SPREAD GE-FREE ZONES EVERYWHERE
DEFEND THE MENDOCINO VICTORY & SPREAD GE-FREE ZONES EVERYWHERE
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge-free.htm
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge-free.htm
Starmail - 5. Aug, 14:37
Genmanipulation
5
Aug
2004
4
Aug
2004
Health Hazards of GE Foods
Starmail - 4. Aug, 23:32
TURNING GENETICALLY ENGINEERED TREES INTO TOXIC AVENGERS
by Hillary Rosner
New York Times
August 3, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/science/earth/03tree.html
Last summer, on the site of 35 former hat factories where toxic mercury was once used to cure pelts, city officials in Danbury, Conn., deployed a futuristic weapon: 160 Eastern cottonwoods.
Dr. Richard Meagher, a professor of genetics at the University of Georgia, genetically engineered the trees to extract mercury from the soil, store it without being harmed, convert it to a less toxic form of mercury and release it into the air.
It was one of two dozen proposals Dr. Meagher has submitted to various agencies over two decades for engineering trees to soak up chemicals from contaminated soil. For years, no one would pay him to try. "I got called a charlatan," he said. "People didn't believe a plant could do this."
He will begin to assess the experiment's success this fall. But his is not the only such experiment with trees.
In laboratories around the country, researchers are using detailed knowledge of tree genes and recombinant DNA technology to alter the genetic workings of forest trees, hoping to tweak their reproductive cycles, growth rate and chemical makeup, to change their ability to store carbon, resist disease and absorb toxins.
The research is controversial. Environmentalists and others say that because of the large distances tree pollen can travel, altered genes will migrate to natural populations, leading to damage to ecosystems and other unforeseen consequences.
Dr. Jim Diamond, a retired pediatrician who is chairman of the Sierra Club's national genetic engineering committee, sees trees as a bastion of the natural world.
"It's quite possible the stands of trees that are left will be domesticated new varieties of trees and the natural varieties will cease to exist," he said. "Where do you draw the line?"
Dr. Meagher's toxic-avenger trees are intended to remove heavy metals from contaminated soils in places where other forms of cleanup are prohibitively expensive. Because mercury is an element, it cannot be broken down into harmless substances; the Danbury trees release the diluted mercury into the atmosphere, where it dissipates and falls back to earth after a few years.
This has opened Dr. Meagher to the charge that he is engaged in a shell game, simply moving toxins from one place to another. He does not disagree, but says the risk of human exposure will be lower if the chemicals are not concentrated in certain areas. In time, he says, such trees may be deployed in places like Bangladesh and India, where mercury- and arsenic-laden drinking water has created a growing health crisis.
"I really believe we're on the way to doing something great, and 20 years from now this is how these things will be taken care of," he said.
Tree geneticists are acutely aware that public acceptance will depend at least partly on whether altered trees can be made sterile or their reproductive capacity tightly controlled.
Dr. Steven Strauss, a professor of forest science at Oregon State University, directs the Tree Biosafety and Genomics Research Cooperative, a group working on strategies for gene containment, including control of flowering cycles and sterility. He is also exploring ways to link desirable traits to traits that make a tree unlikely to spread.
"If you take a gene for herbicide resistance that you don't want to spread, and you link it to a gene that makes a tree shorter and fatter, that's a tree that's not going to be very invasive," he said.
Not everyone is convinced that these containment strategies will work.
"Any number of molecular geneticists will tell you, 'Oh, these things are not a problem, we've got various ways of making sure the genes won't function outside of their intended plants,' " said Dr. Yan Linhart, a biologist at the University of Colorado who studies the ecology and evolution of forest trees. "But just as confident as they are, you will find any number of ecologists and evolutionary biologists like myself who believe in the Missouri motto, 'Show me.' "
Dr. Strauss and his colleagues view genetic engineering as a way to ease the pressure for logging in wild forests. If they can engineer trees in a plantation setting that grow faster and possess other desirable commercial traits, they say, then the industry will have less incentive to go after old-growth trees.
"It is possible," said Dr. Ron Sederoff, a professor of forestry at North Carolina State University, "that we could engineer trees that are so much better for specific purposes that you wouldn't want to cut down a natural tree."
Among the goals is the creation of trees that produce less lignin -- a substance similar to plastic that makes wood fibers stiff -- so they can be turned into paper and lumber using fewer chemicals. Lignin production is important to trees in the wild, contributing to the strength of their trunks, but less so on a plantation, where trees will be harvested every few years. Researchers have discovered a link between low lignin and faster growth, which could make the engineered trees desirable for plantation foresters.
Still, this has not satisfied critics.
"Perhaps part of growing faster is that it won't put all this effort into useless pine cones," said Dr. Diamond of the Sierra Club, "so there's no sustenance for the chipmunks. What if the tree in your backyard turns out to be a low-lignin tree but just happens to fall on your house or your car in a moderate wind? There are all kinds of risks besides just my aesthetic problem with remaking nature."
Dr. Strauss is also trying to use genetic engineering to address climate change. He wants to create trees that would store more carbon in their root systems -- "sequestering" it from the atmosphere, thereby cutting atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping greenhouse gas. In a project sponsored by the Department of Energy, Dr. Strauss and colleagues at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory are modifying tree architecture and cell wall chemistry to increase the amount of carbon stored below ground.
Much of the research relies on basic tree genetics -- made easier by the sequencing of the poplar tree genome, a major effort in forest biotechnology whose results are to be made public this month. Scientists can now study classes of genes that affect absorption of sugars and carbohydrates, which in turn can change the chemical processes that affect the rates at which trees rot and release stored carbon.
"In the U.S., there are about 40 million acres of excess, surplus or idle agricultural land," said Jerry Tuskan, a researcher at Oak Ridge, who led the effort to sequence the poplar genome. "If we could economically capture those and deploy fast-growing trees bred and created for carbon sequestration over a 10-year period, we could reach 25 percent of the Kyoto prescription for the U.S." The Kyoto treaty, never signed by the United States, calls for reductions in the growth of greenhouse gas emissions.
The aboveground portion of the trees would be harvested every 10 years and used for ethanol, which Dr. Tuskan believes would offset the use of petroleum and, by extension, carbon dioxide emissions.
In another forest biotechnology project that has been making strides, researchers are using genetic engineering to produce a disease-resistant strain of American chestnut, a tree that once dominated Eastern forests but was decimated by the mid-20th century by a fungus introduced from Asia. The American chestnut project has proved among the least controversial, in part because the tree's demise was caused by human intervention.
Elsewhere, researchers are using forest biotechnology to quicken the pace of traditional breeding experiments. At the University of Georgia's Warnell School of Forest Resources, Dr. Jeffrey Dean monitors individual genes to learn how they react to changes like the addition of fertilizer or the presence of a fungus.
Dr. Dean said he had spent the past several years "philosophizing" about the genetic engineering of trees, weighing the pros and cons. "We probably don't want to be thinking about genetic engineering as a magic bullet or cure-all," he said. "There will be times where we may want the magic bullets, but they have to be applied in specific ecological contexts."
Said Dr. Linhart of the University of Colorado: "One always needs to put into the equation biological caution and common sense. It's a case-by-case basis. One has to not make sweeping judgments that say this particular type of activity is all good or all bad."
Informant: NHNE
New York Times
August 3, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/science/earth/03tree.html
Last summer, on the site of 35 former hat factories where toxic mercury was once used to cure pelts, city officials in Danbury, Conn., deployed a futuristic weapon: 160 Eastern cottonwoods.
Dr. Richard Meagher, a professor of genetics at the University of Georgia, genetically engineered the trees to extract mercury from the soil, store it without being harmed, convert it to a less toxic form of mercury and release it into the air.
It was one of two dozen proposals Dr. Meagher has submitted to various agencies over two decades for engineering trees to soak up chemicals from contaminated soil. For years, no one would pay him to try. "I got called a charlatan," he said. "People didn't believe a plant could do this."
He will begin to assess the experiment's success this fall. But his is not the only such experiment with trees.
In laboratories around the country, researchers are using detailed knowledge of tree genes and recombinant DNA technology to alter the genetic workings of forest trees, hoping to tweak their reproductive cycles, growth rate and chemical makeup, to change their ability to store carbon, resist disease and absorb toxins.
The research is controversial. Environmentalists and others say that because of the large distances tree pollen can travel, altered genes will migrate to natural populations, leading to damage to ecosystems and other unforeseen consequences.
Dr. Jim Diamond, a retired pediatrician who is chairman of the Sierra Club's national genetic engineering committee, sees trees as a bastion of the natural world.
"It's quite possible the stands of trees that are left will be domesticated new varieties of trees and the natural varieties will cease to exist," he said. "Where do you draw the line?"
Dr. Meagher's toxic-avenger trees are intended to remove heavy metals from contaminated soils in places where other forms of cleanup are prohibitively expensive. Because mercury is an element, it cannot be broken down into harmless substances; the Danbury trees release the diluted mercury into the atmosphere, where it dissipates and falls back to earth after a few years.
This has opened Dr. Meagher to the charge that he is engaged in a shell game, simply moving toxins from one place to another. He does not disagree, but says the risk of human exposure will be lower if the chemicals are not concentrated in certain areas. In time, he says, such trees may be deployed in places like Bangladesh and India, where mercury- and arsenic-laden drinking water has created a growing health crisis.
"I really believe we're on the way to doing something great, and 20 years from now this is how these things will be taken care of," he said.
Tree geneticists are acutely aware that public acceptance will depend at least partly on whether altered trees can be made sterile or their reproductive capacity tightly controlled.
Dr. Steven Strauss, a professor of forest science at Oregon State University, directs the Tree Biosafety and Genomics Research Cooperative, a group working on strategies for gene containment, including control of flowering cycles and sterility. He is also exploring ways to link desirable traits to traits that make a tree unlikely to spread.
"If you take a gene for herbicide resistance that you don't want to spread, and you link it to a gene that makes a tree shorter and fatter, that's a tree that's not going to be very invasive," he said.
Not everyone is convinced that these containment strategies will work.
"Any number of molecular geneticists will tell you, 'Oh, these things are not a problem, we've got various ways of making sure the genes won't function outside of their intended plants,' " said Dr. Yan Linhart, a biologist at the University of Colorado who studies the ecology and evolution of forest trees. "But just as confident as they are, you will find any number of ecologists and evolutionary biologists like myself who believe in the Missouri motto, 'Show me.' "
Dr. Strauss and his colleagues view genetic engineering as a way to ease the pressure for logging in wild forests. If they can engineer trees in a plantation setting that grow faster and possess other desirable commercial traits, they say, then the industry will have less incentive to go after old-growth trees.
"It is possible," said Dr. Ron Sederoff, a professor of forestry at North Carolina State University, "that we could engineer trees that are so much better for specific purposes that you wouldn't want to cut down a natural tree."
Among the goals is the creation of trees that produce less lignin -- a substance similar to plastic that makes wood fibers stiff -- so they can be turned into paper and lumber using fewer chemicals. Lignin production is important to trees in the wild, contributing to the strength of their trunks, but less so on a plantation, where trees will be harvested every few years. Researchers have discovered a link between low lignin and faster growth, which could make the engineered trees desirable for plantation foresters.
Still, this has not satisfied critics.
"Perhaps part of growing faster is that it won't put all this effort into useless pine cones," said Dr. Diamond of the Sierra Club, "so there's no sustenance for the chipmunks. What if the tree in your backyard turns out to be a low-lignin tree but just happens to fall on your house or your car in a moderate wind? There are all kinds of risks besides just my aesthetic problem with remaking nature."
Dr. Strauss is also trying to use genetic engineering to address climate change. He wants to create trees that would store more carbon in their root systems -- "sequestering" it from the atmosphere, thereby cutting atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping greenhouse gas. In a project sponsored by the Department of Energy, Dr. Strauss and colleagues at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory are modifying tree architecture and cell wall chemistry to increase the amount of carbon stored below ground.
Much of the research relies on basic tree genetics -- made easier by the sequencing of the poplar tree genome, a major effort in forest biotechnology whose results are to be made public this month. Scientists can now study classes of genes that affect absorption of sugars and carbohydrates, which in turn can change the chemical processes that affect the rates at which trees rot and release stored carbon.
"In the U.S., there are about 40 million acres of excess, surplus or idle agricultural land," said Jerry Tuskan, a researcher at Oak Ridge, who led the effort to sequence the poplar genome. "If we could economically capture those and deploy fast-growing trees bred and created for carbon sequestration over a 10-year period, we could reach 25 percent of the Kyoto prescription for the U.S." The Kyoto treaty, never signed by the United States, calls for reductions in the growth of greenhouse gas emissions.
The aboveground portion of the trees would be harvested every 10 years and used for ethanol, which Dr. Tuskan believes would offset the use of petroleum and, by extension, carbon dioxide emissions.
In another forest biotechnology project that has been making strides, researchers are using genetic engineering to produce a disease-resistant strain of American chestnut, a tree that once dominated Eastern forests but was decimated by the mid-20th century by a fungus introduced from Asia. The American chestnut project has proved among the least controversial, in part because the tree's demise was caused by human intervention.
Elsewhere, researchers are using forest biotechnology to quicken the pace of traditional breeding experiments. At the University of Georgia's Warnell School of Forest Resources, Dr. Jeffrey Dean monitors individual genes to learn how they react to changes like the addition of fertilizer or the presence of a fungus.
Dr. Dean said he had spent the past several years "philosophizing" about the genetic engineering of trees, weighing the pros and cons. "We probably don't want to be thinking about genetic engineering as a magic bullet or cure-all," he said. "There will be times where we may want the magic bullets, but they have to be applied in specific ecological contexts."
Said Dr. Linhart of the University of Colorado: "One always needs to put into the equation biological caution and common sense. It's a case-by-case basis. One has to not make sweeping judgments that say this particular type of activity is all good or all bad."
Informant: NHNE
Starmail - 4. Aug, 17:55
31
Jul
2004
Whitewash on Health Hazards of GE Foods
Overview of Nat'l Academy of Sciences Whitewash on Health Hazards of GE Foods
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/overview072904.cfm
News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods
http://www.thecampaign.org
Informant: Teresa Binstock
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/overview072904.cfm
News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods
http://www.thecampaign.org
Informant: Teresa Binstock
Starmail - 31. Jul, 00:00
30
Jul
2004
29
Jul
2004
Ban Plant-based Transgenic Pharmaceuticals
ISIS Press Release 29/07/04
Prof. Joe Cummins and Dr. Mae-Wan Ho call for a global forum and a ban on testing pharm crops, especially in Third World countries
Sources for this report are available in the ISIS members site. Full details here http://www.i-sis.org.uk/membership.php
As one after another biotech giant retreated from genetically modified (GM) crops for food and feed in Europe (see "Biotech investment busy going nowhere", this issue), the industry is redoubling its efforts to develop plant-based transgenic pharmaceuticals in North America and elsewhere.
In April 2004, California stalled a major attempt to introduce GM rice producing human lactoferrin and lyzozyme into 10 counties, but efforts to use rice and other food crops to produce hazardous pharmaceuticals have continued unabated.
On 12 July, the European Union (EU) announced the award of 12 million euros to a network of laboratories in 11 European countries plus South Africa to explore the possibilities of producing pharmaceuticals grown in genetically modified plants. The consortium, "Pharma- Planta", will use plants to produce vaccines and treatments against major diseases including AIDS, rabies, diabetes and TB. Human trials of the drugs are to begin within the next five years. The project is co-ordinated in the UK by Prof. Julian Ma of St. George's Medical School London; and John Innes Centre, UK's top GM crop research institute is also a member of the consortium.
A day later, it was revealed that South Africa, the only member of the consortium outside Europe, is to be the test site of the first pharm crops. South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research is particularly interested in potential vaccines against HIV. Philip Dale, plant technologist at John Innes Centre in Norwich and the project's biosafety co- ordinator, reportedly said that the cost of 24-hour surveillance of GM fields in the UK has made it expensive to conduct similar trials in Britain.
The use of Third World countries for testing and producing plant-based pharmaceuticals unacceptable both in Europe and the United States smacks of colonialism. It also raises the spectre of unmonitored and unregulated human exposures to the dangerous products. This problem will be exacerbated as opposition to pharm crops is growing in the United States, and more Third World countries will be targeted for test sites and production facilities. ISIS has played a key role in exposing the marketing of pharm crop products in the United States previously unbeknownst to the public, via a gaping loophole in the US regulatory system (see "Pharm crop products in US market", this issue).
A coalition of consumer and environmental organizations in the US issued a call for a moratorium on genetically engineered pharm crops on 21 July. They want the California state agencies to conduct a rigorous investigation of the potential hazards posed by a biotech company's plan to produce pharmaceutical drugs from genetically engineered rice.
There is an urgent need for proper international regulation on the testing and production of plant-based pharmaceuticals. The first step may be a wider discussion of the drawbacks and dangers of plant-based pharmaceuticals as well the "advantages" put forward by proponents in academe and corporations. The overlooked dangers of pharm crops include pharmaceuticals that are toxic, that could produce immune sensitization followed by anaphylaxis, or oral tolerance leading to loss of immunity to pathogens; and general loss of confidence in the food supply. These have been discussed in numerous reviews from the Institute of Science in Society.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has run a number of electronic conferences around "Agricultural Biotechnology for Developing Countries - an Electronic Forum". These moderated discussions have been quite productive. It is time to have an electronic forum on "Plant-based Pharmaceuticals in Developing Countries".
Do contact the administrator of the FAO project Dr. John Ruane, at biotech- admin@fao.org to call for such a forum as a matter of urgency. The FAO forums are described at the following URL:
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/004/Y2729E/Y2729E00.HTM
It is important that the testing and production of plant-based pharmaceutical in the Third World are made public before they are quietly and extensively carried out without the informed consent of those directly affected.
Meanwhile, it is imperative to impose a ban on field test releases and biopharmaceutical production by multinational corporations and foundations, especially in Third World countries.
This article can be found on the I-SIS website at http://www.i-sis.org.uk/
Prof. Joe Cummins and Dr. Mae-Wan Ho call for a global forum and a ban on testing pharm crops, especially in Third World countries
Sources for this report are available in the ISIS members site. Full details here http://www.i-sis.org.uk/membership.php
As one after another biotech giant retreated from genetically modified (GM) crops for food and feed in Europe (see "Biotech investment busy going nowhere", this issue), the industry is redoubling its efforts to develop plant-based transgenic pharmaceuticals in North America and elsewhere.
In April 2004, California stalled a major attempt to introduce GM rice producing human lactoferrin and lyzozyme into 10 counties, but efforts to use rice and other food crops to produce hazardous pharmaceuticals have continued unabated.
On 12 July, the European Union (EU) announced the award of 12 million euros to a network of laboratories in 11 European countries plus South Africa to explore the possibilities of producing pharmaceuticals grown in genetically modified plants. The consortium, "Pharma- Planta", will use plants to produce vaccines and treatments against major diseases including AIDS, rabies, diabetes and TB. Human trials of the drugs are to begin within the next five years. The project is co-ordinated in the UK by Prof. Julian Ma of St. George's Medical School London; and John Innes Centre, UK's top GM crop research institute is also a member of the consortium.
A day later, it was revealed that South Africa, the only member of the consortium outside Europe, is to be the test site of the first pharm crops. South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research is particularly interested in potential vaccines against HIV. Philip Dale, plant technologist at John Innes Centre in Norwich and the project's biosafety co- ordinator, reportedly said that the cost of 24-hour surveillance of GM fields in the UK has made it expensive to conduct similar trials in Britain.
The use of Third World countries for testing and producing plant-based pharmaceuticals unacceptable both in Europe and the United States smacks of colonialism. It also raises the spectre of unmonitored and unregulated human exposures to the dangerous products. This problem will be exacerbated as opposition to pharm crops is growing in the United States, and more Third World countries will be targeted for test sites and production facilities. ISIS has played a key role in exposing the marketing of pharm crop products in the United States previously unbeknownst to the public, via a gaping loophole in the US regulatory system (see "Pharm crop products in US market", this issue).
A coalition of consumer and environmental organizations in the US issued a call for a moratorium on genetically engineered pharm crops on 21 July. They want the California state agencies to conduct a rigorous investigation of the potential hazards posed by a biotech company's plan to produce pharmaceutical drugs from genetically engineered rice.
There is an urgent need for proper international regulation on the testing and production of plant-based pharmaceuticals. The first step may be a wider discussion of the drawbacks and dangers of plant-based pharmaceuticals as well the "advantages" put forward by proponents in academe and corporations. The overlooked dangers of pharm crops include pharmaceuticals that are toxic, that could produce immune sensitization followed by anaphylaxis, or oral tolerance leading to loss of immunity to pathogens; and general loss of confidence in the food supply. These have been discussed in numerous reviews from the Institute of Science in Society.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has run a number of electronic conferences around "Agricultural Biotechnology for Developing Countries - an Electronic Forum". These moderated discussions have been quite productive. It is time to have an electronic forum on "Plant-based Pharmaceuticals in Developing Countries".
Do contact the administrator of the FAO project Dr. John Ruane, at biotech- admin@fao.org to call for such a forum as a matter of urgency. The FAO forums are described at the following URL:
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/004/Y2729E/Y2729E00.HTM
It is important that the testing and production of plant-based pharmaceutical in the Third World are made public before they are quietly and extensively carried out without the informed consent of those directly affected.
Meanwhile, it is imperative to impose a ban on field test releases and biopharmaceutical production by multinational corporations and foundations, especially in Third World countries.
This article can be found on the I-SIS website at http://www.i-sis.org.uk/
Starmail - 29. Jul, 08:30
28
Jul
2004
Greenpeace klagt gegen geheime Gen-Felder
Gen-Mais in Sachsen-Anhalt: Greenpeace klagt gegen geheime Gen-Felder
28.07.04
Zur Offenlegung geheim gehaltener Gen-Mais-Felder in Sachsen-Anhalt reicht Greenpeace am heutigen Mittwoch eine Klage gegen die Landesregierung beim Verwaltungsgericht Magdeburg ein. Die Umweltorganisation will damit per Gerichtsbeschluss Akteneinsicht erhalten und damit die Standorte des Gen-Mais in Sachsen-Anhalt öffentlich machen. Die Verheimlichung der umstrittenen Gen-Mais-Felder schädig Landwirte und Imker und verstoße gegen das geplante neue Gentechnikgesetz, sowie geltendes EU-Recht, so die Kritik. Nach dem geplanten Gentechnikgesetz müssen Gen-Pflanzen mindestens drei Monate vor der Freisetzung in einem öffentlichen Kataster registriert werden.
Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:
http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=9008
28.07.04
Zur Offenlegung geheim gehaltener Gen-Mais-Felder in Sachsen-Anhalt reicht Greenpeace am heutigen Mittwoch eine Klage gegen die Landesregierung beim Verwaltungsgericht Magdeburg ein. Die Umweltorganisation will damit per Gerichtsbeschluss Akteneinsicht erhalten und damit die Standorte des Gen-Mais in Sachsen-Anhalt öffentlich machen. Die Verheimlichung der umstrittenen Gen-Mais-Felder schädig Landwirte und Imker und verstoße gegen das geplante neue Gentechnikgesetz, sowie geltendes EU-Recht, so die Kritik. Nach dem geplanten Gentechnikgesetz müssen Gen-Pflanzen mindestens drei Monate vor der Freisetzung in einem öffentlichen Kataster registriert werden.
Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:
http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=9008
Starmail - 28. Jul, 18:16
Scientists for a GM-Free Sustainable Europe
ISIS Press Release 28/07/04
Special European Parliament Briefing – Preliminary Announcement
Scientists for a GM-Free Sustainable Europe
An international panel of scientists will call on Europe to ban all environmental releases of genetically modified (GM) crops and instead to promote and adopt sustainable agricultural practices as a matter of urgency.
Invited speakers include:
Dr. Tewolde Egziabher, distinguished agronomist and director of Ethiopia's Environment al Protection Authority, who will tell Parliament why his country is going organic to feed the poorest; an important policy decision based on the remarkable increase in crop yields subsequent to the introduction of a simple composting package in the State of Tigray since 1996
Edward Goldsmith, founding editor of The Ecologist , who will present evidence on why sustainable agriculture must be adopted to ameliorate climate change
Michael Meacher, MP, former environment minister of the UK, who will call for changes in science research and other policies that are needed to shift away from GM in order to support and invest in sustainable agriculture
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, director of the Institute of Science in Society, who will tell Parliament that genetic modification is based on the discredited science of genetic determinism and hence unlikely to deliver its many promises; and that the new genetics of the ‘fluid genome' demands a thoroughly ecological approach to health and agriculture.
Jill Evans, MEP Plaid Cymru - The Party of Wales (Greens/EFA), will be chairing and hosting the event organised by the Institute of Science in Society, the Independent Science Panel, GM Free Cymru and Third World Network.
The English, French and Spanish editions of the Independent Science Panel Report, The Case for a GM- Free Sustainable World , will be released on the occasion. This Report is a comprehensive dossier of evidence on the problems and hazards of GM agriculture and the proven successes of all forms of sustainable farming systems around the world.
Date: 20 October 2004
Venue: European Parliament
Time: 13:30 – 17:00
Organised by Institute of Science in Society, Independent Science Panel, GM-Free Cymru and Third World Network in conjunction with Jill Evans MEP
Spaces are limited and participants must register by 1st October, 2004
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/
Special European Parliament Briefing – Preliminary Announcement
Scientists for a GM-Free Sustainable Europe
An international panel of scientists will call on Europe to ban all environmental releases of genetically modified (GM) crops and instead to promote and adopt sustainable agricultural practices as a matter of urgency.
Invited speakers include:
Dr. Tewolde Egziabher, distinguished agronomist and director of Ethiopia's Environment al Protection Authority, who will tell Parliament why his country is going organic to feed the poorest; an important policy decision based on the remarkable increase in crop yields subsequent to the introduction of a simple composting package in the State of Tigray since 1996
Edward Goldsmith, founding editor of The Ecologist , who will present evidence on why sustainable agriculture must be adopted to ameliorate climate change
Michael Meacher, MP, former environment minister of the UK, who will call for changes in science research and other policies that are needed to shift away from GM in order to support and invest in sustainable agriculture
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, director of the Institute of Science in Society, who will tell Parliament that genetic modification is based on the discredited science of genetic determinism and hence unlikely to deliver its many promises; and that the new genetics of the ‘fluid genome' demands a thoroughly ecological approach to health and agriculture.
Jill Evans, MEP Plaid Cymru - The Party of Wales (Greens/EFA), will be chairing and hosting the event organised by the Institute of Science in Society, the Independent Science Panel, GM Free Cymru and Third World Network.
The English, French and Spanish editions of the Independent Science Panel Report, The Case for a GM- Free Sustainable World , will be released on the occasion. This Report is a comprehensive dossier of evidence on the problems and hazards of GM agriculture and the proven successes of all forms of sustainable farming systems around the world.
Date: 20 October 2004
Venue: European Parliament
Time: 13:30 – 17:00
Organised by Institute of Science in Society, Independent Science Panel, GM-Free Cymru and Third World Network in conjunction with Jill Evans MEP
Spaces are limited and participants must register by 1st October, 2004
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/
Starmail - 28. Jul, 17:42
Scientists advise government to be cautious with biotech crops
Federal regulators should look more closely at the potential health effects of some genetically modified plants before they can be grown as commercial crops, a scientific advisory panel said...
http://www.enn.com/news/2004-07-28/s_26248.asp
http://www.enn.com/news/2004-07-28/s_26248.asp
Starmail - 28. Jul, 09:25
26
Jul
2004
Proteste gegen Versuchfeld mit Gen-Kartoffeln
Gen-Food: Proteste gegen Versuchfeld mit Gen-Kartoffeln
26.07.04
Etwa 30 Umweltschützer protestierten am Samstag gegen das letzte Brandenburger Gentechnik-Versuchsfeld in Berge (Prignitz). Dabei "ernteten" sie trotz Absperrungen und Polizeischutz einige der genmanipulierten Kartoffeln. Das Barnimer Aktionsbündnis gegen Gentechnik und die BUNDjugend Brandenburg wollten mit der Aktion auf den Gen-Versuch aufmerksam machen. Mit Erfolg: Ein Landtagsabgeordneter, obwohl Mitglied des zuständigen Agrarausschusses, erfuhr erst durch deren Ankündigung von dem Versuch.
Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:
http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=8987
26.07.04
Etwa 30 Umweltschützer protestierten am Samstag gegen das letzte Brandenburger Gentechnik-Versuchsfeld in Berge (Prignitz). Dabei "ernteten" sie trotz Absperrungen und Polizeischutz einige der genmanipulierten Kartoffeln. Das Barnimer Aktionsbündnis gegen Gentechnik und die BUNDjugend Brandenburg wollten mit der Aktion auf den Gen-Versuch aufmerksam machen. Mit Erfolg: Ein Landtagsabgeordneter, obwohl Mitglied des zuständigen Agrarausschusses, erfuhr erst durch deren Ankündigung von dem Versuch.
Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:
http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=8987
Starmail - 26. Jul, 23:57
