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
Read the story of Dr Arpad Pusztai the Aberdeen-based scientist who first raised concerns about the safety
of eating genetically modified potatoes, now turning his attention to GM maize. Dr Arpad Pusztai, a worldrenowned
biochemist lost his job at Aberdeen's Rowett Institute after he announced the findings of animal
experiments in a television documentary about his laboratory-based work on rats, conducted where he had
been employed for 36 years. His research indicated that eating GM potatoes had an effect on the animals'
organ development, causing brain shrinkage and gut problems. After he went public Pusztai was attacked by
the British scientific establishment which attempted to discredit his work. His laboratory was disbanded and
his scientific team broken up.
Read the story of Percy Schmeiser. This brave seventy year old canola farmer, from Saskatchewan was
accused of patent infringement by Monsanto who demanded restitution for its seeds when his crops became
contaminated by GM crops on a neighbouring farm. Supported by his wife of 55 years, he decided to fight
the company. Genetically engineered corn, soybeans, cotton and canola have become widely used in the
United States, Canada, Latin America and India. It was claimed that their pollen spread to conventional crops.
The Monsanto canola contains a gene that protects the crop from the herbicide Roundup. With Roundup
Ready canola, farmers can spray the herbicide widely and control weeds. Hence there is a clever linked
market for the herbicide too. Seed companies representing Monsanto, and similar biotechnology companies,
sell their genetically modified seeds to farmers under an agreement that they use them for only one season.
Traditionally, farmers saved their best seeds and replanted them. Margaret Mellon, director of the
agriculture and biotechnology program of the Union of Concerned Scientists says people who are in the
neighbourhood of genetically modified crops may have to pay royalties to the companies for products they
never purchased and got no benefits from. A spokeswoman with the National Farmers Union, which
represents 300,000 small farmers and ranchers in the United States says, "We're extremely concerned by
what liabilities may unfold for the farmer, particularly with cross-pollination of genetically modified plants".
Some 82% of customers "tell us they will not buy GM wheat," says Louise Waldman, Media Relations
manager for the Canadian Wheat Board. Currently, over three quarters of Canadian wheat is exported to 70
countries, generating $4 billion (Can.) in annual sales. "Our position is not ethical or moral or scientific; it's
purely economic. Our customers are telling us they don't want to buy GM wheat, the market is telling us they
don't want it, and we certainly haven't seen evidence that people want it." Basically the threat is that
Canadian farmers will be unable to grow or export organic crops to countries where people want organic or
GM free soya, corn and canola.
GM - The position of the UK government and many MPs on GM is worrying. This is a key area in which most
are uninformed and appear to accept the GM line uncritically. They appear not to understand the
importance of the precautionary principle. Of course they have to take account of diverse views and
interests. But whose interests are they serving – citizens’ or corporate interests?
Nanotechnology GM and Nanotechnology were being advocated by Sir John Beddington, the UK
government’s chief scientific adviser, supported by Hilary Benn, the secretary of state for environment, food
and rural affairs, as part of a hi-tech “new greener revolution,” a 20-year plan to feed Britain as our
population rises and our self-sufficiency in food declines as a result of our policies. Again, government is
serving the interests of scientists and corporations rather than protecting citizens from the unknown risks.
Many farming experts have expressed concerns about Nanotechnology. Ethical Consumer provides a
86