GM - The Shape of Things to Come?

Western Morning News (UK) 9mar04

Twelve cows being fed GM maize die inexplicably, farmer paid compensation, the only available laboratory samples go missing, cow skeletons paraded outside Parliament buildings by Greenpeace protesters. It's Germany not here, as yet, and admittedly connected with a different sort of GM maize to the one likely to be approved in the UK. But there are very good reasons why it could be the UK in a few years' time.

The present furore over environmental issues related to the very limited field scale trials must be filling the biotech industry with joy. By entering into nitpicking disputes over the interpretation of so-called scientific but very inadequate trials measuring the effect of GM crops on wild life, they divert attention from the numerous serious questions that remain unanswered.

The classic detective Sherlock Holmes solved one of his cases by drawing attention to the dog that did not bark when it ought to have done. Therefore it is the trials that have not been produced when they should have been that are particularly remarkable. The most obvious fact is that no trial evidence has been produced of the feeding of the Chardon GM forage maize to ruminant animals, for which it is designed and intended.

The government confirmed on Friday, in answer to a parliamentary question, that no such trial results were available. The plant breeders once claimed to have spent £600,000 developing the variety. According to experts feeding trials could have been completed in a year.

You will say "But there must have been some safety tests done for it to pass all those committees". These committees are filled with experts who nevertheless usually have an interest in promoting biotechnology. The fact is the Chardon maize made progress before procedures were tightened up to their present standards. It takes a spectacular level of scientific arrogance to claim that the novel genetic construct in Chardon maize is safe on the basis of tests done in a glass dish with the stomach juices of rats at an abnormal acidity using the genetic construct obtained from rapeseed not the GM maize. A further small sample of live rats were also fed the rape seed for 14 days when trials would normally last for 90 days. This was cited as evidence of proof for the safety of Chardon maize. In the only trial on farm animals, broiler chickens were fed the GM maize in a badly designed trial where the death rate of the GM fed chickens was twice that of the conventionally fed ones. Further investigation was clearly called for.

All this information came to light at the hearing to establish whether Chardon GM maize should be approved for the national seed list. This is the variety which is near to approval for planting in the UK and which was grown in trials near Totnes. The barrister appointed to hold the hearing was nonplussed when the GM plant breeding company refused to be cross-examined verbally or to cross-examine others. At the hearing other concerns included instability and unpredictability of the genetic construct and the potential for that part of it called a promoter, the cauliflower mosaic virus stripped of its natural protective coating, to re-combine to form dangerous and novel products.

The plant breeding company seem particularly sensitive to publicity on the toxic nature of glufosinate, which is the herbicide that has to be used with Chardon maize to destroy all other growth. They took out a legal injunction on the Pesticide Safety Directorate to prevent them releasing information about glufosinate to Friends of the Earth researchers. This arouses suspicion. Despite claims by the company that glufosinate is proven safe, suspicion appears to be justified. Professor Malcolm Hooper, Emeritus Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at the University of Sunderland, says of glufosinate "It is difficult to imagine a compound with greater potential threat to human and environmental health than glufosinate". It has been shown to cause neurological and birth defects, to be particularly harmful to soil microflora and marine life and to be hazardous to water courses. It is classed as a persistent and mobile contaminant by the US Environment agency. The Dutch Pesticide Board has failed to approve its use on Chardon maize and one US State has set a limit of 20 parts per billion for glufosinate in drinking water.

As a farmer I have spent my life looking over the fence and assessing other farmers' practices so the experience of growing GM crops for over six years in the US and Canada is particularly interesting. Independent research shows that, contrary to corporate claims, yields are lower in GM varieties by 5% to 6% except for maize grain, where they were up by 2.5% - insufficient to cover the increased seed costs. The much-vaunted savings in chemical use did occur in the early years but from year 3 - 6 they have increased steadily overall to well above the original usage level due to predicted development of weed resistance and gene flow. Indeed the very harmful herbicide atrazine, recently banned in the EU, is now said to be recommended in conjunction with glufosinate in the majority of maize sites in the US. It was this harmful chemical that the introduction of GM maize was claimed to avoid.

It has become almost impossible to grow GM free or organic crops in many areas. Corporate power has increased due to the biotech's purchase of seed companies and availability and improvement of non GM varieties are being phased out. Due to GM contamination of the land and threat of prosecution by the biotech companies, farmers have frequently resigned themselves to growing GM whilst through their farming unions they plead with governments not to permit the growing of GM wheat to proceed.

Contrary to the impression they would have us accept, the use of science and scientifically established facts has been the provenance of the critics of plant genetic engineering rather than of those promoting it.

Many thanks for sending this file to to GM Watch http://www.gmwatch.org  9mar04