SnowBall archive
[Index][Thread]
GE - GMO news 11 & 12th March
- To: <genetics@gn.apc.org>
- Subject: GE - GMO news 11 & 12th March
- From: genetics <genetics@gn.apc.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:03:17 +0000
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
- Resent-From: snowball@gen.free.de
- Resent-Message-ID: <"XJHwyD.A.hIH.fzv72"@bakunix.free.de>
- Resent-Sender: snowball-request@gen.free.de
> The Independent (London) March 11, 1999 SECTION: COMMENT; Pg. 2
> HEADLINE:
> LETTER: SAINSBURY MUST GO BYLINE: Charles Secrett BODY: Sir: The
> case for
> Lord Sainsbury to resign, or be sacked, as Science Minister because
> of
> the conflicts between his extensive commercial holdings in
> biotechnology
> and plant-breeding companies and his duties to safeguard the public
> interest in these issues is overwhelming ("Lord Sainsbury in
> Monsanto
> talks", 8 March). Since Friends of the Earth first revealed the
> extent of
> Lord Sainsbury's investments last December, the Government has
> repeatedly
> defended his impartiality because the holdings sit in a blind trust.
> When
> we pointed out that all his investments
> return to his control once he ceases to be a minister, we were
> told that Lord Sainsbury "left the room" whenever policy
> discussions on biotechnology took place.
> When we pointed out that he did not leave the room when he
> chaired a meeting with us and industry representatives on how to
> hold public consultations on GM foods, we were told that that
> meeting didn't count - and that Lord Sainsbury never discusses
> government policy on GM issues with anyone. When we replied
> that, as Science Minister, he went to China and Korea last
> September with Professor Ray Baker, chief executive of the
> Biotechnology and Biological Science Research Council (BBSRC)
> to promote UK biotechnology programmes and secure bilateral
> agreements, we were told he took no part in such discussions. We
> pointed out that this visit prepared the way for a Foreign
> Office sponsored UK -China ministerial meeting this month on
> genetically modified plants; and anyway, what about a photograph
> which shows Lord Sainsbury overseeing the signing of a
> collaborative agreement between the BBSRC and the Korean
> Institute for Biosciences and Biotechnology?
> When we asked to see the agreements and to have confirmed in
> writing that Lord Sainsbury took no part in any biotechnology
> discussion, Professor Baker told us "no", because there were no
> publicly available papers or statements about this trip or the
> agreements.
> When we were told that "to avoid the appearance of a
> conflict of interest, Lord Sainsbury takes no interest in the
> science of GM organisms", we replied that Lord Sainsbury has
> repeatedly confirmed in public his longstanding, passionate
> interest in this science.
> When we asked about Lord Sainsbury's loan to Diatech, one of
> his biotechnology companies, which was completed while he was
> minister, we were told that, as the loan agreement had been
> settled in the week before he became minister, there could be no
> possible conflict of interest. When we continued to call on
> him to do the decent thing and resign, Lord Sainsbury continued
> to insist that he had nothing to do with GM food issues in
> government. Now The Independent has revealed that, as minister,
> he met with Monsanto the US GM crop giant, and discussed GM
> crops and food. Tony Blair's ministerial code of conduct is
> quite clear that not only must conflicts of interest be avoided,
> they must be seen to be avoided. Lord Sainsbury position is
> untenable. He must go.
> CHARLES SECRETT
> Director
> Friends of the Earth
> London N1
>======================
The Independent (London) March 11, 1999 SECTION: TITLE PAGE; Pg. 1
> HEADLINE: INQUIRY INTO WORK OF GM FOOD SCIENTIST BYLINE: Steve Connor
> Science Editor BODY: A HIGH-POWERED team of scientists has been
> appointed to
> investigate the work of Dr Arpad Pusztai, whose findings triggered a
> furore
> over genetically modified (GM) food. The Royal Society, Britain's
> most
> eminent body of scientists, has asked six of the country's leading
> scientists to review the data that led Dr Pusztai to warn that people
> who
> eat GM food are "unwitting guinea pigs in a mass experiment". The six
> specialists were selected by the Royal Society for their expertise in
> different disciplines and their independence from the Pusztai affair.
> None
> has commented publicly on the controversy.
> It is almost unprecedented for the Royal Society to
> establish what is effectively an independent peer review of a
> scientist's unpublished work. It was brought about because of
> the intense publicity associated with the Pusztai affair.
> Last August, the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen
> suspended Dr Pusztai after he claimed in a television interview
> that rats fed GM potatoes had stunted growth and a defective
> immune system. The institute said Dr Pusztai had no evidence on
> which to base his assertions and claimed that he had become
> "muddled" over experiments that had not taken place. In
> February, 20 scientists, mostly friends of Dr Pusztai, signed a
> memorandum supporting him, citing new evidence.
> The members of the review team include experts in
> statistics, nutrition, animal genetics, epidemiology and
> pharmacology. They will report their findings next month.
> ======#======
> The Northern Echo March 11, 1999
WOULD YOU GIVE YOUR KIDS GM FOOD?
BYLINE: Chris Lloyd
BODY: THROUGH hype and scare
> stories - a strange process that passeth the understanding of
> science -
> the public is convincing itself that genetically modified food is
> somehow
> unsafe. It is unsafe because the scientists - mad boffins in
> long
> white coats who carry fuming test-tubes around isolated labs while
> laughing
> manically - are somehow meddling with Nature, messing with God's
> patent. It
> is because they are fiddling with our future, somehow storing up
> problems
> for our children. It is because of the unsavoury taste left in the
> mouth by
> multi-
> national businesses funding the President's election campaign
> while peddling their suspect wares for profit. It is because of
> the use of complex chemicals which are said to do strange things
> to the inside of rats and cause fish to change sex. Such
> gut-feelings are affecting the High Street. On Monday,
> supermarket chain Asda gained positive publicity when it said it
> was trying its hardest to remove all traces of GM foods from its
> own brands. Yesterday, a survey for a health magazine suggested
> that 86 per cent of shoppers would use a supermarket that could
> guarantee GM-free foods and 84 per cent of them were prepared to
> travel twice their normal distance to reach the 'clean' shop.
> There is, therefore, only one question to ask Professor Janet
> Bainbridge. She is head of the School of Science and Technology
> at Teesside University and chair of the health safety committee
> that advises the Government on GM foods. It is her committee,
> the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes, that Tony
> Blair has so much faith in that he publicly announced that he
> was happy to eat GM foods.
> That question is: why do you say these new foods are safe?
> "We have the most robust and stringent regulatory system in the
> world," Prof Bainbridge replies. "GM foods that are approved for
> sale are scrutinised in incredible detail. We ask for 13
> different categories of scientific information. We ask for
> information about the source of the food and information about
> how it is processed. We need three subsets of genetic
> information about the gene inserts - we ask about the insert's
> stability, its expression (how it works in the food) and how it
> arrives in the GM cell. We need nutritional data, toxicological
> data and to know how it's going to be grown." Sitting in her
> large office in Middlesbrough - its slabby 1960s-style
> construction humanised by a fine collection of green plants -
> this advocate of what the tabloids call "Frankenstein foods" do-
> esn't have two heads; nor does she glow in the dark. She is
> normal, rational and sane and, to boot, she is the mother of two
> young children.
> She continues with her answer: "Consider our conventional
> foods. They are the result of an agricultural process which has
> evolved over centuries, a process based on strain selection and
> hybridisation and the use of chemicals. Yet we know absolutely
> nothing about their genetics. Many conventional foods have
> specific problems: if you don't soak beans they are toxic;
> coffee contains caffeine; the common potato goes green in the
> light and that green substance is toxic.
> "Many of those things would be sufficient for us to reject them
> under the current system and that's the basis on which I say GM
> foods are safe." Originally from Kent, Prof Bainbridge
> qualified as a microbiologist at Newcastle University and worked
> in industry before doing a PhD in applied biochemistry at
> Durham. She has worked at Teesside for 19 years and is regarded
> as an international expert in her field. She was appointed to
> advise the Government 18 months ago - she stresses that she has
> no political connections and, as an academic, has no commercial
> axe to grind either - and sees "tremendous advantages" in
> developing GM technology.
> "We can increase crop yields," she says. "We can improve the
> climate range in which crops grow, perhaps by making them
> drought resistant so they can be grown in arid areas. The
> world's food supply is growing by two per cent a year but its
> population is growing by four per cent so there is an imbalance
> that needs to be addressed.
> "We can improve flavour and taste. We can make it so we use
> less pesticides. We can improve nutritional values. If we can
> put proteins into rice where rice is a staple food it will have
> a major effect. For ourselves, we can lower cholesterol or
> improve vitamin content.
> "Potatoes are being developed with a modified starch content
> which means they absorb less fat. I have children. I am
> realistic and pragmatic. I know there's no way I could ban chips
> or crisps no matter how bad they are for the children's health
> but chips from GM potatoes could be much more healthy.
> "Peanut allergies are very serious but if you could genetically
> modify a peanut so that it is non-allergenic, the public would
> say it was a great technological achievement. That will come."
> Prof Bainbridge's committee deals purely with the food
> safety aspect of genetic engineering and she doesn't feel
> qualified to discuss the many environmental concerns about
> growing GM plants. However, she is interested in the moral
> aspect of her work and defends genetic engineering against
> accusations that its messing with Nature.
> "I don't think it was wrong that we interfered with Nature
> and started vaccinating people against smallpox or diptheria,"
> she says. "I would like to think that biotechnology would also
> be able to cure cystic fibrosis or haemophilia.
> "Science and morality are not incompatible and you could
> argue that if you can use biotechnology for the good of people
> who are starving, it would be immoral not to. At a conference
> recently I met an African delegate whose village depends upon
> selling bananas. Her people were very poor and she was saying:
> 'Forget regulations, just give us a GM banana so we can increase
> yield which will make all the difference to all the families in
> my village'." Prof Bainbridge understands why the public is
> sceptical about the benefits of GM. "The science is extremely
> complex," she says. "If you try to go deeply into it, I end up
> saying: 'If I go any further you won't understand'. That sounds
> patronising, so Joe Public errs on the side of caution." She
> continues: "When agriculture was based on horses pulling
> ploughs, people were very suspicious of new-fangled practices
> like tractors, and if a protest group wanted to look at the
> number of people who had fallen under tractors and been killed,
> it could say tractors were a disaster. But I don't think anyone
> with a modicum of commonsense would say that we shouldn't have
> tractors in this day and age.
> "I think GM is a bit like that. It is lack of confidence and
> faith in a new technology, particularly as it comes on the back
> of so many food scares and because so many protest groups see it
> as a mission."
> However, she doesn't believe that a moratorium would help allay
> fears, particularly as GM food is so accepted in the US which
> exports large quantities of food to this country. But she is
> very keen that labelling of foods is improved so the British
> people can make their choice.
> "The propaganda battle is being lost but eventually things
> will quieten down and I don't think it will be the end of
> technology," she says. "Today you have conventional and organic
> products and you pay a premium for organic. The day will come
> when people accept that conventional stuff contains GM but you
> will be able to buy non-GM at a premium. I suspect it will be a
> very high premium." All of which leaves one last question:
> does Prof Bainbridge pass the John Selwyn Gummer test? When
> Agriculture Minister at the height of the BSE crisis, he
> confidently fed his daughter Cordelia on a beefburger. Do Prof
> Bainbridge's children, aged eight and ten, dine on genetically
> -modified food in their North Yorkshire home?
> Says their mother: "I don't have any hang-ups about them
> eating GM food, although I don't buy much processed food because
> I prefer to start from scratch with my cooking."
> Does this change any gut-feelings?
> ======#======
> THE HINDU March 11, 1999
India- Call to impose non-tariff barriers
BYLINE: Our Special Correspondent CHENNAI, March 10.
> BODY: The demands for getting justice to India and other developing
> countries in future negotiations at the World Trade Organisation
> (WTO)
> dominated discussions at a national colloquium held here on Sunday
> which
> issued an appeal styled the 'Chennai Declaration'. While most of the
> speakers from the scientific community and other fields emphasised
> the need
> to protect the country's interests from what they perceived was an
> unjust
> order being brought about by the WTO, one of the eminent
> participants,
> however, emphasised that the WTO itself was only
> adjusting to the process of globalisation brought about by
> technological changes and that a negative attitude towards the
> organisation was not a healthy response.
> The colloquium was organised by the Catalyst Trust, Chennai,
> jointly with the Dr.M.S.Swaminathan Foundation, Chennai, and the
> Consumer Unity Trust Society (CUTS), Jaipur.
> Addressing the opening session, Dr.M.S.Swaminathan said
> there was no question of a level-playing field between the
> developed countries which spent billions of dollars on
> infrastructure for agriculture and countries like India marked
> by rural backwardness and poverty. He urged policy-makers to be
> prepared with a well- conceived and well-argued "precautionary
> package of non-tariff barriers (NTBs)" that could be placed
> before the WTO during the review of the Marrakesh Agreement.
> Declaring that protecting mass employment as a means of
> protecting access to income and thus food security could be a
> legitimate ground for placing NTBs on imports, Dr.Swaminathan
> cautioned against dumping of banned chemicals by developed
> countries and the social impact of allowing genetically
> modified organisms ( GMOs) .
> Khadi should be promoted in the world market as an eco-friendly
> material and niche products of Indian origin should be
> identified for coverage under the category of 'geographical
> appellation', he said. He also called for recognition and
> rewarding of community knowledge and ensuring ethics and equity
> in the preservation and use of biological resources.
> Dr.S.Kalyanaraman (Saraswathi Research Centre, Chennai),
> said China and India should set the world trade agenda for the
> next millennium and cooperate to protect the developing
> countries from the "exploitative and unethical practices" of
> transnational corporations (TNCs). With mega cross-border
> mergers between TNCs, governments even in developed countries
> were becoming "mouthpieces" of the corporations, he said.
> Dr.Pushpa Bhargava alleged that a TNC in the seed business
> had exploited the ignorance of the Indian farmer. He demanded a
> ban on seeds import or a test for five years before permitting
> marketing of imported seeds. No product patent should be given
> to genetically engineered products, he added.
> Dr.P.K.Ghosh, Advisor to the Department of Biotechnology of
> the Union Government, said developing countries should try to
> expand the purview of "public domain" (with respect to prior
> knowledge of a product/process) to prevent exploitative use of
> the patent regime by developed countries. Mr.A.V.Ganesan, former
> Commerce Secretary, sounding a somewhat different note, said the
> WTO, as a successor to GATT, represented an attempt to adopt the
> rule-based world trade regime to the changes brought about by
> the revolution in the communication, computer and transportation
> technologies. The right approach to the WTO would be to "accept
> what cannot be changed and demand changes in what cannot be
> accepted".
> The TRIPS agreement did not impose any bar on any country
> exercising sovereignty over its bioresources or rewarding
> communities for traditional knowledge or practices. The
> provisions on product patent on drugs in the TRIPS agreement was
> only intended to prevent industries in member-countries copying
> drugs developed at huge cost in developed countries.
> A lot of issues often cited in the debate on the WTO like
> impact of export of agricultural raw material and grain and
> subsidising the consumer of food through the PDS were
> essentially domestic issues having no bearing on the WTO,
> Mr.Ganesan said.
> Declaring that "globalisation cannot be wished away", he
> said inclusion of agriculture on the agenda of the GATT (and
> restrictions on subsidies) had affected mostly developed
> countries whose agriculture was "subsidy-driven", while
> countries like India had negative subsidy (or net taxation) on
> agriculture, he said.
> Copyright(C) 1999 The Hindu
> ======#======
> Daily Record March 11, 1999,
> SHOPPERS READY TO TURN THEIR BACKS ON GM FOOD
BODY: NINE out of ten shoppers would
> switch supermarkets to avoid genetically modified food, a survey
> shows.
> They would travel up to double the distance to a store which banned
> all
> modified ingredients. Food safety concerns are at an all-time high,
> according to the Here's Health magazine poll. And consumers are so
> desperate to avoid GM products that 86 per cent would change to a
> supermarket which banned them. All previous research has shown that
> people
> simply shop at their most convenient store, so this new finding
> underlines
> the scale of public alarm. Shoppers also believe they're being kept
> in
> the dark about the use of GM ingredients.
> A total of 93 per cent say they don't think products are
> clearly labelled. Iceland is the only national chain to
> adopt a blanket ban on GM ingredients in its own- label
> products.
> Sainsbury's, Tesco, Asda and Marks & Spencer have all cut
> down on GM foods, but say a total ban would be very difficult to
> enforce.
> The British are particularly alarmed about so-called
> Frankenstein Foods after being battered by previous health
> scares.
> The survey shows 77 per cent of people still worry about the
> threat of BSE. Eight out of ten think they could eat far
> more healthily if manufacturers used fewer additives and
> pesticides.
> Asked what words they are most likely to respond to on a label,
> 73 per cent said "additive free" and 72 per cent said "natural".
> Elaine Griffiths of Here's Health said: "Food safety is the
> issue of our times.
> "Supermarkets wise and brave enough to ban GM foods and
> provide an increasing range of organic products will secure a
> flood of new customers. "Consumers are fed up with being
> fobbed off and are becoming increasingly incensed at being used
> as guinea pigs.
> "It is outrageous the way supermarket chains are abusing the
> choice available."
> ======#======
> Daily Record March 11, 1999,
> KIRK CALLS FOR STRICT RULES ON PRODUCTS
BODY: THE Kirk has condemned the
> introduction of Frankenstein foods to Britain as "a serious failure
> of
> democracy". A hard-hitting report criticises the way genetically -
> modified ingredients have been added to products without public
> consultation. And it warns of a consumer backlash unless the
> Government
> imposes strict labelling rules on all foods containing GM
> ingredients. The
> report from the Church of Scotland's Society, Religion and Technology
> Project attacks companies behind GM food, such as Monsanto. It
> states:
> "The companies' failure to segregate
> modified and unmodified products is an unacceptably aggressive
> attitude towards the public of another nation."
> The report also attacks the EC for giving its "express
> approval" to GM foods for fear of a trade war with the US. And
> it strongly condemns the way profit has been allowed to come
> before people.
> It states: "There is an urgent need to bring the driving
> forces behind the research and marketing of transgenic food back
> into proper democratic accountability."
> Yesterday, a spokesman for the Ministry of Agriculture said
> they would make an announcement next week on GM food and
> promised to "have the most comprehensive labelling regulations
> in Europe".
=====================
GMO News 03/12
> ======#======
> 03/12 SAINSBURY ORDERS REVIEW OF CONTROVERSIAL SCIENCE By John von
> Radowitz, Science Correspondent, PA News The Government needs to be
> more in
> tune with the public's awareness of science and technology, science
> minister
> Lord Sainsbury said today. He has ordered a review of the way the
> Government
> handles scientific issues of public concern such as genetic
> engineering and
> cloning.
> There will be consultation and research into public knowledge and
> attitudes about science which could be used to inform policy making.
> At the launch in London of the sixth national Science Week, Lord
> Sainsbury said:
> "I'm very concerned about our lack of knowledge about what the
> public really think and know.
> "One of the things I learned as a businessman is that any
> organisation which doesn't understand its customers doesn't have
> much of a future." The Government is anxious to repair the
> damage caused by the controversy surrounding genetically
> modified food and GM crops, which showed it to be badly out of
> step with public opinion.
> "I'm determined that by this time next year we'll have an
> action plan to take science communication forward to the next
> millennium," Lord Sainsbury told a breakfast reception attended
> by some of the most eminent figures in the scientific
> establishment.
> Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) '99 -- 10 days of
> events around the country dedicated to popularising scientific
> research -- had two important roles to play, he said.
> It helped to recruit the potential scientists and engineers
> of the future and also enabled the public to become involved in
> scientific debate. There had never been a time when both
> goals were more vital, said Lord Sainsbury.
> "In the future our lives are likely to be altered radically
> by the science revolution taking place in IT, new materials, and
> biotechnology," he added. Top scientists will be taking time
> out from their laboratories to meet the public during SET '99.
> Among them is leading cosmologist Professor Stephen Hawking,
> who today launches a series of events in Cambridge to mark the
> sixth National Science Week.
> Professor Hawking is giving a talk on how science and
> technology might develop over the next 1,000 years.
> Across the country, more than a million visitors are expected
> to attend thousands of lectures, workshops and demonstrations.
> Topics include the origins of the universe, space travel,
> dinosaurs, computers and genetics.
> Two Russian cosmonauts, Alexander Volkov and Alexander
> Martynov, make an appearance in Cambridge to talk about space
> travel.
> BBC Online and the Tomorrow's World programme have offered
> audiences the chance to take part in an unusual experiment
> during the week. Visitors to the Tomorrow's World website
> were invited to chat with one of three randomly-assigned
> characters and then judge whether they were talking to a real
> person or a computer program. The results will be given on
> Megalab '99 live on BBC1 on March 17.
> Science is also being taken to the heart of Government, in
> the form of a showcase celebrating the best of British research
> at the House of Commons. It will include a contribution of
> posters from 300 young researchers from around the country.
> Last year, SET '98 saw more than 7,000 events held across the
> UK and attracted more than 1.2 million visitors.
> ======#======
> Aberdeen Press and Journal March 11, 1999
> Church accuses GM companies on ethics
BODY: COMPANIES behind genetically
> modified (GM) food have been accused of unethical practice in a
> damning
> Church of Scotland report. In a report to the General Assembly, the
> Kirk's National Mission has condemned it, following a five-year
> study, as
> little more than a profit-making machine. It says it does not
> believe GM
> food itself is unethical but the way it is being used is. Study
> director
> Donald Bruce said: "We do not doubt the potential that the crops
> could
> have for good use, but the moral stance of claiming 'we need this to
> feed
> the world' is not being borne out. If there was a significant change
> in
> that - and a lot more
> resources were put into creating crops suitable for raising in
> drought conditions, for example - then I think we would be
> saying that could well be a good way forward." Mr Bruce said
> there was concern about the way GM foods were being introduced
> into Europe from the US.
> He pointed to the controversy surrounding soya and maize from
> America, which is being used in products on sale in Scotland
> without any labelling to inform consumers.
> "There is indignation from people that they are not being
> given a choice," Mr Bruce said. "It smacks of imperialism - but
> instead of a Boston Tea Party, this time we could have a
> Rotterdam Soya Bean Fest with soya and maize dumped in the North
> Sea."
> The report into GM food followed a five-year study by
> Scottish scientists, ethicists and sociologists as part of the
> Kirk's Society, Religion and Technology project.
> Genetically modified crops pose unknown risks to wildlife and
> ecosystems in the British countryside, experts advising the
> Government told MPs yesterday. Two senior scientists from
> English Nature said the impact on natural food chains of crops
> engineered to increase their tolerance to weed killers and
> resistance to insects had not been assessed.
> Until the risks were known, no attempt should be made to
> plant GM crops commercially, they told the Commons Science and
> Technology Select Committee. English Nature's chief executive
> officer, Derek Langslow, and Keith Duff, chief scientist, were
> giving evidence to MPs investigating the way Government policy
> on GM foods was driven.
> They said GM crops were likely to make farming practices more
> intensive, which could have an impact on countryside ecology and
> threaten wildlife. Mr Duff said: "Our concern is that genetic
> modification of traits such as herbicide tolerance will allow
> even more effective management of unwanted species.
> Opposed
> "The loss of these weeds will lead to the loss of
> invertebrates which feed on them and the loss of birds which
> feed on these."
> Douglas Parr, director of the environmental pressure group
> Greenpeace UK, told the committee he was wholly opposed to GM
> foods and crops because of the inherent unpredictability of the
> science.
> Ministers should be listening to the voice of public opinion,
> which was highly suspicious of GM foods.
> Also appearing before the committee yesterday were
> representatives of Monsanto, the multinational seed firm which
> has extensive interests in the development of GM products.
> Ann Foster, responsible for the company's government and
> public relations in the UK, acknowledged its high profile in the
> field meant it was suffering from an image problem during the
> present controversy.
> ======#======
> The Guardian (London) March 11, 1999
SECTION: The Guardian Online
Soundbites
BYLINE: COMPILED BY BILL O'NEILL
BODY: We are not a clone 'The nuclei from somatic cells of the infertile
couple
> could
> be transferred to enucleated germinal-stage oocytes and, after
> meiosis,
> two haploid genomes (one from each parent) could be combined in a
> single
> oocyte. If this approach worked, the resulting child would be a
> random
> genetic combination of the parental genomes, the same as every other
> human.' Davor Solter, of the Max Planck Institute of Immunology in
> reiburg, and John Gearhart, of the Johns Hopkins University School of
> Medicine in Baltimore, on how cloning technology could
> create natural offspring. Science Efficacious harvests
> 'If we need new drugs, where are we going to go? Space? No.
> It's sitting right there. It's diverse as hell. And it's waiting
> for us.' William Fenical, of the Scripps Institution of
> Oceanography in California, on the potential of the Pacific, and
> other oceans, to provide medicines for the next millennium.
> Discover
> Breaking the silence
> 'A new technology has been introduced and on the basis of a
> single published paper . . . in one sense, what I achieved is
> we're all sitting here talking about it.'
> Arpad Pusztai, the molecular biologist whose public
> discussion of his work on genetically modified food led to his
> summary suspension from the Rowett Research Institute in
> Aberdeen, presenting evidence to the House of Commons Select
> Committee for Science and Technology. BBC Newsnight Sweet
> revenge
> ' Greenpeace, the environmental pressure group that wants
> a ban on GM foods, has launched a biodegradeable credit card
> with the Co-op Bank. Made from a sugar-based polymer called
> Biopol, it decomposes when put on a compost heap. Greenpeace
> members may be less pleased to learn, however, that Biopol is
> made by . . . the Frankenstein food people Monsanto, who are
> researching ways Biopol can be produced in greater quantity from
> GM sugar cane and maize.' Greensleaze column. Private Eye
> Electra guide in purple
> 'They want you to drive a three-wheeled cockroach that goes
> 35 miles an hour and if you get hit by a motorcycle, you're
> dead. No radio, because that's fun. No carpeting, because it
> might be some animal fibre. Well, we're not going to play their
> game any more. We are starting a new game.'
> John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland, self-confessed environmentalist
> and renegade electric car designer, on the traditional
> environmental movement and his plans for Purple Phaze, a re-
> configured Datsun minitruck with a high-voltage battery stack at
> the rear and 1000 watts of audio under the bonnet. Wired
> Spinless politics
> 'One of our most important tasks is to try to have an impact
> on society. We want to make psychological factors visible, and
> to show politicians that they need to use these factors to help
> them make good decisions.' Birgit Hansson, president of the
> Swedish Psychological Association. The Psychologist
> Out of the closet
> 'It needs to be said: Tinky Winky is a hero, and an ideal
> role model for any child without toes or genitalia.'
> Paul Rudnick, playwright and screenwriter, on the love that
> dare not say 'eh -ho' and his former relationship with the outed
> Teletubby. The New Yorker
> ======#======
> THE JOURNAL (Newcastle, UK) March 11, 1999,
HEADLINE: GM crops could 'lead to the loss of insects
> and birds' BODY: Genetically modified crops pose unknown risks to
> wildlife and ecosystems, experts advising the Government told MPs
> yesterday. Two senior scientists from English Nature said the impact
> on
> natural food chains of crops engineered to increase tolerance to
> weed
> killers and resistance to insects had not been assessed. Until the
> risks
> were known no attempt should be made to plant genetically modified
> crops
> commercially, they told the Science and Technology Select Committee
> at the
> House of Commons. English Nature chief executive officer Dr Derek
> Langslow and
> Dr Keith Duff, chief scientist, were giving evidence to MPs
> investigating the way Government policy concerning genetically
> modified foods is driven.
> They said GM crops were likely to make farming more
> intensive, which could affect ecology and threaten wildlife.
> Dr Duff said the concern was that greater herbicide tolerance
> would lead to the greater loss of weeds which would lead to the
> loss of invertebrates which feed on them, and the loss of birds
> which feed on the insects. There were also unknown effects
> which GM crops could have on biodiversity. The duo said
> English Nature, which advises the Government, was not in
> principle opposed to GM crops and supported large field
> experiments since only those could provide the data.
> Dr Langslow said, so far, ministers appeared to have been
> listening to the advice English Nature was giving. Dr Douglas
> Parr, director of environment pressure group Greenpeace UK,
> said he was wholly opposed to GM foods and crops because of the
> inherent unpredictability of the science. He said the
> advisory committees, instead of beginning from a standpoint that
> genetic modification was desirable, should be listening to
> public opinion, which was highly suspicious of GM foods.
> Also before the committee were representatives of Monsanto
> plc, the multi-national seed firm which has extensive interests
> in the development of GM products.
> Ann Foster, responsible for the company's government and
> public relations in the UK, said: "Whatever we say or do is
> twisted and turned and spun until it's very difficult to get a
> fair hearing."
> She told the committee the company had held discussions with
> the Government about GM-related issues and all were a matter of
> public record.
> ======#======
> 03/12 WSJ: Sometimes It Takes A Nuclear Scientist To Decode A Mkt By
> Thomas
> Petzinger Jr. Los Alamos, N.M. -- Has commerce become so complex it
> must
> turn to nuclear scientists for answers? For a certain category of
> problems,
> the answer is yes. Since 1995, several exiles from Los Alamos National
> Lab
> have been building a consulting firm that applies bomb science to
> business
> affairs. A former plasma physicist helps Monsanto shape product
> strategy. An
> expert in laser fusion helps Citigroup cope with international
> volatility.
> One scientist, an authority on electron beams, helps focus
> direct-marketing
> campaigns for pinpoint precision. Now, after growing to 40
> scientists and
> several million in annual revenue, the Center for Adaptive Systems
> Applications is poised to leap even more deeply into the blue-chip
> world.
> Next week the firm, called CASA for short, plans to absorb a division
> of the
> consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers that also deals with
> complex problems. The Big Five firm, in turn, will retain an
> interest in and collaborate with the scientific boutique.
> "We're taking consultants from Manhattan and going back to the
> site of the Manhattan Project," says Winslow Farrell, who heads
> the PricewaterhouseCoopers unit.
> How do these atomic wonks get away with advising business? The
> answer begins with a computer scientist named John Davies.
> In 1978, after working in the space program, Mr. Davies joined
> Citicorp, now Citigroup, to help create cutting-edge computer
> applications. This work eventually exposed him to a pet interest
> of Citicorp Chairman John Reed: complexity theory. (It's also a
> favorite subject of mine, as regular readers know.)
> WHAT IS complexity theory? For one thing, it's misnamed. The
> scientists who created it should have called it simplicity
> theory, because it explains how order springs from disorder.
> Under the right conditions, large, seemingly chaotic systems
> (bees, businesses, air currents, computers) will, all by
> themselves, organize into well-ordered states (hives, stock
> markets, thunderstorms, the Internet). These "complex adaptive
> systems," as scientists call them, continually change by
> interacting with, and adjusting to, all that surrounds them.
> Studying the wildly erratic data generated by these systems
> often requires the same kind of byzantine mathematics used in
> weapons research (called nonlinear dynamics). Thus, in the
> 1980s, Los Alamos and the surrounding scientific community
> became a hotbed of study in all kinds of complex adaptive
> systems. Then came the early 1990s. John Davies was downsized
> out of Citicorp. He joined Los Alamos to find ways of putting
> the lab's mathematics to work studying the complex systems of
> business. A few years later, with the lab's blessing, he and
> some others quit to conduct this work commercially.
> CASA's first client was one of his former Citicorp bosses:
> Colin Crook, then chief technology officer. Mr. Crook handed
> over a mountain of credit histories from which the scientists
> created new formulas for scoring card applicants and spotting
> frauds. The bank also turned over customer-service records of
> millions of incoming phone calls. CASA, in turn, uncovered
> patterns that helped Citicorp cut staff in its call centers
> while improving response times. More recently, CASA provided
> simulation software to help employees increase their intuition
> and expertise in responding to economic turbulence.
> "There are a lot of self-organizing forces out there in
> consumer behavior," notes Mr. Crook, who joined CASA's board
> after retiring from Citicorp in 1997. But, he adds, "you need
> the right tool set, and the right mind-set, to find them."
> CASA now serves several huge clients, but most demand strict
> confidentiality. (Nuclear scientists know how to keep secrets,
> notwithstanding this week's concern about possible Los Alamos
> leaks to China).
> ONE OTHER CASA client, Monsanto, confirms engaging the firm to
> develop software to help product managers plot their marketing
> moves. "There's a set of business problems with so many
> variables, you can't get your arms around them," says Pat
> Fortune, Monsanto's chief information officer. "But with a
> complex adaptive model, the marketing people can conduct serious
> strategic and tactical analysis."
> When I first met Mr. Davies, three years ago, he acknowledged
> his firm would have to join forces with a big outfit. CASA's
> intellectual property - its golden algorithms and software
> programs - could apply to more clients, but nuclear scientists
> aren't known for their sales skills. A short time later, he met
> Win Farrell.
> I first wrote about Mr. Farrell two years ago. With a small
> band of math whizzes and social scientists at
> PricewaterhouseCoopers, he created a program to simulate the
> buying actions of 200,000 actual Americans (a "focus group of
> 200,000," he claims). Tweaking the parameters of a marketing
> campaign, clients could watch these consumers cluster into
> buying patterns - a complex adaptive system evolving on the
> computer screen.
> Mr. Davies and Mr. Farrell explored not only what their work
> had in common but also how it differed. By combining their
> respective tools and data sets, they figured they could model
> consumer behavior with a richness that neither firm could
> accomplish independently. Soon, prospective partner firms in
> Japan and Switzerland will provide more data so CASA can model
> the behavior of millions, maybe billions, of consumers.
> Also in the works: Connecting clients directly to CASA's
> computers so businesses can transmit their data and model their
> problems the moment they occur - and adapt in real time.
> (END) DOW JONES NEWS 03-12-99
> 12:37 AM
> ======#======
> Agence France Presse
HEADLINE: Carlsberg to keep modified maize out of beer
> DATELINE: COPENHAGEN, March 12
BODY: Danish brewer Carlsberg plans to
> prohibit use of maize in the production of its beer in future to avoid
> controversial genetically modified varieties, a spokesman said
> Friday.
> The company says this is not because of any perceived danger but
> because of
> public attitudes. The spokesman denied reports that Carlsberg was
> planning
> to abandon maize immediately or in the near future. He said the
> company
> still had guarantees for its supplies of natural maize,
> and also had the means to carry out checks. "However if we do
> not succeed in obtaining maize which has not been genetically
> modified we will find alternative products to replace it," the
> spokesman, Henrik Moelstroem, told AFP.
> Carlsberg has been using maize for 40 years in its beer,
> together with malt and hops.
> It currently imports maize from France which produces
> relatively little genetically modified maize compared with the
> United States, Denmark's main maize supplier.
> Carlsberg refuses to use genetically -modified products "not
> because they are dangerous but because Danish consumers don't
> want them," said Merethe Guldborg, head of quality control.
> "We have nothing against the technology," she said. "Indeed,
> genetic modification creates certain environmental advantages,
> allowing reduction in use of pesticides and herbicides during
> cultivation."
> ======#======
> The Grocer March 13, 1999 S
GMO update: off the fast food menu
BODY: Asda tells suppliers it wants them to stop
> using ingredients that may be derived from GM sources in its own
> label
> lines. The ban comes five months after the chain started to drop GM
> soya
> and maize from its products A survey carried out by Friends of the
> Earth
> shows PizzaExpress, Domino Pizza and Wimpy are GM free, while
> Burger King
> and KFC are among those chains trying to go down the same route
> -Commons Science and Technology Committee hears former Rowett
> Research
> Institute scientist Arpad Puztai say the public are
> being used as guinea pigs over GM foods
> -Top scientist Philip James tells the Committee that more
> effective and accurate screening methods are needed to monitor
> GMOs, while Monsanto says it has been branded the "devil
> incarnate"
> -International development charity Panos publishes a report
> calling for a reasoned debate on whether GMOs will help
> developing nations solve their food supply problems
> -The Daily Mail launches an anti GM campaign dubbed Genetic
> Food Watch. One of its stories highlights a project under way
> in North America to grow genetically modified salmon it dubs
> Frankenfish'
==================
> The Grocer March 13, 1999
Monsanto: we messed up
BODY: Monsanto has admitted it messed up the introduction of the
> first GM products to Europe. Sir Dominic Cadbury, president of the
> Food and
> Drink Federation, says the biotech giant now accepts future GM
> ingredients
> must be segregated from conventional crops. The pledge came from
> senior
> Monsanto executive Hugh Grant, Sir Dominic told the FDF dinner. He
> said the
> FDF would continue to work on the unresolved issues surrounding GMO
> labelling. "We are urging Brussels to decide on the threshold and the
> negative list. Until these questions are decided, there will continue
> to be
> conflicting labelling practice. Blanket labelling is not helpful as it
> denies the consumer choice."
> He said the industry was committed to providing customers
> with the right sort of information and highlighted its work on
> the labelling of food allergens and its contribution to the
> joint health claims initiative. But he said the industry must
> resist the pressure exerted by every lobby group to list their
> particular hobby horse. "Clearly, if all the requests for data
> were to be met labels would either be bigger than the products
> or impossible to decipher." l FDF figures show food and drink
> exports worldwide fell 4.7% or by L 500m last year, although by
> only 1% to other EU countries. Sir Dominic said sister companies
> in multinationals were undercutting their UK counterparts on
> price. However, breakfast cereals and biscuits manufacturers
> grew their exports 12% and 2% respectively.
> ======#======
> The Grocer March 13, 1999
HEADLINE: Freshlands plans 20 superstores
BODY: Organic retailer Freshlands has unveiled an
> ambitious plan to open 20 supermarkets in and around London over the
> next five years. The new chain which opens its first store in Camden on
> March 24 is headed and backed by Hass Hassan. He was previously president
> of Wild Oats, where he was instrumental in building the alfafa chain
> into the second largest natural food retailer in the US. To run the new
> business over here, Hassan has formed a management team comprising
> five directors with more than 60 years' experience in the natural food
> business in the UK and US.
> The stores will stock 1,500 organic lines many of them not
> stocked by conventional supermarkets. Freshlands hopes most of
> the products will eventually be sourced locally, and said it
> would never knowingly stock any genetically modified lines.
>
> ======#======
Aust gene food conference says more information needed
> BYLINE: By Stephen Spencer
BODY: CANBERRA, March 12 AAP -
A landmark conference today
> called for comprehensive labelling of genetically modified food
> and a
> halt to the import and development of such food until a new
> regulatory
> regime was established. The food industry welcomed the findings
> which it
> said gave the green light for the sale here of genetically modified
> foods. The consensus conference brought together 14 lay people who
> questioned experts of genetically modified foods and
> others with an interest in the topic.
> Their report released today was hailed by Australian
> Democrats Deputy Leader Natasha Stott Despoja because of its
> call for comprehensive labelling to allow consumers to decide
> whether or not they bought such foods. "A labelling scheme
> at every step of the process, so that you know how that
> particular food has been altered or modified," she told
> reporters. "So that consumers have the right to make an informed
> choice about the products they are not only buying but they are
> actually eating and consuming." The Australian Food and
> Grocery Council, the peak body for Australia's big food
> producers, also declared its satisfaction with the outcome.
> "The report they produced recognised that gene technology is
> potentially a very useful technology and the benefits of it
> should be taken forward," council scientific and technical
> director Dr Geoffrey Annison told AAP. "It's the green light
> to a cautious and deliberate approach to the technology with
> appropriate and open regulation."
> Dr Annison said gene technology had the potential to provide
> consumers with enhanced benefits, and could earn billions of
> dollars in export income for Australia.
> The CSIRO also hailed the conference outcome.
> "Gene technology is vital to Australia's future, our
> environment and our competitive position in the world, but it
> needs the certainty of effective regulatory arrangements and
> public confidence in its safety and effectiveness," Chief
> executive Dr Malcom McIntosh said.
> "This report endorses that view."
> However, the National Farmers' Federation expressed concern
> about the labelling of genetically modified products, saying
> it could "create immense confusion".
> "Labelling the end product, because of its production
> process, would not be meaningful, where the product is
> substantially equivalent," NFF Vice President Brendan Stewart
> said.
> He said the ban on imports and new genetically modified
> products could also lead to trade sanctions against Australia
> and set back the local food industry.
> ======#======
> The Dominion (Wellington) March 12, 1999
> HEADLINE: Greens say they may strike at crops again
BYLINE: SAMSON Alan
> BODY: RADICAL greenies have said they might strike again after
> destroying a research plot of genetically engineered potato crops near
> Christchurch early yesterday. The raiders, members of a "direct
> action" youth activist section of the Green Party, drew sympathy from
party
> co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons. Though not condoning breaking the
> law, she said she "certainly understood the frustration" that drove her
members to the
> action. Police are investigating the early-morning raid on a Crop
> and
> Food Research Institute test site at Lincoln, near Christchurch.
> The science programme of three researchers has been set back by
> at least 12 months. Responsibility has been admitted by a
> Green Party faction styled "The Wild Greens". The group's
> spokesman is Nandor Tanczos. Ms Fitzsimons's office confirmed
> last night that he would be a candidate for the party in this
> year's elections, "probably a list candidate".
> Ironically, part of the Lincoln research intent was to assess
> the safety of genetically engineered potatoes.
> In breaching containment of the trial the raiders could have
> increased the risk of spreading the modified material,
> scientists said. Mr Tanczos issued a statement saying there were
> times when "it becomes a duty to break the law in order to do
> what is right".
> "These plants were being grown despite the serious health and
> environmental risks they could easily have caused." He said the
> plants could expose people to "frequent doses of broad spectrum
> antibiotics and we'd run the risk of creating widespread
> antibiotic resistance".
> Institute chief executive Michael Dunbier said the trials,
> also aimed at producing disease and pest-resistant plants to
> reduce the use of chemicals, had been approved by the
> Environmental Risk Management Authority and undergone
> international research scrutiny. The trial had been damaged
> beyond repair. Ms Fitzsimons said it was impossible to tell
> if the research crops were "safe". And the fact that there was
> no avenue for broader debate on whether modified crops should be
> in New Zealand at all, strengthened her call for a royal
> commission.
> Safe Food campaigner Sue Kedgley said the act was a symptom
> of the "incredible frustration and emotion" felt by ordinary
> people around the world. Asked if she condoned the act, she
> said: "I certainly don't condemn it." Meanwhile, Prime
> Minister Jenny Shipley's office indicated that her call for a
> system of mandatory labelling could soon be the subject of an
> investigation by a group of experts and consumers.
> But a spokesman rejected claims by the opposition that Mrs
> Shipley had changed her stance to suit an election year. Last
> year she had opposed a private member's bill seeking the
> labelling of genetically modified foods because it was "badly
> framed, manufacturers couldn't live with it, it would incur high
> costs and wouldn't work".
> "The Government would still oppose that bill," the spokesman
> said. Editorial p8
> ======#======
> The Dominion (Wellington) March 12, 1999
: Public's right to know
BODY: THE Wild Greens' destruction of a research plot of genetically modified
potatoes at Lincoln raises the
> stakes in what could have been -- and still could be -- a sensible
> debate about the implications of the new technology for the food we eat.
> The irony is that if facts are to determine the public's acceptance or
> otherwise of genetically modified foods, they will never be
> established by idiotic sabotage of responsible research. More positive is
Prime
> Minister Jenny Shipley's softening of the Government's hostility to
> any requirement to label
> genetically modified food. Only six months ago she prevailed on
> party waverer Christine Fletcher to suppress her support for a
> private member's bill aimed at making labelling compulsory and
> vote with the Government instead, so ensuring the bill's defeat
> in a 60-60 vote. Since then Associate Health Minister Tuariki
> Delamere has been adamant that labelling would be unworkable,
> costly and could lead to trade disputes with countries wanting
> to export modified products. But the ground has been crumbling
> from under the Government's feet.
> In December the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Council
> voted to make labelling mandatory. An outcry in Britain and
> Europe has brought modified food squarely on to the political
> agenda there. This week the Royal New Zealand College of General
> Practitioners raised concerns over health and the environment,
> urging caution till more is known and pointedly reminding the
> Government of its duty to protect the public from harm. The
> public is now more aware that this is an issue that concerns
> them directly.
> The sensible course lies somewhere between calls to ban
> modified foods outright and the laissez-faire attitude favoured
> by some scientists, food and biotechnology companies, and
> traders. Just as genetic engineering has produced beneficial
> new drugs, modifying crops could increase yields, improve
> quality, add to growers' returns and, hopefully, lower prices.
> Some genetic modification takes place naturally. Some is
> engineered by traditional breeding techniques. Scientists
> implanting specific genes can now do the job more precisely.
> Besides potatoes, New Zealand has undertaken research on sugar
> beet, maize, peas, broccoli, rape, canola, barley, apples,
> kiwifruit, tamarillos, radiata pine, flowers, and breeding sheep
> to produce a human protein in their milk. Much of this research,
> as with Lincoln's potatoes, is intended to combat diseases,
> insects or viruses, or to make crops resistant to herbicides.
> The public interest is not to stop the scientists in their
> tracks, but to demand full accountability and transparency. That
> means placing the burden of proof of safety (and liability for
> harmful outcomes) on the innovator, insisting on verifiable
> testing before and after release, informing of the presence of
> modified elements in foods through disclosure at each stage of
> processing, and labelling the end product.
> Without that, the public will remain justifiably sceptical
> over bland safety assurances. The ball is in the Government's
> court.
> ======#======
> Financial Times (London) March 12, 1999,
HEADLINE: GM crops may affect land value NEWS
> DIGEST: BODY: AGRICULTURE GM crops may affect land value The Royal
> Institute of Chartered Surveyors, which represents the managers of
> most of
> the UK's agricultural land, has told the government that growing
> genetically modified crops could potentially affect the value of
> farmland.
> "If there is a perception by buyers of land that they would prefer
> not to
> buy land that has grown GM crops we might find a price differential
> appearing," said Peter Faulkner, president of RICS' rural practice
> division
> yesterday. In a submission to the government's review of the
> framework
> for overseeing developments
> in biotechnology, RICS raised the possibility that tenant
> farmers who grow GM crops may have to compensate landowners for
> any shortfall in the price of the land. Vanessa Houlder
> ======#======
> Financial Times (London) March 12, 1999,
HEADLINE: Waitrose moves towards ban
> BODY: MODIFIED INGREDIENTS Waitrose moves towards ban Waitrose, the
> grocery division of the John Lewis Partnership, is to ban
> genetically
> modified ingredients from its own-label foods. The supermarket
> chain,
> which has 117 branches, said it expected to complete the exclusion of
> GM
> soya and maize from Waitrose foods and petfoods in the next two
> weeks. It
> also intended to remove oils, additives and other derivatives of GM
> crops
> wherever possible. On Monday, Asda said it was moving towards
> excluding
> GM
> ingredients in own-label products - a step taken by Iceland, the
> frozen-food retailer - last year. John Willman
> ======#======
> The Independent (London) March 12, 1999 SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 9
LORD SAINSBURY TO HEAD BIOTECH TEAM
BYLINE: Fran Abrams Westminster Correspondent
> BODY: LORD SAINSBURY of Turville, the minister at the centre of the
> recent
> controversy over genetically modified food, is to head a government
> team to
> promote GM food companies, The Independent has learnt. The Science
> minister
> will be joined by representatives of food and medical biotechnology
> companies, whose names have not yet been made public. The initiative
> aims to
> boost "clusters" of biotechnology companies that have sprung up in
> Oxford,
> Cambridge and Dundee.
> Lord Sainsbury has major interests in companies developing the
> technology
> for GM foods. These interests are now in a blind trust and he has
> promised
> not to get involved in policy-making on GM food. But he has already
> been
> criticised for leading a biotechnology trade mission to Korea and for
> sitting on a cabinet sub-committee dealing with the issue.
> News of the initiative drew an angry reaction from environmental
> campaigners, including the Liberal Democrat Norman Baker, MP for
> Lewes.
> Mr Baker said the Government had given assurances that Lord Sainsbury
> would
> not be involved in decisions or discussions on the subject. "Either he
> is
> involved and we have been lied to, or he is a lame-duck chairman
> because
> he can't talk about these things. He should be replaced," he said.
> A spokeswoman for the Department of Trade and Industry said the
> group
> would only deal "very remotely" with GM food issues. "The policy
> issues here
> are about promoting industry within the cluster arrangement. It isn't
> about
> promoting GM foods," she said.
> The group is to visit Cambridge, Oxford, Scotland and two US-based
> biotechnology clusters. It will also hold brainstorming meetings with
> industry, planning authorities, science park managers and
> universities.
> Officials from the Department of Trade and Industry will make
> information-gathering visits, and the team will publish a report.
> Among the companies in the Cambridge biotechnology cluster is Axis
> Genetics, which is developing vaccines from plants. Its chief
> executive,
> Iain Cubitt, sat on the board of the Sainsbury Laboratory, which is
> financed
> by the Science minister's charity, the Gatsby Foundation.
> Other firms that could be involved include Plant Breeding
> International
> in Cambridge, which runs a number of test sites for GM crops, and the
> Scottish Crop Research Institute in Dundee.
> The Science minister has been looking increasingly embattled as
> revelations about his role appear to contradict his statements on the
> issue.
> Lord Sainsbury, whose shareholding in the supermarket is in a blind
> trust,
> has also taken charge of another government consultation to which the
> issue
> of GM food and crops is central. The Government has asked the
> pollsters Mori
> to run a series of focus groups to canvas public opinion on GM crops,
> genetic testing and cloning.
> Lord Sainsbury chaired a conference on the consultation in
> December and
> took part in a discussion on it in a cabinet committee earlier this
> month.
> ======#======
> The Independent (London) March 12, 1999, Friday
LETTER: IN BRIEF
BYLINE: Brian Marshall
BODY: Sir: Horses know
> instinctively not to eat ragwort and will not willingly do so
> because it is poisonous to them. Cattle avoid eating buttercups for the
same
> reason.
> There are many such examples in the wild. Duff Hart- Davis (Country
> Matters, 6 March) gives us another, that pheasants will not
> willingly eat
> genetically modified maize. Will this information be researched? Let
> the
> precautionary principle apply. It is not for us to prove
> that GM foods may be harmful. It is for Monsanto, Agrevo et al to
> prove
> that they never will be. BRIAN MARSHALL
> Linton, Cambridgeshire
> ======#======
>