Post by Jeni Treehugger on May 22, 2006 15:11:30 GMT
New documents released to Friends of the Earth reveal that the European Commission has been approving GM foods and crops despite having serious doubts over their health and environmental impacts. Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have called for a suspension in the use and sale of all GM foods and crops until the safety issues have been addressed.
The documents reveal the scientific arguments put forward behind closed doors in the recent GM trade dispute at the World Trade Organisation. In them, the Commission argues that there are "large areas of uncertainty" and that "some
issues have not yet been studied at all". They also reveal that:
* On human safety: "there simply is no way of ascertaining whether the introduction of GM products has had any other effect on human health... there is no unique, absolute, scientific cut off threshold available to decide whether a GM product is safe or
not."
* On growing GM crops: "It is a reasonable and lawful position" that insect-resistant crops (the only GM crops being grown in the EU) should not be planted until all the effects on the soil are known.
* On the environment: a key scientific study that was used to support the environmental safety of a GM crop is "scientifically flawed".
* There are huge disagreements between the Commission and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), an EU agency. In one example, the Commission criticises the EFSA for not requiring further investigations after dismissing scientific evidence
that showed that a certain GMO had negative effects on earthworms.
At the same time as the Commission was writing and submitting these documents to the WTO highlighting safety concerns, it:
* pushed through the approval of seven GM foods over the past 2 years, despite a lack of support from member states;
* required member states to vote twice on proposals to lift national bans on GM products in five countries. It was defeated in both votes. Ironically, in the submissions to the WTO, the Commission gave scientific arguments to justify the bans.
* Commercialised 31 varieties of Monsanto's GM maize for cultivation in the EU.
Adrian Bebb of Friends of the Earth Europe said, "This is a political scandal.
When the EU Commission broke the moratorium and forced new genetically modified foods into Europe, it told the public they were safe. Now we know that behind closed doors the Commission was arguing the complete opposite.
"These double standards of the EU Commission clearly show that public health and environmental protection are being compromised by an institution intent on promoting trade and business interests at any costs."
www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6457
Reports by the Daily Telegraph and the BBC on this story:
www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6456
The documents reveal the scientific arguments put forward behind closed doors in the recent GM trade dispute at the World Trade Organisation. In them, the Commission argues that there are "large areas of uncertainty" and that "some
issues have not yet been studied at all". They also reveal that:
* On human safety: "there simply is no way of ascertaining whether the introduction of GM products has had any other effect on human health... there is no unique, absolute, scientific cut off threshold available to decide whether a GM product is safe or
not."
* On growing GM crops: "It is a reasonable and lawful position" that insect-resistant crops (the only GM crops being grown in the EU) should not be planted until all the effects on the soil are known.
* On the environment: a key scientific study that was used to support the environmental safety of a GM crop is "scientifically flawed".
* There are huge disagreements between the Commission and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), an EU agency. In one example, the Commission criticises the EFSA for not requiring further investigations after dismissing scientific evidence
that showed that a certain GMO had negative effects on earthworms.
At the same time as the Commission was writing and submitting these documents to the WTO highlighting safety concerns, it:
* pushed through the approval of seven GM foods over the past 2 years, despite a lack of support from member states;
* required member states to vote twice on proposals to lift national bans on GM products in five countries. It was defeated in both votes. Ironically, in the submissions to the WTO, the Commission gave scientific arguments to justify the bans.
* Commercialised 31 varieties of Monsanto's GM maize for cultivation in the EU.
Adrian Bebb of Friends of the Earth Europe said, "This is a political scandal.
When the EU Commission broke the moratorium and forced new genetically modified foods into Europe, it told the public they were safe. Now we know that behind closed doors the Commission was arguing the complete opposite.
"These double standards of the EU Commission clearly show that public health and environmental protection are being compromised by an institution intent on promoting trade and business interests at any costs."
www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6457
Reports by the Daily Telegraph and the BBC on this story:
www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6456
