| Betreff: SAFER WORLD Newsletter/E - 37 - |
| Von: "SAFER WORLD" |
| Datum: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 07:57:44 +0200 |
From Coalition against BAYER-dangers (Germany:
March 21, 2005 GM crop trail
blow to biotech industry
The final results of the GM farmscale evaluations,
announced today, are a severe blow to the biotech industry, Friends of
the Earth said today. The results of the trials showed that growing GM
winter oilseed rape led to
o Fewer important food plants for insects and birds
o An increase in grass weeds which farmers may have to
tackle with more herbicides, which would further damage wildlife.
Friends of
the Earth has also
discovered that biotech giant, Bayer, has told the EU that it wants to
withdraw its application to grow the GM winter oilseed rape trialled in
the UK's GM farmscale evaluations. The Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs has told Friends of the Earth that Bayer
applied to the European Commission (EC) "reduce the scope of the
application to import and processing" [1]. The results of the crop
trials of GM winter oilseed rape - the final results of the farm scale
evaluations - are due to be revealed today.
Bayer told the EC that it wished to withdraw its
application to grow the GM oilseed rape and only seek permission to
import it into the EU for use in food and animal feed. There is
widespread European opposition to the rape; Friends of the Earth
discovered that 23 out of 25 EU countries, including the UK, objected
to the GM crop being grown because of concerns about the impact on the
environment and human health [2].
But, in a bizarre twist, the EC has refused to allow
Bayer to alter its joint application (to grow the GM oil seed rape and
import it for use in food and feed). A decision is likely to be taken
later this year. Clare Oxborrow, Friends of the Earth's GM campaigner
said:
"These results are yet another major blow to the biotech
industry. Growing GM winter oilseed rape would have a negative impact
on farmland wildlife. No wonder Bayer tried to withdraw its application
to grow GM winter oilseed rape. Almost every EU country has raised
serious concerns about the impact that this crop could have on our
environment and health. Bayer should now scrap the whole application -
including its intention to import it into the EU as food.
"The farm scale evaluations only looked at a narrow range
of concerns. They were not a comprehensive assessment of the risks of
growing GM crops. The vast majority of consumers have made it clear
that they do not want GM. The Government should pull the plug on this
unnecessary and unpopular technology and invest in a truly sustainable
farming future instead."
Growing GM oilseed rape would inevitably lead to the
contamination of neighbouring crops and the environment. Research
published by DEFRA has shown that GM oilseed rape pollen can be carried
26 kilometers, and in Canada, where GM oilseed rape has been grown for
a number of years, organic oilseed rape production has been abandoned
because of widespread contamination from GM crops.
The British public remains deeply opposed to GM crops. A
Which? survey last year revealed that opposition had hardened since a
similar study in 2002. Sixty one per cent said that they were concerned
about the use of GM in food production (56 per cent in 2002) and 58 per
cent said they try to avoid GM ingredients altogether (a 13 per cent
increase).
The four -year GM farm scale evaluations [3] were ordered
by the Government, following widespread public concern, to assess the
impact on farmland wildlife of growing GM crops compared with
conventional crops. They cost an estimated £5.5 million. The FSE
results for GM maize, beet and spring oil seed rape were published in
October 2003 [4]. GM oilseed rape and beet were judged to be more
damaging to the environment than conventional counterparts, and Bayer
abandoned plans to grow GM maize - claiming it was "commercially
non-viable" [5] - after its crop was only given limited approval by the
government.
Notes:
[1] Email from DEFRA, Tuesday 1 March 2005:
"The notifier (Bayer) chose to reduce the scope of the
application to import and processing after the sixty day period.
However, the EU Commission's position is that the notifier cannot
change the scope of the notification at this stage...."
[2] Friends of the Earth obtained the Member State
comments on the GM application through a Freedom of Information request
to DEFRA. Examples of comments from member states:
UK: "The UK Competent Authority agrees ... that on the
basis of the information provided in the dossier approval for
cultivation should not be granted."
Austria: "No data/studies at all on possible effects on
human health are provided."
Belgium: controlling gene flow will be "impracticable,
hardly workable, and hard to control".
France: "the French Food Safety Agency considers that the
safety of genetically modified rape Ms8xRf3 from the health point of
view cannot be guaranteed."
Poland: "...granting any consent for growing this species
in EU territory would be inappropriate."
Slovenia: "the gene flow from a cultivation could not be
managed satisfactory, so to ensure existence of all different
agricultural practices in EU, including organic farming. In the same
way the gene flow to wild relatives would be impossible to prevent."
Italy: "The Italian National Competent Authority agrees
... that no authorisation should be granted for the cultivation of the
product under notification C/BE/96/01".
Norway: "we will not support consent for this
notification if it is to cover cultivation
"Sweden retains objection to the culitivation of this
oilseed rape"
[3] The Farm Scale Evaluations (FSEs) compared GM crop
management with conventional crop management (which are themselves
known to be harmful to wildlife and the environment). GM crops were not
compared to organic farming, a system that has been shown to improve
wildlife in the field.
The trials did not consider:
o the development of herbicide tolerant oilseed rape
volunteers and weeds,
o impacts on wider soil ecology,
o contamination of non-GM crops,
o cross-pollination with wild plants.
Researchers have calculated that the farm scale
evaluations can only detect differences of between 50 - 100% in changes
to wildlife population sizes. Therefore, if smaller differences
occurred between the GM and non-GM crops during the trials, they might
not show up in the results because the trials were not sensitive enough
to detect them with any certainty. In the case of the spring sown
crops, the effects on biodiversity were very clear and surprisingly
large. However, uncertain results for winter oilseed rape do not
necessarily mean that no harm has occurred. In fact, evidence shows
that differences as low as 13 per cent may be ecologically important
for wildlife. A FSE briefing is at: http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/media_briefing/government_to_publish_the.pdf
[4] http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/gm_crops_blair_who_do_you.html
[5] http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/biotech_firm_ditches_gm_ma_31032004.html
Coalition against BAYER-dangers (Germany)
www.CBGnetwork.org
CBGnetwork@aol.com
=================================================
NANOTECH
Science News Week of March 19, 2005; Vol. 167, No. 12 , p. 179
Nano Hazards: Exposure to minute particles harms lungs,
circulatory system
Janet Raloff
Nanomaterials, the current darlings of industry, are showing up in
products ranging from cosmetics to electronics. However, new animal
studies indicate that inhaling these microscopic spheres and tubes
could cause big trouble, especially for workers who manufacture and
handle them.
That message came through loudly in New Orleans last week at the
Society of Toxicology meeting, where several dozen reports unveiled
details about how nanopollutants interact with the body. Most of the
studies focused on the effects of lung exposures because the particles'
size-just a few billionths of a meter in diameter-permits them to reach
the most vulnerable lung tissue. ...
Sources:
Alison Elder University of Rochester Department of Environmental
Medicine Rochester, NY 14627
John T. James Space and Life Sciences NASA Johnson Space Center
Houston, TX 77058
Shawn D. Lamb Society of Toxicology 1821 Michael Faraday Drive Suite
300 Reston, VA 20190
Anthony Seaton Department of Environmental and Occupational Medicine
Liberty Safe Work Research Centre Foresterhill Road Aberdeen AB25 2ZP
United Kingdom
Akinori Shimada Department of Veterinary Pathology Tottori University
Tottori-shi, Tottori 680-0945 Japan Petia Simeonova Health Effects
Laboratory Division National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health Morgantown, WV 26505
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050319/toc.asp
=================================================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS
#811Feb. 17, 2005 Published March 31, 2005
Human Exposure and Health Hazards - Pt. 2 by Anne
Steinemann*
Body Burden of Chemicals and Burden of Proof
#810 Feb. 3, 2005 Published March 24, 2005
Human Exposure and Health Hazards - Pt. 1 by Anne
Steinemann*
United States environmental regulations, intended to protect human
health, generally fail to address major sources of pollutants that
endanger human health. These sources are surprisingly close to us and
within our control, such as consumer products and building materials
that we use within our homes, workplaces, schools, and other indoor
environments. Even though these indoor sources account for nearly 90%
of our pollutant exposure, they are virtually unregulated by existing
laws. Even pollutant levels found in typical homes, if found outdoors,
would often violate federal environmental standards. ...
#809 January 20, 2005 Published March 10, 2005
Globalize Liberation, Part 2
Continuing from last week our celebration of the book,
Globalize Liberation (San Francisco: City Lights Book, 2004), edited by
David Solnit.
We are celebrating this book by reprinting excerpts from one of its
major essays, "Decolonizing The Revolutionary Imagination:
Values Crisis, the Politics of Reality, and Why There's Going to Be a
Common-Sense Revolution in This Generation," by Patrick Reinsborough.
The entire text of Patrick's essay can be found at http://www.rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=508
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS Environmental Research
Foundation P.O. Box 160 New Brunswick, N.J. 08903 Fax (732) 791-4603;
E-mail: erf@rachel.org
Subscriptions are free. To subscribe, send a blank Email to join-rachel@gselist.org .
The Rachel newsletter is also available free in Spanish; to subscribe,
send a blank Email to join-noticias@gselist.org
.
BACK ISSUES IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH Past issues are on the web at http://www.rachel.org in plain-text and PDF formats.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Permission to reprint Rachel's is hereby granted to
everyone, though we ask that you not change the contents and we ask
that you give credit.
=================================================
RADIATION
Mobilphone Archiv (English)
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Mobilfunk+Archiv+%28Englisch%29/
Prof. Olle Johansson
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/559799/