LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE  August 2004

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE August 2004

Subject:

New anti-GM leaflet from Catholic Inst Internatl Relns

From:

Robt Mann <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:09:11 +1200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (212 lines)

Here is the full text of a new leaflet from the Catholic Institute for
International Relations entitled 'What's wrong with GM?'

One can also download it from:
http://www.ciir.org/content/news/documents/GM_leaflet.pdf


----------------------------------------------------------
WHAT'S WRONG WITH GM?
Why genetically modified crops are bad for people and bad for the environment


Why should we care?

Genetic engineering of crops is a complex and controversial issue.  It is also
an issue with far-reaching implications for the environment and for people,
for the way crops are produced and the world s people are fed.

As an agency working for sustainable international development, CIIR is
especially concerned about the impact of genetically modified (GM) crops in
developing countries.  We believe that the introduction of GM crops in these
countries will endanger small farmers' livelihoods, undermine poor people's
ability to feed themselves, and increase the pressures on already damaged and
vulnerable environments.

We believe that an alternative approach to agriculture that is
environmentally, economically, culturally and socially sustainable will help
reduce poverty and help protect the environment.  In contrast, growing GM
crops will do the opposite.


What are GM crops?

People have been selectively breeding or cross-breeding plants for centuries 
for example, to adapt them to a particular climate or improve their yield.
What makes genetic engineering radically different from traditional breeding
methods is that genes are transferred between completely unrelated species.
For instance, animal genes are transferred into plants and bacteria genes are
moved across to food crops.


Two main types of GM crops are:

* insecticide crops: these have had genes transferred from a natural bacterium
so that they can act like insecticide plants and kill the pests that eat them
* roundup-ready crops: these have been made tolerant to specific herbicides,
so that when these herbicides are applied only weeds and other plants are
destroyed ("roundup" is a herbicide originally developed by the biotechnology
corporation Monsanto).

Other GM crops include those that have been made resistant to fungal
infections and those that have had their nutritional properties enhanced
(such as "golden rice" which contains vitamin A).


What's wrong with them?

Advocates of GM crops argue that GM crops are good for the environment since
they will reduce the amount of agrochemicals (pesticides and herbicides) that
need to be used in crop production.

However, opponents of GM crops believe that these crops are a threat to the
environment.  The claim that GM crops require fewer herbicides and pesticides
has been proved wrong.  They require fewer chemicals than conventional crops
in the short term but gradually they need significantly more.(1)

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) threaten plant biodiversity. Planting GM
crops is not a question of choice: once they are planted somewhere, crops
elsewhere become contaminated by them. This could be especially disastrous
for organic farmers.

For example, although it is illegal to grow GM maize in Mexico, in 2001
researchers found that traditional maize varieties grown by farmers in two
remote Mexican states had been contaminated with GMOs from GM maize.(2)
There are thousands of varieties of maize in Mexico.  If contaminated by
GMOs, these
precious indigenous varieties could be irretrievably lost.

Some farmers whose conventional crops have been contaminated by GM material
have found themselves obliged to pay fees to biotech corporations (which have
patented the GM material) or face legal action. In the words of a US farmer:
"Farmers are being sued for having GMOs on their property that they did not
buy, do not want, will not use and cannot sell".(3)

GM crops are produced for corporate profit. Seeds, and the chemicals that are
required to grow them, must be bought from the multinational biotech
corporations.  Farmers are prohibited from saving and sharing seeds: every
year they must buy more seeds and the associated agrochemicals from the
corporations.

The majority of farmers in developing countries struggle to afford even the
most basic inputs (seeds, fertilisers, etc).  Their survival depends on the
age-old practices of selecting, saving and sharing seeds from one year to the
next. GM crops do not allow farmers to do this.

By patenting GM seeds and their associated technologies, biotech corporations
will consolidate their already worrying control over the world food market.
They will exercise a monopoly over what we eat and what we plant, with
devastating effects, particularly in developing countries, for food security
(people's ability to have access to safe and nutritious food at all times).


REFS:

1 Charles M Benbrook, BioTech InfoNet, Technical Paper Number 6, November
2003.
2 See ' Mexico confirms GM maize contamination' on the Science and
Development
Network website www.scidev.net/news.
3 Tom Wiley, a farmer in North Dakota, quoted in Seeds of doubt: North
American farmers - experiences of GM crops by Hugh Warwick and Gundula Meziani
(Soil Association, 2002).


Resistance to GMOs

Biotech corporations have faced resistance to the introduction of GMOs in
Europe from faith groups, consumers, environmentalists, non-governmental
organisations and MPs.

In the South, several developing countries, such as Angola, India, Sudan,
Zambia and Malawi, have said no to GM crops.  They have also resisted GM
foods as food aid. USAID, the US international agency, has exerted enormous
pressure through the United Nations World Food Programme, effectively telling
countries that they have no choice: accept GM food, or get no food aid at
all.

In May 2004, more than 60 groups from 15 African countries, including
environmental and development organisations and farmer and consumer groups,
wrote an open letter to the World Food Programme denouncing the way in which
hunger is being cynically used to impose GM crops and food on developing
countries.

Biotech corporations and the US government present GM crops as the solution to
world hunger. The reality is that there is enough food in the world to feed
all of us. People experience hunger because they have no money to buy the
food that is available, or because they have no means to grow this food. The
real causes of hunger and poverty are social and economic inequalities that
will not be fixed by biotechnology. Instead, GM crops will make these
inequalities worse.


What is the alternative?

Agroecology or sustainable agriculture is an approach to agriculture that is
environmentally, economically, culturally and socially sustainable. It
emphasises crop diversity and rotation, conserves natural resources, and
favours small and medium-sized farming rather than agribusinesses and large
corporations.

Moreover, it focuses on food security (ensuring there is enough food for
people to eat) and thus prioritises the production of staple crops (rather
than cash crops for export). It is a key livelihood strategy for poor farmers
in Latin America and the Caribbean, who have recognised that their best hope
for a sustainable future is to nurture and protect the environment.


How can we promote sustainable agriculture?

We need to:

* use aid to maximise the potential of sustainable agriculture to reduce
poverty in developing countries
* change international trade rules so that they do not force developing
countries to  liberalise  their economies  instead, we ought to enable
these
countries to invest in sustainable agriculture and rural development
* free the poorest countries from the crushing burden of debt, which forces
them to focus on export-led development, over-exploit their natural
resources, and neglect their most vulnerable people.


What can you do?

Find out more:
www.gmwatch.org
www.soilassociation.org
www.abcinformation.org (website set up by biotech corporations)
www.nuffieldbioethics.org (see www.gmwatch.org for counter comments on the
Nuffield Council for Bioethics)
Write to your MP to:
*express concerns about the forceful introduction of GM crops and food in
developing countries and its implications for the food security of poor
farmers
*ask him/her to urge the UK Department for International Development (DFID) to
prioritise research on the potential of low-cost sustainable agriculture
methods to reduce poverty in developing countries, instead of unsustainable
and unsafe technologies such as GM. [Find details of local MPs at
www.locata.co.uk/commons]

If you are a Catholic:
*write a personal letter to the Vatican expressing concerns about GM crops and
the way in which biotech corporations are actively seeking the endorsement of
the church. [For a sample letter visit www.ciir.org or write to CIIR
Environmental Action at the address below]

 CIIR 2004 Catholic Institute for International Relations (CIIR) Unit 3,
Canonbury Yard 190a New North Road London N1 7BJ Charity reg no 294329
Company reg no 2002500
In some countries CIIR is known as International Cooperation for Development
(ICD)

Design: Twenty-Five Educational. Printed on 100% chlorine-free recycled paper
by APG (APG holds ISO14001 accreditation for international environmental
standards).

Produced with the financial assistance of the European Commission. The views
expressed herein are those of CIIR and can therefore in no way be taken to
reflect the official opinion of the European Commission.

www.ciir.org

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
May 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager