that food producing companies, food retailers, grain processors, and governments are indicating that they are not ready for GE foods. The bank warns that culturing GE crops might bring losses to farmers. And that food companies will find it too risky to sell food with GE ingredients. Finally the report warns that the biotech stock market could collapse. Already nine months ago, the Washington analysts of the Deutsche Bank, Frank Mitsch and Jennifer Mitchell, warned that the biotech industry seems to meet the same future as the nuclear industry did in the US. Now they are surprised how rapidly this prediction appears to come true. CommentOn July 12, we issued a warning about the risk of investing in the food biotech sector, see "PSRAST issues warning to Food Biotech investors" (at the end of this page). It is very satisfying to find that a leading finance analyst now follows suit. [End][Added: 26/08 1999] US consumer union asks government for GE food labelingOn August 24, 1999, Consumers Union, a leading U.S. consumer group asked the government to require labels on food products containing ingredients made from genetically modified crops.[End] Major Blow against Genetically Engineered Hormone (rBGH) MilkThe FAO organ, Codex Alimentiarius decided in August 1999 to support the rBGH moratorium of the European Union. This ruling represents the first major blow against the GE industry.Recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH)has been extensively used to increase milk production in cows in the US since FDA approved it in 1994. However it causes suffering to cows, including udder infections (resulting in increased antibiotics concentrations in milk), reproductive problems and lameness. In addition it causes increases of a hormone that has been proven to increase the risk of breast and prostatic cancer in humans. In spite of this Monsanto has been pressing hard to make the European Union approve its use. The handling of this issue by the producer Monsanto, including suppression and manipulation of research data, gives reasons to doubt the company's reliability in GE food safety issues according to Professor Samuel Epstein, see Codex Alimentiarius decided to support rBGH moratorium. [EL].[End] [Added: 08 1999] Australia and New Zealand decides to label GE foodsNew Zealand and Australian Health Ministers on August 3rd decided that all foods containing GE ingredients should be labeled. In August 1999 one of the country's biggest food manufacturers, Heinz Watties said it is working towards becoming free of GE ingredients. US farmers beginning to hesitate about cultivating GE crops[Added: 08 1999]According to GE seed dealer Doughty there is a feeling among the farmers that the Biotech companies have let them down by trying to force GE foods upon Europeans without proving that they are safe (see "US farmers fear GM crop fallout" BBC News 14 july 1999). [End] [Added: 07 1999] British doctors call for Biotech Moratorium The British Medical Association (BMA), which represents 115,000 doctors, recently called for a complete moratorium on biotech crops in Britain until extensive research is carried out to determine the safety of these crops. The BMA report, The Impact of Genetic Modification on Agriculture, Food and Health, says that detailed research is needed into possible toxicity of GM food and whether eating it could lead to the development of new allergies and antibiotic resistance in humans. [End] PSRAST issues warning to Food Biotech investorsOn July 12, 1999, PSRAST issued a warning saying a/o: "We are convinced that, considering the steadily growing and world-wide opposition due to increasing awareness of the truth about Genetically Engineered (GE) foods, it won't take long before a global moratorium will be agreed upon." It was sent to stock investment newsgroups, leading stock investment advisors in the US (including Deutsche Bank) and on-line stock investment news media.The latest news | October-November 1999 | Before July 1999 For a news overview article containing most of the news and additional information, go to "Problems and Obstacles in Food Biotechnology" "Genetically Engineered Food - Safety Problems" News Introductory articles Health hazards Environmental hazards Global issues Safety issues Alternatives to GE FAQ About us What You can do Membership E-mail How to sponsor us |