GENET archive


6-Genetech §§: BIOSAFETY - Canadian media split between propaganda and information (1)

-------------------------- GENET-news ---------------------------

TITLE:  The biotech brawl in Montreal
SOURCE: National pots, by Terence Corcoran
        edited by Agnet, Canada
DATE:   January 20, 2000

----------------- archive: ------------------

The biotech brawl in Montreal

Columnist Corcoran writes that the masters of agit-prop -
Greenpeace, the Council of Canadians, CBC Radio's Bob Carty,
assorted purveyors of junk science and fear‹are gearing up for a
week-long assault on genetically modified food and biotechnology.
It won't match the World Trade Organization extravaganza in
Seattle, but the agitators hope the Biosafety Protocol
negotiations in Montreal next week can be hyped up into a major
anti-GM food fight worthy of global attention.

The factual background and warped politics behind the Biosafety
Protocol, a remote offshoot of the 1992 Rio Biodiversity
Convention, would drive even the most ardent internationalist to
terminal boredom. The main point to know is that the objective of
Maude Barlow and her NGO associates is the opposite of the Battle
in Seattle. While the non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
wanted to shut down the 135-nation WTO trade negotiations, the
Brawl in Montreal is aimed at getting the same countries to
approve a global biosafety agreement. If approved as promoted by
these organizations, the protocol could halt the development of
genetic engineering and biotechnology.

Actual negotiations begin on Monday, but Greenpeace et al have
their events planned for Saturday, including workshops,
demonstrations and a big finale Saturday night starring Ms.
Barlow and Jeremy Rifkin, U.S. anti-beef activist, biotech
alarmist and world-class economic crank. Mr. Rifkin's oeuvre
includes The End of Work, a 1995 book in which he claimed
technology was creating mass unemployment‹just as the United
States was setting job creation records because of technology.

Whenever the Council of Canadians wants to spook Canadians, the
first thing it does is call in an American fearmonger. A
favourite last year was Samuel S. Epstein, whose theories on the
causes of cancer know no bounds. The need to import talent from
the U.S. is understandable, however, since the council has a hard
time rounding up any experts in Canada who are as willing to
twist fact and science as the likes of Messrs. Rifkin and

A good example of Canada's junk science brain gap is the
Council's release on Tuesday of a study that alleged Health
Canada's approval of genetically modified crops was based on
inadequate science. When the story of the study hit the
newswires, it sounded authoritative. "A group of prominent
Canadian scientists and academics," said a Southam News report,
had formed GE-Alert, a research agency that had found flaws in
Health Canada's procedures and logic.

While the study masqueraded as science, it was ridiculed as
"silly" by one scientist, dismissed by Health Canada, and called
"unethical" by the dean of Guelph University's agricultural
college. Anyone who took the time to dig into the Council of
Canadians' deliberately obfuscatory Web pages would also have a
hard time establishing the prominence and biotech credentials of
the scientists who signed the study.

The lead scientist was Ann Clark, an expert in pasture management
whose expertise in genetic engineering is considered limited.
Other members of the group include an animal nutritionist, an
anthropologist, a film and television producer, a parasitologist,
a biochemist and a philosopher whose field is ethics. All good
people, presumably, but most of them unqualified to carry out any
scientific assessment of Health Canada's approval proceedings.

Bad science has never deterred activists. Greenpeace, for
example, is making the rounds of newspaper editorial boards and
using its usual technique: If the science isn't there, then make
it up! At a meeting with the National Post's board the other day,
Greenpeace's biotech campaigner glibly said the U.S. Department
of Agriculture had found that farmers who use genetically
modified crops actually end up using more herbicides.

One of the Post's board members had actually read the USDA
report, however, and challenged Greenpeace. The USDA had in fact
reached the opposite conclusion. "The net result," it said, "was
a decrease in the overall pounds of herbicide applied." Oh well,
that's the Greenpeace credo: Misrepresentation in the name of the
cause is justified‹and the only option when the evidence is
overwhelmingly in favour of genetic engineering. The USDA study
found modified corn, cotton and other products produced
"significant decreases in herbicide use" and "decreased
insecticide use."

Over at CBC Radio, meanwhile, journalist Bob Carty‹Greenpeace's
official media pipeline to the Canadian public‹yesterday repeated
the Greenpeace version of the USDA study. Use of GM crops
increases herbicide use, he said during an appearance on the
network's national This Morning show. Mr. Carty fanned the flames
of GM food fears, saying there was growing evidence that
Canadians and Americans were growing increasingly concerned about
the products. This has caught industry off guard, he said --
although he didn't acknowledge his own role in creating alarm. In
reports last year, Mr. Carty and his colleagues compared genetic
engineering to Nazi experiments, linked the industry to Agent
Orange and nuclear war, called beef hormones "crack for cows,"
interviewed known kooks, and uncritically reported on the work of
a British scientist whose study on modified potatoes had been
dismissed by Britain's scientific community.

So that's what's coming over the next week in Montreal. Later,
we'll get to the Biosafety Protocol.


|                   GENET                     |
| European NGO Network on Genetic Engineering |
|                                             |
|             Hartmut MEYER (Mr)              |
|          Reinhaeuser Landstr. 51            |
|            D - 37083 Goettingen             |
|                 Germany                     |
|                                             |
| phone: +49-551-7700027                      |
| fax:   +49-551-7701672                      |
| email:                    |