Rotorua GE Tree Trial remains an environmental threat

/in , ,

The GE tree field trial at Rotorua, run by Crown research institute Scion, has an increasing risk of spreading GE pollen according to the Soil & Health Association.

“Scion, MAF Biosecurity New Zealand (MAFBNZ), and ERMA are continuing to allow GE pine trees to grow in a way that makes GE pollen dispersal all the more likely,” says Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

According to research from Duke University’s Center on Global Change, which has studied pollen from GE conifer trees, the pollen from transgenic pines can spread more than a thousand miles, leading to as they put it, “substantial … subsequent colonization.”

Following the Soil & Health alert of Scion’s not meeting the conditions of ERMA’s consent, and following a breach by protestors of the GE field trial’s security fence and the cutting down of 19 experimental trees, Scion has taken some corrective actions, but it has left trees unpruned to approximately 4.5 metres (Photographs attached, higher resolution available).

The ERMA consent requires that the pinus radiata experimental trees are ‘hedged’ at two metres with the central leader allowed to grow to 5 metres. This was to allow detection of male pollen producing structures and the larger female seed bearing cones.

“At two metres most growing tips (where male pollen producing structures occur) would be visible by a Scion researcher or the MAFBNZ auditor. However with the trees now bushy and more than 4.5 metre tall, observation by use of a ladder is quite different from at standing level and makes pollen release just a matter of time.”

“ERMA regards the issue as one to be worked through by Scion and MAFBNZ, but we urge ERMA to ensure the consent requirements are being met. Not hedging at two metres is a clear and very risky breach of consent conditions.”

MAFBNZ have the audit function over GE trials and carried out the investigation of the cutting down of GE trees and of Soil & Health’s concerns.

Soil & Health had reported poor management and auditing of the field trial, of rabbits freely entering the trial, of tractor mowing of GE prunings with no equipment clean down, and of trees not being correctly pruned.

“The MAFBNZ investigation report showed complicity between the decision making agency ERMA, the audit agency MAFBNZ, and the researcher Scion. On the positive side, they have now dealt with the rabbit issues and have erected a fenced area to contain prunings and dead trees ahead of incineration, however what is probably the riskiest aspect, that of potential pollen dispersal, has not been addressed.”

“It must be asked, what is to happen when ERMA and MAFBNZ allow a GE researcher such as Scion to consistently breach the conditions of what must be regarded as a very privileged permission, to field test GE organisms in New Zealand? ”

Soil & Health is opposed to all GE field trials in New Zealand and has a vision of an Organic 2020.

GE brassica planting possibly illegal

/in , ,

Soil & Health is alarmed that Crop & Food has planted genetically engineered brassicas ahead of the March 31 Wellington High Court appeal against the ERMA decision granting permission last year.

The appeal by GE Free NZ was joined by Organics Aotearoa New Zealand (OANZ), BioGro, and the Biodynamic Association, and questions potential errors of process by decision maker ERMA.

The possibly flawed decision granted Crop & Food permission to field trial brassicas (broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage and forage kale) genetically engineered with a toxin derived from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis(Bt). However that decision was appealed by GE Free NZ within the allowable timeframe.

“Good process and natural justice should not allow an applicant to proceed with planting a GE field trial when the very basis of that decision is under appeal,” says Soil & Health Association spokesperson Steffan Browning. “Appropriately, if it was the RMA, not a sod would be turned until any appeals against decisions were resolved, as many appeals are upheld. What makes the HSNO Act any different?”

“This latest GE planting shows a cavalier attitude on behalf of Crop & Food’s GE team, as well as from the decision maker ERMA, and compliance agency MAF Biosecurity NZ.”

ERMA have confirmed that the Brassica trial was planted last December, although the High Court appeal is not to be heard until March 31.

Soil & Health’s submission at the ERMA hearing included concerns of GE contamination risks to organic and non-GE growers, resistance to the organic pesticide Bt, horizontal gene transfer, and the threat to New Zealand’s clean green image.

Soil & Health is committed to a GE free environment and food supply and has a vision of an Organic 2020.

MAF Biosecurity choking on the truth

/in , ,

Soil & Health is alarmed at the collusion between government agencies that is being displayed in their damage control efforts, following serious breaches of the trial of genetically engineered pine trees near Rotorua.

MAF Biosecurity NZ (MAFBNZ) has just released a report, “MAFBNZ Investigation of Compliance and Monitoring of the Scion GM Field Test,” following the security breach and GE tree cutting at the Rotorua site in early January, and the earlier release of information by Soil & Health in its Organic NZ magazine showing Scion’s non-compliance with the trial’s controls.

“The suggestion that rabbit holes at the Scion GE trees field trial were possibly human-made for publicity purposes goes against the evidence that is available to MAFBNZ or Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) auditing staff,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning. “They should stop pretending that Scion are compliant.”

“Soil & Health has produced clear photographic evidence to both authorities, of well-aged rabbit holes, droppings and all, going under the GE pine trees field trial security and vermin-proof fence (photos attached). The photographs also show the mismanagement of the trees. Because everyone from the Minister down through ERMA and MAFBNZ choose to be complicit with the GE trees experimenter in defending poor compliance, further civil disobedience is predictable as those opposed to genetic engineering have nowhere to turn.”

“The report is consistently misleading and blind to Scion shortcomings. It uses innuendo to shoot the messenger and is effectively deceitful. MAFBNZ originally tried covering up Scion’s sloppy management by telling me that Scion had an ERMA amendment to dispose of prunings on site, allowing mulching. Now they suggest that we made an inaccurate claim,” said Mr Browning.

“We had already pointed out the lack of amendment, and now the inspector says that there was no mulching, although acknowledges the prunings had been mown.”

The report says: ‘MAFBNZ issued a minor non-compliance to Scion following notification of this incident, and recommended that a separate area on site be designated for the drying of tree prunings to prevent future mower access. MAFBNZ graded this as a minor incident, because no serious biosecurity risk/threat has resulted, prunings have not been “disposed” of by mulching and incineration is still the intended final disposal method, and staff had taken measures to remedy the situation and ensure it would not occur again.’

“Scion staff had apparently raked up the remaining prunings the day after the security breach was observed, and following Soil & Health’s media release showing Scion’s mismanagement. Retrospectively there is now an ‘agreement’ between complicit ERMA, MAFBNZ and Scion that will allow incineration on site,” said Mr Browning, “Our understanding is that this agreement is illegal. MAF has no jurisdiction: it is the auditor. ERMA is the decision-maker and any change must be a formalised amendment, and to be meaningful should be notified as the community has concerns on how such incineration should take place.”

“The report fails to recommend a wash down facility for equipment for the tractor, mower and other equipment used in the trial. Ironic considering the ‘bath’ (photo attached) that vehicles entering the rest of the (non-GE) Scion facility must drive through. The arrogance that has ERMA, MAFBNZ and Scion assuming that no heritable material can be taken out by rabbits, tractors, footwear etc, perpetuates poor compliance.”

According to the GE trial rules, the pine trees must be hedged at a height of 2 metres, although they are allowed to have a central leader growing up to 5 metres. This is to enable monitoring to stop the release of genetically engineered pollen escaping to the environment and pines of the Rotorua region.

“The inspector has failed to spot the obvious even though Soil & Health have reported that the trees are not being pruned according to the consent. The inspector has chosen to overlook the lack of required hedging at 2 metres high, when reporting that the trees had grown potentially 300 mm in the 3 months ahead of inspection and were apparently no more than 4.8 metres tall. Is there another convenient non-notified ‘agreement’ between the complicit agencies to remove the precaution of hedging at 2 metres?”

“Now a tree that is approaching 6 metres is described as a non-GE ‘filler’ and the report states ‘could mistakenly be concluded to be part of the GM trial itself.’ There are 5 non-GE controls in the trial, but we have never heard of these ‘fillers’ before. In the ramshackle excuse for a shade-house in the trial plot (photo attached), according to Scion’s December 7 report to ERMA, there are apparently 46 cuttings. No cuttings were visible in Soil & Health’s visits, so it must be asked where in the Rotorua environment are these cuttings also reported to have a propensity for producing pollen? Considering the doubts raised by poor compliance, it will be appropriate for Soil & Health to have a copy of the Scion management plan,” says Browning.

“The inspector has gone on to suggest that the rabbit holes we earlier reported were contrived: ‘MAF is still investigating the cause of these holes, and has not ruled out the possibility these were man-made for publicity purposes.’”

“I had supplied the inspector several photos that clearly show the reality of the holes and had a 50 minute interview with her in which I suggested the rabbit burrows could well have been enlarged on the outside of the fence by dogs that are often walked in the area. But the photos clearly show rabbit burrows beyond any enlarged entrances. What is the inspector’s explanation for the sizeable rabbit holes on the inside of the fence at that point, droppings and all, or the rabbits and cat seen within the so-called vermin-proof fence?”

“The MAFBNZ report also states that the outer wire netting fence extends 2 metres below ground. Scion’s reports to ERMA consistently state 1.5 metres although in a report for tangata whenua, Scion have said 2 metres. With rabbits and even a cat, and now protestors having entered the compound, a check of the trial plot’s construction depth is warranted.”

“Honesty in monitoring, reporting and a genuine and full precautionary approach as required by the Royal Commission is imperative in order to minimise the risk of GE contamination of the environment, and may also preclude further civil disobedience.”

Soil & Health is committed to a GE Free future and has a goal of an Organic 2020.

Ends.

Photographs available from Steffan Browning:

* DSCF3680 (2).JPG Vehicle tyre ‘bath’ at Scion compound adjacent to GE trial area that has no equipment wash down facility.
* DSCF3686 (2).JPG 1-11-07 GE trees in centre block. Note tall tree to the right within the block and also ‘shade house’, cuttings not apparent. Prunings lying to front left of GE trees.
* DSCF3689 (2).JPG 1-11-07 Note trees apparently pruned to 4.5 metres 2 weeks before, but no hedging at 2 metres, minimising effectiveness of weekly pollen monitoring.
* DSCF3695 (2).JPG 1-11-07 Note trees as reported by Scion to ERMA 07 December 07 as healthy and growing normally.
* DSCF3696 (2).JPG 1-11-07 Saplings reported to have been cut down in security breach. Reported 07-12-07 as healthy.
* DSCF3707 (2).JPG 1-11-07 Rabbit hole outside perimeter fence possibly enlarged by dogs. Deeper than arms length.
* DSCF3710 (2).JPG 1-11-07 Rabbit hole inside fence adjacent to others outside. Note size, activity level and droppings top right.
* DSCF3713 (2).JPG 1-11-07 Steffan Browning at holes. Right hand indicating hole from photo #10. Two main entrances on both sides of fence.

Failure in GE tree reporting may bring tears to Crop & Food’s onion trial

/in , , ,

State-owned GE tree researcher Scion has been negligent in its reporting, as has GE trial auditor MAF Biosecurity New Zealand, and the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) may have been complicit in this, the Soil & Health Association has discovered.

Scion’s annual report to ERMA has been presented online recently*, but although all previous annual reports record that rabbits have been present and destroyed, the December 2007 report has no mention of rabbits, and for the first time reporting began is now presented as (Public Version).

“Soil & Health is keen to see the genuine unsanitised version, as presented to ERMA ahead of the recent Rotorua GE tree field trial breach. ERMA insist the report is unchanged, but a ‘Public Version’ on the heels of public criticism must be treated with scepticism,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Every preceding year, Scion has reported rabbit problems and stated that ‘in any event they could not get out as the fence was buried 1.5metres. Soil & Health in its last Organic NZ magazine, ran a report with photos of the rabbit problem and has also questioned other aspects of compliance.”

“Scion had not pruned all trees according to consent conditions and is now mulching prunings on site, then without a washdown facility is removing GE plant material on mowing equipment to other research and forest areas, and the wider environment.”

“MAF Biosecurity New Zealand had suggested that ERMA had granted an amendment to Scion to allow disposal on site, but such an amendment has not occurred and Scion are in clear breach of conditions by mulch mowing prunings, and MAF had failed again by not addressing the issue.”

Scion Acting chief executive Elspeth MacRae recently said that genes involved with the research would not pose a danger to the outside environment, as the genes were sourced from naturally occurring New Zealand organisms.

However Soil & Health National Councillor and ex Crop & Food GE researcher, Dr Elvira Dommisse said, “That does not mean that the same gene which has been genetically engineered into another species in an artificial gene construction will be harmless. This is the sort of misleading comment we get from some GE scientists. It is in part true, but we cannot conclude from this that all is well.”

“In its genetically engineered form, the gene is no longer under the control of its own DNA. It is jammed into a complicated construct made up of bits of DNA from a number of different organisms. This means the gene is always switched on and is engineered to produce large amounts of a protein that pine trees don’t make. The cellular machinery of a pine tree may produce a protein that is different from the original bacterial protein. Such an altered protein could be harmful.”

“This has already happened in genetically engineered peas, when a harmless bean protein became a toxin when engineered into the closely related pea,” said Dr Dommisse.

“Scions December report also states that all of the trees in one tree experiment are healthy and growing normally. Photographs available to Soil & Health show that is not necessarily the case with some trees having significant die-back,” said Mr Browning.

“Soil & Health would like to see a site plan showing controls and GE trees. The other tree experiment reported does not claim normal growth and photographs show abnormal growth.”

“MAF have also overlooked ERMA’s control condition of limiting the Scion trees to be hedged at 2 metres with just a central leader reaching 5 metres. However the trees are hedged nearer 5 metres with a few taller limbs. Pruning controls are to reduce the chance of GE pollen escape and with these tall bushy trees will be difficult to ensure no flowering occurs.”

“Consistent failures of auditing by MAF show reason to also be concerned at the hundreds of GE experiments in New Zealand universities, crown research institutes and laboratory containment.”

“Crop & Food GE onion researcher Colin Eady was crowing about developing a tearless onion, but with poor performance by all agencies involved with genetic engineering, and the public disdain at risky GE foods, Mr Eady will be wise to listen to farmer calls for New Zealand to be GE Free,” said Mr Browning.

“Crop & Food has already broken consent conditions to its GE onion trial and with MAF and ERMA consistently failing in their GE overview. Any tolerance for the GE trials of onions, brassicas, cows and trees is running out.”

“Producers and consumers share the desire for an economy based on the clean green environment that New Zealand’s discerning markets are looking to. Mr Eady will have no tears if Crop & Food’s research focuses on natural breeding techniques and extends its valuable organic research.”

Soil & Health is committed to GE free food and environment and aspires to an Organic 2020.

Note *Scion Annual Report to ERMA, 2007 Annual Report GMF99001 & GMF99005 (PUBLIC VERSION)

GE Tree trial breach shows institutional contradictions

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association hopes that Biosecurity NZ’s investigation of last weekend’s security fence breach and cutting down of genetically engineered (GE) trees at Rotorua, will lead to far more rigorous controls and compliance checks at the Scion GE tree field trial.

“Biosecurity NZ will investigate today whether action is required under the HSNO Act due to possible removal of GE plant material, and has indicated it will investigate Soil & Health’s concerns with the field trial,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

Soil & Health has previously reported compliance breaches by Scion of the consent conditions for the field trial, and yesterday’s news had raised concerns of GE plant material being removed from the secured area.

“The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) have said that there appeared not to have been material removed by those involved in the cutting down of GE trial trees, however rabbits appear to have been risking that ever since the trial started, with having both caused damage and repeatedly infesting the trial plot and surrounds.”

“Ironically, Scion’s own activities will be the greater risk with material being removed on mower equipment following mulching of GE tree prunings. Scion have been granted an ERMA amendment to their consent, which previously required autoclaving or incineration of cuttings or plant material. The mulching of prunings allows even more GE material to remain in the environment, and with no clean down facility on site, means GE plant material being removed to other adjacent non-GE trial sites and forestry areas.”

“Amendments such as these, further show ERMA’s lack of precaution and bias towards field trials. Agresearch, Crop & Food, and Scion, the operators of the only New Zealand GE field trials, have all used the amendment process with ERMA allowing changes that the public have not had opportunity to adequately scrutinize.”

“Civil disobedience is not surprising, when precaution and transparency are disregarded,” said Mr Browning. “Considering overwhelming opposition to genetic engineering in New Zealand, field trials should be treated as a privilege and run to the highest level of precaution.”

Christmas is over Scion, take the GE trees down

/in , ,

It’s time for Scion to pull down its Rotorua GE Christmas trees, says the Soil & Health Association.

“Scion appears unable to manage its genetic engineering tree experiments to meet the requirements of its ERMA consent, so like any Christmas trees, their time is up,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

The genetically engineered tree field trials at the Rotorua base of CRI Scion (formerly Forest Research Institute Ltd) have rabbits and cats free ranging in and out of the trial, and the weekly fence inspection requirements of the ERMA (Environmental Risk Management Authority) consent have clearly not been followed for years according to Scion’s annual ERMA reports and photographic evidence collated for Soil & Health’s Organic NZ magazine.

“The consistent rabbit breaches show that the Ministry for the Environment (MfE), ERMA, MAF (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry) and Scion, are all falling down in their responsibilities. Scion first in its lax approach to the GE experiment conditions, MAF for not monitoring Scion’s compliance thoroughly, ERMA for not recognising the consistency of the breaches in repeated Scion annual reports, and MfE for falling down in its overview position.”

“Further, the requirement to have all experimental trees topped at 5 metres has not been followed, with one clearly left to exceed that height. Also prunings are being mower mulched on site instead of the required incineration.”

“With all levels of authority not taking genetic engineering risks seriously it will not be surprising if the community takes control of such field trials.”

“Scion and other crown research institutes have valuable contributions to make in traditional breeding and plant development techniques that do not create environmental risk, or risks to New Zealand’s clean green marketing image,” said Mr Browning.

Soil & Health applauds pause on high lysine corn

/in , , ,

Soil & Health applauds Food Safety Minister Annette King’s pause on the approval of a GE animal feed corn (LY038), engineered to produce high amounts of lysine for maximum weight gain in pigs and chickens. Monsanto is seeking approval for its appearance in processed foods in New Zealand to avoid costly recalls that would occur if the animal feed was not approved for human consumption.

“However Soil & Health is concerned that Minister Annette King’s request for advice from the NZ Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) may be to sort out whether this GE corn was legal in NZ, rather than the real, more concerning issue of food safety,” said spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Some assurance that food safety is being investigated, would show New Zealand’s independence from the trans-Tasman agency FSANZ’s flawed assumptions and disregard for precaution.”

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has rejected a detailed, scientific submission from a leading New Zealand authority on GE organisms, Associate Professor Jack Heinemann of Canterbury University’s Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety. Dr Heinemann wanted further, more rigorous testing of the LY038 corn.

Ms King, the sole New Zealand member of the trans-Tasman FSANZ Ministerial Council, had asked for the original review of an earlier FSANZ recommendation to allow the GE animal feed corn in human food. Ms King is now asking the NZFSA for more advice as to how appropriate it is for New Zealand to accept amendments for GE varieties intended for use as animal feed to join food standards.

To date Monsanto has only carried out feeding tests on chickens and rats eating raw corn, but the corn would be cooked when included in processed food for human consumption. When cooked, this corn produces toxic compounds that have been linked to several human illnesses, such as Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes mellitis and cardiovascular disease.

The high lysine corn (LY038) has not been compared with its equivalent non-GE corn, as is required under NZ law, but with another variety of GE corn that has NOT been approved for human use anywhere in the world. The comparator has NO history of safe use. In fact, it is the brother of LY038.

”Soil & Health supports Heinemann’s submission and it is encouraging to see that Minister Annette King might not be taking the flawed FSANZ recommendation at face value,” said Browning. “Soil & Health has called for New Zealand to undertake its own food safety assessments and studies following a lack of scrutiny of GE feeding test data by Australian government authorities.”

“Decisions based on inadequate and biased food studies are not acceptable, and New Zealand needs to reclaim control over food safety testing and its food supply.”

“Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020. Commitment by New Zealand’s leaders to a sustainable future and healthy community should target growth in organic production and reject risky GE foods such as LY038 high lysine corn.”

NZFSA and New Zealand Nutrition Foundation short on credibility

/in , , ,

“It is time people retired or were fired from the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) so New Zealanders might be given independent and reliable information about food safety,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning today, adding that, “the New Zealand Nutrition Foundation was also a food industry mouthpiece lacking credibility.”

“The information coming to the public from these two organisations is consistently big food industry based, while the real independent and credible research, that damns artificial sweetener aspartame’s safety, is consistently ignored or crudely glossed over.”

“Yesterday both agencies effectively used the Washington based food industry mouthpiece, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) for their media release wording and spin, while attempting to defend the use of the neurotoxin aspartame as a sweetener. However they failed to mention who is funding IFIC.”

Examples of IFIC supporters in 2002 were:

* Archer Daniels Midland Company
* Aventis CropScience
* BASF
* Burger King Corporation
* Cargill, Incorporated
* The Coca-Cola Company
* Dow AgroSciences, LLC
* DuPont Agricultural Products
* Frito-Lay, Inc.
* General Mills, Inc.
* Gerber Products Company
* Hershey Foods Corporation
* H. J. Heinz Company
* Kellogg USA, Inc.
* Kraft Foods
* McDonald Corporation
* Monsanto Company
* The Pepsi-Cola Company
* Nestle USA, Inc.
* Taco Bell Corporation
* The Procter & Gamble Company
* Syngenta
* Unilever Bestfoods

“Soil & Health challenges NZFSA and the New Zealand Nutrition Foundation to a public debate on the issue. Overwhelming evidence of corruption of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when it approved aspartame for the food chain, and the well documented deceit by then aspartame manufacturer, drug company G.D. Searle, is at odds with significant independent research showing serious health risks from aspartame use, and a public forum is warranted.”

“It is dismaying that organisations that should have the publics trust, are, despite what they say, not actually assessing the weight of sound, scientific evidence that surrounds aspartame,” said Browning. “Does the Deputy Chief Executive of NZFSA want the agony suffered by many New Zealanders from this poison to reach even greater proportions?

The protection of food industry aspartame pedlars makes the NZFSA and New Zealand Nutrition Foundation culpable for the harm that aspartame sufferers endure here.”

“Thanks to the research and the support of visiting international anti-aspartame expert Betty Martini, Soil & Health has further significant evidence to support its call for a ban on aspartame in New Zealand.”

“NZFSA refused to meet with Betty Martini, yet following publicity of Wellington woman Abby Cormack’s aspartame poisoning symptoms, and the information provided through public meetings and the media by Betty Martini, people already have benefited significantly by removing aspartame from their lives.”

“In the very first instance NZFSA and school boards should be removing aspartame from schools, as is happening in other parts of the world where the harm of aspartame is recognised. The majority of health professionals do not recommend the taking of aspartame when they become aware of the recognizable symptoms in affected patients.”

Soil & Health is grateful for the knowledge and enthusiasm that Betty Martini has contributed.

GE food safety tests not up to scratch

/in , ,

Another GE corn has been recommended to be approved as safe for human consumption by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. But the food safety trials used were flawed,and new ones need to be developed, according to the Soil & Health Association. The high lysine corn (LY038) was compared not with regular corn, as should be the case, but with another variety of GE corn, on the basis that this was already approved.

The animal feed corn has been engineered to produce high concentrations of lysine,to promote animal growth. Monsanto has only carried out feeding tests on chickens and rats eating raw corn, but the corn would be cooked when included in processed food for human consumption. When cooked, this corn produces toxic compounds that have been associated with several human illnesses, such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

A decision to either support or reject the FSANZ review recommendation is expected to be released on Monday by the Australasian Ministerial Council, including Food Safety Minister Annette King. The New Zealand Minister had requested the review following an earlier FSANZ recommendation.

“We call on the New Zealand Government to reject the decision. We do not need to follow poor Australian analysis and interpretation of research codes of practice as has happened on this occasion,” said Soil and Health spokesperson, Steffan Browning.

“Soil & Health is conscious of the anger in the community against this incremental moving of international food safety goalposts promoted by the very companies that in turn apply for the introduction of novel and risky foods,” said Mr Browning.
“New Zealanders are rejecting trans-Tasman decisions relating to food safety and health care as shown by opposition to previous FSANZ and Ministerial Council acceptance of GE foods, and also the Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill,” said Mr Browning.

“Decisions based on inadequate and biased food studies are not acceptable, and New Zealand needs to reclaim control over food safety testing and its food supply.”

“Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020. Commitment by New Zealand’s leaders to a sustainable future and healthy community should target growth in organic production and reject risky GE foods such as LY038 high lysine corn.”

Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill Rethink Time

/in , , ,

The government has an ideal opportunity for a rethink of New Zealand’s health choices, with the placing of the Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill (TPMB) at the bottom of the Parliamentary Order Paper on Tuesday, according to the Soil & Health Association.

Community opposition to the Bill remains very high, and Soil & Health has received 1600 signatures through a modest appeal to members and friends over the last two weeks. Thousands have signed other petitions and hundreds attended last weekend’s Auckland rally against the TPMB.

Today, Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning presented Green Party MP Sue Kedgley with the indicative signatures. “We all understand the issues are complex,” he said, “but there is an overriding concern from our members that they do not want any regulatory system controlled from Australia and they do not want to lose the choice of the natural products that they have at present.”

“One signatory, a 71 year old great grandmother who has successfully used herbal products, vitamins and minerals since 1980, finished a message with, ’We are mature enough & dare I say it wise enough to keep it right in New Zealand.’”

“One method of achieving this may be through a New Zealand Office of Natural Health Products, such as proposed by the Natural Health Alliance,” said Browning. “Their draft concept has a regulatory structure for consumer protection while keeping compliance costs low for producers.”

“With nanotechnology and genetic engineering being used in the production of some so-called therapeutic goods, it is important that we have strict guidelines, but also that they have the support of and input from New Zealand consumers and natural therapists, through a structure such as suggested by the Natural Health Alliance.”

“Consumer choice is increasingly being removed and unwanted additives are being included because New Zealand bureaucrats are chasing free trade agreements and international harmonisation of food and health standards (through Codex, CER and FSANZ, WTO and others). Soil & Health suggests that each agreement maintains full domestic opt-out clauses, and has better local consumer input,” said Browning.

Please Find Below the Draft Proposal by the Natural Health Alliance.

TO ESTABLISH AN Office of Natural Health Products New Zealand (onhpnz)

Mission Statement

Our mission is to make New Zealand’s health care sustainable into the future by becoming a world leader in the regulation of Natural Health Products resulting in New Zealand being the country recognised as having the Healthiest People on Earth.

Goal for New Zealand

To develop and maintain a sustainable health policy based on a wellness paradigm. To establish an appropriate regulatory environment for Natural Health and dietary supplement products.

To establish a Centre of Excellence for Natural Healthcare that will optimise the health of New Zealand consumers; address the escalating costs of health care in an ageing population; maximise a New Zealand wellness brand and secure New Zealand’s place in the global market – all resulting in a sustainable, innovative Health and Wellness industry lead economy.

New Zealand Health in the Future

The Natural Health Alliance believes that optimised health and disease prevention through the use of Natural health products and health promotion can substantially improve the quality of life. One of the greatest concerns of the OECD countries is the escalating cost for health care in an ageing population, especially for medication resulting from fundamental weaknesses in the present illness model of Health policy. This model is predicted to cripple many countries and individuals. To this end, the Office should be committed to meeting the challenges of tomorrow by supporting research into the health benefit properties of low risk and low cost Natural Products (especially New Zealand herbs and flora)

Export Led Wellness Economy

New Zealand exports of natural products and ingredients have the potential to exceed imports. New Zealand due to its isolation has unique herbs and ingredients – some of which are recognised as world leaders. Having a unique Natural health Products (NHP) regulator will give New Zealand the opportunity to foster entrepreneurial companies exporting unique leading natural health products.

The Natural Health Alliance recommends that:

1. A separate Office of Natural Health Products New Zealand (ONHPNZ) be established that:

a) Is separate and independent from the Pharmaceutical Regulatory office,

b) Develops an appropriate risk-based regulatory framework that ensures consumers have freedom to choose quality natural health products and good information about those products to assist in making informed choices, whilst protecting philosophical and cultural diversity,

c) Is headed by a person with experience and expertise in Natural Health Products as the Canadians have done in appointing a Doctor of Naturopathy as head of the Natural Health Directorate of Health Canada; and

d) Is also staffed with personnel qualified and experienced in natural health products.

2. Twenty percent of ONHPNZ national health and medical research funding be directed towards research projects into natural health products.

3. A Centre of Excellence of Natural Healthcare be established with industry, Maori and consumers in partnership to focus on research, education and economics with objectives similar to those of the US Office of Dietary Supplements.

4. A cost-benefit study be conducted into the potential cost savings from greater use of natural health products be undertaken.

5. An on-line consumer information service be established in consultation with industry to provide consumers with balanced, factual information on natural health products.

6. A rebate for all natural health products and services be negotiated with private health insurance providers.

7. A Natural Health Products Advisory Committee be established to provide expert advice on natural health products and alternative health practices to the Minister and regulatory bodies.

8. An adverse event reporting system for NHPs to monitor trends and emerging safety issues and that such reports be assessed by a Committee of persons with knowledge and expertise in natural healthcare.

9. That the cost of the regulator be at least 50% subsidized by the New Zealand government as New Zealand will gain through the significant cost savings coming from a wellness health care system. Cost recovery system to recover only those costs that relate to regulatory services to the Industry.

10. Penalties and fines for breaches of the NHP standards to be set at appropriate levels that would be normal for this level of breach in accordance with similar used in the Food Industry in New Zealand.

11. Research into the health benefits of our Native Natural flora and fauna be sponsored by the Government to establish the active ingredients and confirm the benefits that have been discovered anecdotally over many years of use .The published research will help develop a good research based industry in New Zealand and the evidence to support the development of the New Zealand Natural Health Brand Internationally.

12. The government to promote the use of NHPs as a means of improving the nation’s Health and reducing the escalating cost of healthcare in an aging population.