Food Safety Authority continues to shoot the messenger

The Soil & Health Association is very concerned that New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) staff are hell-bent on ignoring scientific research that clearly shows the links between aspartame and cancer, especially in children when the mother consumes aspartame during pregnancy. Aspartame converts to formaldehyde when ingested.

Not only that but Food Safety calling the Soil & Health spokesperson a scaremonger is again shooting the messenger instead of attending to the health concerns of the New Zealand community.

“Evidence from award-winning scientific researchers and the increasing local evidence is being studiously ignored by the agency. Why?” asks Soil & Health spokesperson, Steffan Browning.

“The agency has nothing original in its material and is trotting out the same old industry pap. Why? Who are they beholden to? Is it commercial and trade imperatives, philosophical, attitudinal and institutional blindness and deafness? What ever it is, it needs to change very quickly. The information that substantiates the rising list of aspartame victims concerns exists, but the precautionary approach is not even considered unless it is for trade protection.”

“Although the NZFSA toxicologist is touted as an expert, with over 30 years experience, including serving on international expert consultations, he is ignoring mounting research from the international scientific community, such as the following:

“These are indeed extremely high levels for adducts of formaldehyde, a substance responsible for chronic deleterious effects that has also been considered carcinogenic…..
”It is concluded that aspartame consumption may constitute a hazard because of its contribution to the formation of formaldehyde adducts.” (Trocho 1998)

“It was a very interesting paper, that demonstrates that formaldehyde formation from aspartame ingestion is very common and does indeed accumulate within the cell, reacting with cellular proteins (mostly enzymes) and DNA (both mitochondrial and nuclear). The fact that it accumulates with each dose, indicates grave consequences among those who consume diet drinks and foodstuffs on a daily basis.” (Blaylock 1998)

Methanol from aspartame is released in the small intestine when the methyl group of aspartame encounters the enzyme chymotrypsin (Stegink 1984, page 143). A relatively small amount of aspartame (e.g., one can of soda ingested by a child) can significantly increase plasma methanol levels (Davoli 1986a).

Clinically, chronic, low-level exposure to methanol has been seen to cause headaches, dizziness, nausea, ear buzzing, GI disturbances, weakness, vertigo, chills, memory lapses, numbness & shooting pains, behavioral disturbances, neuritis, misty vision, vision tunneling, blurring of vision, conjunctivitis, insomnia, vision loss, depression, heart problems (including disease of the heart muscle), and pancreatic inflammation (Kavet 1990, Monte 1984, Posner 1975).

The methanol from aspartame is converted to formaldehyde and then formic acid (DHHS 1993, Liesivuori 1991), although some of the formaldehyde appears to accumulate in the body as discussed above. Chronic formaldehyde exposure at very low doses has been shown to cause immune system and nervous system changes and damage as well as headaches, general poor health, irreversible genetic damage, and a number of other serious health problems (Fujimaki 1992, He 1998, John 1994, Liu 1993, Main 1983, Molhave 1986, National Research Council 1981, Shaham 1996, Srivastava 1992, Vojdani 1992, Wantke 1996). One experiment (Wantke 1996) showed that chronic exposure to formaldehyde caused systemic health problems (i.e., poor health) in children at an air concentration of only 0.043 – 0.070 parts per million!

“Methanol is a metabolic poison which, in the absence of ethanol (such as in fruits) is unstable and breaks down into formaldehyde, a poison and carcinogen, and formic acid, also a poison and carcinogen,” said Browning.

“The NZFSA “expert” toxicologist quotes formaldehyde in fruit digestion as some sort of equivalent, yet in fruit the methanol does not break down at the same rate into formaldehyde, when bound by natural pectin and is balanced by the proportionately much greater ethanol.”

“Fruit has protective factors which help prevent chronic poisoning from methanol metabolites such as formaldehyde. A dose of aspartame is significantly different than that of a mouthful of fruit which has a range of enzymes and compounds in balance.”

“Some NZFSA staff are also choosing to ignore the very real experiences of New Zealanders who thanks to Abby Cormack, Betty Martini, Safe Food Campaign and Soil & Health have quit aspartame and have recovered from serious life altering health effects,” said Browning.

“For the NZFSA toxicologist to suggest that Soil & Health encouraging people away from a carcinogenic neurotoxic synthetic sweetener is in any way inappropriate because of obesity or diabetes, shows a lack of objectivity. Yes we are taken seriously and the Obesity Action Coalition Executive Director has changed her televised pro-aspartame view since meeting anti-aspartame campaigners Abby Cormack and Betty Martini, and hearing of the corruption and spin, and having the independent research produced in a public forum.”

“Soil & Health will produce research papers substantiating any of its aspartame claims and the supportive information has all been available to NZFSA. It is a matter of will to acknowledge that people in the community are being harmed by aspartame and then actually do something about it.”

“Soil & Health is committed along with Safe Food Campaign, ADHD Society, Mission Possible, many scientists and doctors, consumers and producers to have the toxic aspartame and its stablemates out of the food chain.”

Note:
www.dorway.com/formaldehyde.html

Formaldehyde in diet coke more dangerous than chinese pyjamas

Formaldehyde is one of the synthetic sweetener aspartame’s by products, and is an even greater health threat than formaldehyde in imported clothing according to Soil & Health.

“Formaldehyde produced in childrens bodies from the aspartame in Diet drinks, some chewing gum and cereals and many processed foods, is likely to be an even greater health hazard than that in the unregulated clothing market,” according to Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, “Cancer and many other health issues come from the junk additives that the regulated food industry is allowed to use.”

The Ministry of Consumer Affairs says it is urgently looking into the extent of the imported clothing problem and will soon begin analysing clothing samples. It is looking into whether the allegations are true and if stricter controls are needed at the border.

“However, the same sort of concern should be shown by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority, the Prime Minister, Health and Food Safety Ministers, and the legions of scuttling bureacrats around the formaldehyde being swilled down in the schools and streets of New Zealand in Diet drinks and chewing gum,” said Browning.

The cancer causing, mostly genetically engineered chemical sweetener known as 951, Equal, aspartame and NutraSweet, is found in over 6000 products internationally including ‘Diet’ drinks, effervescent vitamin tablets, chewing gum, and sweets.

Aspartame has been linked to many health symptoms, including those expressed as ADHD, anxiety, depression, irritability, confusion, memory loss, insomnia, dizziness, migraines, cramps, abdominal pain, numbness or tingling of extremities, rashes, chronic fatigue, and personality changes.

“Recently released European Ramazzini Foundation research (1), showed that offspring of rats fed aspartame, developed tumours much earlier than those fed the carcinogen later in life.

Earlier research from the University of Barcelona (2) showed clear evidence that formaldehyde when transformed from aspartame spreads throughout the kidneys, liver, eyes and brain.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington DD has now come out against aspartame and along with 12 prestigious Toxicologists they have asked that the precautionary Delany Clause be invoked and aspartame be removed from the American diet, due to its carcinogenicity. (3)

“Dr. Woodrow Monte Ph.D. retired Professor of Food Science, University of Arizona and early investigator of aspartame, often residing in New Zealand, has said, “Curiosity about the safety of Aspartame need go no further than the indisputable fact that each molecule of the sweetener turns into a molecule of Formaldehyde when metabolized in the human body. Enough said!” (4)

Dr Monte filed the first petition to ban aspartame from use in foods in the United States over 20 years ago, when corrupt political processes introduced the sweetener against the wishes of food safety scientists.

Formaldehyde in food, drink or clothing is dangerous and researchers, Cogliano VJ, Baan RA, Straif K, .(5) make particular mention of garment workers and other industrial users when discussing the cancer causing compound.

“Soil & Health want an immediate removal of aspartame from schools as is happening in other parts of the world where the harm of aspartame is recognised,” said Browning, “and for the hesitant, Soil & Health is also calling as a first step for school boards to pull aspartame from school canteens and vending machines for 60 days to test for behavioural and health improvements in pupils.”

“Should sugar be undesirable, Soil & Health recommends natural alternatives such as stevia, rather than the neurotoxic carcinogenic synthetic sweeteners such as aspartame.”

“Soil & Health has a motto of Healthy Soil, Healthy Food, Healthy People, and promotes a diet free from synthetic additives.”

Notes:
(1) http://www.ramazzini.it/fondazione/pdfUpload/Environ%20Health%20Perspect…
(2) http://www.presidiotex.com/barcelona/SUMMARY/summary.html)
(3) http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706251.html
(4) http://www.sweetpoison.com/articles/dr-woodrow-monte4.html
(5) www.ehponline.org/members/2005/7542/7542.html

NZFSA fails food test, bring on the organics

Soil & Health is looking forward to the Organics Aotearoa New Zealand Conference at Lincoln University, on Friday & Saturday, following release of NZFSA’s Total Diet Survey (TDS) results.

“NZFSA should reduce the spin it puts in its pesticide residue results and admit that it is pure good luck to find pesticide and heavy metal residue free food,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“The statement that of approximately 199,100 individual analytical agricultural compound residue results, 997 results (0.5%) represented detectable residues, was misleading. The majority of the tests were totally irrelevant to the foods tested and were in fact a by catch from a multi residue screen of 221 compounds, multiplied by about 121 tested foods in batches.”

“Of course most foods do not have anything like 221 pesticides near them and so there are numerous zero detections, but put around the other way, we find that numerous foods have one or more residues. Of 121 foods just 25 had no residues, and some of those would instead have dubious food additives also considered safe by the trade focused NZFSA,” said Browning.

“New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) also fails consumers with its food testing by using the spurious Maximum Residue Limit as a safety guide and takes no account of the cocktail effect of consuming multiple agrichemical residues.”

At Wednesday’s media conference, NZFSA staff downplayed the health risks of chemical cocktails, by saying the total volume of chemicals ingested was the appropriate measure, rather than accepting evidence that some pesticides heightened health effects at low residue levels when mixed in typical food combinations with other pesticides.

““Dose makes the poison,” was the repeated phrase as the NZFSA chemical apologist attempted to hoodwink yesterday’s strong media presence. Suggesting that synthetic agrichemical residues in New Zealand food were no worse than what occurs naturally, and that the Allowable Daily Intake (ADI) limits and MRL’s were all set at such conservative levels that meant that even the numerous non-compliances in the Total Diet Survey were absolutely safe.”

“Soil & Health has another view based on independent science (eg. Lodovici, M. et al 1994,1997) and the continuing withdrawal of agrichemicals when serious health effects are finally acknowledged. For example an organophosphate and also pentachlorophenol, will be withdrawn by the Environmental Risk Management Authority this year,” said Browning, “NZFSA should acknowledge that their ADI’s and MRL’s are just their tool in the absence of knowledge and serious precaution, and should stop fudging the residue figures.”

“Chlorothalonil the active ingredient in Bravo fungicide, is noted and down played in the NZFSA celery and spinach residue results. 16 and 13 results above the MRL respectively for 48 tests each, but the real fact is that celery only had 6 out of 48 tests chlorothalonil negative and 5 of those had other residues. The only one residue free celery sample of 48, would most likely be organic but was not differentiated.”

“Chlorothalonil, a carcinogen, mutagenic environmental toxin, was in all samples of conventional celery tested almost 3 years ago by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority and Soil and Health. However part of the change is use by growers of different fungicides.”

“Organic celery of course has no such pesticide residues and while not always looking like the nitrate and pesticide compromised supermarket versions, can still be attractive but more sustainably produced.”

“A fresh approach to food is needed in New Zealand and with massive growth in organics internationally, it is time that synthetic pesticide free organic production targets, such as in Soil & Health’s Organic 2020 vision, were taken on for the well being of New Zealand’s environmental and human health.”

Healthy Soil, Healthy Food, Healthy People.

1080 A Dirty Green Poison

The decision by ERMA to allow ongoing aerial drops of 1080 for possum control leaves no real incentive for operators in so-called ‘clean green’ New Zealand to find an alternative, according to the Soil & Health Association.

“ERMA continues to base its decisions on economics, rather than on environmental precaution,” said Soil & Heath spokesperson Steffan Browning. “ERMA is choosing ‘dirty green’ over ‘clean green’. ERMA spin that TB control is part of our clean green image, is rubbish when it is by widespread aerial poisoning.”

New Zealand uses 80% of the world’s production of the often green-dyed pesticide 1080, which is a manufactured chemical compound called sodium fluoroacetate or sodium monofluoroacetate.

The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) said in its decision, “it does not give the aerial application of 1080 a green light so much as a flashing amber light – ‘proceed, but with caution.’”

Section 7 of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act requires that those making decisions under it shall take into account “… the need for caution in managing adverse effects where there is scientific and technical uncertainty about those effects.”

“Soil & Health predicts there will be little change to the current aerial drops, which represent 94 percent of the 1080 toxins use.” Says Browning. “The ‘flashing amber light’ lacks the precautionary approach that is required under New Zealand’s international obligations. There is no amber light or sunset clause, just monitoring under economic imperatives.”

“The areas of uncertainty according to ERMA are to be further researched, but ERMA’s recommended studies are not inclusive enough, and the adage that lack of evidence does not constitute lack of effects, must be considered. Studies need to be designed by more than those following the current economic argument. DOC, Landcare, MAF and Forest & Bird all promote 1080 based on economic concerns.”

“Soil & Health strongly shares biodiversity concerns, but knows that very effective control can happen by ground control, and is concerned that those closely interested in biodiversity may be missing strong ecological points as they accept the current economic-based solution.”

“The decision is littered with cost-based comments against ground control and has failed to demand that ground-based control must be used in most instances although most areas are accessible. The current economic threshold used in decision-making must be changed to make ground-based controls financially feasible.”

“ERMA’s message that regular aerial scattering of huge amounts of poison on New Zealand’s picture postcard wilderness is better than employing people on the ground to manage pest control, does nothing for the clean green image that DOC, MAF, and Forest & Bird, the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition refer to when it suits,” said Browning, “Nor will the genetically engineered possum control alternatives (that Landcare Research is experimenting with) be good for the New Zealand clean green brand.”

“Soil & Health sees an organic future where decisions are made considering the full toxic cost, and decisions create economic incentives for solutions that we can be proud of.”o.nz

Successful Therapeutics Campaign needs to push further

The success of the community in stalling the Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill needs to be extended to rolling back Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) decisions allowing risky additives in food, according to the Soil & Health Association.

The Government admitted yesterday that it currently could not get the Therapeutics Bill through Parliament. This comes at a time when there are big questions about the decision by FSANZ allowing the artificial sweetener Aspartame into the food chain, and when the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) is unable to control a baby food manufacturer’s use of un-assessed additives.

“Soil & Health congratulates the thousands of therapeutic products consumers and producers who signed our petition opposing a trans-Tasman agency that would have regulated natural products and supplements,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Agencies such as FSANZ and NZFSA appear to operate mostly to facilitate trade, and there is good cause for consumers to resist another such agency.”

“Soil & Health will this morning welcome international anti-aspartame campaigner Betty Martini to New Zealand, highlighting products such as Aspartame, NutraSweet, Equal, E951, Canderel and Benevia, that have been criticised for a range of serious health ailments but have been allowed through FSANZ into widespread New Zealand use.”

Food Standards Australia New Zealand sets food standards for both countries, and the New Zealand Food Safety Authority monitors food to those standards.

“Soil & Health is also concerned that another sweetener additive has been included in baby food by international company Nutricia without the required safety assessment. NZFSA is not even insisting on withdrawal of the product, which shows the legislative flaws,” said Mr Browning, “I expect that FSANZ will push the baby food additive (fructo-oligosaccharide -fos) through an assessment process, as the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) in the USA has already given it a tick, and if the corrupted FDA says its fine, invariably so does the trans-Tasman agency FSANZ.”

“While ‘fos’ is often derived for supplement use from natural chicory root, large commercial operations like Nutricia often use the cheap and questionable genetically engineered form. New Zealanders need agencies that reflect deep caution over GE and baby foods and proven risky food additives.”

“The success of consumers against the Therapeutics Bill must be rewarded with a New Zealand regulatory system that reflects the low risk of most natural products, but uses effective precaution and genuine independent research, in decisions about the synthetic food ingredients that international big business pushes,” said Mr Browning.

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020, free of risky synthetic and GE food ingredients.

Time to ban aerial spraying here too

COMBINED MEDIA RELEASE:
Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa NZ
Soil & Health Association
Safe Food Campaign

“Congratulations to the European Union for their enlightened approach to protecting human health and the environment by progressing plans to ban aerial spraying of pesticides”.

That’s the message today from Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa NZ, the Soil & Health Association and the Safe Food Campaign.

The EU’s Environment Committee has endorsed plans by the European Commission for a ban on aerial spraying of pesticides as part of a wide-ranging strategy to cut down the use of pesticides.

“Its time now for New Zealand to also look at banning aerial spraying of pesticides” said Dr Meriel Watts of Pesticide Action Network. “Far too many people have had their lives blighted by aerial spraying in both rural and urban areas of New Zealand. Terrible health effects have resulted from the aerial spraying of the herbicide 2,4-D; and the adverse effects of the unnecessary spraying of West Auckland for the Painted Apple moth are still being felt.”

“Many horticultural growers have lost valuable crops to drift from the aerial spraying of 2,4-D” added Steffan Browning of Soil & Health. “Soil & Health often receives complaints of cross-boundary spray drift.”

“ The aerial spraying of highly toxic insecticides such as chlorpyrifos is still permitted in New Zealand, even though this insecticide is known to cause adverse developmental effects in children and has been restricted in the US” said Alison White of the Safe Food Campaign.

The three organisations, which have been trying to combat pesticide problems in New Zealand for many years, also welcome other initiatives by the EU and urge the New Zealand government to be equally proactive in reducing pesticide use here.

These initiatives include:

* A national pesticide use reduction target of 25% within 5 years, and 50% within 10 years, including non-agricultural uses
* A system of levies on pesticides to fund the reduction plan
* Ban on pesticides in all areas used by the general public (e.g. parks, school grounds, residential areas) and in “substantial no-spray zones” around them.
* A buffer zone of 10m around all water courses
* Using the ‘substitution principle’ whereby more dangerous substances will be removed from the market if safer alternatives exist

“These are all very good measures that will certainly contribute substantially to improved public health and environmental integrity”, said Dr Watts. “New Zealand has dragged its feet for many years on this issue, trying to shuffle it under the carpet and manage the problems by talking with industry. But progress has been too slow. Until this country is prepared to take a firm stand on pesticides the issue will not go away.”

”One of the major problems New Zealand has failed to deal with is the unregulated non-commercial uses.”

“Right now untrained home gardeners can access all kinds of toxic herbicides and are enthusiastically waging war on weeds, with no clue about the toxic effects of the herbicides they are exposing themselves and their neighbours, too – let alone the effects on the wider environment” said Dr Watts. This is simply no longer acceptable in so-called developed country.”

“Soil & Health has recently requested that ERMA reassess home gardeners access to pesticides,” said Steffan Browning.

The European Committee stressed that only quantitative use reduction targets in the national action plans will push governments to lower the amount of pesticides used. The Member States are urged to promote low pesticide-input farming and organic farming, giving priority to non-chemical alternatives.

New editor at Organic NZ

New Zealand’s leading magazine on organics and sustainable living, Organic NZ, has a new editor.

Adelia Hallett joins the magazine this month and begins by producing the September/October issue.

Organic NZ is published by the Soil and Health Association, an organisation established in 1941 to promote sustainable agriculture and nutrition. Co-chair Steffan Browning said that Ms Hallett was a good fit for the magazine.

“Adelia has a strong background in journalism and the organics sector, and we are delighted to welcome her as editor of Organic NZ,” he said.

“New Zealand is at a critical point, where it must choose its path for the future. We believe that New Zealand can be organic by 2020, but can only be achieved through public pressure.”

“Organic NZ has a huge role to play in helping people to understand the vital link between healthy soil, healthy food and healthy people.”

Ms Hallett has worked in newspapers around New Zealand, including the New Zealand Herald, and is now freelancing and specialising in environmental reporting. She lives with her family on a smallholding on the Kaipara Harbour and is involved in local organic organisations.

Mr Browning paid tribute to the work of previous editor Allan Baddock in building Organic NZ into the country’s leading magazine on organics and sustainable living.

“Organic NZ has a huge reputation for its credibility and authority, and we thank Allan for his role in developing that,” he said.

Picton’s toxic gas use lacks consent

Methyl bromide fumigation at ports around New Zealand needs urgent reassessment, according to the Soil & Health Association, following the Marlborough District Council’s refusal to require their Port Company to apply for resource consent to discharge the toxic gas to the Picton environment.

“Port Marlborough has no idea where the gas is going after fumigation covers are pulled off the export log stacks’, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“The ozone depleting neuro-toxin methyl bromide gas is under contention as it is implicated in 6 Port Nelson workers deaths by motor neuron disease, yet Picton has far less controls than Nelson. Low temperature inversion layers in calm winter time conditions may be particularly dangerous, considering the findings in District Health Board reports for neighbouring Port Nelson gas dispersal modelling.”

“With no Picton air movement modelling to predict the contamination area of the highly toxic, odourless and tasteless gas, workers and tourists in the Port and ferry terminal area, and the greater Picton community may be at risk during every log shipment.”

“The Code of Practice in Picton has not been available to the media and on my inspection showed lack of substance and no community input. The Code of Practice has not been peer reviewed by the Labour Department or Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA).”

“Conflicts of interest between councils with RMA regulatory functions, their council owned dividend generating port companies and the responsibilities of staff need scrutiny, especially Unitary Authorities as in the Nelson Marlborough region, which does not have a regional council”, said Browning.

“The problem however extends nationwide with capture and destruction of methyl bromide fumigant not used with export logs anywhere in New Zealand, and little truly independent monitoring .”

“Responsible methyl bromide fumigators internationally are capturing the gas rather than participating in ozone depletion and risking the health of communities. Log exporters in clean green New Zealand need to lift their game. Methyl bromide is 50 times more damaging to the ozone layer than banned CFC refrigerants.”

“Soil & Health want to see an urgent reassessment by ERMA of methyl bromide use nationally, and immediate precautions on discharge at Picton and other ports.”

“Clean alternatives to neurotoxin ozone depleting gases must be implemented in keeping with Brand New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure image, and Soil & Health’s vision of an Organic 2020.”

GE brassica decision lacks justification

Today’s Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) decision approving a Crop and Food application to field trial brassicas (broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage and forage kale) genetically engineered with a toxin derived from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis(Bt), lacks justification in New Zealand’s new era of sustainability, and is full of contradictions, according to Soil & Health’s spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“ERMA has yet to decline an application for a GE field trial, and appears to look for a way to approve, regardless of how shonky the application is. This shows that ERMA is biased towards genetic engineering in clean green New Zealand, regardless of the community’s opposition,” said Mr Browning, adding, “that not running food safety feeding trials ahead of field trials of GE crops is a nonsense.”

“Why grow a crop that is potentially toxic to humans and animals for ten years without first establishing if it is even potentially edible?”

The ERMA Committee states that “GM brassicas will be prevented from entering the human food chain and a further application to the Authority for a release approval would be necessary before effects on food safety and food choice would arise. Therefore, the Committee did not consider the effects on food safety and food choices further for this application.”

“That the GE Bt brassica’s are ultimately intended for commercial release, yet have not undergone feeding studies to ensure food safety, makes this trial a serious potential waste of tax payers money, said Mr Browning, ” Animals are sick and dying in India from eating cotton also modified with Bt toxins and cotton workers have health issues. Feed studies also show health risks from other Bt engineered crops.”

“The ERMA decision appears to be predicated heavily on upskilling of scientists and increasing experience in working with gene technology in the field. The decision expects marginal public benefit however, and ERMA states, “This beneficial effect will accrue to the applicant and the staff involved in this field test and is considered to be of minimal value. A public benefit accruing to the wider scientific community when papers are published describing the research and its results (particularly in the area of impacts on the soil biota of GM plants) would be of minor value. However, this may be very unlikely to be realised.”

“Despite ERMA receiving 941submissions of objection, many advocating an organic alternative for New Zealand and the overwhelming desire for a clean green country, the ERMA decision merely states, “Given the contained nature of this field test, the Committee did not identify any significant adverse effects on society and community.”

“New Zealand’s markets are already concerned with food miles, and will not like the signals that clean green NZ is intending commercial production of GE vegetables sometime”, said Mr Browning.

ERMA’s decision in considering alternatives, states, “The Committee considers that the primary goals of this field test are to assess the agronomic performance of these GM plants under natural environmental conditions, the resistance of GM brassicas to insect pests, and to assess the environmental impacts of these GM brassicas.”,

and after suggesting the field test, “provides a valuable opportunity for experimental work to assess the impacts of GM brassica plants on the soil biota, non-target organisms, and the persistence of DNA sequences and Cry proteins in the soil.”,

then states, “The Committee notes that there is some uncertainty regarding the potential for meaningful information on the environmental impacts of growing GM brassicas to be obtained given the limitations of scale inherent in this field test.”

Soil & Health points out however funding was uncertain for the limited work that ERMA notes as valuable, that other Crown Research Agencies would be required to assist in, and spokesperson Steffan Browning, adds that, “it would be wasting resources considering public opposition and the unlikely commercialisation of the brassicas, if the current level of security required to protect GE trial crops was to be continued.”

In considering the potentially significant adverse effects on the market economy, ERMA states, “that since this application is for a small-scale contained field test with a fixed time period after which all plants will be removed, the potentially significant adverse and beneficial effects associated with this application are not economic in nature.”

However New Zealand farmers, the community and customers of the riches of a clean green land may see it differently according to Mr Browning and the ramifications of field tests trialling GE food crops, although at risk of sabotage, will send messages contrary to that of Prime Minister Helen Clark’s desire for New Zealand to be the worlds first truly sustainable country, and National’s John Key a week ago, “New Zealand’s clean green environment is vital to the Kiwi way of life and vital to the image New Zealand sells to the world,” both messages that Soil & Health agrees with.

Soil & Health will be discussing with other groups, potential further action against the field trial, as it is committed to true sustainability and a GE Free future.

MAF dinosaurs must stop robbing sustainability budgets

Soil & Health welcomes the budget initiatives around true environmental sustainability announced yesterday, including the household sustainability programme and the public recycling scheme, and the $800 million investment quoted by Environment Minister Benson-Pope, “to take a big step towards New Zealand becoming the world’s first truly sustainable nation”.

However the big money will be sustainability rhetoric when it comes to primary production unless there are major changes within MAF Policy, according to Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, adding, “The recent MAF Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change discussion document, contained the word organic just once in 90 odd pages, and that was in the glossary, showing a remarkable and critical level of sustainability ignorance coming from that institution.”

“Best practice organic systems support high yields with low off farm impacts and significant carbon sequestration achieved, as shown in research such as the US Rodale Institute studies, showing organic methods are far more effective than conventional methods at taking CO2 from the atmosphere and fixing it as beneficial organic matter in the soil.”

The 23-year study calculated that if 10,000 mid sized U.S. farms converted to organic production, it would be equivalent to taking 1,174,400 cars off the road, or not driving 14.62 billion miles.

Former British Environment Minister Michael Meacher told a 2004 Soil Association conference in Edinburgh, that that government must boost organics to help Britain meet its Kyoto targets. He also highlighted the Rodale Institute research, which also found that soluble nitrogen fertilisers in conventional farming destroyed soil biota that trap greenhouse gases.

“Current New Zealand dairy pasture research, theoretically in a sustainability direction, includes nitrite and urease inhibitors, with one inhibitor giving off cyanide in the presence of acid. What message does that give to our trading partners when we market the riches of a clean green land and to consumers looking to a truly sustainable future”, asks Browning.

A new research fund, allocated in Budget 2007, will bolster New Zealand’s international leadership position in helping the agriculture and forestry sectors respond to climate change, Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton and Climate Change Minister David Parker announced yesterday. The ministers said New Zealand needed and wanted to develop its role as a world leader in agriculture and forestry research on climate change.

“To be world leaders and maximise research dollar benefit, MAF needs to acknowledge and begin multiplying the best of organics significantly beyond current organic sector budgets”, according to Browning, “Brand New Zealand is waiting”.

“The Prime Minister put sustainability at the heart of the government’s agenda when she opened Parliament in February, yet some Ministries struggle with acknowledging the mistakes of the past and are set on more of the same.”

“The Soil & Health Association of NZ sees improved government support for the organic sector as an important solution to primary production climate change hurdles, and supports the Prime Minister’s aim of a truly sustainable New Zealand. But change the guard for a truly sustainable nation with an international point of difference: Nuclear Free, GE Free, clean and green, and heading to an Organic 2020.”