Why is it necessary to have the Biosafety Protocol?

[Guest guest]

One area of genetic engineering that has had the least

media attention is the consequences of genetically modified

livestock feed. While in the States Kellogs has removed their

genetically modified corn flakes from grocery store shelves

because the corn has not been determined to be fit for human

consumption, little attention has been given to the " livestock "

that has developed tumors and cancers as a result of GM crops.

 

This was recently reported on National Public Radio:

Talk of the Nation.

 

http://search.npr.org/cf/cmn/cmnps05fm.cfm?SegID=72551

 

" Engineered Foods NPR's Richard Harris reports on a long-awaited

report from the National Academy of Sciences on the safety of

genetically engineered foods. The academy's panel of experts,

from academia, business and environmental groups, deemed

so-called GM foods as safe so far. But they did recommend tougher

rules for testing newly engineered foods. (3:30) "

 

The FDA does not believe that it has the responsibility to oversee

the impact of gm crops on animals. No governmental agency is

regulating this activity. The political climate suggests that

people do not want government intervention, regulation and control.

The FDA does not want nor do they have the resources to monitor

this. On the one hand, experts suggest tougher rules and guidelines

but the politicians and public do not want to pay the increased

costs nor do they support govenment regulation.

 

The following is from Greenpeace:

 

Why is it necessary to have the Biosafety Protocol?

 

Because of the potential negative impacts which genetically

modified organisms (GMOs) can have on biodiversity and

human health, governments from throughout the world have

been working together since 1996 to develop binding rules

and principles to regulate the main activities of companies

and countries in relation to GMOs.

 

These rules are intended to set out international binding

standards of practice in relation to GMOs with the aim of

preventing and reducing risks to biodiversity, including

human health. Countries could always take stronger

measures than the international standards where these are

necessary to protect the environment or human health.

 

Particular focus has been given to setting up a procedure so

that countries which want to export their GMOs have to get

the consent in advance from a country which will receive the

GMOs. The idea is that the importing country will have the

choice to accept, reject or place conditions on the GMOs in

question, based on environmental and other relevant

considerations. It is also envisaged that the Protocol will

include international rules on key issues such as liability and

redress, labelling, standards for assessing the potential

negative consequences of releasing GMOs, rules in cases

of accidents, illegal traffic, and public participation (1).

 

With the European market for GM food on the verge of

collapse due to widespread consumer rejection and action

by governments concerned about possible adverse

consequences to the environment, human health and

socio-economic conditions, international environmental

rights will become especially relevant for countries in the

developing world who will be on the receiving end of the

agro-biotech industry who will be desperate to sell their

products. Countries in the developing world have learned to

their detriment that they will become the dumping ground for

products such as toxic waste or dangerous chemicals which

the industrialised world no longer considers desirable or

safe.