by Common Ground staff

Support workers in Argentina

An inspiring and courageous workers’ struggle in Argentina needs support according to Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis.
The Zanon ceramic tile factory, a democratic, worker-run factory in Patagonia, is facing a serious threat of eviction, and the workers are requesting international support for their struggle.
For those of you who have seen the documentary, The Take, the Zanon factory, and Argentina’s wider movement of worker-run companies will be very familiar. For those of you who haven’t, this new movement of some 15,000 workers in almost 200 democratic workplaces is building hope and a concrete economic alternative in the rubble of Argentina’s disastrous experiment with orthodox neoliberalism in the 1990s.
Recovered companies are run by assembly: one worker, one vote. In most of them, workers have decided that everyone should receive the same salary. They are proving the viability of an economy run on an entirely different value system, and they are growing.
In the past year, Zanon has increased its workforce from 300 to 450: a 50 percent increase. What multinational corporation or national government could boast of such a dramatic rise in decent-paying employment in the middle of an economic crisis?
And Zanon has cultivated a deep and mutual relationship with the surrounding community. For 20 years, the poor neighbourhood of Nueva España, across the highway from the factory, has been asking the provincial government for a health clinic. Zanon workers took a vote earlier this year, and in three months built and opened a brand new community health facility.
But now the provincial government is threatening to send in the Gendarmeria to remove Zanon’s precious machines. This is an illegal order, since this force is federal, intended to police Argentina’s borders. On a second front, the federal judge presiding over the bankruptcy of the former owner is refusing to recognize the Zanon workers’ co-operative (called FaSinPat – short for Fabricas Sin Patrones, Factories Without Bosses.)
The former owner received millions in public subsidies, and still amassed a huge debt and bankruptcy: he has since been removed from his own board of directors for “accounting irregularities.” The workers’ co-operative, on the other hand, is a major success: it is now producing 380,000 square metres of ceramic tiles a month – a level of production higher than when the former owner closed the factory – and the workers do it without the huge public subsidies (300,000 pesos per month) that he used to receive.
The Zanon workers say that a massive international petition in support of their struggle could make a key difference with the various levels of courts and governments.
Zanon’s highly successful combination of direct action and direct democracy is a precious example of that other world that is possible, that is growing before our very eyes. To support the workers see www.PetitionOnline.com/zanon/petition.html and do everything you can to encourage others to do the same.

Guelph’s ag school to offer organic major

About five years after 350 University of Guelph students signed a petition to have a course on organic agriculture taught there, the university is introducing Canada’s first major in the subject.
The major in organic agriculture, contained within the bachelor of science in agriculture program, was approved by the university’s senate recently, and will begin full operation next fall.
“I’m delighted,” said Ann Clark, a plant agriculture professor who has long felt the need for organic agriculture programming at the university.
Clark said five new courses will be added for the major, but the other 35 additional classes are agricultural courses that already exist.
She added, however, that professors in other departments who teach some of those classes have indicated a willingness to upgrade their courses to include an organic component.
Clark began teaching the university’s first and only organic course nearly four years ago because of the 1999 petition, and while she is pleased with gains made in the area, she said it still takes a lot of work to have organics accepted, even at the U of G.
“I think organic agriculture is a perceived threat,” she said, adding mainstream farming methods tend to be skewed towards problem-solving, while organic agriculture focuses on “problem avoidance through design.”
Clark added it has been tough to promote organic programming in certain quarters on campus, since the university relies so heavily on research dollars from industries that promote the problem-solving (chemical) method of farming.
Some of these companies fund research at the university.
“It puts the university, more or less, at the mercy of industry.”
But Rob McLaughlin, who was dean of the U of G’s Ontario Agricultural College from 1990 to 2000, said those characterizations are unfair.
“Certainly while I was dean, organics was a growing phenomenon,” he said recently, adding, however, that when you have finite resources and funding, “the research money gets directed to the mainstream.”
He added that the school’s agricultural research stations are owned by the province, and “our responsibility is not to any corporate investor but the province of Ontario.”
McLaughlin said the university’s agricultural college in Alfred, northeast of Ottawa, is looking at converting its dairy herd to organic.
Peter Purslow, chair of the food science department, said while he and his faculty are “extremely supportive” of the new major, “we are not in the business of making new courses for organic food.”
Purslow said while some of his department’s existing courses will be taken by students in the major, the department will not create “bogus standards” specifically for organic food in areas of food safety and quality.
He added that the new major is a good addition in that it addresses a specific component of the farming industry, “and we should be addressing it as that, not as a fringe element.”
Les Eccles, one of the students who spearheaded the petition in 1999, said yesterday he is pleased with the new major and hopes it spurs more interest in the field.
“We thought if (the agriculture college) wanted to offer the best education they should have something in organic agriculture,” he said.
Eccles, who will graduate this spring with a bachelor of science in agriculture, said while organic farming may be gaining respect, there has been resistance to the methods.
“I think there wasn’t a lot known about the methods, so it was seen as invalid,” he said.
Stewart Hilts, chair of the land resource department who is spearheading the organizational side of the new program, said there is the necessary interest in organics to sustain a major.
“I think a lot of urban consumers feel we’ve lost our connections with farmers,” he said. “Programs in organic agriculture can tie you back to that.”
Hilts said organic farming advocates have long come up against the farming trend towards “get big or get out.”
Clark said it is about time organic teachings make their way into university classrooms on a greater scale.
“In a perfect world we would already do this,” she said. 

CIA sued over WMD falsification

A former CIA officer is suing his employers for retaliating against him for his alleged refusal to falsify reports on weapons of mass destruction, according to the BBC.
In a complaint published last month, the unnamed operative said he was warned by a colleague that management wanted to “get him” for his actions.
His reports were “contrary to official dogma,” the document says.
The subject of the reporting has been blacked out, but correspondents say the complaint clearly refers to Iraq.
The CIA has refused to comment on the lawsuit, but spokeswoman Anya Guilsher told the Washington Post newspaper that the idea that officers were ordered to falsify reports was “flat wrong.”
The plaintiff maintains that he had attempted to report intelligence on weapons of mass destruction in 2001 and 2002, but was thwarted by his superiors who then insisted on his falsifying his reports.
When he refused to do this, investigations were allegedly made against him into allegations that he had sex with a female informer and stole money used to pay informers.
The plaintiff said in the complaint that both investigations were “a sham, initiated for the sole purpose of discrediting him and retaliating against him.”
The operative was sacked in August 2004 for “unspecific reasons,” but is seeking the restoration of his salary, job and promotions denied to him, as well as compensation.
The plaintiff’s lawyer, Roy Krieger, has requested a meeting with CIA director Porter Goss, or another representative, to discuss the allegations in this case, “including deliberately misleading the president on intelligence concerning weapons of mass destruction.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4086361.stm

 Is finding significant?

Here’s a science question: when is a significant finding not significant? Answer: when it’s a Monsanto finding. This is the latest revelation from France, where brouhaha continues over Monsanto’s MON 863 corn, approved in the EU in spite of the company’s own findings that it damaged the health of rats.
Our food safety section following, also features Dr Arpad Pusztai’s incisive comments on recent industry-generated lists of so-called safety studies on GM foods. Monsanto and co. is claiming there are lots of studies demonstrating GM food safety, but it turns out they’ve stuffed these lists full of commercial studies with very little scientific value when it comes to the likely biological consequences of long term exposure to GM foods.
Dr Pusztai is, of course, among a series of scientists who have been attacked for raising questions about GM crops.

 Coexistence impossible

Australian farmer Julie Newman of the Network for Concerned Farmers in Australia has drawn our attention to a report about a New Zealand vegetarian food manufacturer who has been fined for “positively promoting the absence of GM content” in a non-GM product that was found to be GM contaminated.
“Non-GM” or “GM free” must mean what they say, the court said. The judge during sentencing also noted that “many consumers only bought goods they understood contained no genetically modified products.”
Julie points out, “This is a critical bit of news, as coexistence is based around definitions that claim that 0.9 percent is accepted in non-GM produce (for the EU) when the reality is that 0.9 percent is merely what triggers a GM label in the EU.
“In order to legally sell something as GM-free or as non-GM, the produce can not have any trace of GM contamination. Coexistence is proven to be impossible to maintain at a zero tolerance level, therefore coexistence plans are worthless.”
And zero tolerance, Julie points out, is exactly what the market wants. For instance, the Grainpool of Western Australia, the Australian Barley Board, and the Australian Wheat Board have all indicated a zero tolerance requirement is essential for their markets. In other words, there will be problems if any material from GM contaminated canola (oilseed rape), which has been given federal approval in Australia, contaminates their grain shipments.
The Australian dairy industry similarly requires a guarantee that stock have not been fed any GM grain. While some dairies have tolerance levels for GM contamination, others do not. Producers of pork, lamb and beef have also indicated there is no tolerance for their stock being fed GM contaminated grain and contracts will need to be signed to verify this.
In Australia markets for hay, clover, wine and honey have also requested a zero tolerance of GM in their produce or in any process used to produce their products. The AUS $300 million organic industry also requires a zero tolerance of GM in any of its produce. http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=1761. Julie also points out that while farmers are increasingly being asked to sign guarantees of the non-GM status of their produce, they will not in fact know if their products have been contaminated if there are nearby GM trials or there’s a commercial release of a GM crop. They do not have to be notified by their GM growing neighbour.
Yet if there is a market rejection of their non-GM product, it is the non-GM farmers who may find themselves liable because liability will rest with the person who signed the contractual agreement to declare their product had no GM present in it. On top of this, it is looking increasingly unlikely that farmers will be able to obtain insurance to cover this risk.
Julie says that as farmers are already having to sign such non-GM guarantees, it would make far more sense to have a strict liability regime that ensured the GM industry was liable for compensation for any losses. The GM industry, however, while claiming coexistence is easily achievable, refuses to put its money where its mouth is - it opposes bearing any liability for GM contamination and resultant economic loss. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4724 

GM “weeds” hit Japan

GM corn and soybeans have been growing wild at Shimizu port in Shizuoka Prefecture, citizen groups opposing GM foods report. They also said GM rapeseed (canola) has been found growing wild near Hakata port in Fukuoka Prefecture. The discovery of the GM rapeseed follows its detection at ports in six other prefectures - Ibaraki, Chiba, Kanagawa, Aichi, Mie and Hyogo. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4719

Bt corn affecting health in Philippines

GM Bt corn, which is widely used by farmers, causes adverse health effects to consumers and planters, according to a science group. “Considering that Bt is a toxin injected into the corn seed to fight certain pests and anything toxic is harmful to our health, it’s just like having pesticide inside us,” said Shen Maglinte, deputy director of the NGO, Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya.
Sibol, along with other NGOs, are documenting cases of diarrhea, headache, influenza and chest pains possibly brought by the corn pollen from Mindanao. Bt corn breeds are usually yellow corn commonly used as livestock feed. However, Maglinte said that Bt toxin is also used in white corn, which is for human consumption.
Apart from the illnesses, Maglinte said it was observed that people residing near the fields with Bt corn crops experience itchiness when in contact with corn leaves. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4716

 Bitter harvest: GMOs in India

 Gene Campaign’s Suman Sahai, writing in the Times of India, lambasts India’s government for “implementing a full-fledged program on GM crops and foods in the absence of a national policy and a national consensus.”
It is a matter of shame that the government has been implementing a full-fledged program on GM crops and foods in the absence of a national policy and a national consensus. Nobody knows the priorities for Indian research on GM crops, how these priorities have been identified, and the criteria by which the crops and traits have been selected and by whom. There are grave doubts about the competence and independence of the structures for regulation, oversight and monitoring of GM crops. And it is regrettable that neither farmers nor the public, who will be consumers of GM foods, have been taken into confidence. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4721 

GM rice may be tested on people

In China, authorities are still mulling over a decision about whether to commercialize GM rice in China. The ministry of agriculture will make the decision early this year.
The newspaper The China Daily comments, “Some supporters of GM rice said everything incurs risks when it generates benefits. It is not wise to give up the benefits for the potential risks. But this is true only when the benefits overwhelm the risks. We do not yet know if this applies here. People should not be used as guinea pigs with food they eat every day. The authorities must treat the matter with more caution.” www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4718 

Mexico passes “Monsanto law”

Mexican lawmakers have approved a new law to regulate GM crops, but opponents said it catered more to the interests of big business than to the protection of centuries-old biodiversity.
Greenpeace has called the new legislation the “Monsanto law,” claiming it protects the company’s economic interests from policies that could cut into profits. “This only benefits multinationals and supports the interests of a tiny elite in Mexico and goes against thousands of farmers,” Greenpeace spokeswoman Cecilia Navarro said.
A NAFTA environmental panel from Canada, the United States and Mexico recommended in October that Mexico adopt strict measures to control imports of GM corn. One recommended measure, which could only be carried out at considerable expense to companies like Monsanto, was that corn be milled before entering Mexico in order to prevent contamination of its 7,000-year-old corn gene pool.
In recent weeks the report was attacked by US authorities as “fundamentally flawed and unscientific,” and Mexican trade authorities said they had no plans to change import policies.
Mexican farmers say they need to stop imported GM corn from mixing with local strains. But the new law has been drawn up under the guidance of US corporate interests.
The drafting of the Mexican legislation involved paying lip service to public consultation but has deliberately excluded any of the amendments to the legislation which were drawn up as a result of these consultation exercises.
In a damning open letter, which was reported in the Mexican press, Dr Ignacio Chapela, who first exposed the GM contamination of Mexican maize, compared the report which was presented to the Mexican senate for approval to a document from the time of the Inquisition: “a consummate exercise in obfuscation and pseudoscientific complication designed solely to erase the least opposition to a new and powerful appropriation of resources and the erosion of the rights of farm workers and small landowners.”
Dr Chapela has called on his fellow Mexicans to vigorously defend their land, their liberty and their genetic independence. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4726 

US media black out study showing GM crops increase pesticide use

Two articles from Farmers Weekly interactive - website of the UK’s biggest selling publication for farmers - report on an important US study released this autumn that showed that “the biotech industry’s claims that GM crops help reduce the use of pesticides are unfounded.”
As Farmers Weekly has it: “Substantial increases in herbicide use on herbicide-tolerant crops, especially soya, accounted for the increase in pesticide use on GM crops compared to conventional varieties, said the report. Many farmers have had to spray incrementally more herbicides to keep up with shifts in weeds towards species that were harder to control. This was coupled with the emergence of genetic resistance in certain weed populations, claimed the report.”
Interestingly, the report, which draws on US Dept of Agr. data, has received almost no coverage in the US despite the fact that the author is one of the US’s most distinguished independent agronomists.
Dr Charles (Chuck) Benbrook served as the agricultural staff expert on the Council for Environmental Quality/The White House before moving to Capitol Hill where he was executive director of the Subcommittee of the House Committee on Agriculture with jurisdiction over pesticide regulation, research, trade and foreign agricultural issues, and oversight of the USDA.
He later served a seven-year stint as executive director of the board on agriculture of the US National Academy of Sciences. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4733 

Premiums paid for non-GM soybeans

Manitoba growers are receiving premiums for non-GM soybeans from buyers around the world looking for a reliable source of non-GM beans. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4720

US becomes net food importer

Following nine harvests as the world’s biggest adopter of GM crops, the US is now running an agricultural trade deficit for the first time in nearly 50 years!
Moreover, Brazil recently noted it exported more soy and soy products in the first 10 months of 2004 than the US will export in the entire year – US $9.3 billion versus US $8.83. Brazil is of course a major supplier of GM-free soya; the US is not.
Meanwhile the biotech companies are running round the world trying to persuade other farmers that they need GMOs in order to be competitive!
Outgoing US Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman has no explanation of how Bush administration economic and trade policies have taken US agriculture from a $13.6 billion trade surplus in 2001 to a flat line in four short years. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4722 

Zambia bans GM food

The Zambian government has drafted biosafety legislation to ensure the country is not consuming GM food. The bill will make Zambia one of the few African countries to have biosafety legislation in place.
“Our intention is to make Zambia GMO-free, but we have not got there yet - we need to build the capacity of our scientists. A substantial portion of our strategy plan will focus on human resource development,” said Paul Zambezi, permanent secretary for the Zambian ministry of science, technology and vocational training.
Zambia was among several southern African countries which banned GM food relief in 2002, at a time when it was facing critical food shortages. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4725

Syngenta’s PR crop in Kenya delayed

The introduction of GM maize to Kenya is likely to be delayed for two years until 2010 following revisions to safety regulations for the insect resistant maize for Africa (IRMA).
The revisions are intended to bring the project in line with national and international standards by giving greater attention to threats that the release of GM maize could pose to the environment and human health. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4728
The driving force behind the IRMA project is the Syngenta Foundation which says it aims to provide GM maize for use by resource poor farmers in the context of efficacy and environmental and socio economic effects. However, according to a report by Aaron deGrassi of the Institute of Development Studies, the Syngenta Foundation’s activities have more to do with PR than with delivering real benefits to poor farmers.
He writes, “The Syngenta Foundation - has a poor record of supporting client-driven public agricultural research institutes, as illustrated by the Cinzana research station in Mali. The extent of damage by stem borers was repeatedly over-estimated based on ad hoc guesses. No rigorous assessments were done before the project was started of the extent of damage by stem borers, nor of whether farmers felt they were a significant problem. When the project did survey 30 villages throughout the country, none identified stem borers as the most pressing constraint upon maize production...project surveys found that many farmers were already using their own resistant varieties.”
Insect resistant maize for Africa has been the foundation’s main project with its showcase IRMA project being the one in Kenya. Scientists have genetically engineered several maize varieties to protect against three types of stem borer.
DeGrassi points out that the IRMA project has yet to engineer protection against the most important stem borer in Kenya - the one which affects 80 percent of the country’s maize crop!
In any case, deGrassi reports, stem borers are a relatively insignificant contributing factor to poverty in these areas. Of greater importance are other agronomic constraints - such as “droughts, low soil fertility and the weed stiga - as well as other socio-economic and political constraints - such as corruption, HIV/AIDS, poor transport, unequal land tenure and political repression.”
Moreover, other less generously funded projects have used a range of techniques that have already proved capable of protecting against stem borers in farmers fields. These methods, unlike the use of the GM Bt maize, do not face the likelihood of evolved pest resistance.
DeGrassi’s overall conclusion on the Syngenta Foundation project, and others like it, is that “while genetic modification may constitute a novel tool, in Africa it is a relatively ineffective and expensive one. Cash-strapped scientists working with poor farmers in Africa might well regard genetic modification as a waste of time and money.” www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=179 

Controversy rages over corn

After having expressed doubts about the safety of Monsanto’s GM corn, MON 863, France’s Biomolecular Engineering Committee (BEC), approved its importation into the EU on December 14, 2004 at a controversial meeting held without a quorum. There would be nothing special about the approval, had not the same body delivered an opinion on October 28, 2003 opposing the introduction of the same GMO!
The effect of the controversial decision is that the committee now sides with the French Agency for Food Health Security and the European Agency for Food Security (EAFS) both of which gave favourable opinions on MON 863 six months ago. Unanimity is not, however, the case within the BEC. The professor of molecular biology at the University of Caen voted against the approval.
The affair began in the spring of 2004, with the publication of the minutes of BEC meetings. Normally, only the opinions are made public, but Crii-Gen (Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering) - an association founded by former Environment Minister Corinne Lepage - obtained publication of the minutes by suing through the Committee for Access to Administrative Documents. In this way the conclusions from the first toxicological study, which Monsanto transmitted to the BEC, cataloging numerous biological effects on rats fed MON 863 for 90 days, were made public.
Researchers from Covance Laboratory - commissioned, according to custom, by Monsanto - discovered blood stream anomalies (increase in white blood cell levels and lymphocytes in males, decrease in new red blood cells in females). An increase in female blood sugar levels was also noted. There were also more frequent appearances of renal lesions (inflammations, kidney stones) as well as variations in kidney weight in the animals fed MON 863.
These results led the BEC to conclude in its unanimously adopted October 28, 2003 opinion that “the study of low level toxicity conducted with MON 863 corn...raised... numerous questions... relating to the... significant differences observed in blood chemistry, clinical biochemistry, urinary chemistry and the weight of certain organs of tested animals”.
The French body for GMO evaluation requested further information from Monsanto. Monsanto got two anatomic pathologists to re-examine the results from the Covance Laboratory. They concluded in September 2004 that the lesions and blood anomalies were within natural variability.
In relation to the lower kidney weight in animals fed MON 863, Monsanto commissioned a new study in November 2004, this time using another variety of corn hybridized with MON 863. This new study, conducted by Wil Research Laboratory - once again chosen by Monsanto - did not bring the same anomalies to light.
These last conclusions do not satisfy Gilles-Eric Seralini, BEC and Crii-Gen member, who voted against MON 863’s importation. “Monsanto contradicts itself,” Seralini says. “The first time around, their studies explain, in a rather amusing manner by the way, that there are ‘significant effects without a pathological significance,’ and the second time around, their studies say that the effects observed are no longer significant. On top of that, the file was sliced up by examining the problems separately and not in their entirety, which is unacceptable. The least fairness demands would have been to do the study over again from the beginning, which was not done. In any case, not with the same variety of corn.” Seralini recalls, moreover, that “no test of the insecticide produced by MON 863 has been effected on the human cell” and that this substance “is not entirely natural because the Bacillus thurigensis sequence - introduced into the corn genome - has been modified.”
Crii-Gen has demanded that the industrial secrecy surrounding the study conducted on MON 863 be lifted, so that the scientific controversy can be opened to the public. The association also demands that an independent expert assessment be conducted and paid for with public funds. Crii-Gen considers the studies financed by the companies to be “dependent.” Some BEC members, who are not suspected of being anti-GMO, are not far from making a similar observation. Pascal, who voted in favour of MON 863, considers that the summary of the study on this corn “did not exactly correspond to what was in the detailed study.” According to Pascal, this summary did not mention certain differences between the groups of rats observed in the study. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4731 

Fred journalists still fighting Fox TV

GM Watch veterans may remember the 1997 firing of two award-winning investigative reporters - Jane Akre and Steve Wilson - by Rupert Murdoch’s Fox TV, after they refused to broadcast lies about the safety of a Monsanto product.
Fox TV, following pressure from Monsanto, had tried to sweep under the rug much of what the two journalists had discovered, but were never allowed to broadcast, about Monsanto’s GM cattle drug - bovine growth hormone (BGH, aka BST).
This whole sordid story of media misconduct is a centerpiece of the independent film The Corporation” (more at www.thecorporation.com/about/)
The film is the winner of nine audience choice awards including one at Robert Redford’s Sundance Festival. The Seattle Times calls the film “one of the must-see documentaries of the new century.”
If you don’t live within reach of the sort of cinema that will show this film (see international list at www.thecorporation.com/dvd.php), the video is now available. 
Background on the Akre/Wilson story:
Akre and Wilson twice refused Fox offers of big-money deals to keep quiet about what they knew, filing their landmark lawsuit in April 1998. They survived three Fox efforts to have their case summarily dismissed, in the first instance of US journalists using a whistleblower law to seek a legal remedy for being fired for refusing to distort the news.
After a five-week hearing, in August 2000 a Florida state court jury unanimously determined that Fox “acted intentionally and deliberately to falsify or distort the plaintiffs’ news reporting on BGH.” In that decision, the jury also found that Jane Akre’s threat to blow the whistle on Fox’s misconduct to the Federal Communications Commission, was the sole reason for the termination of her contract and the jury awarded US $425,000 in damages.
Fox appealed and prevailed in February 2003 when an appeals court issued a ruling reversing the jury’s decision, accepting a defence argument that had been rejected by three other judges on at least six separate occasions. The journalists are now said to be considering an appeal to the Florida state supreme court. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4715

Group seeks to stop biopharming

A group of doctors and others will ask the Oregon Legislature to impose a four-year moratorium on biopharming, growing crops genetically altered to contain pharmaceuticals. The state chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility is concerned that such crops would infiltrate the environment, exposing residents to drugs they don’t need.
Rick North, project director of the nonprofit group’s Campaign for Safe Food, said biopharming threatens to expose the public to microscopic levels of medicines drifting through the air. “I want to take a drug when I have a need for it,” he said. “I don’t want to be exposed to it without knowledge of what it does and what its side effects are.” www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4713 

Oversight of pharm crops is poor

Federal oversight of crops genetically engineered to produce medications is inadequate to prevent unwanted contamination of food crops, according to an analysis released December 15 by a scientific advocacy group. As a result, the report concludes, consumers are at risk of inadvertently dosing themselves with prescription drugs while eating a morning bowl of cereal.
The report, which biotech executives and regulators denounced as overwrought, raises the specter of accidental contamination of the food supply with blood thinners, hormones or any of the scores of biologically active compounds being made experimentally in plants.
The report, A Growing Concern: Protecting the Food Supply in an Era of Pharmaceutical and Industrial Crops, was commissioned by the Union of Concerned Scientists and carried out by independent experts in the fields of agronomy, entomology and ecology. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4732 

Christian Aid concerned over GMOs

Christian Aid has issued an important updated statement reaffirming its concern about the possible effects of GM crops on developing countries and on the poor - so many of whom depend on agriculture for their livelihoods and an adequate and reliable food supply.
Excerpts from Christian Aid’s latest statement:
Too much pressure is being applied and too little time and assistance is being given to developing countries to help them properly debate and decide for themselves whether to use GM crops. Those in favour of GM crops often appear to dismiss the right of others to choose whether or not to grow GM crops or eat GM food by ignoring concerns that the widespread introduction of GM crops will effectively close off other, non-GM options. It is clear that commercial and other interests are in danger of overriding public concern, democratic decision-making and local control. www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4727

GM bugs to stop tooth decay?

Fancy a mouthful of GM bacteria to prevent tooth decay? This is another brilliant idea from the gene bashers, hyped in the UK Sunday Times even before clinical trials have taken place (item 1). Note that, as item 2 points out, the primary cause of tooth decay is not, as the Sunday Times implies, the bacterium Streptococcus mutans in itself, but the interaction between the bacterium and substances ingested in abnormally large amounts in a junk food diet, i.e. refined sugar and the starch in processed foods. The interaction between the bacteria and sugar or starch produces acid, which rots the teeth.
A second contributory cause to decay is mineral depletion of soils and diets - another problem that cannot be solved by GM bugs.
The aim of this initiative appears to be to enable the continuing consumption of junk food and the continuing depletion of soils.
1. Good bacteria can put an end to tooth decay www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1389246,00.html
Scientists have adapted the “friendly bacteria” idea promoted by the makers of yoghurt to help in the war against dental decay. The GM bacteria will prevent decay by displacing the germs that cause cavities.
The company making the bug, Florida-based Oragenics, has just won approval to conduct trials on humans. If it works, a dentist could simply rub the bacteria onto patients’ teeth - potentially protecting them from decay for years or even for life. It would also become the first big therapeutic application of GM organisms…
[The] approach focuses on Streptococcus mutans, one of several hundred bacterial species found in people’s mouths, but the one blamed for most tooth decay. The bug produces an acid that eats away the enamel coating that protects teeth.
However, Oragenics has created a strain of the germ that has been genetically modified to prevent it producing the damaging acid. It is also better adapted to survive in the mouth, so displaces the original decay-causing strain.
Children as young as one could be given the germ as soon as they start growing teeth. However, it must first pass through years of safety testing. It will be at least 2009 before it could go on the market.
Approval for the trial follows years of research and delays over fears the GM germ could revert to a decay-causing form. Clinical trials involving GM viruses have already led to at least one death. 

Fraser Institute gets three-day weekend calendars

The Work Less Party gave away free three-day weekend calendars to members of the Fraser Institute in Vancouver in December. “The less work the Fraser Institute does, the better off we all are” said Work Less Party candidate, Scott Nelson.
Over the past 30 years, the Fraser Institute has opposed the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, encouraged the privatization of Medicare, and promoted off-shore drilling near the Queen Charlotte Islands.
“There is more to life than financial profits. We need to care more about communities, health of the environment, quality of life, and education of our children. The Fraser Institute, as the non-profit think tank, and, some would argue, PR firm for big business, seems to more often than not, create answers its sponsors want to hear.” The interests of the Fraser Institute are not the interests of the average Canadian.
Last month, the Work Less Party gave three-day weekend calendars to Liberal MLAs in Victoria. The party will continue to distribute calendars and encourage organizations whose work is detrimental to the environment, to work less. www.worklessparty.org/calendar3day/calendar2.htm.