French GM Ban Infuriates Farmers, Delights Environmentalists
PARIS - France officially banned Saturday a strain of genetically modified corn from US agribusiness giant Monsanto, delighting environmentalists but sparking outrage from the company and French farmers.
At least one association planned a legal challenge to the ruling, but leading environmental campaigner Jose Bove welcomed the decision, describing it as the fruit of a 10-year battle by anti-GM groups.
A spokeswoman for Monsanto said Saturday that France’s decision to outlaw the use of the MON810 strain of corn, the only GM crop grown in France, “had no scientific basis”.
She added: “Monsanto is studying all the legal options to defend the liberty of French farmers to use safe and authorised products.”
Farmers affected by the decision expressed their frustration Saturday.
“France finds itself isolated and the south-west penalised against Spanish competition, which does not apply the same rules,” said Dominique Barrau, a farmers’ union leader from the southwest of the country, bordering Spain.
His part of France would be particularly hard hit, he said, as 80 percent of GM crops grown in France were planted in the southwest Pyrenees and Aquitaine regions.
Bove, who launched a hunger strike last month along with 15 colleagues over the issue, said the ban was overdue.
“We are satisfied this morning, that after 10 years of combat the MON810 corn has been banned from cultivation,” he said.
“There will be no MON810 cultivation in France in 2008 and that is a good thing,” he told France 2 television.
Bove, who has staged several hunger strikes, has been convicted of ripping up GM crops in southern France.
The question is already set to go before France’s Council of State after the General Association of Corn Producers (AGPM) warned in late January that they would challenge the ruling there.
With the law requiring a hearing within three weeks, corn producers could still plant the variety of GM corn this spring if France’s highest administrative court supports their appeal, said AGPM director Luc Esprit.
The association estimates the ban would cause farmers losses of some 10 million euros (15 million dollars).
France officially imposed the ban with the publication of an agriculture ministry order in the state’s official journal.
“The growing of corn seeds … derived from genetically modified corn strain MON810 is prohibited on [French] territory,” read the order, signed by Agriculture Minister Michel Barnier.
Last year, 22,000 hectares (55,000 acres) were sown with the product — less than one percent of the sown acreage for corn in France.
The French government began moves for a ban last month after a watchdog authority said it had “serious doubts” about the product.
Chairman Jean-Francois Le Grand, who also holds a seat in the Senate, said evidence had emerged that MON810 had an effect on insects, a species of earthworm and micro-organisms.
There was also concern that wind-borne pollen from MON810 could travel much further than previously thought — perhaps as much as hundreds of miles (kilometres), said Le Grand.
But the report remains controversial: 12 of the 15 scientists who compiled it issued a statement complaining that Le Grand had misrepresented their findings.
Copyright © 2008 AFP.
Another spelling mistake.
Hoa binh
That was fast.
I set forth the following challenge to the inevitable arrival of the pro-GM posters:
The burden of proof rests upon the proponent of any proposed action. Hocus-pocus claims to “substantial equivalence” don’t cut it. So, please point us to 1) an independent animal feeding trial showing that MON810 (not Event 11, Event 10, MON863, etc - though you can post those as an aside, if you like - we’d appreciate them) is safe and most importantly 2) an independent double-blind, placebo-controlled human trial with a focus on vulnerable groups like children, the elderly and those suffering from HIV, hepatitis or the like showing that MON810 (not the other strains, but again, any studies on them are welcome as an aside) is safe.
After that, you can then tell us why we have to use MON810 (or any variety of Bt corn) when there are proven organic IPM strategies that reduce borer loses by more than 80%.
Vivisection experiments dont work. All the pro GMO person has to say is there needs to be more study. You cant rely on science to validate something created by science. Its bogus.
Only a science-worshiping fool who has his head stuck up his rear end in some sort of human supremacist fetish would say that we need GMOs.
Nature isnt broken, humans are.
Humans are the failure of nature, not the other way around.
We have all the food we need–but humans have to spread it around–stop wasting water and grain and land resources on livestock production.
Its simple.
GMOS are just a fast food quack solution that creates more problems(just as the cough medicine called Heroin didnt turn out the way the idiot scientists predicted).
Science does not lead to common sense or wisdom. That’s why ancient mystics in India came up with the Uncertainty principle 3000 years before Werner Heisenberg did.
“Monsanto is studying all the legal options to defend the liberty of French farmers to use safe and authorised products.”
Wow- the powerful just love to use the perversion of once meaningful phrases to fit their less than noble ends. As though we are all fooled by their doublespeak.
Scientists who aren’t in the pay of the powerful are usually very humble people who fully understand the vastness of the unknown and the ever changing views of science. Quite a different situation though when owned by corporate giants!
you go kelmer, take it to those darn scientists! and don’t be bothered by the facts. just say anything to confuse the issue and to create chaos.
way-to-go.
One only need to read the following article to understand the dangers of GMO’s.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7529
World dominion beliefs by both economic elites and organized Christian religions needs to be ended.
Although there are other places to purchase organic and heirloom seeds here is just one: www.seedsavers.org and also
www.slowfoodusa.org/ark
Millions of backyard gardeners and seed savers is the best method of preserving seeds.
In the US, the beautiful Monarch butterfly is in danger of extinction because the UNmodified corn on which it used to feed has been replaced by GM corn that lacks an essential enzyme without which the butterfly cannot reproduce.
We do not yet know the long-term effects upon humans.
France will be sued by Monsanto just as Percy Schmeiser was. I hope France fares better.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/genetics_modification/percyschmeiser.html
This from the March - May issue of the Maine Organic Farmer & Gardener (MOFGA) magazine:
“The first GE crops were planted in open fields in the United States in 1995. Since then, genetically engineered crops have not lived up to their initial promises of huge profits for farmers and benefits for consumers. Promises of health benefits and reduced pesticide use with GE crops have not panned out. Farmers planting Monsanto’s ‘Roundup Ready’ seeds apply more, not less, weed killer.
“Vice-President of plant genetics for Dow Agrosciences said recently, ‘There will be continuing bumps in the road, but we are starting to see a balance of very good news and growth. The genie is way out of the bottle.’”
Indeed, the genie is way out of the bottle.
Preliminaries about Monsanto:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monlink.cfm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11796
http://www.coopamerica.org/programs/rs/profile.cfm?id=268
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/12/13/vandana_shiva_on_farmer_suicides_the
One of the reasons the French take so much flack from the elite [and their corporate media machine] is their tendancy not to go along with the program. Viva la France!
Cheers, Cheers, Cheers, Cheers, Cheers,Cheers.
Funny how Monsanto employee used the term, “there is no scientific basis for this decision”.
Anyway, Cheers!!!!!!
papercut:
To put it nicely: piss off, you little dung beetle.
This action should serve as an example of what happens in a country where the voter participation rate is over 70%, unions have political power, and consumers care passionately about what goes in their mouths. It is amusing to see an Agribusiness giant like Monsanto rail furiously when it does not get its’ way like it usually does in the USA. That needs to happen more often.
Peace Czar: With all due respect for your attempt to be nice, I must say I take exception to you calling papercut a dung beetle. These little animals are fascinating marvels of nature who perform valuable functions in the ecosystems which they inhabit, and do not at all deserve to be compared to papercut.
Thank You France for standing up to the Evil that could kill us all. Monsanto and GM crops!
Cheers!!!
Normally, claims need to be empirically based. THere is one statement that holds true a priori - you can’t trust Monsanto on anything.
It has been a long time coming but all the fruits of Jose Bove’s labor are being realized.
Touche, magpie!
And to kelmer:
Your wisdom and insight constantly delights me. I’d love to get a suggested reading list from you. If I don’t find you again on this thread, perhaps another.
bleedingheartsclub@gmail.com works great, too
I rail against corporations alot. I just had a letter published in a couple of local papers doing just that. However, let us not forget that big business does somehow manage to do alot of wonderful things from time to time. Not long ago I had continuous and highly annoying pain for a few weeks from neck osteo-arthritis. Luckily those nasty scientists made a drug called feldene that has been a miracle for me. It costs $4/month. I happen to use less pesticides on my gm crops than years ago. My crops stand better so there is less need to harvest early and dry them with propane. Yes, there are always dangers with anything new. But sometimes we overlook the good.
Greg R:
“sometimes we overlook the good.” very true, but in the case of GM, the point is there is no scientific evidence to say they are good.
Maybe in a few years the American consumer of such products will benefit - either way they are guinepigs currently, they French don’t want to be though.
The world was not created for American consumers and it is much easier to take a pill than use the required judgement and knowledge to understand your own body and how nature provides a bounty though interdependent relationships that have absolutely nothing to with with science.
As I expected: a proponent showed up but was unable to provide any references to the requested safety testing. Telling.
P.S. Regarding the non sequitur Feldene: Good call. No more effective than related NSAID drugs, but with significantly higher incidences of ulcers and serious skin reactions, according to the European Medicines Agency.
We need to get more labels on food. We need to be sure to label organic food with the words “produced with manure”. We also need a label saying “not kosher” on all food that is not kosher, and “not free-range” on all turkeys raised in cages. For that matter, we need to include not raised in this state for all folks that want to buy locally. Clearly it is not the burden of those producing food in some trendy way to label their own products. Instead everyone needs to label their products as not being whatever some clever marketer can convince the public to buy. We also need to ban GM crops because farmers are buying the stuff like its going out of style. We cannot have a free market. That would be crazy! Instead we need to vote on what should be available. Then we could disband the regulatory agencies and stop believing that evidence rather than popular opinion should decide what’s safe. For that matter, we should get rid of doctors and take a vote on what treatment you recieve the next time you or your child gets ill. Clearly we cannot trust any scientists to understand biology. In the US, over 50% of the people do not believe in evolution, so we should get this fairytail out of the schools. For that matter, we should get science out of the schools, since we do not trust the scientists trained in these schools. Mother-earth will take care of us…
I set forth the following challenge (again) to pro-GM posters:
The burden of proof rests upon the proponent of any proposed action. Hocus-pocus claims to “substantial equivalence” don’t cut it. So, please point us to 1) an independent animal feeding trial showing that MON810 (not Event 11, Event 10, MON863, etc - though you can post those as an aside, if you like - we’d appreciate them) is safe and most importantly 2) an independent double-blind, placebo-controlled human trial with a focus on vulnerable groups like children, the elderly and those suffering from HIV, hepatitis or the like showing that MON810 (not the other strains, but again, any studies on them are welcome as an aside) is safe.
And I’ll say again, these studies don’t exist for any food and are not considered necissary by those knowledgable in toxicology. A knowledge of the mode of action of the transgenic proteins, pure protein toxicity assays in animals at thousands of times of exposure to humans and animals in food or feed, and animal feeding studies are conducted and considered sufficient by toxicologists. These studies are funded by the patent holder. If you think that other studies are needed, then take up a collection among your supporters and run them. Substantial-equivalence studies for input traits are just silly since unintended disruption of the native genome is far less likely with molecular-biological techniques compared with traditional breeding where mutation of genes and movement of hundreds or thousands of genes causes disruption on a scale that is hundreds of magnitudes higher. Douple-blind, placebo-controlled human trials are used when ealier conservative tests indicate some potential risk of harm, or when a benefit in human populations must be demonstrated. This is basic toxicology, and the reason that hacks are not the ones regulating these crops, chemicals or pharmacuticals - Thank God!
I set forth the following challenge (again) to pro-GM posters who I mistakenly assumed intelligent enough to know that proper testing would entail comparison with the non-transgenic parent of the GMO in question:
The burden of proof rests upon the proponent of any proposed action. Hocus-pocus claims to “substantial equivalence” don’t cut it. So, please point us to 1) an independent animal feeding trial showing that MON810 (not Event 11, Event 10, MON863, etc - though you can post those as an aside, if you like - we’d appreciate them) is safe and most importantly 2) an independent double-blind, placebo-controlled human trial with a focus on vulnerable groups like children, the elderly and those suffering from HIV, hepatitis or the like showing that MON810 (not the other strains, but again, any studies on them are welcome as an aside) is safe.
A reasonable challenge. Now let the irrelevant rants fly!
[Oh, and while this is off topic, regarding the toxicity of the cry proteins, it’s controversial:
Vázquez-Padrón RI, Moreno-Fierros L, Neri-Bazán L, de la Riva GA & López-Revilla R (1999). Intragastric and intraperitoneal administration of Cry1Ac protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis induce systemic and mucosal antibody response in mice. Life Sciences, 64: 1897-1912. – Shows that “recombinant Cry1Ac protoxin (pCry1Ac) administered to mice by the intraperitoneal (ip) or intragastric (ig) route induces systemic and mucosal antibody responses similar to those obtained with cholera toxin.
Vázquez-Padrón RI, Moreno-Fierros L, Neri-Bazán L, de la Riva GA & López-Revilla R (1999). Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac protoxin is a potent systemic and mucosal adjuvant. Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, 46: 578-584. – Shows “in adjuvanticity studies, pCry1Ac elicited serum antibodies against hepatitis B surface antigen and BSA when these antigens were coadministered ig, and IgG antibodies in the intestinal fluid when the antigens were administered ip.”
Vazquez-Padron, R.I., Moreno-Fierros, L., Neri-Bazan, L., Martinez-Gil, A.F., de la Riva, G.A. and Lopez-Revilla, R. Characterization of the mucosal and sytemic immune response induced by Cry1Ac protein from Bacillus thuringiensis HD 73 in mice. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 33, 147-155 (2000) - Shows that “The kinetics of induction of serum and mucosal antibodies showed an immediate production of anti-Cry1Ac IgM and IgG antibodies in serum after the first immunization with the protoxin by either the intraperitoneal or intragastric route…. Cry1Ac toxin administration induced a strong immune response in serum but in the small intestinal fluids only anti-Cry1Ac IgA antibodies were detected. The data obtained in the present study confirm that the Cry1Ac protoxin is a potent immunogen able to induce a specific immune response in the mucosal tissue, which has not been observed in response to most other proteins.
Bernstein I, Bernstein J, Miller M, Tiewzieva S, Bernstein D, Lummus Z, Selgrade M, Doerfler D and Seligy V. Immune responses in farm workers after exposure to Bacillus thuringiensis pesticides Environ Health Perspect 1999,107, 575-82. - Shows “that skin sensitization to Bt in pesticides could be a precursor of clinical IgE-mediated diseases, several aspects of this investigation may be relevant to other current health issues: immediate hypersensitivity induced by bacteria and transgenic foods engineered to incorporate pesticidal genes in their genomes.”
But this is all aside from the very valid request for independent safety studies on those with whom the burden of proof rests.]
Now your in an area that I actually am very familiar with. For those following this, please be sure that regulators are very familiar with the studies cited by Mr. Barnes above. The studies show that proteins (most proteins) produce immune responses in animals - a well known effect. This is what our immune systems do. It is the basis for why the detection system for proteins, enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) is used to test for proteins (for example, common blood tests done by your doctor - ask him or her yourself). This system relies on specific antibodies produced in animals exposed to the protein of interest. This response can be generated in response to just about any protein. This is a basic response by animals to most every protein to which we are exposed and does not indicate any danger. If it did, then we could not eat protein (which is a necessary nutrient in our diet). Allergies are caused by IgE antibodies (not IgG). This brings us to the Bernsten publication which found IgE antibodies expressed in workers to Bacillus thuringiensis pesticides used by organic farmers. A reading of this paper by anyone with a brain will show that the researchres determined that the insecticidal protein was not responsible but rather proteins in the spores (bacterial reproductive structures). The spores contain many proteins, non of which are expressed in transgenic plants. Thus the paper demostrates that organic sprayable Bt pesticides may cause allergies but that the insecticidal protein expressed in plants does not. The type of propaganda being shoveled above by Mr. Barnes is why you all need to actually read these papers and understand the science, and not accept the interpretation of fear peddlers.