[Gen-Streitfall] Presseschau 22. - 28.9.03

[Sabine]

GM Crops - No thanks!

Hi, anbei die Wochenschau. Außerdem (ich kanns nicht lassen) eine neue
Auflistung von 
negativen Auswirkungen der GMOs. Gentransfer von GMOs wurde nicht nur
bei Wildkräutern, nativem 
mexikanischem Mais, Mikroorgnismen und Insekten beobachtet, sondern über
den Umweg über Bakterien
offenbar auch in Säugetierzellen! Na dann, guten Appetit! Gruß, Sabine

Sabine Altmann
Attac Marburg
Email: altmann.tent at t-online.de


Gentransfer von GMOs
*	Roundup Ready soybeans contain DNA that its creators did not
know they had introduced into it.
*	A study has shown that genes move reasonably readily from wheat
to jointed goatgrass, 
a major weed in wheat-producing areas of western US.
*	Weeds that have acquired resistance to more than one herbicide
have been reported in Canada.
*	Experimental studies confirm that genes passing from crops to
weeds can persist for generations, 
rather than disappearing quickly due to the lack of any positive
selective pressure.
*	Commercial transgenes, or parts of them, have found their way
into native maize in remote locations 
of Mexico despite a ban on their cultivation.
*	The direct transfer of genes from bacteria to mammalian cells
has been demonstrated.
*	Differences have been found in soil microbial communities around
GE canola and conventional canola.
*	It has been found that some Bt-resistant insects are actually
able to digest and utililise the toxin protein, 
potentially increasing the fitness of resistant populations.

Vergiftung von Insekten durch BT Mais
*	The Bt toxin exudes from the roots of plants and accumulates in
soil, and retains insecticidal activity 
for at least 6 months, bound to particles in the soil.
*	Bt corn, especially one that expresses toxin at high levels,
appears to damage non-target monarch and 
black swallowtail caterpillars in the wild.  

Verunreinigung von Lebensmitteln
*	A British study has reported GE material found in honey two
miles away from GE crops.
*	In 2000, a variety of GM maize called StarLink, designed by GM
company Aventis as an animal feed and 
not allowed to be fed to humans, was found to have contaminated taco
shells in the USA. Aventis had to 
buy the whole harvest in the US, at estimated cost of $100m.
*	In May 2000, conventional non-GM oilseed rape imported from
Canada and sold in the UK, France, 
Germany and Sweden by seed company Advanta was found to be contaminated
with GM oilseed rape.
*	Commercialisation of GM oilseed rape and maize would increase
costs of non-GM and organic farmers 
by up to 41 per cent.

>From the Summary of the report by Dr Peter Wills, a theoretical
biologist in the 
Department of Physics at the University of Auckland, on recent problems
found with GM crops: 
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1510
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=1525

_________________________________________________
28. Sept.03 Dresdner Neue Nachrichten
Pillnitzer Bürger protestieren gegen Gen-Äpfel 
 
<http://www.dnn-online.de/regional/regional_bilder/onl_23_apfelprobe.jpg
>   <http://www.dnn-online.de/pic_dnn/pixel.gif> Noch in diesem Herbst
wollen Pillnitzer Obstforscher im Herzen der Obstbauzüchtung auf einer
Fläche 
von einem Hektar Land an der Oberpoyritzer Straße gentechnisch
veränderte Apfelbäume auspflanzen. 
Es wäre der erste Freilandversuch gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen im
Dresdner Raum. Anwohner, 
Öko-Bauern und Grüne befürchten unkalkulierbare Risiken und wollen einen
solchen Versuch in Pillnitz 
nicht dulden. Auf einer von Bürgern angeregten Informationsveranstaltung
gestern Abend in Pillnitz - 
über 100 Anwohner und Interessenten waren gekommen - gab es viele Fragen
und zum Teil sehr 
emotionale Kritik an dem Vorhaben. 

"Wir haben Gene verwendet, die die Apfelbäume resistent machen sollen
gegen Schorf, Mehltau und 
Feuerbrand", erklärte Prof. Viola Hanke, Direktorin des Instituts für
Obstzüchtung Pillnitz. …
Gegenwärtig müssten sächsische Obstproduzenten jährlich zehn- bis
zwölfmal Fungizide spritzen, 
um dem Apfelschorf beizukommen. Und um den Feuerbrand zu bekämpfen, gäbe
es keine Mittel. 
Denn Antibiotika dürften vom kommenden Jahr an gegen die von Bakterien
verursachte Krankheit 
nicht mehr eingesetzt werden. ...

So haben die Forscher zum Beispiel das Gen einer Schmetterlingsart
transformiert. " … Sie sind in 
der Lage Proteine zu bilden, die die Zellwand des Bakteriums auflösen.
Diese Eigenschaft wollen wir 
auf die Apfelbäume übertragen", so Hanke. 

Die ersten 500 Apfelbäumchen stehen ...schon bereit. Insgesamt sollen im
Verlauf des für 20 Jahre 
geplanten Versuches 10 000 Apfelbäume ins Freiland gesetzt werden. ... 
Catrin Steinbach
http://www.dnn-online.de/regional/39569.html

_____________________________________________________
Hard Realities: Brazil Drops Resistance to Genetically Altered Crops
By LARRY ROHTER

Published: September 28, 2003
New York Times
RIO DE JANEIRO, Sept. 27 — In barely 36 hours, Brazil's left-leaning 
government first announced that it would allow farmers to plant
genetically 
altered soybean seeds, then reversed course, before changing yet again, 
late on Thursday.
The result is that Brazil, a bastion of global opposition to genetically

modified organisms, has given in.
 From the time President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva founded the Workers' 
Party more than 20 years ago, environmentalists have been an important 
constituency and their programs part of the party's platform.
Those commitments, though, have had to give way to the hard realities of

politics and to Brazil's drive to increase exports. The country wants to

become an agricultural superpower.
Brazil is the world's second largest producer of soybeans, but it is 
expected to surpass the United States to become the largest soybean 
producer as early as the coming harvest. The Southern Hemisphere's
planting 
season is just starting, ...
...
Nevertheless, the decision is a significant victory for large
biotechnology 
companies like Monsanto, which stands to gain the most from the policy 
change. Since the mid-1990's, Greenpeace and other international and
local 
consumer and environmental groups have been battling in Brazilian courts

and the corridors of Congress to prevent Brazil from following the path
of 
Argentina and other large agricultural producers that have already 
legalized the genetically modified crops.
...
The government's about-face is also likely to provoke tensions in the
warm 
relations between Mr. da Silva and his allies and admirers in the Green 
movement in Europe. His Workers' Party has been the main sponsor of the 
annual World Social Forum in the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul,
which 
has emerged as a magnet for antiglobalization groups, whose agenda
includes 
strong opposition to the genetically modified foods.
But many small farmers affiliated with the landless movement have also
been 
clandestinely planting their own fields with genetically modified soy
seeds 
smuggled across the border from Argentina. They justify that
contradiction 
by arguing that they have lower production costs with these seeds and
have 
complained that they will be driven into bankruptcy if the Brazilian 
government continues to ban them.
Monsanto has tried unsuccessfully to collect royalties from Brazilian
soy 
producers using its genetically modified seeds. The government decision 
includes a provision that requires farmers planting such seeds to 
acknowledge that they, and not the government, are responsible for any
such 
payments.

________________________________________________________________________
_______________
vwd
AUSBLICK/EU-Agrarminister beraten über Reform und Gentechnik 
Freitag 26. September 2003, 16:26 Uhr 

Brüssel (vwd) - Die europäische Agrarreform und der Einsatz von
Gentechnik sind die beiden Schwerpunkte, 
wenn sich am Montag die 15 Landwirtschaftsminister der EU in Brüssel
treffen. …

Deutschland beispielsweise will das Regionalmodell für die künftigen
einmaligen Pauschalzahlungen an 
Landwirte vorstellen. Ab 2005 könnten dann die einzelnen Bundesländer je
nach Gesamtfläche in Hektar 
Agrarbeihilfen aus Brüssel erhalten. Bislang werden die EU-Subventionen
in Höhe von rund 40 Mrd EUR
 abhängig von der Produktion an die Agrarbetriebe ausgezahlt. Nach der
Reform sollen die Zahlungen an 
Landwirte für Getreide und Ölsaaten mindestens zu 75 Prozent von der
Produktion abgekoppelt werden.

...Darüber hinaus müssen sich die EU-Minister mit dem umstrittenen
Einsatz von Gentechnik beim 
Pflanzenanbau auseinandersetzen. Ungeklärt ist die Problematik der
Koexistenz von herkömmlichen 
Feldern mit Gen-Anbauflächen, bei der es zu einer Verunreinigung der
konventionellen und ökologischen 
Agrarerzeugnisse kommen könnte. Im Mittelpunkt steht vor allem die
Haftungsfrage, bei eventuellen 
Schäden durch Kreuzung von genveränderten Organismen (GVO) mit
traditionellen Lebensmitteln. 
Fischler lehnt eine EU-weite Regelung dazu ab, da die regionalen
Unterschiede und Gegebenheiten 
keine harmonisierten Vorschriften ermöglichten. Daher überlässt es die
Kommission den EU-
Regierungen, wie sie mit der Koexistenz umgehen.

Die italienische EU-Ratspräsidentschaft hat dazu einen Fragebogen an die
Mitgliedstaaten verteilt, 
der während des Agrarrats beantwortet werden soll. Italien will etwa die
Frage erörtern, ob die anderen 
EU-Staaten gemeinschaftsweite Haftungsregeln für den Fall einer
Kontaminierung von konventionellen 
mit GVO-Kutluren fordern. Ferner soll darüber diskutiert werden, ob
bestimmte geografische Gebiete 
als GVO-freie Zonen oder Obergrenzen für GVO-Vorkommen in Saatgut
festgelegt werden sollten.

Deutschland, Österreich und Italien setzen sich bei der Koexistenzfrage
für strikte EU-weite 
Rahmenvorschriften ein. Da Gen-Saatgut nicht an den Landesgrenzen halt
mache, sei eine rein 
nationale Gesetzgebung nicht sinnvoll, heißt es zur Begründung. Eine
eventuelle Gesetzesinitiative 
der EU-Kommission zur Regeln der GVO-Koexistenz und den daraus
resultierenden Haftungsfragen
 müsse spätestens bis November vorliegen, damit das Parlament in der
laufenden Legislaturperiode 
noch über den Vorschlag beraten könne, hieß es weiter aus diplomatischen
Kreisen. Allerdings 
müssten die EU-Staaten gemeinsam auf eine Initiative der Kommission
drängen. +++ Ali Ulucay
vwd/26.9.2003/ul/ptr

_____________________________________________
Samstag, 27. September 2003 / 06:48:26, News.ch
Brasilien legalisiert Anbau von umstrittener Gen-Soja
Brasilia - Die Regierung Brasiliens hat trotz zahlreicher Proteste von
Politikern, Bauern, Umwelt- und 
Verbraucher-schützern den Anbau des umstrittenen Gen-Soja freigeben. …
http://www1.news.ch/detail.asp?ID=152140

______________________________
26. September 2003
Brasilien lässt Gen-Soja wachsen
Heftige Proteste von Gegnern - Umweltministerin stellt sich gegen ihren
Präsidenten
http://derstandard.at/  <http://derstandard.at/img/dot_clear.gif> 
 
 	 Brasilia - Die Regierung Brasiliens hat trotz zahlreicher
Proteste von Politikern, Bauern, Umwelt- und 
Verbraucherschützern den Anbau der umstrittenen Gen-Soja freigeben. Die
Legalisierung der gentechnisch 
veränderten Soja-Pflanze trat nach der Unterzeichnung einer so genannten
"provisorischen Maßnahme" 
durch Vizepräsident Jose Alencar am Freitag in Brasilia sofort in Kraft.
Sie gilt demzufolge bereits für die 
am Dienstag beginnende Anbausaison im gesamten Land.

Die betroffenen Produzenten werden den Angaben nach die Gen-Soja für den
Verbraucher deutlich kennzeichnen
müssen. ...

Proteste

Die Gegner der Legalisierung hatten seit Wochenanfang mit scharfer
Kritik und mit Kundgebungen vor dem 
Landwirtschaftsministerium protestiert. Gegen die Maßnahme hatten sich
unter anderem auch Umweltministerin 
Marina Silva, die Umweltschutzgruppe Greenpeace und die mächtige
"Bewegung der Landlosen Bauern" ausgesprochen.

Mit der Freigabe der Gen-Soja mache sich die linksgerichtete Regierung
von Präsident Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva 
einer der "schlimmsten Aggressionen gegen die Bürgerrechte der
Brasilianer" schuldig, erklärte die 
Verbraucherschutzgruppe Idec. Es wird auch Widerstand seitens der Justiz
erwartet, die in verschiedenen 
Instanzen den Anbau gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen mehrfach untersagt
hatte.

Gen-Lobby

Beobachter meinten, die Regierung sei vor allem von Großbauern des
wohlhabenden Agrarlandes Rio Grande do Sul 
unter Druck gesetzt worden. Dort ist die große Mehrheit der bislang
illegal arbeitenden "Gentechnik-Bauern" tätig. 
Die transgenen Samen für den brasilianischen Schwarzmarkt stammen
vermutlich aus dem benachbarten Argentinien, 
wo der Anbau von Gen-Pflanzen zulässig und weit verbreitet ist.
(APA/dpa)

_________________________
Brasilien erlaubt Gen-Soja
26. Sep 12:12 Netzzeitung
Der brasilianische Präsident Lula hat die Aussaat von gentechnisch
manipuliertem Soja genehmigt. Die Kritik kam 
prompt; auch aus den eigenen Reihen. ...
http://www.netzeitung.de/spezial/gentechnik/256055.html

________________________________________________________________________
__________________
26.9.03 Tiroler Tageszeitung
Brasilien legalisierte trotz Proteste Anbau von umstrittener Gen-Soja
"Schlimmste Aggression gegen die Bürgerrechte"
http://news.tirol.com/politik/international/artikel_20030926_233798.html

___________________
GM crops? No thanks 
Britain delivers overwhelming verdict after unprecedented public opinion
exercise
By Michael McCarthy Environment Editor
The Independent´s, 25 September 2003

The title of the debate was "GM Nation?" But that is precisely what the
British people do not want 
their country to be, according to the official report from the national
consultation on genetically 
modified crops and food presented to the Government yesterday.

The unprecedented test of public opinion, which over six weeks this
summer involved 675 public 
meetings and elicited more than 36,000 written responses, revealed a
deep hostility to GM technology 
across the population.

Alongside fears that GM crops and food could be harmful to human health
and the environment, the debate 
threw up widespread mistrust and suspicion of the motives of those
taking decisions about GM - especially 
government and multi-national companies such as Monsanto.

On a whole series of questions GM-hostile majorities were enormous, with
85 per cent saying GM crops 
would benefit producers not ordinary people, 86 per cent saying they
were unhappy with the idea of eating 
GM food, 91 per cent saying they thought GM had potential negative
effects on the environment, and no 
fewer than 93 per cent of respondents saying they thought GM technology
was driven more by the pursuit 
of profit than the public interest. Figures in support of GM were, by
contrast, tiny.

Even special focus groups, deliberately selected from people who were
uncommitted one way or another, 
to tease out the views of the "silent majority", and whose members were
initially prepared to admit the 
technology might have benefits, opposed GM technology more the more they
learnt about it, the report 
discloses.

The extent and the unequivocal nature of the hostility revealed by "GM
Nation?" will represent a substantial 
political hurdle to those who wish to bring the technology to Britain as
soon as possible - led by Tony Blair 
and his Environment Secretary, Margaret Beckett, and the giant American
and European agribusiness 
companies such as Monsanto and Bayer.

Yesterday Mrs Beckett reaffirmed a promise that the Government would
"listen" to the views the debate 
has highlighted and respond to them publicly, although she made no such
pledge that it would take 
account of them in deciding its course of action.

But that was what the Government had to do, said green groups, the
organic agriculture movement and 
others sceptical of the values of GM, who warmly welcomed the report.
"The Government will ignore this 
report at its peril," said Pete Riley, the GM campaigner for Friends of
the Earth. "The public has made 
it clear that it doesn't want GM food and it doesn't want GM crops.
There must not be any more weasel 
words from the Government on this issue."

The umbrella body for the GM companies in Britain, the Agricultural
Biotechnology Council, rejected the
report's findings, saying that "public meetings do not equal public
opinion," although the ABC's chairman, 
Paul Rylott, had been a member of the debate steering group and issued
no dissenting opinion in the 
report itself.

Criticising the debate's methodology, the ABC claimed that nearly 80 per
cent of the debate response 
forms "can be clearly identified by cluster analysis as being
orchestrated by campaigning groups". 
The chairman of the debate, Professor Malcolm Grant, rejected the
accusation.

The report is indeed likely to be widely seen as reflecting public
opinion, and Mrs Beckett herself
legitimised it yesterday by saying it had been "a new way of engaging
the public in the policy-making 
process."

The embarrassment that "GM Nation?" will cause to Mr Blair and his
like-minded colleagues is all the 
greater in that it is the third such in as many months, after two other
GM reports, both commissioned 
by ministers and published in July. One final report is now due before
the Government decides 
whether to give the go-ahead to the commercial growth of GM crops in
Britain. This is on the 
farm-scale evaluations of GM crops, a four-year trial designed to see if
the deadlier weedkillers 
used with them cause new harm to the environment. It is due to be
published on 16 October and 
will be the crucial document in the debate, because the decision to go
ahead is taken by the EU 
in Brussels, and the only way the Government can countermand it is by
finding new evidence 
of harm to human health or the environment from GM technology - such as
crop trials may provide.

The general mood, the report said, "ranged from caution to doubt,
through suspicion and scepticism, 
to hostility and rejection." Professor Grant said: "I now look forward
to the Government's responding 
to the points raised in the debate, and taking these into account in the
future formulation of policy on GM."

GM NATION? BY NUMBERS

* 20,000 people attended 675 meetings across Britain
* The public sent in 1200 letters and e-mails
* The website received 2.9 million hits in just six weeks
* 70,000 feeback forms were downloaded; 36,557 were returned
* 93% of respondents believed GM technology was driven by profit rather
than public interest
* 85% thought GM crops would benefit producers, rather than ordinary
people
* 84% believed they would cause "unacceptable interference" with nature
* 54% never want to see GM crops grown in Britain
* 86% were unhappy with the idea of eating GM food
* 93% said too little was known about health effects
* 2% were happy with GM foods in all circumstances
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=446787
http://www.gmnation.org.uk/ut_09/ut_9_6.htm

________________________________________________________________________
__
Brazil to Lift Ban on Crops With Genetic Modification
By TONY SMITH
New York Times
September 25, 2003
PORTO ALEGRE, Brazil, Sept. 24 - Brazilian farmers, the world's No. 2 
producers of soybeans, got the go-ahead today to plant genetically
modified 
seeds this season after the country's vice president said he would lift
a 
ban on transgenic crops.
Vice President José Alencar, standing in for President Luiz Inácio Lula
da 
Silva who is visiting the United States, Cuba and Mexico, said that he 
would sign a decree ending the ban, despite resistance from
environmental 
advocates and their supporters in the government.
The decree effectively extends a temporary decree legalizing the sale of

genetically modified soy from this year's harvest, but officials said
they 
expected it to pave the way for legislation that would be sent to
Congress 
this year. The extension comes just in time for the October planting.
Until last year, Brazil was one of the world's last main exporters of
farm 
goods to ban the planting or sale of genetically altered crops or foods,

although an increasing number of farmers, especially in the southern 
farming states Rio Grande do Sul and Paraná, have flouted the ban in
recent 
years by planting transgenic seeds smuggled in from neighboring
Argentina.
...

__________________________________________________________________
The Cartagena Protocol to boost the African Model Law in Biosafety
Wednesday 24 September 2003 5:24 pm
Biotech activists
From: "Guy Patrick" 

The global voice for consumers
PRESS RELEASE
The Cartagena Protocol to boost
the African Model Law on biosafety

15 September 2003 - The coming into force of the Cartagena Protocol on
 Biosafety on 11 September 2003 puts in the spotlight efforts by
consumer
 organisations towards the implementation of biosafety regulatory
frameworks
 in Africa, says Consumers International Office for Africa (CI-ROAF).

"This Protocol will boost our campaigns and actions for safety in
 biotechnology", Amadou Kanoute, Regional Director for CI-ROAF, said.

The Cartagena Protocol is the first legally binding international
agreement
 governing the movement of GMOs from country to country. It aims to
ensure an
 adequate level of protection regarding the safe transfer, handling and
use
 of GMOs, and to make sure that GMO shipments have appropriate
identification
 documentation. In Africa, 16 countries have ratified the Protocol to
date:
 Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Djibouti, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho,
Liberia,
 Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Tunisia
and
 Uganda.

On the day the Protocol took effect, Dr. Tewolde Egziabher, Chief
Negotiator
 in the Biosafety Group for the African Group called "on the African
states
 that have yet to ratify the protocol to do so as soon as possible, and
on
 all African states to make their biosafety laws based on the African
Union's
 Model Law on Safety in Biotechnology".

Consumers International Office for Africa (CI-ROAF) believes that the
African
 Union's Model Law on biosafety in biotechnology is an Africa-specific
 version of the Cartagena Protocol and it represents a comprehensive
approach
 to the introduction of GMOs in the continent.

Currently, genetically modified cotton experiments are conducted in
Kenya,
 Uganda, South Africa, Burkina Faso and Mali without prior consultations
with
 farmers or consumers. In reaction, farmer organisations and consumer
 associations have teamed up to sensitise consumers on the hazards and
risks
 associated with GMOs.

The strategy of GM proponents seems to be "contaminate then regulate",
said
 Amadou Kanoute. That is why, "there is urgent need to adopt high
standards
 of safety by subjecting all GM products and related activities to
rigorous
 safety assessments in Africa", he further asserted. CI-ROAF recommends
that
 African countries base their national biosafety laws on the African
Union's
 Model Law on Biosafety in Biotechnology.




-------------- nächster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde abgetrennt...
URL: <https://listi.jpberlin.de/pipermail/gen-streitfall/attachments/20030928/58b9dd22/attachment.htm>