GMO Myths and Truths

Recommendations

Info

(EIS) on the environmental and economic effects of contamination of non-GM crops. In the case of GM sugar beet, the USDA defied the court order and allowed farmers to continue planting the crop while it worked on the EIS. In the case of GM alfalfa, USDA completed an EIS in which it admitted that cross-contamination with non-GM alfalfa could occur and that the economic interests of non-GM growers could be harmed. But, bowing to heavy lobbying from the GM industry, USDA “deregulated” GM alfalfa, an action that superseded the court ruling and allowed planting of the crop without restriction. 145 GMO Myths and Truths 88
5.11 Myth: If GM contamination occurs, it is not a problem Truth: GM contamination has had severe economic consequences for farmers, food and feed companies, and markets “If some people are allowed to choose to grow, sell and consume GM foods, soon nobody will be able to choose food, or a biosphere, free of GM. It’s a one way choice, like the introduction of rabbits or cane toads to Australia; once it’s made, it can’t be reversed.” – Roger Levett, specialist in sustainable development 163 GM contamination of crops has had severe economic consequences, threatening the livelihoods of farmers who receive premiums for growing organic and GM-free crops and blocking export markets to countries with strict regulations on GMOs. Examples of GM contamination problems include: ● In 2011 an unauthorized GM Bt pesticidal rice, Bt63, was found in baby formula and rice noodles on sale in China. 146 Contaminated rice products were also found in Germany 147 and Sweden. 148 The same rice was found in rice products in New Zealand in 2008, leading to product recalls. 149 GM Bt rice has not been shown to be safe for human consumption. Periodic recalls of products contaminated with Bt63 rice continue to be reported even today in Europe. ● In 2009 an unauthorized GM flax called CDC Triffid contaminated Canadian flax seed supplies, resulting in the collapse of Canada’s flax export market to Europe. 150,151 ● In 2006 an unapproved experimental GM rice, grown only for one year in experimental plots, was found to have contaminated the US rice supply and seed stocks. 152 Contaminated rice was found as far away as Africa, Europe, and Central America. In 2007 US rice exports were down 20% from the previous year as a result of the GM contamination. 153 In 2011 the company that developed the GM rice, Bayer, agreed to pay $750 million to settle lawsuits brought by 11,000 US farmers whose rice crops were contaminated. 154 A court ordered Bayer to pay $137 million in damages to Riceland, a rice export company, for loss of sales to the EU. 155 ● In Canada, contamination from GM oilseed rape has made it virtually impossible to cultivate organic, non-GM oilseed rape. 156 ● Organic maize production in Spain has dropped as the acreage of GM maize production has increased, due to contamination by crosspollination with GM maize. 157 ● In 2000 GM StarLink maize, produced by Aventis (now Bayer CropScience), was found to have contaminated the US maize supply. StarLink had been approved for animal feed but not for human consumption. The discovery led to recalls of StarLinkcontaminated food products across the US, spreading to Europe, Japan, Canada, and other countries. Costs to the food industry are estimated to have been around $1 billion. 158 In addition, the US government bore indirect costs of between $172 and $776 million through the USDA’s Loan Deficiency Payments Program, which offers producers short-term loans and direct payments if the price of a commodity crop falls below the loan rate. 159 Aventis paid out $110 million to farmers who brought a class action suit against the company 160 and spent another $110 million buying back StarLinkcontaminated maize. 152 As no official body keeps records of GM contamination incidents, Greenpeace and Genewatch UK have stepped into the gap with their GM Contamination Register. 161 In the years 2005–2007 alone, 216 contamination incidents were recorded in the database. 162 GMO Myths and Truths 89
Page 1 and 2:
GMO Myths and Truths An evidence-ba
Page 3 and 4:
About the authors Michael Antoniou,
Page 5 and 6:
3.1.5. Regulators currently do not
Page 7 and 8:
Truth: Co-existence means widesprea
Page 9 and 10:
1. THE GENETIC ENGINEERING TECHNIQU
Page 11 and 12:
1.2 Myth: Genetic engineering is pr
Page 13 and 14:
ornamental plants. 9 It also includ
Page 15 and 16:
successfully incorporate the GM gen
Page 17 and 18:
“conventionally bred” varieties
Page 19 and 20:
inspection. Their scrutiny cannot e
Page 21 and 22:
Conclusion to Section 1 GM proponen
Page 23 and 24:
2. SCIENCE AND REGULATION 2.1 Myth:
Page 25 and 26:
of a protein (prion), a difference
Page 27 and 28:
data on GMOs available on the Inter
Page 29 and 30:
2.1.8. GM corporations and the US g
Page 31 and 32:
the defamation and intimidation cam
Page 33 and 34:
lacked proper controls. Both claims
Page 35 and 36:
18. Pusztai A, Bardocz S, Ewen SWB.
Page 37 and 38: 3. HEALTH HAZARDS OF GM FOODS 3.1 M
Page 39 and 40: their lambs showed cellular changes
Page 41 and 42: well known to have different effect
Page 43 and 44: developing multi-trait crops becaus
Page 45 and 46: 3.2.2. Schrøder (2007) 23 A study
Page 47 and 48: 3.4 Myth: GM foods have been proven
Page 49 and 50: However, the authors of a 1990 stud
Page 51 and 52: 3.6 Myth: GM Bt insecticidal crops
Page 53 and 54: 3.7 Myth: GM foods are properly tes
Page 55 and 56: acute allergenicity problems to a l
Page 57 and 58: 3.9 Myth: Genetic engineering will
Page 59 and 60: poor and hungry in the Global South
Page 61 and 62: 30. European Food Safety Authority
Page 63 and 64: sheep and pigs fed Roundup Ready ca
Page 65 and 66: 4.1 Myth: Roundup is a safe herbici
Page 67 and 68: 100% of air and rain samples taken
Page 69 and 70: 11. Romano RM, Romano MA, Bernardi
Page 71 and 72: “Over the past decade, corporate
Page 73 and 74: supposedly high-yielding GM soybean
Page 75 and 76: often use more glyphosate herbicide
Page 77 and 78: 5.4 Myth: GM Bt crops reduce insect
Page 79 and 80: has called GM crops “pesticide pl
Page 81 and 82: 5.6 Myth: Roundup is a benign and b
Page 83 and 84: fixation and reduce the growth of r
Page 85 and 86: 5.9 Myth: GM crops bring economic b
Page 87: 5.10 Myth: GM crops can “coexist
Page 91 and 92: acterium, thereby creating a “sup
Page 93 and 94: een found to be unreliable and inco
Page 95 and 96: emergence of resistant and secondar
Page 97 and 98: mycorrhizal symbiosis in experiment
Page 99 and 100: Canada: Organic Agriculture Protect
Page 101 and 102: 6.1 Myth: GM will deliver climate-r
Page 103 and 104: 6.3 Myth: GM will solve the nitroge
Page 105 and 106: Agriculture cannot continue to depe
Page 107 and 108: 7.1 Myth: GM crops are needed to fe
Page 109 and 110: A 2003 report on the project calcul
Page 111 and 112: Previously, agricultural markets we
Page 113 and 114: and the Caribbean have found that o
Page 115 and 116: 7.3 Myth: GM is needed to provide t
Page 117 and 118: King produced this example when und
Page 119 and 120: IAASTD report, commissioned by the
Page 121 and 122: LifeScientist. 12 March 2012. http:
Page 123: mixtures of chemicals in an attempt
show all

GMO Myths and Truths

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?