a long one..but... CANCER FROM GE FOODS?

[Guest guest]

poor rats!!!

 

 

Posted below are several important articles on issues regarding genetically

engineered foods.

 

CANCER FROM GE FOODS?

 

The Sunday Herald from Glasgow, Scotland featured an article titled " GM

expert warns of cancer risk from crops. " Dr. Stanley Ewen delivered his

message to the Scottish Parliament's Health and Community Care

Committee.

 

Dr. Ewen has 29 year experience and worked with Dr Arpad Pusztai, former

researcher at Aberdeen's Rowett Institute, when he published a study

suggesting that genetically engineered potatoes harm rats.

 

The British Medical Association also sent an submission to the Scottish

Parliament's Health and Community Care Committee urging that genetically

engineered crop trials be stopped immediately, as a precautionary

measure to safeguard public health. The British Medical Association said

that " insufficient care " has been taken over public health and concerns

are " serious enough " to justify an immediate end to the trials.

 

Unfortunately, no United States newspapers we know of have reported on

these serious health concerns recently raised by the British Medical

Association or Dr. Stanley Ewen about the possible hazards from eating

genetically engineered foods.

 

U.S. and EU TRADE WAR BREWING OVER GE CROPS

 

Ignoring reports from Europe that genetically engineered crops could

cause cancer and other health conditions, the Bush administration seems

prepared to take their concerns to the World Trade Organization (WTO)

that Europeans are not approving genetically engineered foods. The

second article posted below from Reuters is titled " US leans to WTO case

against EU on biotech freeze. "

 

The third article below, also from Reuters, is titled " EU govts agree

new GM crop import and label rules. " The European Union knows the heat

is on them from the U.S. to remove the moratorium on approving

genetically engineered foods. On Monday, European Union environment

ministers agreed to new controls on genetically engineered foods that if

passed by Parliament, could lead to the moratorium being removed.

 

We assume that the U.S. is not going to like what the EU environmental

ministers approved. Each shipment will need to be traced and labeled.

Reuters reports that " Greenpeace was pleased with the agreement. "

 

PRODIGENE FINED MORE THAN $3 MILLION FOR CONTAMINATION

 

As we reported in detail last week, the biotech company ProdiGene

contaminated a grain elevator of soybeans with genetically engineered

corn that contained a pharmaceutical drug. The United States Department

of Agriculture has fined ProdiGene $250,000 and told them they also have

to pay for the value of the grain elevator contents which is worth a

reported $2.7 million. The four article from Associated Press reports on

this development in a story titled " Agriculture Department Fines

Biotech Co. "

 

The last article is a press release from the Department of Agriculture

titled " USDA Announces Actions Regarding Plant Protection Act Violations

Involving Prodigene, Inc. " The USDA is spinning the fact that they

caught the ProdiGene contamination before it made it into the actual

food supply.

 

The press release quotes Bill Hawks, USDA's under secretary for marketing

and regulatory programs, who states, " This is an example of how

biotechnology safeguarding regulations are working to ensure the integrity

of the system. " But if the regulatory system really worked, the

pharmaceutical drug corn would have never made it into the grain elevator

in the first place.

 

 

Craig Winters

Executive Director

The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods

 

The Campaign

PO Box 55699

Seattle, WA 98155

Tel: 425-771-4049

Fax: 603-825-5841

E-mail: label

Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org

 

Mission Statement: " To create a national grassroots consumer campaign

for the purpose of lobbying Congress and the President to pass

legislation that will require the labeling of genetically engineered

foods in the United States. "

 

***************************************************************

 

GM expert warns of cancer risk from crops

Demand for Executive to ban crop trials until effects of GM food on

health are studied

 

By Rob Edwards, Environment editor

Sunday Herald - 08 December 2002

 

EATING genetically modified (GM) food could give you cancer. That is the

stark warning today from one of Scotland's leading experts in tissue

diseases.

 

Dr Stanley Ewen, a consultant histopathologist at Aberdeen Royal

Infirmary, says that a cauliflower virus used in GM foods could increase

the risk of stomach and colon cancers.

 

He is calling for the health of people who live near the farm-scale GM

crop trials in Aberdeenshire, Ross-shire and Fife to be monitored. Their

food and water will be contaminated by GM material, he said, which could

hasten the growth of malignant tumours.

 

'I don't want to be scare-mongering, I want to be understated,' Ewen

told the Sunday Herald. 'But I'm very concerned that people who rely on

local produce might be endangering themselves.'

 

The government, backed by its scientific advisors, has always insisted

the GM trials pose no risk to human health or the environment. Never

theless, the trials have provoked widespread opposition, with dozens of

protesters arrested for damaging GM crops.

 

Ewen's warning, which has been delivered to the Scottish Parliament's

Health and Community Care Committee, is bound to be seized on by critics.

The committee is just completing an investigation into the safety of

GM food and is hoping to report its findings this week.

 

Ewen, who has 29 years' experience as a histopathologist, is currently

leading a pilot project in Grampian to screen people for colon cancer.

In 1999, along with Dr Arpad Pusztai, a former researcher at Aberdeen's

Rowett Institute, he published a study suggesting that GM potatoes harm

rats.

 

In his submission to the health committee, Ewen expressed 'great

concern' about the use of the cauliflower mosaic virus as a 'promoter'

in GM foods. The virus is used like a tiny engine to drive implanted

genes to express themselves.

 

But Ewen pointed out that the virus is infectious, and could act as a

'growth factor' in the stomach or colon, encouraging the growth of

polyps. The faster and bigger polyps grow, the more likely they are to

be malignant, he added.

 

There are also risks in feeding GM products like maize to cattle, he

cautioned.

 

'It is possible cows' milk will contain GM derivatives that can be

directly ingested by humans as milk or cheese. Even a lightly cooked,

thick fillet steak could contain active GM material.'

 

GM material can be destroyed by cooking or boiling for 10 minutes, and

it can be broken down by the acids and enzymes in the stomach. But Ewen

is worried that genes in uncooked GM fruit and vegetables could survive

common stomach infections.

 

'It is possible GM DNA could affect stomach and colonic lining by

causing a growth factor effect with the unproven possibility of

hastening cancer formation in those organs,' he stated.

 

Ewen stressed that he is not opposed to all GM technology, which he

believes could have real benefits, particularly in medicine. But he is

sufficiently alarmed by the current use of the technology to urge the

health committee to call for a ban on GM crop trials while their safety

is tested on animals.

 

Doctors from the British Medical Association have also suggested a GM

ban to the committee because of the unknown effects on health. The

committee's investigation was prompted by a petition of 6000 signatures

gathered by protesters who maintained a vigil at a GM trial site at

Munlochy in Ross-shire.

 

'What is most worrying about Dr Ewen's evidence is that while his

concerns are disease-specific, the risks extend to a wide range of GM

food crops,' said Jo Hunt, director of the lobby group Highlands and

Islands GM Concern.

 

'The effects are caused not by just one 'bad' DNA fragment, but are a

result of the reaction of plant cells to genetic engineering itself. All

the major GM food plants currently produced could have the same effect

when eaten.'

 

Hunt argued that long-term research was needed to establish whether GM

food was safe. 'But instead of looking at the impact of GM food on

people's health, the Scottish Executive has spent over £5 million on

farm-scale trials to see how growing GM crops on Scottish farms will

affect butterflies and weeds. The Executive has already released GM at

11 sites and is considering allowing GM to be released anywhere in the

country from 2004, before it knows whether GM food is safe to eat.'

 

The Executive also came under fire from the Scottish National Party's

shadow environment minister, Bruce Crawford, who demanded a freeze on GM

crops trials. 'We cannot allow GM material to enter the food chain until

there are absolute guarantees that there are no risks,' he said.

 

He pointed out that, in a recent letter, the environment minister, Ross

Finnie, had admitted to him that plants around GM crops could become

contaminated . Finnie added, however, that the government's advice was

'unanimous in its conclusion that GM crops that have approval do not

pose a safety threat.'

 

Ewen's evidence to the health committee is backed up by a separate

submission from Arpad Pusztai, who now works as an independent

consultant. He warned that GM contamination could jeopardise human

health and cause irreversible environmental damage.

 

'We need to rethink the whole strategy of genetic engineering,' Pusztai

said. 'Because of its potential importance for, and effect on, mankind,

it should not be left to the decision of a few multinational companies.'

 

***************************************************************

 

US leans to WTO case against EU on biotech freeze

 

WASHINGTON - (Reuters) A trade dispute pitting the United States against

the European Union over the EU's refusal to approve new,

genetically-engineered products, is brewing and could soon boil over, a

U.S. government official and industry experts said.

 

They said the administration of President George W. Bush was leaning

towards taking the issue to the World Trade Organization, despite

concerns about the ramifications of filing such a high-profile case, not

the least of which is a strain on U.S.-EU relations before a possible

attack on Iraq, continue to weigh on policymakers.

 

At the heart of the matter is an EU moratorium on approvals of

genetically-modified goods, ranging from soybeans to pharmaceuticals.

 

Trade groups wants the U.S. government to file a complaint with the WTO

over the moratorium.

 

In Washington, an interagency group, consisting of mid-level Bush

administration officials, has kicked the decision of a WTO complaint up

to President Bush's Cabinet.

 

The Cabinet heads, which include the secretaries of state, agriculture

and U.S. Trade Representative, will soon hear a strong argument from a

" trade policy review group " about the merits of filing a complaint.

 

Not a single member of the group will argue against filing a complaint,

said a U.S. official, who asked not to be identified.

 

" Are we close to a decision? Yes, I think so, " the official said,

adding, " I think people feel that there is a strong case " to be made at

the WTO against the EU moratorium.

 

But, the official explained, the fact that a Cabinet meeting is being

scheduled to review the trade problem " means they're not prepared to

tell senior White House officials, 'Yes, go ahead and do this.' "

 

MAJOR TRADE CASE

 

Taking on the EU over genetically-modified products " would be a major

trade case and that carries lots of political implications for other

trade issues as well as for bilateral relations with Europe outside of

trade, " the official said.

 

Asked whether those non-trade issues include the Iraq situation, the

official answered, " I wouldn't rule anything out. "

 

One U.S. industry source said the administration is " inclined toward a

time-line that would be in mid-December or within a month following

that " for filing a WTO case, unless the EU somehow makes great strides

toward lifting the moratorium.

 

Another private-sector trade expert said it would be unusual for the

president's Cabinet to overturn the findings of the trade policy review

group.

 

" The decision hasn't been made yet, but I think it's likely that it will

be positive, " he added.

 

U.S. Trade Representatives Robert Zoellick, the trade source said, is

now " firmly in the camp " of those believing a WTO case should go

forward. " He certainly swings the heaviest bat in interagency meetings, "

he added.

 

Richard Mills, a spokesman for Zoellick, refused to comment on the

likelihood of a WTO complaint. But Mills noted that the EU's moratorium

is " illegal under both EU and international law " and " its ripple effects

abroad have blocked food distribution to starving people in the

developing world. "

 

For the past four years, the EU, bowing to consumers' biotech fears, has

maintained a moratorium on approvals of genetically-modified goods

ranging from soybeans to pharmaceuticals.

 

The U.S. had hoped to avoid a time-consuming, expensive World Trade

Organization complaint and that EU member states would allow a lifting

of the moratorium.

 

In recent weeks, the EU has taken some steps in that direction. But

those steps may be too little too late, especially now that some biotech

food aid from the United States is being turned away by starving

Africans who say they fear getting on the wrong side of the EU's ban.

 

U.S. farmers, who have increasingly devoted their crop-plantings to

biotech commodities, also have told the administration their patience

has worn thin.

 

Story by Richard Cowan 12/9/02

 

***************************************************************

 

EU govts agree new GM crop import and label rules

 

By Robin Pomeroy

 

BRUSSELS, Dec 9 (Reuters) - European Union environment ministers on

Monday agreed new controls on genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

which could eventually lead the 15-member bloc to reopen its markets to

GM foods.

 

" We can now give consumers a choice between products that contain GMOs

and those that don't, " Danish Environment Minister Hans Christian

Schmidt said at the end of a meeting of EU ministers in Brussels.

 

Denmark currently holds the rotating EU presidency.

 

" We have got a majority in favour of a solution...The result is very

important for Europe. It gives the possibility to industry to use GMOs

for the benefit of all, " Schmidt said in a meeting beamed to journalists

by closed circuit TV.

 

The new rules require ships carrying bulk grain to detail exactly what

GM products, if any, the shipments contain. The regulation now requires

approval by the European Parliament.

 

The EU has had a virtual ban on most GM crops since 1999 when a large

minority of EU states vowed not to authorise any new GM crops for use in

the bloc, pending tougher rules on what the media was calling

" Frankenstein foods. "

 

The United States said the ban was illegal, dismissing European fears of

possible future environmental and health risks.

 

The cabinet of U.S.President George W. Bush is considering launching a

World Trade Organisation case against the EU, a high-level U.S. official

said last week.

 

BRITAIN, NETHERLANDS VOTE AGAINST

 

The new rules will require GM shipments to carry a code number which

identifies the origin of the crops, enabling products to be withdrawn

from the food chain if problems arise.

 

Britain and the Netherlands voted against the rules, saying they would

prove too costly for bulk shippers as some mixing of GM and non-GM grain

is inevitable.

 

They wanted shipments to be labled " may contain GMOs " without the need

for an exact list of the crops on board, but they were outvoted.

 

Environmental group Greenpeace was pleased with the agreement.

 

" An overwhelming majority of ministers have saved the traceability

system which was under threat, " Greenpeace campaigner Lorenzo Consoli

said.

 

Anti GM-campaigners say even if GMOs -- plants or animals whose gene

sequence has been spliced with that of other species -- show no

immediate health risks, they might cross breed with conventional plants

or wild relatives.

 

The new rules are meant to ensure that GMOs can be traced " from farm to

fork " and removed from the food chain if any health or environmental

problems emerge.

 

Monday's text and an agreement by EU farm ministers last week which set

a 0.9 percent threshold below which traces of GM matter in non-GM crops

would not need to be labelled, now pass to the European Parliament to be

approved or rejected.

 

12/09/02 16:59 ET

 

***************************************************************

 

Agriculture Department Fines Biotech Co.

 

By EMILY GERSEMA

..c The Associated Press

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - A biotechnology company will pay the government more

than $3 million in penalties for mixing genetically engineered corn

containing an animal vaccine with soybeans meant for humans, the

Agriculture Department says.

 

The government, which stopped ProdiGene Inc.'s contaminated soybeans

from entering the food supply, fined the company $250,000 on Friday.

 

Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman said ProdiGene also will reimburse the

government for the 500,000 bushels of contaminated soybeans, valued at

$2.7 million, and the cost to destroy them.

 

ProdiGene signed an agreement with the department that it will pay the

penalties and won't seek an appeal.

 

Anthony G. Laos, CEO and president of ProdiGene, apologized for the

mistake. ``We're very sorry for the mishap and have corrected it,'' he

said.

 

It is the first time the agency has levied a fine against a

biotechnology company for violating the Plant Protection Act, said Bobby

Acord, administrator of the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service. The law was signed in 2000 and regulates the transportation and

planting of genetically engineered plants.

 

As a precaution, ProdiGene also agreed to post a $1 million bond to pay

for any future problems caused by its products, Acord said.

 

The company, based in College Station, Texas, makes proteins and enzymes

for pharmaceutical and industrial production by growing them in

genetically modified corn. The government has strict guidelines for

planting and removing such crops to ensure those products do not mix

with the food supply or cross-pollinate with neighboring crops.

 

ProdiGene failed to remove all the corn that contained a protein for a

swine vaccine before planting soybeans in fields in Pocahontas County,

Iowa, and Hamilton County, Neb. Government inspectors discovered stray

corn plants and ordered the company to remove them.

 

The Iowa corn was burned. Acord said the Nebraska crop, impounded at a

warehouse, will be incinerated and the warehouse cleaned.

 

The government is working with ProdiGene to improve its compliance

through a stringent program, which Laos said he hopes ``would set a

benchmark for the rest of the industry to follow.''

 

The Food and Drug Administration and Agriculture Department said they

will increase monitoring of the company to ensure a similar incident

does not occur.

 

The government and biotech industry are under pressure by food

processors to toughen rules for growing pharmaceutical and industrial

crops. The Grocery Manufacturers of America, for example, wants biotech

companies to stop using corn and soybeans - which are widely used for

food - as vehicles for growing biotech products that humans and animals

are not supposed to eat.

 

Margaret Mellon, spokeswoman for the Union of Concerned Scientists, an

environmental group, said the next step toward keeping the food supply

safe is to set a national standard.

 

``We need to set as a national standard, zero contamination of the food

supply, so that we're going to go ahead with industrial and

pharmaceutical plants, but only if we can assure ourselves as a nation

that the way we grow these does not result in contamination of our food

supply,'' she said.

 

On the Net:

 

USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov

 

12/07/02 02:09 EST

 

***************************************************************

 

USDA Announces Actions Regarding Plant Protection Act Violations

Involving Prodigene, Inc.

 

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture,

working in conjunction with the Food and Drug Administration, today

announced actions being taken regarding violations of the Plant

Protection Act (PPA) involving ProdiGene Inc., of College Station,

Texas.

 

A consent decision and order regarding violations of the Plant

Protection Act has been signed by ProdiGene and USDA. While ProdiGene

neither admitted nor denied any violations of the PPA, the company will

pay a civil penalty of $250,000. In addition, the company will

reimburse USDA for all costs to acquire approximately 500,000 bushels of

soybeans in storage in Nebraska, destroy the beans and clean the

facility and all equipment.

 

" This is an example of how biotechnology safeguarding regulations are

working to ensure the integrity of the system, " said Bill Hawks, USDA's

under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs. " When inspectors

identified noncompliant items in the ProdiGene experimental field

trials, we moved quickly to ensure confinement and take appropriate

actions. "

 

ProdiGene also agreed to a $1 million bond and higher compliance

standards, including additional approvals before field testing and

harvesting genetically modified material. The company will develop a

written compliance program with USDA to ensure that its employees,

agents, cooperators and managers are aware of, and comply with, the

Plant Protection Act, federal regulations and permit conditions.

 

The soybeans never reached the human or animal food supply. USDA and

FDA continue to work in close coordination to enforce current safeguards

covering research in bioengineered foods, and the agencies will continue

to take appropriate action to ensure human, animal and plant health.

 

Under the Plant Protection Act, USDA's Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service (APHIS) regulates the movement, importation and field

release of genetically engineered plants. APHIS requires significant

safeguards to prevent the unauthorized release of genetically engineered

material. The Act provides criminal penalties as well as civil

penalties. Companies or individuals that violate the Act face civil

penalties of up to $250,000 per violation, or $500,000 per adjudication,

and may have their permits revoked.

 

USDA has strengthened field-testing requirements for permits on

genetically engineered traits that are not intended for commodity uses,

such as pharmaceuticals, veterinary biologics and certain industrial

products by adding new safeguards as a condition for all permits

allowing the confined release of such products into the environment.

These specific safeguards include comprehensive confinement procedures,

performance standards, and required monitoring/auditing practices for

ensuring that out-crossing or commingling with other seeds and

commodities are prevented.

 

As a part of the Department of Health and Human Services, FDA regulates

foods and feed derived from new plant varieties under the authority of

the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. FDA policy is based on

existing food law and requires that genetically engineered foods meet

the same rigorous safety standards as is required of all other foods.

 

For more information on this issue, visit http://www.aphis.usda.gov or

http://www.fda.gov.

 

SOURCE U.S. Department of Agriculture