November headlines

Return to November article index

South Korea's StarLink recall said 'unnecessary'

November 13
Reuters

CHICAGO - South Korea jumped the gun with its recall of tortillas believed to be contaminated with an unapproved gene-altered corn - the chips were made from wheat flour, the US supplier said on Friday.

The agency said Korea had imported a total of 33,796 kgs of tortillas from Mission Foods, of which 19,268 kgs have been consumed. It has asked the US Embassy in Seoul to ensure no more exports of corn and food products contained StarLink.

Mission Foods spokesman Peter Pitts said tortillas the company supplied to South Korea were made from wheat flour.

"The products are made from wheat flour rather than yellow corn," he told Reuters. "It's an unnecessary, premature recall."

Pitts said the Korean agency sent a letter by fax to Mission Foods on Thursday asking if the company's food products contained StarLink, which is not approved for human consumption because of concerns that it might trigger allergic reactions.

He said the company would be replying to the KFDA that its tortillas sold in South Korea are made from wheat flour, adding that the recall could have been avoided if the agency had waited for the reply.

Pitts said he suspected that the Korean agency had not carried out testing to check the tortillas for StarLink corn.

StarLink corn hit the headlines in the United States in late September after it was discovered in Taco Bell brand taco shells, sparking their recall voluntarily by Philip Morris Cos. Inc unit Kraft Foods.

Since then, 300 kinds of taco shells, tortillas, chips and tostadas have been recalled from grocery stores and restaurants because of StarLink contamination, the US government says.

StarLink, produced by European pharmaceutical giant Aventis SA , has been buying up the corn from farmers to ensure it is kept out of the food chain.

Aventis has however acknowledged that about 12 percent of this year's StarLink crop, or 9.6 million bushels, had been commingled into the food chain and that it would need four years to flush out all the corn.

Mission Foods began a recall of its yellow corn products after StarLink was discovered in food items, and has since switched to white corn as the raw material.

Pitts said Mission Foods had recalled between 5.5 million to 6 million pounds of its yellow corn products. The recall was still in progress, he said.

The recalled products include yellow taco shells, yellow tortilla chips. yellow corn tortillas and yellow tostadas.

Pitts said the recall of its yellow corn products covered both the United States and Canada, and had cost the company "millions and millions" of dollars.

Mission Foods is a unit of Texas food producer Gruma Corp., which is a subsidiary of Mexican food producer Gruma SA .

South Korea imports about two million tons of corn a year for human consumption, mostly from the United States, and another eight million tons, mostly from China and the United States, for feed production.

Biosafety protocol crucial for trade

November 13
The Times of India

NEW DELHI: The Union Cabinet's seal of approval to the Cartagena protocol on biosafety has brought into focus once more the issue of genetically modified organisms, with the controversial trade and environment linkage being highlighted.

With the acceptance and signing of the Cartagena protocol, India, which is party to the international Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), would benefit in its agricultural and biotechnology industry, officials say as conservationists still call for a cautious approach.

The protocol is an instrument for regulating transboundary movement of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), called "Living Modified Organisms (LMO)", and it would be "in the country's interest to join the international community", says the government.

Moreover, the country's fledgling biotechnology industry with a strong research base and highly qualified scientists and experts in the area would also benefit, officials say.

"If India does not sign the protocol, it would send wrong signals to the global community," they contend.

The Cartagena protocol on biosafety was adopted at Montreal, Canada, in January this year after hectic negotiations, under the auspices of the CBD, with the primary aim of developing mechanisms for safe transfer, handling and use of GMOs.

The protocol takes into account risks to human health and specifically focuses on transboundary movement of the LMOs.(PTI)

Pope warns on biotech health risk

November 12
AP

VATICAN CITY - Dedicating Sunday to the world's farmers, Pope John Paul II urged those who are developing new biotechnologies to keep a ``healthy balance'' with nature to avoid putting people's lives at risk.

Tens of thousands of farmers and their families, most of them from Italy but many from other countries and continents, crowded into St. Peter's Square on a chilly, overcast day to attend Mass celebrated by the pope on the steps of St. Peter's Basilica. The Mass was part of a Holy Year tribute to the world of agriculture.

John Paul didn't cite any specific kind of biotechnology Sunday. But his words picked up on a speech he gave Saturday evening in which he urged rigorous scientific and ethical controls to avoid possible ``disaster for the health of man and the future of the Earth'' from new agricultural technologies.

On Sunday, the pope told the farmers in the square that ``if the world of most refined techniques doesn't reconcile itself with the simple language of nature in a healthy balance, the life of man will run ever greater risks, of which already we are seeing worrying signs.''

John Paul didn't specify what signs he meant.

The 80-year-old pope looked tired and his breathing at times sounded labored as he read his speech. Some 90 minutes into the ceremony, he consulted his watch as if growing weary of the event. When he was leaving the square, he briefly lost his balance on one of the basilica's steps. Two aides flanking him quickly grabbed on to him and the pontiff was able to continue walking down the steps to his ``popemobile.''

Hip surgery a few years ago and a chronic shuffle as he walks -- a symptom of Parkinson's disease -- have made it difficult for the pontiff to get around.

Throughout the Holy Year called for by John Paul to mark the start of Christianity's third millennium, various fields of work have had their day at the Vatican, from politics to journalism to circuses.

John Paul told the farmers Sunday to ``resist the temptations of productivity and profit that work to the detriment of the respect of nature.'' Saying God entrusted land to mankind to take care of it, the pope said: ``When you forget this principle, becoming tyrants and not custodians of the Earth, sooner or later the Earth rebels.''

World view: Vatican defers to science on modified food

November 11
Religion News Service

A Vatican official urged caution on genetically modified food Tuesday but said it is up to scientists, not the church, to decide whether the procedure is a blessing or a curse for mankind. Archbishop Fernando Charrier, president of the Vatican's Committee for the Jubilee of the Agricultural World, made his comments one day after the Pontifical Academy for Life issued a declaration on another controversial issue arising from biotechnology -- stem cell research. The panel of Vatican experts said the production and therapeutic use of stem cells taken from embryos created for the purpose violate Roman Catholic teaching on respect for life from the moment of conception, but it welcomed similar research conducted with adult stem cells.

Fight looming over biosafety treaty

November 10
Australian Financial Review

Not many people in Australia have heard of the Biosafety Protocol.

And up until this week it was quite possible the new international restrictions on trade in live genetically modified organisms could have remained in relative obscurity even as the Federal Government quietly signed up to them.

Sure, the agrifood industry and the farm lobby had been warning that the rules risked being used as a de facto trade barrier.

But the strong argument within the foreign affairs bureaucracy was that there was nowhere to hide from the new rules, because enough other countries were going to sign and ratify the protocol for it to come into legal force. Australia's trading partners were therefore going to require compliance whether we signed or not.

But this week a backbench committee started informal hearings on the protocol. After what they heard, even if the Federal Government does eventually sign and ratify, there is no way it is going to happen quietly.

The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties does not have the power to veto Australia's acceptance of new international regimes, but it does make public recommendations to the Government and can wield considerable political power.

On Monday, the committee heard an official government briefing on the protocol.

It hasn't heard the case against ratification yet, but according to the committee chairman, Government backbencher Andrew Thompson, the Government case alone was enough to convince the committee to cast an unequivocal "no" vote.

"Most of the committee members can see no reason why we should recommend in favor of ratification of this one ... and while we don't have a veto we can put up a considerable political fight," Mr Thompson says.

The evidence that most unnerved the Coalition committee members came from Australia's Ambassador for the Environment, Ralph Hillman.

According to committee members, Hillman conceded there could be a cost to Australian exporters. But Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade officials said it would be impossible to quantify the cost at this stage.

"If I go back to my electorate and say we have approved a treaty which will have a cost to agricultural exporters but we don't know what that cost is, what do you think they'd say," says committee member and outspoken National Party backbencher De-Anne Kelly.

The case in favor of the protocol also includes arguments about the need for national sovereignty over the movement of live GMO to protect crucial biodiversity.

But none is likely to make quite the same impression on the committee as DFAT's inability to quantify the cost.

The Biosafety Protocol covers trade in live genetically modified organisms like seeds, fish, trees and animals but not foods processed from them, like oils or cornflakes or peanut butter.

It divides GMOs into two categories - those destined to be released into the environment, for which an exporting nation must gain explicit approval from the importing nation, and other GMOs, the export of which has to be notified to a central data bank.

Industry groups like the National Farmers Federation and the Australian Food and Grocery Council argue the governments of agricultural exporting economies like our own have to exercise extreme caution in ratifying anything that could be used as a stalking horse for protectionism.

And the "we have no choice" argument certainly doesn't wash with NFF spokesman Lyall Howard, who argues that WTO rules cover the issue and would preclude other nations blocking Australian exports on the basis that Australia was a non-signatory to a parallel Biodiversity Protocol.

But the chairperson of the Organic Federation of Australia, Scott Kinnear, believes food exporters are simply scared of consumer rejection of genetic modification and argues the protocol is ecologically crucial.

Internationally, negotiations to get the treaty up and running are proceeding apace, with the next meeting in Montpellier, France from December 11 to 15.

But in Australia, with an election looming and rural backbenchers and farm groups up in arms, it is unlikely that anything will happen in a hurry.

Britain's plan to list GM maize seed set for delay

November 9
Reuters

LONDON - Britain's plans to register gene-modified maize were headed for further delay on Thursday when the government asked for an adjournment of a public hearing on the GM seed's inclusion on the National Seed List.

The farm ministry said officials needed to look into queries about earlier tests on the maize -- Aventis's herbicide tolerant Chardon LL -- and asked the barrister conducting the hearing to adjourn it until a later date.

``I have been requested by the minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food...to give consideration to adjourning the hearing until...the full implications of the situation for the status of the Chardon LL hearing can be definitively established,'' barrister Alun Alesbury said in a statement.

``My preliminary view is that in the circumstances which have arisen an adjournment would be appropriate.''

A sitting was scheduled in the northern city of Manchester on November 15 to decide whether to adjourn the hearing -- the results of which have forced the ministry to reassess earlier testing of the maize.

The ministry said earlier it had found that data from French trials were based on one year's data from accredited breeders and one year's data from government run trials.

This fell short of the relevant European Union directive affecting seed approval which requires two years worth of official trials.

``Other member states in the EU also rely on French data and the views of the commission on the status of the French procedures are being sought,'' the ministry said on Thursday.

``The UK authorities wish to take account of these views before taking a decision on how this affects the Chardon LL hearing.''

A delay in the hearings would be another blow for the government, which wants the seeds to registered and has sought to reassure an increasingly sceptical public over the safety of genetically modified foods.

The hearing, which began early last month and allows opponents to air their views, was forced by environmental group Friends of the Earth after it logged 67 objections to the listing of the GM seeds from other interested parties.

Opponents have long argued that the variety of maize had not been properly tested and that allowing genetically modified crops to be commercially grown will lead to contamination of non-GM crops.

U.S. corn sales to Japan down, StarLink blamed

November 9
Reuters

Chicago - Top customer Japan continues to buy U.S. corn but concerns that the genetically modified StarLink variety could slip into shipments appears to have that country buying less than in previous years, analysts said.

``Usually they are in for a mid-200,000 to low 300,000 tons per week this time of year,'' said Joe Victor, vice president of marketing for the grain research firm Allendale Inc. ``StarLink must be an issue because they are buying a little bit less.''

The U.S. Agriculture Department's weekly export report released on Thursday showed Japan bought 164,700 tons of U.S. corn during the week ended Nov. 2.

StarLink, developed by European firm Aventis SA , has been approved for feed use in the United States but not for food use because tests indicate it may trigger allergic reactions in humans. In Japan, StarLink is not allowed in either food or feed.

Calls for testing corn shipments arose early this fall after traces of StarLink were found in food products both here and in Japan. U.S. grain companies have been testing corn exports for StarLink for several weeks and the USDA will begin to oversee such testing beginning about Nov. 15.

Japan bought nearly 16 million tons of the 1999 U.S. corn crop but purchases so far this year are down from that pace. Thursday's USDA export report showed that during the current crop year, which began September 1, Japan has bought 5.083 million tons of corn versus 6.463 million a year ago.

``I just don't think that at the end of the year that it will reach its maximum potential,'' said Shawn McCambridge, grain analyst with Prudential Securities, of Japan's buying U.S. corn.

Japan will likely increase purchases of corn from South America and South Africa to offset a drop in purchases from the United States, analysts said.

``They can't totally stop buying because they still have demand in that country,'' said McCambridge. ``The concern about StarLink remains and outside supplies will be secured.''

Biotech firm assessing cost of recovering unapproved grain

November 9
Fox Market Wire

WASHINGTON — The company that developed a variety of biotech corn linked to nationwide recalls of taco shells said Thursday that it is still adding up the costs of recovering this year's crop, predicting only that it would be "significantly below'' $1 billion.

Aventis CropScience, a unit of France's Aventis SA, is reimbursing the Agriculture Department for the cost of buying and handling the corn to make sure it goes to livestock or industrial uses.

The corn, known as StarLink, was not approved for human consumption because of questions about its potential to cause allergic reactions.

USDA initially estimated the cost to Aventis at $100 million. However, StarLink corn has been widely mixed with other corn in Iowa and other states, leading to demands for compensation from grain elevators. Farmers also are concerned about legal liability for contaminated corn.

Aventis issued a statement saying it is "assessing the degree of shared responsibility of the different actors'' in the agricultural and food business "as well as insurance coverage for such costs.'' The company said "it is not possible to determine today the entire costs related to StarLink.''

A spokeswoman for the company declined to comment.

Aventis has asked the Environmental Protection Agency to temporarily approve StarLink for food use to prevent further recalls of corn products and prevent disruptions among grain handlers and food processors.

The EPA has scheduled a public meeting on the Aventis request Nov. 28 and expects to have a recommendation from a panel of scientific advisers by Dec. 1.

Meanwhile, attorneys general in seven corn-growing states were asked to investigate whether Aventis and EPA properly controlled and regulated the corn variety.

"We've had to reach out to state attorneys general because the USDA is clearly more interested in protecting Aventis than farmers,'' said Mark Ritchie, president of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, an advocacy group. "The USDA has taken the unprecedented move of participating in a corn recall to aid a private company.''

In letters to the attorneys general, the group said farmers "are vulnerable to significant financial losses and legal liability because of irresponsible and reckless corporate'' by Aventis. The group is a member of the Genetically Engineered Food Alert, a coalition of anti-biotech organizations that first discovered StarLink in taco shells.

The company has acknowledged that some farmers did not know about restrictions on the corn's use.

Genetically modified cotton outstanding: Monsanto

November 8
The Hindu

BANGALORE - The Bt gene had been stably incorporated into Indian cotton and the performance of this cotton had been ``outstanding,'' according to Monsanto.

Monsanto was reacting to issues raised by Prof. Geeta Bharathan of the State University of New York in an article in the latest issue of the scientific journal, Current Science. The article had raised questions about the suitability of Monsanto's genetically modified Bollgard cotton and the large-scale field trials which have been permitted. Based on this article, The Hindu had carried a news item, ``Expert questions cotton trials,'' in the November 7 issue.

According to a statement issued by a Monsanto spokesperson, the field trials were not being conducted by Monsanto, but by Mahyco. Only the initial gene had been provided by Monsanto. All the backcrossing and breeding work into Indian cotton had been done in India by Mahyco.

The statement noted that the Bt gene had been stably incorporated into the Indian germplasm and evaluated for the past four and a half years both in the greenhouse and field trials for the past three years. The performance had been outstanding and the stability established. Detailed results of the field trials for the past two years had been sent to the Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation (RCGM) by Mahyco.

In her article, Dr. Bharathan had questioned whether the earlier limited field trials of the Bt cotton had been carried out on a sufficient scale. She pointed out that a study of genetically modified crop trials in the United States showed that even 100 acre trial areas were being considered too small for safe extrapolation from field trials to large-scale cultivation.

The Monsanto spokesperson observed that Bt cotton was growing in millions of acres during the past five years in many countries where the gene had been working quite well, reducing the volume of insecticides sprayed on cotton for bollworm significantly.

Commentary: The wonder of fighting famine with biotechnology

November 6
Scripps Howard News Service column by George McGovern

The most promising weapon in the global war against world hunger is high-yielding, scientific agriculture, including genetically modified crops. Yet, the gene modification controversy and trumped-up fears of "Frankenfoods" are stepping on the promise of a hunger-free future.

Today, science enables life-sustaining plants to survive pests, salt and dry weather -- all of this with less reliance on pesticides and irrigation water. Cereal grains can be modified to mature more quickly and yet have more nutritional benefits. Some of the earlier successes with modifying plant genes have resulted in crops with greater resistance to insects. Since such plants require less pesticide, they improve farm income while reducing environmental damage.

Research has also moved ahead by Swiss scientists to produce a healthier strain of rice -- a crop that could improve the diet of nearly 2.5 billion people. The so-called "golden rice" has increased levels of vitamin A and iron, potentially preventing millions of cases of blindness and anemia among children with scant access to nutritious food, let alone Western medicines.

I shuddered recently when I read that a prosperous chef of a chic Manhattan restaurant denounced this new live-saving technology.

How could we have come to this?

Many scientific breakthroughs have been greeted over the centuries by skepticism, fear and some hostility. Such reactions are not all bad and, indeed, can be productive by forcing a measure of caution before new ideas are accepted. There should be sufficient research, experimentation and discussion before unimagined, far-reaching new foods created by the merger of biotechnology and agriculture are made available to all.

To meet those needs, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has established an intergovernmental group of experts to look into critical issues related to biotechnology, including prudent risk assessment. It is the answer to the calls for labeling or outright bans, as well as those who seek standards for international trade. This group can give us the benefit of searching inquiry into key questions relative to the farming of genetically improved food by some of the best minds in the world. They have no ax to grind. Their mission is to arrive at the most realistic assessment possible of all aspects of the genetic farming issue.

The United Nations' work builds upon the solid regulatory foundation established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. None of the genetically improved foods already available to us would have come to pass without their review and oversight. We know that science and technology have played a key role for the past century in adding greatly to the production of American farmers and those in other advanced countries. Hybrid seed corn developed in the early 1900s was a highly valued breakthrough, not only for Iowa farmers, but for farmers around the world.

"The Green Revolution" got its name after scientists discovered through gene modification how to increase the capacity of green plants to use sunlight, water and soil nutrients, essentially making it possible to grow more food on less land with fewer pesticides and less water.

In the past three decades, most of the increase in food production -- with an estimated three-fourths of it notably in India and other parts of South Asia -- has stemmed from the Green Revolution. To the best of my knowledge, no one has been poisoned or sickened by progress. Indeed, the health of people and livestock consuming modified grains has improved, and often even flourished.

In fact, for more than four decades, the United States and other countries have helped in keeping millions of our fellow humans alive because science has enabled us and others to achieve a much higher output of corn, rice, wheat and potatoes. And in the not too distant future, an estimated 2 million unnecessary deaths each year may be prevented when wholesome bananas, soybeans, rice, tomatoes, wheat, corn and even lettuce can be genetically improved to protect children with edible vaccines. Where an injection of a diphtheria vaccine may be logistical nightmare in a faraway jungle, a fresh piece of fruit could save a life.

Dr. Norman Borlaug, the Nobel Prize-winning distinguished professor of international agriculture at Texas A&M University, is an esteemed, socially conscious scientist who used his genius to soar above famine and want. It is because of his love for humankind that we dare not ignore the alarm he sounded in the International Herald-Tribune: "Extreme environmental elitists seem to be doing everything they can to stop scientific progress. Small, well-financed, vociferous, anti-science groups are threatening the development and application of new technology, whether it is developed from biotechnology or more conventional methods of agricultural science."

Understandably, some of the economic and social issues that we face in the future will be controversial. But one compelling moral issue is clear: Every major religion and ethical formulation commands its adherents to feed the hungry. There is no room in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any of the other great religious and technical traditions for those who turn their backs on the needy.

The scientific, biotechnical improvements in both the quality and quantity of foods is a major breakthrough. It must not be stymied by voices raised against the hypothetical, while real disease and starvation threaten millions of people.

-- George McGovern, former U.S. senator, is ambassador to the U.S. Mission of the United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture in Rome. Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service.