AgResearch’s Cruel Experiments Cover A Wide Range of Animals

/in , , ,

New revelations of cruel outcomes on experimental genetically engineered (GE) calves at AgResearch’s GE facility are likely to be just the tip of the iceberg according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.
“AgResearch already has a bad track record with its Annual Reports to ERMA for GE cattle showing a less than 9 % live birth rate, deformed foetuses and calves, gangrenous udders and animals suffering from respiratory conditions,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.(1)
The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) last year also granted AgResearch permission to experiment on cats, dogs, pigs, guinea pigs, sheep, mice, rats, rabbits, possums, cattle, goats, and chickens using genetic material from almost any form of life.(2)
“How many cats and dogs, rabbits and guinea pigs, mice, cattle, and other animals are to suffer for AgResearch’s unnecessary experiments?”
“AgResearch’s media tour last year showed off apparently healthy cattle but they were just the lucky survivors. It is now evident that some calves ovaries were growing to the point of rupture, causing death, but the scientist in charge Dr Jimmy Suttie has been quoted as saying the deaths are not a big deal.”(3)
“Animal welfare is a big deal, especially when there are animal free alternative experimental and production methods for the compounds that AgResearch ultimately wants to produce,” said Mr Browning.
“Science Minister Wayne Mapp and Agriculture Minister David Carter have both shown acceptance of AgResearch’s poor animal welfare record, presumably a ‘pragmatic’ response to the dubious promises of high financial returns that AgResearch’s international partners have said will be coming.”
“However good animal welfare records and a GE free reputation are very important for New Zealand’s trading image and increasingly demanded by consumers. Cruel experiments for a GE farming future are not what either New Zealanders or valuable overseas consumers want.”(4)
“AgResearch is at the cruel operator end of a business partnership with a dirty drug manufacturer, Genzyme, who is under investigation by the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) for poor manufacturing practices.” (5)
“Knowing that it would be a nuisance for AgResearch and its overseas partners, the government disbanded the New Zealand Bioethics Council a year ago in full knowledge that distressing animal welfare issues are clearly predictable in GE research. The Bioethics Council had been calling for ethics reviews of all GE animal experiments.” (6)
Soil & Health wants AgResearch’s cruel animal experiments stopped immediately, the reinstatement of the New Zealand Bioethics Council, and the government to quickly move towards desirable high value sustainable, animal friendly, GE free and organic production.

Notes:

Links assessed March 2010
(1) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/no/compliance/agresearch.html ERMA Annual reports on GMF98009 and GMD 02028
(2) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/BertDocs/GMD09011%20decision%20final%20(2009.09.04).pdf
“Donor genetic material may be derived from the Kingdoms Animalia, Planta, Fungi, Protista and Monera and viruses and viroids…”
(3) http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10642031
(4) https://soilandhealth.org.nz/media-releases/kiwi-poll-rejects-ge-animals/
(5) http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/genzyme/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&ndmConfigId=1019673&newsId=20100324005866&newsLang=en http://www.marketwatch.com/story/genzyme-to-pay-175-million-for-allston-plant-woes-2010-04-21http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2124303620100421
(6) http://www.mfe.govt.nz/website/closed-sites/images/bioethics.jpg New Zealand Bioethics Council, August 2004 Report: The Cultural, Ethical and Spiritual Dimensions of the Use of Human Genes in Other Organisms

ERMA GE Decision Smells of US and Political Influence

/in , , ,

The main benefactor of the Environmental Risk Management Authority’s (ERMA) decision to allow the application by Crown Research Institute AgResearch a carte blanche application to genetically engineer (GE) cattle, sheep, and goats using a huge range of E.coli bacteria, human, mouse, sheep, goats, cattle, and viruses, and other material is the United States biotech company GTC Biotherapeutics (GTC), an offshoot of Genzyme Corporation, according to the Soil & Health Association.

“There has been panic on the part of AgResearch and its partner Genzyme ever since the earlier applications by AgResearch for GE animals were halted in June 2009 by the High Court through action taken by GE Free NZ,” said Soil & Health Association of NZ Spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“AgResearch should not have been presumptive in its contractual arrangements with GTC, but appeared to have had the indication from ERMA that they would get the earlier application approved. ERMA has been bending over backwards ever since to ensure AgResearch could meet its US partner’s needs. Even the US Secretary of State’s science and technology advisor Nina Federoff came calling on the government in late January.”(1)

“While ERMA  says the approval is purely for research,(2) AgResearch acknowledge it allows them to meet their contractual obligations (3), and GTC is very clear that AgResearch is to “establish appropriate transgenic founder production lines” (4), this is totally commercial and the New Zealand public are funding it to the tune of at least $8million with science funding(5). GTC’s contribution is only $200,000 but holds the US patents to any transgenic therapeutic mammalian milk proteins. (4)”

“The Chief Executive of ERMA ensuring GTC’s interests would be met, promptly ticked through AgResearch applications for indoor GE goats in December 2009 without public consultation even though ERMA acknowledged existing high public interest.”

“Highly conflicted Dr. Kieran Elborough, as chair of ERMA’s GM Standing Committee, and who had been involved with AgResearch through his own GE work in the past, renewed the consent duration of AgResearch’s existing GE cattle on 11 March 2010 for another 2.5 years. And on 1-2 March as chair of the ERMA Decision Making Committee heard the submissions about the GE sheep, cattle and goats. Soil & Health, on March 3, had again publicly exposed the Chair’s conflict of interest but on 8 March he met with the Committee on the decision-making task. On March 26 Dr. Elborough joined the board of a combined CRIs joint venture, and finally acknowledged a perceived conflict of interest and stood down on 29 March, leaving just one more meeting for the remaining 3 decision-makers.”

GTC is highly reliant on AgResearch and has been under serious financial pressure following product development failures, contaminated medicines, and penalty costs. In its annual report GTC acknowledges its survival relies on its partners and equity programs.

Excerpts from Genzyme’s financial statements September 2009 (7)

“We also have a development agreement in place with AgResearch in New Zealand for co-funding further development of selected follow-on biologics, particularly where European patents expire prior to U.S. patents…

…We have operated at a net loss since our inception in 1993, and we used $20.3 million of net cash in our operating cash flows during the first nine months of 2009. Our recurring losses from operations and our limited funds raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. We are entirely dependent upon funding from equity financings, partnering programs and proceeds from short and long-term debt to finance our operations until we achieve commercial success in selling and licensing our products and positive cash flow from operations.”

Not only  is the New Zealand taxpayer spending precious taxpayers science funding money on GTC, it is at risk of being implicated in liability actions down the line as GTC’s parent Genzyme has a poor safety record in its medicines manufacture,” said Mr Browning.

“Viruses and inert contaminants have led to massive international alerts and the most recent events had the US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) on 26 March moving into a major Genzyme plant to enforce manufacturing practice regulations.”

From Genzyme’s own media release that day, “The FDA enforcement action will likely result in a consent decree, under which a third party would inspect and review the plant’s operation for an extended period and certify compliance with FDA regulations. Under a consent decree, Genzyme also would be required to make payments to the government and could incur other costs.”(8)

“Once again our taxpayer owned Foundation for Research Science and Technology (FoRST) is dishing out precious research money to big US corporates trading in risky dangerous activity. Another one that has gloated about NZ taxpayers money on its annual statement is Arborgen who want to be the Monsanto of GE trees internationally and are partnered with CRI Scion. Scion also benefitted from Dr Elborough signing off without public consultation another 8 years for a previously discontinued GE pine tree field trial in full knowledge of the history of non-compliance there.”

“New Zealand government agencies are tripping over themselves to get into bed with large US corporations, and run roughshod over the New Zealand public to avoid due process and corruptly give blanket approvals to their friends GE experiments.”

“It is no wonder with such disregard for fair process, precaution and law by the agencies, that protestors consider direct action.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 without risky GE or influence by US corporates over New Zealand’s science and decision making processes.

NOTES

Links accessed April 2010

(1)   http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/science+meeting+highlights+strong+tie…

(2)   http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/news-events/archives/media-releases/2010/mr-20…

(3)   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1004/S00040.htm

(4)   http://www.allbusiness.com/science-technology/experimentation-research/1…

(5)   The decision http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/find/WebResultsDetails.aspx?ID=1103

(6)   http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/contracts-law-licensing-agreements/1138…

(7)   http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=687…

(8)   http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/genzyme/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news…

Organic Sector Firmly Opposed To Genetically Engineered Animals

/in , , ,

Organic sector members opposed to AgResearch’s continuing efforts to experiment on genetically engineered (GE) animals have taken a look at the facility that threatens to further tarnish New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure branding. (1)
With the knowledge that the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) was both consenting non-notified applications for GE cattle and goats within the AgResearch Ruakura containment buildings, and was to consider further outdoor field trials there, attendees at the Organics Aotearoa New Zealand (OANZ) conference in Hamilton in November took a spontaneous look at the current GE cattle grazing nearby.
The group including OANZ annual award winners James Millton of Millton Vineyard and Colin Ross, Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, organic farmers, consultants, certification staff, writers and consumers expressed disappointment that inhumane and risky GE science was being government funded, although threatening the advantages of clean and sustainable production such as organic.
“While the GE cattle grazing at Ruakura looked healthy, they were the few GE experimental animals that had survived the less than 5% embryo success, still births, and gross birth deformities that AgResearch don’t want to be open about,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
Current GE cattle are from previously consented AgResearch GE field trials that ERMA have allowed to remain pending new applications for GE experiments to be processed. The expectation that ERMA would tick the AgResearch applications through, regardless of public and scientific concern, was not met when an appeal to the High Court by GE Free NZ had the applications declared invalid in June this year. Although AgResearch has, in turn, appealed the High Court decision, to be heard on 25 January, AgResearch and ERMA have continued to try and allow the AgResearch contractual obligations with overseas GE companies to be met, and both non-notified indoor applications and another outdoor GE field trial application including cattle, sheep, and goats have been lodged. (2,3)
“While the High Court process is still running, it is a mockery of the judicial system for ERMA to allow further applications for essentially the same purpose, and to have the public excluded from decisions allowing GE experimental animals to the mercy of scientists already proven to fail the animal welfare and ethical standards expected by the community.”
“With no public consultation, ERMA has also now allowed indoor GE goats to become bioreactors at Ruakura, in direct contradiction of the findings of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification (RCGM) that recommended food-animals not be used as ‘bioreactors’. The ethical considerations have also been marginalised.”(4)
Groups such as the Soil & Health Association (5), GE Free NZ, Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility (PSGR), Sustainable Future, and many individuals, including organic farmers, have also submitted to ERMA against AgResearch’s latest notified application for GE animal experiments on cattle, sheep and goats. Submissions closed on Friday 18 December.
“Genetic engineering of plants or animals is one of the biggest threats to our organic producers and New Zealand’s rapidly growing international trade in organic products.” said OANZ Chair Derek Broadmore.
“The growing organic sector presents the best possible image for New Zealand primary production overseas and leads in sustainable practices, yet it has to compete for funding with risky science that promotes products that consumers the world over have firmly rejected.”
“New Zealand and overseas consumers appreciate our clean green 100 % Pure NZ certified organic foods, why would we compromise that by allowing GE plants and animals into the New Zealand environment?”
In his submission opposing AgResearch’s current application, an organic farmer Mr Peter McPartlin said, “We farm, organically, 2000 acres in Marlborough producing prime Angus beef for the Asian markets and prime venison for the restaurant trade in Europe. Our marketing exploits the government funded “New Zealand Pure” brand and we have a heavy reliance on being perceived as clean, green and natural and GE free. None of our consumers in these markets ask for GE products in preference to natural ones – any scientist telling you otherwise is lying!”
“AgResearch GE field trial animals, milk and effluent is disposed of at the Ruakura site, with risk of contamination into surrounding land, stock and waterways,” said Mr Browning.
“Organic standards and production rules such as BioGro, have zero tolerance for GE, and any risk of contamination by GE animals or plants should be eliminated.”
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that includes a clean green and 100% Pure GE Free Aotearoa New Zealand.

Notes:

Links accessed May 2009
(1) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/news-events/focus/gm-cattle-amend.html

(2) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/BertDocs/ERMA200223%20Application%20summary%20-%20FINAL.pdf

(3) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/find/WebResults.aspx?search=GMD09016&submit.x=31&submit.y=11&submit=Search

(4) http://www.organicnz.org/ link at; Read the Soil & Health Association submission to ERMA requesting this application be declined !

Clean Up Lincoln Countryside and Clean Out NZs GE Labs

/in , , ,

Leakage of GE material from a Plant & Food Research containment facility should come as no surprise, but be a wake up call to Government that a major GE catastrophe is just a matter of time, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.

It was reported on Monday that Plant & Food Research was aware of another possible breach of containment at one of its Lincoln glasshouses, as Arabidopsis plants testing GE positive were found outside the glasshouse.

“GE containment facilities are only as good as human error or the structure allows,” said Steffan Browning spokesperson for Soil & Health.

“Plant & Food have been aware of such leaks for a long time and the Lincoln science community is well aware of previous containment ruptures.”

“With many GE experiments taking place in risky containment throughout New Zealand, also involving the genetic engineering of microbes such as E. coli or salmonella, it is also just a matter of time before new strains of those will escape containment.”

“MAF-Biosecurity New Zealand (MAFBNZ), now investigating the latest Lincoln GE breach, played down GE contamination risk at last summer’s Plant & Food GE Brassica flowering event, even though they found that the scientist in charge, Dr Mary Christey, had allowed flowering on more than one occasion.”

“Incredibly MAFBNZ then chose to say that pollen would not have blown more than 2 metres and was unlikely to have been moved by insects due to a lack of flowering plants, when in fact the renown Canterbury nor’ wester had blown over an adjacent tree and the flowering GE Brassica was amongst a sea of flowering plants.”

“Soil & Health wants testing of organic brassica seed saved from the Lincoln area last summer, to be included in independent testing for GE contamination. MAF wouldn’t last summer, so it is good to see some possible change in attitude as they actually get to test the surrounds of the latest GE breach.”

“If contamination exists, there is opportunity to clean up, but MAF keeping its genetically engineered head in the sand, just aggravates the risk to non-GE producers such as high value organics, from loss of markets,” said Mr Browning.

“New Zealand consumers and overseas customers like our clean green 100 % Pure Brand NZ. The risky unwanted GE products that Plant & Food, AgResearch and others keep pushing, fly in the face of clean, safe and desirable organic and sustainable production that the researchers could be putting so much more effort into.”

“GE field trials don’t fit and it is clear that GE containment laboratories don’t either.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that includes a clean green and 100% Pure GE Free Aotearoa New Zealand.

GE Food and Environment Regulators Need Changing

/in , , ,

New Zealand’s food and environmental safety regulators need either some major staff changes, political policy push or a culture change, if public safety is to be considered properly, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

The latest revelations showing that Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) distorted research results in 2000 from studies of animals fed with soy that was genetically engineered (GE) to produce high amounts of the amino acid lysine soybean. FSANZ has also failed to take the feeding studies into account when approving a similarly GE high lysine corn, now rejected by European governments.

The study referenced in the FSANZ approval documents showed that some pigs required 66% more feed to grow as well as pigs on a normal diet. This indicates that the GE feed is having an anti-nutrient or toxic effect.

Dr Elvira Dommisse, a former GE scientist for Crop & Food and now an advocate of GE-free organics said, “FSANZ have not actually understood the animal feeding studies, because if they had, there is no way they could have approved such GE food crops for human or animal consumption.”

“This will be another regulatory example for my presentation on GE mis-regulation in New Zealand tomorrow at the Organics Aotearoa New Zealand conference being held at Waikato University,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Following the series of non-compliances at GE field trials, the complicity between the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA), MAF-Biosecurity NZ (MAF-BNZ), science funders and research institutes such as Plant and Food, AgResearch, and Scion, has been outstanding and needs exposure.”

“The culture of economics first and complicity to avoid public scrutiny, or precaution pervades ERMA, MAF, the Crown Research Agencies in terms of environmental risk, but it is also rampant in terms of the food supply in FSANZ and the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA).”

“FSANZ has ticked through 61 GE plant lines as safe for human consumption with NZFSA standing right behind them, although feeding studies have shown increasing serious health concerns.”

“Each of ERMA’s granted GE field trials have had consent conditions breached, and along with MAF inspection and enforcement teams, have effectively assisted those involved to dodge meaningful penalty. AgResearch is being assisted by ERMA to dodge both public processes and meaningful precaution with new GE animal applications that either dodge public process or have unintelligible information to technically circumvent the findings of GE Free NZ’s successful High Court outcome.”

“Organic production, as highlighted in the Innovate – Go Organic titled conference 13-15 November in Hamilton, avoids the risks of GE and requires no backroom complicity for it to succeed. A Clean Green 100% Pure New Zealand will support the market preferred safe and sustainable organics, and shun dodgy unsafe GE technologies,” said Mr Browning.

Soil & Health has a vision of a GE Free NZ in an Organic 2020.

US Commentator Calls New Zealand GE Trees Irresponsible

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association is calling for a ban on New Zealand exports of genetically engineered (GE) organisms.
The intended growing in the United States of 260,000 GE eucalyptus trees from New Zealand has been described as “Irresponsible, Dangerous, and Stupid,” by Jim Hightower, a U.S. national commentator who broadcasts daily radio commentaries carried by more than 150 commercial and public stations, as well as on the web. He was also twice elected Texas Agriculture Commissioner. (1,2,3)
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA), which initially recommended approval of the large GE tree plantings is currently considering the submissions to the forestry biotech company ArborGen’s application.
“This has happened with practically no media coverage or public participation. It is happening solely because a handful of global speculators hope to profit by making ethanol from cellulose-enhanced eucalyptus – never mind that their self-aggrandizement would put America’s native forests in danger of irreversible contamination by these destructive, invasive Frankentrees,” said Hightower.
“It is a double standard to be exporting very risky products, such as GE eucalyptus trees, most of which are intended to be allowed to flower and set seed. We all know the same trees would be unacceptable planted in New Zealand,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“The double standard is being recognised overseas and further GE exports from New Zealand will continue to erode our clean green 100% Pure NZ brand. Those opposed to the GE trees are the very consumers identified as the best value international market for New Zealand produce over the next two decades. They want wellness, GE free, sustainably produced, animal friendly, and fair traded products.”
Nearly 17,500 public comments, including some from New Zealand, were sent to the USDA opposing its recommendation for approval of ArborGen’s proposal. The USDA received only 39 favourable comments. If allowed, the plantings would take place on 330 acres of land across seven states in the Southern U.S., to supposedly trial future biofuel production. Soil & Health submitted against the USDA recommendation (4).
“The irony is that eucalypts, release soil carbon through their nutrient uptake, losing more carbon from the soil than they take from the atmosphere, and as such negate much of the point of biofuels. Not only will the GE trees be very risky as an invasive fire promoting GE weed, but they will also contribute to the human component of climate change,” said Mr Browning.
The 260,000 GE eucalypts were grown in New Zealand by Horizon 2, which is based in ArborGen’s Australasian headquarters near Te Teko in the Bay of Plenty. Rubicon, effectively old New Zealand company Fletcher Forests, is in turn a third of ArborGen. (7)
“The Rubicon – ArborGen – Horizon 2 GE tree exports lower New Zealand’s reputation by being both carbon depleters and GE.”
The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) has also granted Pacificvet Ltd of Christchurch, approval for importing for future exporting, a live GE E. coli vaccine (Poulvac® E. coli) used in the immunisation of poultry against colibacillosis. The vaccine, not permitted for use in New Zealand, is intended to be exported to South Pacific countries which will not be under ERMA controls. (5,6)
Specific consent from the Minister for the Environment is required however, if the export is for the non-contained use of the GE organism (GMO) in the country of import, and it appears import for export consent holder Pacificvet Ltd of Christchurch is now wanting to export the vaccine.
“This is a rather strange situation of New Zealand being the warehouse for GE goods not permitted for use in New Zealand, but for use by some of our less cautious neighbours,” said Mr Browning.
“Like most New Zealanders, Soil & Health is proud that there is no effective release of GE organisms in New Zealand, and to maximize this country’s GE free advantage, wants a ban on the export of GE material.”
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 free of genetically engineered organisms.

Notes
(1) http://jimhightower.com/node/6900 (Text also below)
(2) Audio, http://jimhightower.com/sites/jimhightower.civicactions.net/files/28_17_rnc.mp3
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Hightower
(4) Soil & Health’s previous media release and references further below Jim Hightower text.
(5) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/appfiles/execsumm/pdf/GMC08001-003.pdf
(6) http://www.pacificvet.co.nz/index2.html
(7) Click the links below for photographs of the Horizon 2 facility – ArborGen Australasian Head Office at 1943 SH39 Te Teko Bay of Plenty (07) 3229030 http://by107w.bay107.mail.live.com/att/GetAttachment.aspx?tnail=0&messag…|0|8CBFA35594C4CF0|, http://by107w.bay107.mail.live.com/att/GetAttachment.aspx?tnail=1&messag…|0|8CBFA35594C4CF0|, http://by107w.bay107.mail.live.com/att/GetAttachment.aspx?tnail=2&messag…|0|8CBFA35594C4CF0|, http://by107w.bay107.mail.live.com/att/GetAttachment.aspx?tnail=3&messag…|0|8CBFA35594C4CF0|

(1 Text) The Invasion of Genetically-Engineered Eucalyptus
Jim Hightower jimhightower.com, August 6 2009

Here’s a great idea: Let’s bring into our country a genetically-engineered, non-native tree that is known to be wildly invasive, explosively flammable, and insatiably thirsty for ground water. Then let’s clone thousands of these living firecrackers and plant them in forested regions across seven Southern states, allowing them to grow, flower, produce seeds, and spread into native environments.

Yes, this would be irresponsible, dangerous, and stupid – but apparently “Irresponsible, Dangerous, and Stupid” is the unofficial slogan of the U.S. Department Agriculture. In May, with little consideration of the devastating consequences for our native environment, USDA cavalierly rubberstamped a proposal by a profiteering corporation named ArborGen to do all of the above.

Substantially owned by International Paper, ArborGen shipped tissue from Brazilian eucalyptus trees to its New Zealand laboratories, where it was genetically altered to have more cellulose. New Zealand, however, outlaws plantings of genetically-engineered crops, so ArborGen sought out a more corporate-compliant country: Ours. The engineered eucalyptus was waved right into the good ol’ USA to be cloned, and it’s now awaiting final approval for outdoor release in our land.

This has happened with practically no media coverage or public participation. It is happening solely because a handful of global speculators hope to profit by making ethanol from cellulose-enhanced eucalyptus – never mind that their self-aggrandizement would put America’s native forests in danger of irreversible contamination by these destructive, invasive Frankentrees.

Luckily, several scrappy grassroots groups have mobilized to bring common sense and public pressure to bear on USDA. For updates and action items, visit www.nogetrees.org

Pesticide residues in food shows need for organics

/in , , ,

Pesticide residues in the New Zealand diet are being downplayed by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA), according to two advocacy groups. The comments of the Soil & Health Association of NZ and of Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa New Zealand (PAN) follow analysis of two food study results released by the NZFSA.
“The method of reporting of pesticide residues detected in the Total Diet Study (TDS) (1) hides the fact that most composite regional food samples contained pesticide residues, with several having significant multiple residues. It is time for food without pesticide residues – this means organics,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Analysis of the Food Residue Surveillance Programme (2) results for celery and spinach, showed 100% of the celery samples, and 75% of the spinach samples contained pesticide residues, with many samples containing multiple residues.”
“The celery and spinach were mostly contaminated with chlorothalinol (Bravo) or dithiocarbomates respectively, and sometimes with both. Other toxic pesticides were also found, this showing the need for to boost organic agriculture.”
“Of the celery samples, one had 6 different pesticide residues, one had 3 and three had 2. Fourteen spinach samples had at least 2 pesticide residues. These chemical cocktails are increasingly being shown to be dangerous.”
“The Total Diet Survey, far from giving our produce a clean bill of health has highlighted two persistent problems” said Dr Meriel Watts of Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa New Zealand.
“Tucked away at the back of the document are tables showing that almost all products made with grains such as wheat contains residues of the neurotoxic organophosphate insecticide pirimphos-methyl; and the majority of fruit and vegetables contain dithiocarbmate insecticides.”
“Pirimphos-methyl is used to fumigate grain silos, and there is no chance of removing it from the grain. Organic grain is not treated with this chemical”
“The dithiocarbamate insecticides which turned up in 16 out of 26 of the fruit and vegetables tested, is a perennial problem.”
“It has become very clear that New Zealand simply has to stop using these particular pesticides if we are very going to stop the residue problem,” said Dr Watts.
Dithiocarbamate fungicides and chlorothalonil are on the Pesticide Action Network International list of Highly Hazardous Pesticides for global phase out.
Dithiocarbomate fungicides (eg mancozeb, maneb, thiram) are severe central nervous system toxicant, carcinogen, and endocrine disruptors; they also cause sterility and birth defects, also affecting liver, kidney and respiratory and cardiac, systems. Chlorothalonil is carcinogenic, mutagenic and an environmental toxin and it is thought responsible for aggravating the health effects of other pesticides (3).
A study of cancer patients by Massey University’s Centre for Public Health Research (4) found an elevated leukaemia risk among horticulture workers, with risks to market gardeners and nursery growers, especially women, being higher than those to the general public.
In a separate study released by US government health staff in a recent issue of the American Society of Hematology journal, Blood, (5,6) it was found that exposure to certain pesticides, including dieldrin and chlorothalonil (Bravo) increased the risks 5.6 fold and 2.4 fold respectively, of a blood disorder that can lead to multiple myeloma.
“Considering that dieldrin was banned in agriculture in New Zealand in 1968, and from other uses in 1989, the commonly used fungicide Bravo (chlorothalonil) as found in most non-organic celery, may be a significant culprit in New Zealand cancers. Soil & Health urgently wants studies to focus on Bravo,” said Mr Browning.
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020.

————–
Notes:
(1) http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/publications/media-releases/2009/2009-08-17-residues-still-low-in-nz-food-study-shows.htm
(2) http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/publications/media-releases/2009/2009-06-24-crop-tests-produce-mixed-results.htm
(3) Lodovici, M. et al. 1994. Effect of a mixture of 15 commonly used pesticides on DNA levels of 8-hydroxy-2-deoxyguanosine and xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes in rat liver. /J. Environ. Pathol. Toxicol. Oncol./13(3):163-168. http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=3483984 Lodovici, M. et al, 1997, Oxidative liver DNA damage in rats treated with pesticide mixtures, /Toxicology/, Volume 117, Issue 1, 14 February 1997, Pages 55-60 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9020199. These results indicate that the toxicity of low doses of pesticide mixtures present in food might be further reduced by eliminating diphenylamine and chlorothalonil.
(4) http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-us/news/article.cfm?mnarticle=female-farm-workers-at-highest-risk-of-leukaemia-15-06-2009
(5) http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/short/113/25/6386
(6) http://www.checkorphan.org/news/individuals_who_apply_pesticides_are_found_have_double_risk_blood_disorder

Federated Farmers Bees Man Ambushing Beekeepers GE Protection

/in , ,

Federated Farmers GE statements show they are confused about what clean and green means, and appear to be influenced by the vested interests of one of their provincial presidents, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.
Federated Farmers genetic modification (GE), biosecurity, and bees spokesperson John Hartnell has been hard hitting in the media against Northland Councils seeking public feedback to proposals to set policy protecting non GE growers and the community from the costs of GE contamination.
“It would seem that John Hartnell may be overly influenced by New Zealand’s main lobbyist for GE, Dr William Rolleston, a biotechnology entrepreneur and Chair of the Life Science Network, but now also Federated Farmers President of South Canterbury province,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“The position Hartnell is taking, flies in the face of one of his own ventures, that of exporting organic honey. You can’t have organic or GE free honey if GE crops or trees are in the same region, but like a bee that has lost its way, Hartnell seems to be confused about what direction he should be taking.”
“The position that Northland Councils are exploring is actually about ensuring that honey producers, horticulturalists and farmers are not disadvantaged should GE be allowed in the New Zealand environment.”
“However Hartnell who should be looking out for New Zealand beekeepers and biosecurity appears to be trying to ambush protections for New Zealand beekeepers and primary producers, by criticizing the small spending by the Councils on a poll to test community acceptance of their plans,” said Mr Browning.
“When GE pollen was released by Plant & Food Research at its GE Brassica field trial at Lincoln near Hartnell’s home, did he join Soil & Health demanding that MAF-Biosecurity test nearby bee hives or brassica seed for contamination? No!”
“Good biosecurity practice in protecting New Zealand’s clean green brand would be testing for contamination to remove doubt. Federated Farmers biosecurity emphasis needs to be at home as well as at the border.”
“Hartnell’s honey would not be able to be marketed as clean green, 100% Pure New Zealand if GE contamination was found, but he doesn’t want decent protection to be installed for his fellow industry colleagues either. What’s up? Something’s murky in the Feds and it smells like GE.”
“Federated Farmers Dairy vice-chairperson, Willy Leferink chose to mention the benefit of GMO free grass being part of New Zealand’s market advantage recently, and Federated Farmers Grains Council certainly knew their market risks when maize for Japan was contaminated with GM soy, but somethings up. Hartnell’s here and he doesn’t seem to want to risk Northland Councils putting in protections for non-GE producers,” said Mr Browning.
“It is time Federated Farmers joined in the vision of a clean green Aotearoa New Zealand, recognised the economic advantages of the brand, and protected the real interests of its members.”
Current Government legislation does not give full protection to those disadvantaged should GE contamination occur. Although the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification had 49 recommendations as a framework to its outcome of “to proceed with caution”, only 20 recommendations have been fully implemented and significant gaps remain around environmental testing and liability.
The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) and MAF-Biosecurity New Zealand have allowed GE field trials all to fail consent conditions, including potentially GE pollination events, without significant penalty.
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that includes a GE Free Aotearoa New Zealand.

Life Sciences Confused About GE Risk

/in , ,

The biotech lobby group, Life Sciences appears confused about the birds and the bees, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

Quoted in today’s Christchurch Press newspaper, Life Sciences chairman William Rolleston had said, “The recent breaches by Plant and Food Research at Lincoln in a GM-brassica trial were not as bad as some might think. You have to ask yourself, `what risk was actually posed by those plants?’”

“However genetically engineered cauliflowers, broccoli and kale, all appear to have flowered at Plant & Food Research’s Lincoln facility last year, and yet no tests have been carried out to check on pollen spread,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Does Life Science’s not understand bees and pollen and fertilisation?”

“MAF-Biosecurity New Zealand have covered their backsides for their poor monitoring of the GE field trial by not testing for GE contamination, and now New Zealand’s biggest GE promoter, Life Sciences, is doubting any risk. The fact that the scientist involved allowed rows of GE cauliflowers to start flowering as early as April 2008, and I discovered a pollinated flowering GE kale in December 2008, suggests high risk and insect pollination.”

In 2006 the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) approved a trial – GMF 06001- to genetically modify four species of Brassica –cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli and kale with Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) insecticidal genes. Planting commenced in late 2007 ahead of the 2008 High Court hearing of the appeal by GE Free NZ and the organic sector against the approval …

MAF-Biosecurity New Zealand (MAF-BNZ) is required by law to monitor GE field trials approved by ERMA, but failed to stop the Plant & Food GE brassicas from flowering. The scientist’s midyear report stated that broccoli had commenced bolting in January 2008 and were removed ahead of flowering. However her own photographs suggested flowers, and her April 2008 photographs had fully bolted cauliflowers.

Honey and brassica seed from a nearby organic property have been stored for testing and Soil & Health has been in discussions with Plant & Food regarding testing for the GE material used by the Crown Research Institute during the breach.

“Soil & Health intend testing the material because our own government regulators have failed even the most basic consideration of neighbouring farmers and growers,” said Mr Browning.

“Organic certification can be lost through GE contamination and if there is GE contamination in the Lincoln area, the sooner it is cleaned up the better.”

“Brassica’s are some of the most promiscuous plants around, and with little care by regulators ERMA, MAF-Biosecurity, or the experimenter, Plant & Food Research, it appears that the community must step in to test for contamination.”

Rolleston was also quoted, “There had been a lot of talk about “how onerous and unnecessary” regulations around GM research were.”

However Browning says that the breaches prove the need that both strong regulation around controls and monitoring are necessary, including strict liability controls over the experimenters. Consent breaches have occurred at all ERMA approved field trials.

Soil & Health supports strict liability controls to remove all costs of GE contamination from rates and taxpayers.

“With the track record of regulators and experimenters, a ban would be better.”

Soil & Health has a vision of a GE Free and Organic 2020.

Crop and Food confidential Annual Report No 2210, for GMF06001 July 2008http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/no/compliance/2008%20GMF06001%20Annual%20Report.pdf

MAF dodging Plant & Food’s $10million GE liability

/in , ,

The final response of MAF’s biosecurity and enforcement teams following major breaches of consent by Plant & Food Research (P&F) at its GE brassica (broccoli, cauliflower, cabbages etc.) field trial during 2008, is a massive insult to the more than 930 submitters who opposed the field trial, and shows the corruption of government, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.
Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning first alerted Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry – Biosecurity New Zealand (MAF-BNZ) last December to his discovery of the breach. Plant & Food Research had left GE brassica plants to flower in the field, something that was not permitted under the field trial’s consent conditions.
Last Monday a MAF Investigator from MAF Infrastructure and Compliance Enforcement notified Mr Browning that MAF had finalised the matter by way of a formal warning to the Plant and Food Research Field Test Manager, the scientist who had resigned her position as approved containment facility operator following publicity of the breach.
“MAF was in a position to send the strongest possible message to the science community for its sloppy approach to GE field trials. Instead it has just passed them the most lenient next-to-nothing approach possible,” said Soil & Health Spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Soil & Health has yet to receive the ‘comprehensive information summary’, the investigation report, completed by the MAF Investigator. There is also further information relating to the decision-making process that resulted in the warning decision.” However, Soil & Health believes that MAF, who have informally suggested that they were unable to penalise Plant and Food, have conveniently failed to interpret the law. Plant and Food could have been fined at least $10 million, and the scientist $500,000 (1).”
“The ‘slap over the wrist with a wet seed packet’ of a formal warning to the GE field trial’s key scientist, dodges the responsibility of her employer, Plant and Food Research, who continues to experiment with many other GE vegetables and flowers indoors and is holding an approval for a substantial and more risky GE allium (onion family) field trial that has not yet been planted. These GE crops will be allowed to go to flower and set seed in the field”
“With significant cost to those that submitted against the GE brassica and onion applications and who were vindicated in their concerns about pollen release when Soil & Health and GE Free NZ exposed the GE breaches, how is it that P& F are not fined substantially as the HSNO Act allows? All those submitters get it right, Soil & Health and GE Free NZ do the work, and Plant & Food gets a business as usual pass.”
“This smacks of collusion from the top down and begs the question of why MAF-BNZ is the agency responsible for monitoring GE experiments in New Zealand. When they fail that role along with the scientists involved, they are the sole agency responsible for checking the degree of GE contamination resulting from the breach. Deciding the penalty for this breach is also their task and they failed that. Another MAF division is the judge and jury deciding the legal penalty for those responsible and yet did not penalise P&F at all”
“ Who is responsible? The Minister? The CEO? Someone has allowed the three separate arms of MAF to blend a pro-GE business as usual solution, to a blatant example of why New Zealand science should not be proceeding down the GE path.”
“Is it because P&F is a Crown Research Institute (CRI)? Is it because sneaky behind the scenes GE exports from our science institutions are benefiting New Zealand big business in its environmentally unsustainable and blinkered approach to business? Fletcher Challenge’s manifestation Rubicon’s attempt to grow 260,000 GE eucalypt trees, exported after developmental assistance by the laboratories of Arborgen and CRI Scion in New Zealand, through to flowering and seeding in several US states and Brazil, is one of the more reckless examples of GE development yet,” said Mr Browning.
Just a few days ago Prime Minister Key gave $1million dollars to the Queenstown tourisms 100% Pure branded winter festival.
“How about Plant & Food’s $10 million penalty going to clean green 100% Pure organic research and development?”
“Risky and sloppy GE science does not fit with tourism’s 100% Pure brand or the Clean Green brand that sells so much of our primary production and worse still, it lacks a conscience about long term environmental and health effects.”
Every GE field trial approved by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) has been in breach of its consent conditions, with two closed down since Soil & Health and GE Free NZ have disclosed serious non-compliances at them. Both Scion and Plant and Food risked pollen release.
MAF-BNZ also failed to monitor the Scion GE pine tree field trial correctly, and then joined with ERMA and Scion into damage control, ignoring evidence supplied by Soil & Health, back dating illegal consent changes, misleading the public about the breaches, with the Minister of the day also joining in.
Photographs and the scientist’s own log have shown how the GE brassica field trial was breaching its ERMA consent conditions with flowering plants, even as GE Free NZ and the organic sector were in the High Court appealing ERMA’s decision allowing the trial. If the decision was made under the RMA, the scientist would not have dared plant until the appeal decision was final.
“Plant and Food not only planted but breached its consent conditions ahead of a final decision.”
“Such gross negligence and arrogance gets the wet seed packet approach and business as usual by MAF. What is ERMA’s report, due out shortly, going to say about the many consents given to P&F? Probably not a lot, when two of ERMA’s own team granted the decision to Crop & Food (now P&F ).”
P&F was formed during the time of the GE brassica field trial by a merger of Crop & Food Research (C&F) and HortResearch, who employed two scientists involved in the ERMA decision to allow the GE brassica field trial. The C&F GE brassica applicants and some decision makers were based at the Lincoln CRI research centre. At the time HortResearch employed some ERMA decision makers and assured the many submitters and public that GE pollen release would not be a problem, because of “the controls that have been designed to ensure that GM brassicas do not produce open flowers in the field test site.”
“Blind faith in the colleagues next door or just fobbing the public off?”
“Science funders need to look at their priorities as well, and Foundation of Research Science and Technology (FORST) should be focused on genuine sustainability as their funding target, but with GE contamination well through that organisation, and now also including then acting Crop & Food CEO at the time of the GE brassica breach, it will be a difficult challenge for funding to focus on genuine sustainability and organic research, unless government shows direction.”
“With such incestuous connection between the regulatory and science fraternities, no wonder the community loses faith. The community may have to look beyond the regulations if they are not seen to genuinely work, or GE pollen can be expected as a routine contamination. Science regulation in New Zealand means little this week.” said Mr Browning.
Currently there are no GE field trials in operation in New Zealand, with Plant and Food being coy about their intentions with the GE onion family field trial approval they hold, and AgResearch’s wide ranging GE animal applications have been stopped following GE Free NZ’s successful appeal to the High Court against ERMA. AgResearch GE experimental cattle are grazing at Ruakura, but are not allowed to be experimented with, due to their relevant consents having expired. Technically with the High Court decision they should now be euthanased within a year (2). However, AgResearch intends reapplying, despite the significant animal welfare concerns by the public and admissions of “a less than 9 percent live birth rate, aborted deformed foetuses, deformed calves, gangrenous udders and ‘animals suffering from respiratory conditions’”.
“There is a very good opportunity for government to say NO TO GE FIELD TRIALS. All have failed in some respects, all are contrary to 100% Pure, Clean Green brand NZ, there ***is none in operation and the public are mostly opposed to them.”
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 with a motto of Healthy Soil, Healthy Food, Healthy People, and is active in seeking genuinely sustainable solutions for New Zealand production and environment. Plant and Food’s $10 million plus penalty could be a good investment for sustainable value added organic production.

——
NOTES:
(1) Who will carry out enforcement for new organisms?
The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) is the primary agency undertaking new organism enforcement activities.

What do enforcement officers do?

Enforcement officers will visit premises from time to time to check that controls on new organisms are being complied with. The frequency of inspections should reflect the risks involved. High risk situations should be checked often, while low risk situations may be visited on a less frequent basis. The Act gives enforcement officers the power to enter premises to collect information and evidence. An enforcement officer can also issue a compliance order requiring a person:
* to cease doing anything that contravenes the Act or is significantly dangerous; or
* to do something to ensure compliance, or to remedy the effects of a breach.

(2) What are the penalties for serious offences (non-compliance) under the HSNO Act?
The penalties for breaching the HSNO Act are fines of up to $500,000 in the case of an individual; and, in the case of a body corporate, the greater of $10 million, or three times the value of any commercial gain from the contravention, or 10 per cent of the turnover of the body corporate and all its interconnected bodies corporate, if the commercial gain cannot be ascertained. In addition, a person could be found to have civil liability for acts or omissions in breach of the Act.
(3) 45A Controls required for certain developments and for all field tests
· (1) This section applies to an approval under section 45—

o (a) to develop a new organism in containment that is a genetically modified organism, to the extent that the development does not take place in a containment structure; or
o (b) to field test a new organism in containment if the new organism is a genetically modified organism.
(2) An approval—
o (a) must include controls to ensure that, after the end of the development or field test, the organism and any heritable material from the organism is removed or destroyed; and
o (b) may include controls to ensure that, after the end of the development or field test and after heritable material is removed or destroyed, some or all of the genetic elements remaining from the organism are removed or destroyed.