A better world is possible - Global Commons Institute

Copyright Bruce Nixon 2010. All rights reserved. This electronic copy is provided free for personal, non-commercial use only.
www.brucenixon.com
Because more GM is being rejected, more goes into animal feed but without labels; we don’t know
which dairy or meat products come from these animals. In 2006 NOP poll found that 87% of those
polled wanted labelling to help them avoid GM animal feed.
It is clear that further research into all these issues is vital.
Furthermore the public has not been properly involved in decision making processes, despite strong
public support for the precautionary approach to GM in the UK and the EU.
Much more time is needed to assess the need for and implications of genetic modification in food and
farming, and the increasing use of plant patents by corporations to secure their future markets.
GM Freeze believes that the following measures must be implemented before any further commercial use
of GM:
• A system where people can exercise their right to choose products free of genetic modification.
• Public involvement in the decisions on the need for and the regulation of genetic modification.
• Prevention of genetic pollution of the environment.
• Strict legal liability for adverse effects on people or the environment from the release and marketing
of genetically modified organisms.
• Independent assessment of the implications of patenting genetic resources.
• Independent assessment of the social and economic impact of genetic engineering on farmers.
• GM ingredients must refer to any ingredients that have been genetically modified or that contain
derivatives from GM crops or organisms.
“Golden rice” is an example. Introduced in India, it failed to deliver the promised nutritional benefits. As
Vandana Shiva argued, the problem this rice was supposed to address was not deficiencies in the existing
varieties but difficulties arising from poverty and loss of biodiversity in food crops. These are aggravated by
the corporate control of agriculture based on genetically modified foods. By focusing on a narrow problem
(vitamin A deficiency), she argued, the golden rice proponents were obscuring the larger issue of a lack of
broad availability of diverse and nutritionally adequate food sources. It is alleged that exports of Chinese rice
and processed foods were contaminated, despite government controls and a ban on GM exports. Japan,
New Zealand and Australia now ban GM rice.
Holistic agro- ecological approaches At the Feeding the World Conference, London, 12 th November
2008,(organised by the Organic Research Centre in association with The Ecologist, Friends of the Earth, GM
Freeze, UK Food Group, Slow Food UK and The Sheepdrove Trust), Dr Michael Antoniou, of Kings College,
London, explained that the GM transformation process is highly mutagenic, causing thousands of mutations
with unknown consequences including impaired crop growth, reduced yields, reduced nutritional value of
food, toxic effects and reactions in humans and animals. Fortunately there already exist many highly
nutritious and tasty types and varieties of food crops that are naturally adapted to grow under harsh
conditions and on marginal lands. “Marker assisted selection” (MAS) is generally accepted as a far more
powerful, holistic, biological approach for further development in expanding non-GM biotechnology. It is a
tool for safely developing new varieties from existing ones and their wild relatives. Recently scientists
decoded the genome of an ancient wheat they believe from which they believe new disease resistant
varieties with higher yields can be developed.
Eric Kisiangari of Practical Action in Nairobi in Kenya argues that small-scale agriculture is by its very nature
adaptive to climate change as has been demonstrated over millennia by farmers saving and exchanging seed
and growing a wide variety of crops to manage risks. In Africa’s complex farming environment, instead of
164