GM crops pose an issue of universal human rights.

The more I learn about farming in Cuba, the more impressive I realize the Cuban achievement is. I mentioned the organic agriculture of Cuba in a previous post. Using little mechanization and no pesticides or fungicides or synthetic fertilizers, Cuba has managed to produce enough food to feed its high population. In addition, the overall effect of living in the city (Havanna) with every available little space of land, and bigger allotment areas given over to the growing of lovingly cared for fruit and vegetables, this is something that environmentally has a positive psychological effect on communities. Britain has a lot to learn in this respect about land use, rather than using our unused bits of grassland and scrubland in towns and cities as dumping grounds for litter, or the UK government making it policy to build housing in gardens. With the problems of global warming this issue of land use is as vital for the western world as it is for Cuba.






Bharat Dogra, a respected journalist in India has written about the social, cultural, human health and environmental problems caused in his own and in developing countries, posed by intensive farming systems and GM crops.Talking about GM technology, Bharat says that ..."critics fear very serious and irreversible damage can be caused to our environment, to our food systems and to the health of millions of people".


His article in 'Mainstream Weekly entitled "How GM crops Endanger Environment and Agriculture" is an excellent summary of the main issues. For the purpose of this post I would just like to mention his comments regarding the social impacts on communities of a technology which is not only in effect stealing and destroying our universal human rights to preserve the genetic make up of our crops and all plant life, but also the right of farmers thoughout the world to farm their land according to their own sophisticated and deep knowledge derived from thousands of years of farming tradition, in their own geographical areas.





Bharat Dogra says GM .."technology is spreading so fast that very adverse consequences can result even before we have the time to understand the consequences"..He continues..."In this context the experience generally has been that the high expectations created by big companies promoting GM crops were not justified. In some cases the yields for a short initial period were indeed high, creating a rush for the new seeds, but after some time such expectations could not be maintained. On the other hand, there are many examples of farmers who invested their meagre resources and borrowed heavily to buy expensive GM seeds and other supporting inputs (for example, herbicides linked to these seeds) but later felt betrayed as the low yield left them indebted and saddled with debts. There were even reports of suicides by these farmers. There have been allegations of GM crops like Bt cotton being introduced in rainfed areas like those of Vidarbha (India) for which these were not suited."


One of the reasons the GM industry uses to justify its reductive technology is that less pesticides will be necessary to use with these crops. However, although this might initially be the case, throughout the world farmers are reporting that soon they are having to use more pesticides than ever.

At the end of his article Bharat quotes a paper written by Ricarda A. Steinbrecker (Science Director of the Genetics Forum UK) and Pat Roy Mooney (widely acclaimed winner of The Right to Livlihood Award).


.........." On March 3rd, 1998 the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and a little-known cotton-seed enterprise called Delta and Pine Land Company, acquired US patent 5,723,765 - or the Technology Protection System (TPS). Within days, the rest of the world knew TPS as Terminator Technology. Its declared goal is to promulgate plants that will produce self-terminating offspring-suicide seeds. Terminator Technology epitomises what the genetic engineering of food crops is all about and gives an insight into the driving forces behind the corporate campaign to control and own life.


The Terminator does more than ensure that farmers can’t successfully replant their harvested seed. It is the “platform” upon which companies can load their proprietary genetic traits—patented genes for herbicide-tolerance or insect-resistance and get the farmers hooked on their seeds and caught in the chemical treadmill.
Further this paper says:
Most alarming though is the possibility that the Terminator genes themselves could infect the agricultural gene pool of the neighbour’s crops and of wild and weedy relatives, placing a time bomb. Temporary “gene silencing” of the poison gene or failed activation of the Terminator countdown enables such infection.
Between 15 and 20 per cent of the World’s food supply is grown by poor farmers who save their seed. These farmers feed at least 1.4 billion people. The Terminator “protects” companies by risking the lives of these people. Since Terminator Technology has absolutely zero agronomic benefit, there is no reason to jeopardise the food security of the poor by gambling with genetic engineering in the field. Whether the Terminator works immediately or later, in either instance it is biological warfare on farmers and food security. The Terminator also portends a hidden dark side. As a Trojan Horse for other transgenic traits, the technology might also be used to switch any trait off or on. At least in theory, the technology points to the possibility that crop diseases could be triggered by seed exports that would not have to “kick in” immediately—or not until activated by specific chemicals or conditions. This form of biological warfare on people’s food and economics is becoming a hot topic in military and security circles.Clearly the threat from GM crops to natural farming systems and environment is so serious that any commercial release cannot be allowed. Even any experimental trials should be asked to wait till definite ways to avoid hazards can be found."





In terms of human rights alone, there are huge issues at stake with the advent of GM crops. Brutal corporate pressure is eager to recover their investments and make profit.

Biotech companies reveal their selfish motives....again.

Biotech companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta and BASF claim that they are committed to reducing poverty and hunger throughout the world (altruistic motives indeed), but they have withdrawn from a major international project to map out the future of agriculture.

The International Assembly of Agriculture, Science and Technology for Development is concentrating attention on how to feed the world's population. This project is based on the work of 4,000 scientists and experts from around the world.However, Monsanto, Syngenta and BASF resigned after a draft report from the project highlighted the risks of GM crops and said they could pose problems for the developing world.

So, it seems that these corporates are not so altruistic after all. When they are prevented from distributing their GM seeds throughout the world, they are not interested in contributing to the project at all.

The draft report of the project said there is a "wide range of perspectives on the environmental, human health and economic risks and benefits of modern technology many of which are yet unknown." The report also stated that it is not clear whether GM crops increase yields and warns that use of the technology in the developing world could concentrate "ownership of agricultural resources" in the hands of the companies involved, as well as causing problems with patents.
The science journal 'Nature' commented that the view that "......biotechnology cannot by itself reduce hunger and poverty" is mainstream opinion among agricultural scientists and policy makers.

French Farmer Calls Off Hunger Strike.

The following is from Paris 'Associated Press' Jan 11 2008.

..."Militant French farmer Jose Bove and about 15 supporters called off their hunger strike in its eighth day after the government ordered the suspension of the use of genetically modified corn.

France will suspend cultivation of MON810, the seed for the only type of genetically modified corn now allowed in the country, until a European Union review is conducted, Prime Minister Francois Fillon's office said.

The move was based on a recommendation this week by a government-appointed panel calling for "the need for additional analyses on the health and environmental effects of the genetically modified product MON810 in the long term," Fillon's office said in a statement.

Bove and his supporters began the hunger strike Jan 3, saying they hoped to pressure the government to make good on a promise in November to suspend cultivation of MON810. He said they only drank water or unsweetened tea during the protest.

The seed, which resists some types of insects, was authorized before a government-ordered moratorium on genetically modified products took effect in 1999. Last year, it was planted in about 54,000 acres in France-mainly in southern farmland.

Bove rose to fame in August 1999 when he and supporters used farm equipment to dismantle a McDonald's branch under construction in the foothills of France's Massif Central mountains.

He has faced repeated trials and served jail time for destroying genetically modified crops." (End of quote)

France's environment minister Jean-Louis Boloo told the National Assembly that the clampdown on MON810 was a precaution that would only last until the release of an European re-evaluation of the crop in the coming month. Borloo insisted that biotechnologies were crucial for France....."In terms of agriculture it is doubly crucial for us. We have trouble feeding six billion people, nine billion tomorrow, with less arable land and probable less productive soil" Borloss said.

Borloo voices the pro GM mantra here, that 'biotechnology is needed to feed the growing populations.' The more we explore this claim, the more a different story emerges....

I mentioned in a previous post the Ethiopian farmers who have rejected the introduction of foreign seeds, due to the negative environmental and health impacts . The same sort of resistance to the introduction of foreign seeds has recently been expressed by farmers and scientists in Bangladesh. Agents of multinational companies have made a bid to introduce one-time usable foreign hybrid paddy seeds in the Sidr-southern region. (hurricanes have led to a seed crisis in this region.) Local agricultural experts and farmers have said that the introduction of foreign seeds will threaten extinction of local varieties, which have good taste and greater nutritional value. Also production costs will rise as foreign varieties need more care and costly fertilizer, irrigation and pesticides. The Bangladesh Rice Research Institute says that the government should take initiative for collection, preparation development and supply of local varieties of paddy seeds and take measures so that farmers are not lured to use foreign seeds for 'more profit'.

We see here an echo of Jose Bove's warning of how GM crops represent more than a potential risk to health and environment, but also destroy communities as small farmers are forced off the land.

French farmer on hunger strike over GM crops

Much of the opposition to GM crops is based on the potential harm they pose to humans and wildlife, and the possibility of uncontrollable spread of modified genes into non GM plants and crops.

In addition to the risks posed to humans and the environment, Jose Bove expresses a further concern over GM's. His ethical opposition is perhaps best summed up in his slogan "the world is not merchandise" and " the earth is not for sale".

Many French people regret the effects of globalisation on its rural traditions and farming practice. Bove and his supporters talk about "preservation". He describes how small farmers in France preserve nature through their inherited knowledge and expertise in agriculture. These skills are inseperable from the cultural and social aspects of rural life, from land and animal husbandry to food production,(wine, cheese, meats, pate, etc.)

When Bove refers to "preservation" he is not speaking in a nostalgic or luddite way,(as UK Professor David King likes to characterise the anti-GM campaigners).

From 1998 Bove represented small family farmers as being uniquely qualified to speak about food quality and to fulfil their duty to protect and develop French seeds.

The idea of "preservation" that Bove portrays is a practical, robust, and economic concept. One that is both productive and environmentally sustainable, while continuing to care for cultural and social traditions.

Bove challenges the multinationals for imposing an exploitative international economy. By colonizing and controlling the whole of the food chain, multinationals impose homogeneity on agricultural production, and food production. Nations which are colonised in this way by corporates experience the destruction of their rural communities, livlihoods of farmers, environmental degradation, and also detrimental effects on the health of their people.

French farmer Jose Bove on anti-GMO hunger strike.

Jose Bove (see previous post) and 15 other campaigners started their hunger strike two weeks ago on January 3rd.

Bove wants the French government to use European Union Legislation that allows members to ban GM crops.

At the present time Nicolas Sarkozy, France's President, has suspended the use of MON810, the only GM crop currently authorized in France. This crop is a brand of maize which is highly bug-resistent, and developed by the US agrochemical company Monsanto.

A bill on regulating GM crops is due to be debated in Fance's national assembly later this month and a vote is expected before February 9th, when the government's temporary freeze is due to end.

(More on Bove and his campaign here soon.)

EU Faces Deadline on GM Food Ban. The Parasite Crops.

"People who campaign against GM crops are committing a crime against humanity". Not my words. This seems to be the latest ludicrous claim of the GM protagonists in their attempts to conquer the European market. 'Ludicrous' because in view of the problems caused by GM's, described only briefly below, it would be far more accurate to describe the GM corporates as committing a crime against humanity:-

• the contamination of non gm crops and wild plants by gm varieties.



• resistance to pesticides and herbicides of insects and weeds.



• continuous use of herbicides with herbicide tolerant crops leads to serious ecological problems.



• some herbicides effect non target species in the soil such as beneficial predators-spiders, mites, beetles, earthworms, and microfauna and aquatic organisms including fish.



• large scale soyabean monocultures have rendered Amazonian soils unusable. In Bolivia in many areas soils are compacted and suffering severe degradation. In Argentina intensive soybean cultivation has led to soil nutrient depletion.



• The obliteration of traditional crops and horticulture by corporate farming has led to detrimental health effects on local communities, caused by vitamin deficiencies. Eg. monocultural rice, or maize growth (in Latin America) for export as cattle feed is a prime cause of vitamin A deficiency which leads to blindness.



• there are serious legal consequences for farmers regarding contracts that control farming methods and future use, seed purity and its saving for home use, food contamination, the intrusion into non gm crops and wild plants of gm varieties, and the difficulty in obtaining insurance cover should any harm result.


• (The following extract is from "GM soya Disaster in Latin America" by Prof. Walter A Pengue, Univ.of Buenos Aires, Argentina, and Prof.Miguel A. Altieri, Univ. of California, Berkley.)....

...."In Brazil soybean cultivation displaces eleven agricultural workers for every one who finds employment in the sector"........."In Argentina.....in 1998 there were 422000 farms in Argentina while in 2002 there were only 318,000, a reduction of a quarter. In one decade soybean area increased 126% at the expense of dairy, maize, wheat and fruit production............For the biotech industry huge increases in the soybean area cultivated and a more than doubling of yields per unit area are an economic and agronomic success. For the country, that means more imports of basic foods, therefore loss of food sovereignty, and for poor small and consumers increased food prices and more hunger.

This brings us back to the GM corporate pronouncement that "anti-GM campaigners are committing a crime against humanity"....a claim made no doubt to deflect from their own blatant exploitation of farmers and consumers.

It isn't just that GM crops act parasitically on the soil and wildlife and the environment. GM's are a parasite on the health and livlihoods of farmers and local populations in many parts of the world. At the most extreme there are suicides among Indian farmers, resulting from the increased seed costs and reduced yields.

Thankfully some communities, eg in Ethiopia have been able to resist the domineering influence of the corporates. They tried growing imported seeds and noticed the detrimental health effects on children. They also recognized that it was easier to mill and cook wheat which was grown from their indigenous seed varieties. The effect on digestion was also noticed to be better after consuming the traditional varieties. And last but not least the crop yields were higher! Happily farmers and local communities are collaborating with their seed scientists to return to growing and improving their traditional seed varieties.

In his article "Feeding People is Easy" Colin Tudge concludes....."In reality then our food problems are of two kinds. The first is to grow food well, get it to people and then cook it properly. That should be straight forward. Far, far harder is to circumvent the corporates and their attendant governments. New Labour has applied the same general strategy to food as to all things: to sell off the assets to the highest bidders and to hand the reins and profits to the corporates, which in this case means Tesco, Monsanto and the makers of agrochemicals. The aim is not to grow good food but to maximize cash. That in all ways is immensely destructive. In short the great threat to humanity comes from our own leaders. Now that really is a problem".

In 1998 the EU introduced a moratorium on new biotech authorizations that lasted six years, due to continuing concerns about GM crops.In November 2007, the World Trade Organization gave the EU an extra two months to comply with its ruling for the EU to end restrictions of imports of genetically modified food. The United States, Argentina and Canada argue that their farmers lost money because of GM bans, and they are now threatening to call for WTO sanctions against the EU.

French anti-globalisation activist, Jose Bove, who was convicted of destroying GM crops in southern France has gone on hunger strike to demand a year long embargo.