|
Appendix
1 ¡¡Appendix
2 ¡¡Appendix 3¡¡Appendix
4¡¡Appendix 5 ¡¡Appendix
6¡¡Appendix 7 |
|
Appendix 5: Statement
of Risks and Concerns on GMOs (Institute of Science in Society. 2000. Open Letter from World Scientists to All Governments Concerning Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). www.i-sis.org.) 1 Patents on life-forms
and living processes should be banned because they threaten food security,
sanction biopiracy of indigenous knowledge and genetic resources, violate
basic human rights and dignity, compromise healthcare, impede medical
and scientific research and are against the welfare of animals. Life-forms
such as organisms, seeds, cell lines and genes are discoveries and hence
not patentable. Current GM techniques which exploit living processes
are unreliable, uncontrollable and unpredictable, and do not qualify
as inventions. Furthermore, those techniques are inherently unsafe,
as are many GM organisms and products. 2. It is becoming
increasingly clear that current GM crops are neither needed nor beneficial.
They are a dangerous diversion preventing the essential shift to sustainable
agricultural practices that can provide food security and health around
the world. 3. Two simple characteristics
account for the nearly 40 million hectares of GM crops planted in 1999.
The majority (71%) are tolerant to broad-spectrum herbicides, with companies
engineering plants to be tolerant to their own brand of herbicide, while
most of the rest are engineered with bt-toxins to kill insect pests.
A university-based survey of 8200 field trials of the most widely grown
GM crops, herbicide-tolerant soya beans - revealed that they yield 6.7%
less and required two to five times more herbicides than non-GM varieties.
This has been confirmed by a more recent study in the University of
Nebraska. Yet other problems have been identified: erratic performance,
disease susceptibility, fruit abortion and poor economic returns to
farmers. 4. According to the
UN food programme, there is enough food to feed the world one and a
half times over. While world population has grown 90% in the past 40
years, the amount of food per capita has increased by 25%, yet one billion
are hungry. A new FAO report confirms that there will be enough or more
than enough food to meet global demands without taking into account
any yield improvements that might result from GM crops well into 2030.
It is on account of an increasing corporate monopoly operating under
the globalised economy that the poor are getting poorer and hungrier.
Family farmers around the world have been driven to destitution and
suicide, and for the same reasons. Between 1993 and 1997 the number
of mid-sized farms in the US dropped by 74,440, and farmers are now
receiving below the average cost of production for their produce. The
farming population in France and Germany fell by 50% since 1978. In
the UK, 20 000 farming jobs were lost in the past year alone, and the
Prime Minister has announced a ¡ê200m aid package. Four corporations
control 85% of the world trade in cereals at the end of 1999. Mergers
and acquisitions are continuing. 5. The new patents
on seeds intensify corporate monopoly by preventing farmers from saving
and replanting seeds, which is what most farmers still do in the Third
World. In order to protect their patents, corporations are continuing
to develop terminator technologies that genetically engineer harvested
seeds not to germinate, despite worldwide opposition from farmers and
civil society at large. 6. Christian Aid,
a major charity working with the Third World, concluded that GM crops
will cause unemployment, exacerbate Third World debt, threaten sustainable
farming systems and damage the environment. It predicts famine for the
poorest countries. African Governments condemned Monsanto's claim that
GMOs are needed to feed the hungry of the world: "We¡strongly object
that the image of the poor and hungry from our countries is being used
by giant multinational corporations to push a technology that is neither
safe, environmentally friendly, nor economically beneficial to us¡ we
believe it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge and the sustainable
agricultural systems that our farmers have developed for millennia and
¡undermine our capacity to feed ourselves." A message from the
Peasant movement of the Philippines to the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) of the industrialized countries stated,
"The entry of GMOs will certainly intensify landlessness, hunger
and injustice." 7. A coalition of
family farming groups in the US has issued a comprehensive list of demands,
including a ban on ownership of all life-forms; suspension of sales,
environmental releases and further approvals of all GM crops and products
pending an independent, comprehensive assessment of the social, environmental,
health and economic impacts; and for corporations to be made liable
for all damages arising from GM crops and products to livestock, human
beings and the environment. They also demand a moratorium on all corporate
mergers and acquisitions, on farm closures, and an end to policies that
serve big agribusiness interests at the expense of family farmers, taxpayers
and the environment. They have mounted a lawsuit against Monsanto and
nine other corporations for monopolistic practices and for foisting
GM crops on farmers without adequate safety and environmental impact
assessments. 8. Some of the hazards
of GM crops are openly acknowledged by the UK and US Governments. UK
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) has admitted that
the transfer of GM crops and pollen beyond the planted fields is unavoidable,
and this has already resulted in herbicide-tolerant weeds. An interim
report on UK Government-sponsored field trials confirmed hybridisation
between adjacent plots of different herbicide tolerant GM oilseed rape
varieties, which gave rise to hybrids tolerant to multiple herbicides.
In addition, GM oilseed rape and their hybrids have been found in subsequent
wheat and barley crops, which had to be controlled by standard herbicides.
Bt-resistant insect pests have evolved in response to the continuous
presence of these toxins in GM plants throughout the growing season,
and the US Environment Protection Agency is recommending farmers to
plant up to 40% non-GM crops in order to create refugia for non-resistant
insect pests. 9. The threats to
biodiversity from major GM crops that are already commercialized are
becoming increasingly clear. The broad-spectrum herbicides used with
herbicide-tolerant GM crops decimate wild plant species indiscriminately,
they are also toxic to animals. Glufosinate causes birth defects in
mammals and glyphosate is linked to non-Hodgkin lymphoma. GM crops with
bt-toxins kill beneficial insects such as bees and lacewings, and pollen
from bt-corn is found to be lethal to monarch butterflies as well as
swallowtails. Bt-toxin is exuded from roots of bt-plants in the rhizosphere,
where it rapidly binds to soil particles and becomes protected from
degradation. As the toxin is present in an activated, non-selective
form, both target and non-target species in the soil will be affected,
with knock on effects for species above ground. 10. Products resulting
from genetically modified organisms can also be hazardous. For example,
a batch of tryptophan produced by GM microorganisms was associated with
at least 37 deaths and 1500 serious illnesses. Genetically modified
Bovine Growth Hormone, injected into cows in order to increase milk
yield, not only causes excessive suffering and illnesses for the cows
but increased IGF-1 in the milk, a substance linked to breast and prostate
cancers in humans. It is vital for the public to be protected from all
GM products, and not only those containing transgenic DNA or protein.
That is because the process of genetic modification itself, at least
in the form currently practiced, is inherently unsafe. 11. A secret memoranda
of US Food and Drug Administration revealed that it ignored the warnings
of its own scientists that genetic engineering is a new departure and
introduces new risks. Furthermore, the first GM crop to be commercialized
- the Flavr Savr tomato - did not pass the required toxicological tests.
Since then, no comprehensive scientific safety testing had been done
until Dr. Arpad Pusztai and his collaborators in the UK raised serious
concerns over the safety of the GM potatoes they were testing. They
concluded that a significant part of the toxic effect may be due to
the "[gene] construct or the genetic transformation (or both)"
used in making the GM plants. 12. The safety of
GM foods was openly disputed by Professor Bevan Moseley, molecular geneticist
and current Chair of the Working Group on Novel Foods in the European
Union's Scientific Committee on Food. He drew attention to unforseen
effects inherent to the technology, emphasizing that the next generation
of GM foods - the so-called 'neutraceuticals' or 'functional foods',
such as vitamin A 'enriched' rice - will pose even greater health risks
because of the increased complexity of the gene constructs. 13. Genetic engineering
introduces new genes and new combinations of genetic material constructed
in the laboratory into crops, livestock and microorganisms. The artificial
constructs are derived from the genetic material of pathogenic viruses
and other genetic parasites, as well as bacteria and other organisms,
and include genes coding for antibiotic resistance. The constructs are
designed to break down species barriers and to overcome mechanisms that
prevent foreign genetic material from inserting into genomes. Most of
them have never existed in nature in the course of billions of years
of evolution. 14. These constructs
are introduced into cells by invasive methods that lead to random insertion
of the foreign genes into the genomes (the totality of all the genetic
material of a cell or organism). This gives rise to unpredictable, random
effects, including gross abnormalities in animals and unexpected toxins
and allergens in food crops. 15. One construct
common to practically all GM crops already commercialized or undergoing
field trials involves a gene-switch (promoter) from the cauliflower
mosaic virus (CaMV) spliced next to the foreign gene (transgene) to
make it over-express continuously. This CaMV promoter is active in all
plants, in yeast, algae and E. coli. We recently discovered that it
is even active in amphibian egg and human cell extracts. It has a modular
structure, and is interchangeable, in part, or in whole with promoters
of other viruses to produce infectious viruses. It also has a 'recombination
hotspot' where it is prone to break and join up with other genetic material.
16. For these and
other reasons, transgenic DNA - the totality of artificial constructs
transferred into the GMO - may be more unstable and prone to transfer
again to unrelated species; potentially to all species interacting with
the GMO. 17. The instability
of transgenic DNA in GM plants is well-known(45). GM genes are often
silenced, but loss of part or all of the transgenic DNA also occurs,
even during later generations of propagation(46). We are aware of no
published evidence for the long term stability of GM inserts in terms
of structure or location in the plant genome in any of the GM lines
already commercialized or undergoing field trials. 18. The potential
hazards of horizontal transfer of GM genes include the spread of antibiotic
resistance genes to pathogens, the generation of new viruses and bacteria
that cause disease and mutations due to the random insertion of foreign
DNA, some of which may lead to cancer in mammalian cells. The ability
of the CaMV promoter to function in all species including human beings
is particularly relevant to the potential hazards of horizontal gene
transfer. 19. The possibility
for naked or free DNA to be taken up by mammalian cells is explicitly
mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) draft guidance
to industry on antibiotic resistance marker genes. In commenting on
the FDA's document, the UK MAFF pointed out that transgenic DNA may
be transferred not just by ingestion, but by contact with plant dust
and air-borne pollen during farm work and food processing. This warning
is all the more significant with the recent report from Jena University
in Germany that field experiments indicated GM genes may have transferred
via GM pollen to the bacteria and yeasts in the gut of bee larvae. 20. Plant DNA is
not readily degraded during most commercial food processing. Procedures
such as grinding and milling left grain DNA largely intact, as did heat-treatment
at 90deg.C. Plants placed in silage showed little degradation of DNA,
and a special UK MAFF report advises against using GM plants or plant
waste in animal feed. 21. The human mouth
contains bacteria that have been shown to take up and express naked
DNA containing antibiotic resistance genes, and similar transformable
bacteria are present in the respiratory tracts. 22. Antibiotic resistance
marker genes from GM plants have been found to transfer horizontally
to soil bacteria and fungi in the laboratory. Field monitoring revealed
that GM sugar beet DNA persisted in the soil for up to two years after
the GM crop was planted. And there is evidence suggesting that parts
of transgenic DNA have transferred horizontally to bacteria in the soil.
23. Recent research
in gene therapy and nucleic acid (both DNA and RNA) vaccines leaves
little doubt that naked/free nucleic acids can be taken up, and in some
cases, incorporated into the genome of all mammalian cells including
those of human beings. Adverse effects already observed include acute
toxic shock, delayed immunological reactions and autoimmune reactions.
24. The British Medical
Association, in their interim report (published May, 1999), called for
an indefinite moratorium on the releases of GMOs pending further research
on new allergies, the spread of antibiotic resistance genes and the
effects of transgenic DNA. 25. In the Cartegena
Biosafety Protocol successfully negotiated in Montreal in January, 2000,
more than 130 governments have agreed to implement the precautionary
principle, and to ensure that biosafety legislations at the national
and international levels take precedence over trade and financial agreements
at the WTO. Similarly, delegates to the Codex Alimentarius Commission
Conference in Chiba Japan, March 2000, have agreed to prepare stringent
regulatory procedures for GM foods that include pre-market evaluation,
long-term monitoring for health impacts, tests for genetic stability,
toxins, allergens and other unintended effects. The Cartegena Biosafety
Protocol has now been signed by 68 Governments in Nairobi in May, 2000.
26. We urge all Governments
to take proper account of the now substantial scientific evidence of
actual and suspected hazards arising from GM technology and many of
its products, and to impose an immediate moratorium on further environmental
releases, including open field trials, in accordance with the precautionary
principle as well as sound science. 27. Successive studies
have documented the productivity and sustainability of family farming
in the Third World as well as in the North. Evidence from both North
and South indicates that small farms are more productive, more efficient
and contribute more to economic development than large farms. Small
farmers also tend to make better stewards of natural resources, conserving
biodiversity and safeguarding the sustainability of agricultural production.
Cuba responded to the economic crisis precipitated by the break up of
the Soviet Bloc in 1989 by converting from conventional large scale,
high input monoculture to small organic and semi-organic farming, thereby
doubling food production with half the previous input. 28. Agroecological
approaches hold great promise for sustainable agriculture in developing
countries, in combining local farming knowledge and techniques adjusted
to local conditions with contemporary western scientific knowledge.
The yields have doubled and tripled and are still increasing. An estimated
12.5 million hectares worldwide are already successfully farmed in this
way. It is environmentally sound and affordable for small farmers. It
recovers farming land marginalized by conventional intensive agriculture.
It offers the only practical way of restoring agricultural land degraded
by conventional agronomic practices. Most of all, it empowers small
family farmers to combat poverty and hunger. 29. We urge all Governments
to reject GM crops on grounds that they are both hazardous and contrary
to ecologically sustainable use of resources. Instead they should support
research and development of sustainable agricultural methods that can
truly benefit family farmers the world over.
|