Biotechnology_train_may_be_Pandora's_box

[Guest guest]

> Subject:

> GMW:_Biotechnology_train_may_be_Pandora's_box

> " GM_WATCH " <info

> Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:43:48 +0100

 

>

> GM WATCH daily

> http://www.gmwatch.org

> ---

> FOCUS ON ASIA

> http://www.gmwatch.org/p1temp.asp?pid=42 & page=1

>

> 2 items, including an excellent commentary, on

> what's going in Thailand, where a review is being

> urgently demanded of the plan to approve open field

> trials and commercialisation of GM plants.

>

> There are also demands that the government passes

> biosafety laws and acts to protect farmers' and

> consumers' rights and the country's natural resource

> base, before it considers the new policy.

>

> A particular point of contention is the fact that

> the government has never asked local farmers or

> consumers whether they want GM crops. It stands

> accused of basing its decision solely on a

> requirement from Washington and corporations eager

> to export GM seeds and products to Thailand.

>

> Biothai's director Witoon Lianchamroon points out,

> " The government's policy on biotechnology and GMOs

> will have a big impact on farmers and the

> agricultural sector, so the government should

> consult the public before coming up with any

> decision. " (item 2)

>

> The Thai Cabinet did not consider the new policy

> proposal at its meeting this week, but it is

> expected to do so next Tuesday.

>

> 1.Biotechnology train may be Pandora's box

> 2.LOBBY URGES PM TO DROP FIELD

> TRIALS IDEA

> ---

> 1.Biotechnology train may be Pandora's box

> The Nation, August 24, 2004

>

> When Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra announced on

> Friday that Thailand would embrace genetically

> engineered (GE) crops, he declared that, 'The

> government won't let the country miss the

> biotechnology train.'

>

> The message was clear: Thailand must adopt this new,

> cutting-edge technology as a matter of national

> competitiveness. But a closer look at the reasoning

> behind the National Biotechnology Policy Committee's

> decision suggests that the government knows very

> little about this train, or even where it's going.

>

> Take for example Thaksin's claim that the EU is now

> open to GMOs. Clearly he was trying to reassure

> Thailand's farmers and food exporters that the

> introduction of GE crops would not hurt exports. But

> it's not very reassuring if it isn't true. The EU's

> de facto moratorium on GMOs remains intact, and

> approvals of GE crops remain blocked.

>

> Only one GE food crop - Syngenta's Bt11 sweet corn -

> has slipped through, but Syngenta has now announced

> that it will not be commercialised. More

> importantly, the EU's new GMO labelling and

> 'traceability' laws, requiring comprehensive

> documentation of all every step, impose the

> strictest possible limits on unintended GMO

> contamination in food products - further indicating

> that consumer rejection of GE food remains strong.

>

> So, in practical terms, the EU remains closed to

> GMOs, and the real economic potential for Thailand's

> farmers and food exporters lies in

> a GMO-free policy that promotes 'the kitchen of the

> world' free from GE crops, and therefore free from

> GMO pollution.

>

> It's precisely because of this consumer rejection

> abroad and in Thailand that the government's GMO

> train ride is advertised as heading for two

> different destinations - the world of GE crops and a

> world of non-GE conventional and organic crops.

> This, the government claims, gives farmers and

> consumers a greater choice. But does it? Is this

> 'co-existence' of GE and GE-free crops really

> possible?

>

> Over the past decade we've witnessed dozens of GE

> contamination scandals overseas, involving GE

> pollen, seeds and food ingredients ending up in

> places where they should never have been. Mexican

> corn has been contaminated with GE corn imported

> from the US, and Brazilian soya is contaminated with

> Roundup Ready soya from neighbouring Argentina. On

> top of all this, there has been a flood of lawsuits

> and compensation claims and counter-claims filed by

> farmers and GE corporations in Canada and the US.

>

> Earlier this month, the Organic Agriculture

> Protection Fund (representing organic farmers in

> Saskatchewan) announced that they were filing a

> class action lawsuit against Monsanto and Bayer

> CropScience for GE contamination of organic canola.

> All of this suggests that keeping the worlds of GE

> farming and conventional and organic farming apart

> is not only complex, but simply impossible.

>

> It is the impossibility of 'coexistence' that raises

> the most serious questions about the National

> Biotechnology Policy Committee's decision. It's a

> decision that ignores a vast body of scientific

> evidence concerning GE contamination of organic

> crops, and a growing international consensus in the

> scientific community that contamination through

> pollen flow from GE crops or the accidental movement

> of GE seeds is inevitable.

>

> In other words, contamination will happen. Not only

> has the government chosen to ignore this potential

> disaster on the GMO train ride, but it has also

> refused to recognise the fact that GE papaya

> contamination has already occurred in Thailand,

> under its very own eyes.

>

> Finally, there is the question of whether Thailand

> is really missing anything if it doesn't jump on the

> 'biotechnology train' of genetic engineering. The

> government claims the country shouldn't miss this

> train because it involves cutting-edge technology

> for the future. But the fact is that much of the

> scientific knowledge that was used to create genetic

> engineering has now come under serious challenge.

> Far from being cutting edge, it now appears outdated

> and defunct.

>

> Unexpected and unintended things are happening, and

> the basic assumptions of GE science have been turned

> on their heads. Instead of being a new cutting-edge

> technology that Thailand should embrace, it has

> already become a faulty,

> unreliable technology - outdated and riddled with

> risks. So it seems that the Thai public is being

> asked to jump on board the GMO train without being

> told the whole truth.

>

> Note that as soon as Thaksin gave the green light to

> open-air field trials of GE crops, the Thai public

> found out for the first time that GE crops are

> already in the country and ready to be field tested.

> That's exactly why we need an open, public debate

> and discussion before being forced onto the GMO

> train. Because once we're on board, we can't get

> off. Once GE crops are released into the environment

> in Thailand, they can't be put back in the

> laboratory.

>

> The reason that all GE crops should remain in the

> laboratory is that no GE crops or GE food products

> have undergone independent, comprehensive, long-term

> assessment of their effects on the environment or

> human health. Most GE crops are only tested to see

> if they are 'substantially equivalent' to the normal

> crop. So there's no need to provide evidence proving

> that they're not harmful to the environment or human

> health. In the US, GE crops are approved solely on

> the basis of research data provided by the companies

> themselves, using short-term feeding studies,

> usually involving rats, chickens, etc.

>

> A decision that directly affects the health,

> environment and well-being of the Thai people should

> be a decision made on the basis of

> scientific facts, public opinion, religious beliefs

> and

> cultural values. It's not just about business deals

> and exports. It's about whether Thai people are

> willing to be guinea pigs in a genetic experiment

> that - once it begins - cannot be reversed. And that

> really does seem like a train ride heading for

> disaster, and one we're better off missing.

>

> Varoonvarn Svangsopakul is a genetic-engineering

> campaigner for Greenpeace Southeast Asia.

> ---

> 2.LOBBY URGES PM TO DROP FIELD

> TRIALS IDEA

> Bangkok Post August 23, 2004

>

> Farmer advocates and the FTAWatch group [FTA = Free

> Trade Agreement, is the bilateral agreement

> currently bring negotiated with the US, as part of

> which the US is demanding thailand open up to GM

> crops] have urged Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra

> to reconsider the decision to allow field trials and

> commercial cropping of genetically-modified

> organisms (GMOs).

>

> They say it would pave the way for giant American

> biotechnology companies to dominate Thai farmers and

> biological resources. The government had never asked

> local farmers whether they wanted to grow GM crops.

> The decision was based solely on a requirement from

> Washington and its agribusiness companies, who are

> eager to export GM seeds and products to Thailand,

> said Biothai, a non-governmental organisation

> working on biodiversity conservation.

>

> " The government's policy on biotechnology and GMOs

> will have a big impact on farmers and the

> agricultural sector, so the government should

> consult the public before coming up with any

> decision, " said Witoon Lianchamroon, Biothai

> director.

>

> Academics and non-governmental organisations,

> including organic farmer networks, consumer

> protection groups, anti-FTA activists, and legal

> experts, will rally today to press the National

> Biotechnology Committee, chaired by Mr Thaksin, to

> scrap the idea. Cabinet is expected to adopt the

> committee's resolution tomorrow.

>

> Jaques-chai Chomthongdee, a member of

> FTAWatch, an alliance of independent researchers

> monitoring bilateral trade agreements, said the

> decision showed Thailand had lost its sovereignty as

> a result of the Thai-US FTA negotiations. At

> present, US multinational companies own more than

> 90% of the world's bio-technology especially in

> corn, soybean, potato and rice. Once the FTA

> takes effect, farmers would be forced to buy GM

> seeds at more expensive prices and also would not be

> allowed to save or exchange the seeds for planting

> or breeding in the future.

>

> " The GMO issue is only the beginning of several

> dangerous things to come, " he said. " There is a long

> list of laws and regulations that this government

> will want to change to please Washington. "

>

> Among the most contentious issues were patents on

> drugs, living organisms, and communication

> technology. He blasted the government for

> considering sensitive policies relating to the FTA

> without consulting trade negotiators and

> agricultural specialists. Negotiators at the

> Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Agriculture

> Ministry told the group that the government hardly

> consulted them on controversial issues, particularly

> GMOs, pharmaceuticals, and intellectual property

> rights, he said.

>

>

>

-------------------------