Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - [Livingontheland] GM CROP SAFETY TESTS 'FLAWED', NEW SCIENTIFIC PAPER SHOWS

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@gilanet.com>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Livingontheland] GM CROP SAFETY TESTS 'FLAWED', NEW SCIENTIFIC PAPER SHOWS
  • Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:09:06 -0700

GM CROP SAFETY TESTS 'FLAWED', NEW SCIENTIFIC PAPER SHOWS Approval
of Monsanto's GM Corn Questioned

Washington, DC (US) / Brussels (Belgium)/ London (UK), November 16, 2004 -
A peer-reviewed scientific paper published today in Biotechnology and
Genetic
Engineering Reviews debunks the myth that genetically modified (GM) crops
are thoroughly tested, regulated and proven safe.

The paper, "Safety Testing and Regulation of Genetically Engineered Foods"
[1], reveals fundamental flaws in how biotech companies test and the U.S.
government regulates GM crops. The paper thus raises serious questions
about whether GM foods, which have been on the market since 1994, are in
fact safe, as claimed by the biotech industry and U.S. regulators. [2]

The scientific paper includes a comprehensive case study of two types of
insecticide-producing GM corn (chiefly the MON810 variety of biotech giant
Monsanto Co.), showing how flawed testing and regulation permitted these
varieties onto world markets despite evidence that they could cause food
allergies. The European Union recently approved 17 corn hybrids derived
from MON810 over the objections of several member states.

Authors Dr. David Schubert (cell biologist and medical researcher at
California's Salk Institute) and William Freese (research analyst with
Friends of the Earth U.S) base their meticulously documented, 25-page paper
on nearly 100 sources, including little-known U.S. regulatory documents and
unpublished studies by biotech companies. [3]

"One thing that surprised us is that U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively
on information provided by the biotech crop developer, and those data are
not published in journals or subjected to peer review," said co-author
Schubert.

Added Freese: "In one case, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ignored
a published study by an Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scientist with
suggestive evidence that GM corn might be able to cause food allergies, and
instead asked Monsanto and Syngenta to essentially re-do FDA's analysis."

The US is the world's largest exporter of GM crops and accounts for nearly
two-thirds of all biotech crops planted globally. GM soy and GM corn
account for 83 percent of all GM crops planted on the planet.

"The picture that emerges from our study of U.S. regulation of GM foods is a
rubber-stamp 'approval process' designed to increase public confidence in,
but not ensure the safety of, genetically engineered foods," said Schubert.

"GM food regulation in the U.S. bears as little relation to good science as
the typical used car ad to the true state of the automobile. Both are
designed to sell a product," added Freese.

"We outline a testing scheme that would be a first step toward putting
regulation of GM foods on a scientific footing," said Schubert. "It's quite
similar to science-based testing recommended by several European teams," he
added.

See "Key Findings" below for more information on the paper,

NOTES TO EDITORS:

[1] E-mail one of the contacts below for a copy of the article, which forms
part of Volume 21 of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews
(http://www.intercept.co.uk/gb/not.asp?id=RS6LS3L6S6ROFD&rec=oui&pos=0&refer
er=%2Fgb%2Fdetail.asp%3Faction%3Dcurrent).

[2] An independent study by UK-based Econexus released in October has come
to very similar conclusions regarding the safety of existing GM crops; see
"Genome Scrambling - Myth or Reality?" at:
http://www.econexus.info/pdf/ENx%20-%20Genome%20Scrambling%20Summary.pdf.
The major GM food crops on the market are varieties of soybeans, corn and
canola.

[3] About the authors:

David Schubert, Ph.D is on the faculty of the Salk Institute of Biological
Studies in San Diego, California, where he is head of the Cellular
Neurobiology Laboratory. He has a B.A. in chemistry and a Ph.D. in cell
biology. Dr. Schubert's fields of scientific expertise are molecular
genetics, cell biology, and protein chemistry. He has published over 200
reviewed manuscripts in these areas and has written and lectured on the
potential health hazards associated with genetically modified crops.

William Freese has worked as research analyst with Friends of the Earth
since July 2000. He was part of the team that discovered GM StarLink corn,
unapproved for human consumption, in the food supply. He has helped inform
the public and the food industry about the irresponsible practice of
"biopharming" (www.foe.org/biopharm), and has written and lectured on many
aspects of GM crops and their regulation. Freese has a B.A. in chemistry
from Grinnell College.

[4] In the U.S. regulatory system, the EPA, not the FDA, has primary
responsibility for GM plants that produce insecticides.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

David Schubert (co-author) in California: 858-453-4100 ext. 1528; e-mail:
schubert@salk.edu

William Freese (co-author) in Washington, DC: 301-985-3011; e-mail:
billfreese@prodigy.net






  • [Livingontheland] GM CROP SAFETY TESTS 'FLAWED', NEW SCIENTIFIC PAPER SHOWS, Tradingpost, 11/22/2004

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page