Soil & Health wants a ban on seed imports of alfalfa, soy, corn & maize, as well as GE foodstuffs, from the USA and other GE producing countries, following shonky environmental and food safety appraisals by overseas agencies coming to light.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Monsanto have both been found wanting in the last month, with implications for New Zealand’s environment and food supply, according to Soil & Health.
“Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA), MAF, and the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) have all accepted pseudo science or untested recommendations from Monsanto, Syngenta, USDA, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and others, rather than the concerns of cautious New Zealanders”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Now with US courts and independent scientific peer reviews showing up flaws, including environmental and human health risks, in previously accepted data and institutions, it is time to smarten up clean green New Zealand’s controls.”
A number of genetically engineered foods have been allowed into our food supply without adequate testing, and the risk of environmental contamination from GE contaminated seed or microbes remains high, according to Soil & Health.
Following the release of previously blocked Monsanto data on rat feeding studies of MON 863 corn, approved by FSANZ in 2003 for use in food and feed in New Zealand, it was found that the rats fed with the GM corn showed signs of toxicity in the liver and kidneys compared with those fed non-GM corn. Possible hormone alteration was also shown.
“FSANZ and NZFSA are too quick to accept GE company pseudo science and have consistently ignored the concerns of those providing precautionary advice,” said Mr Browning.
“A FSANZ staff member has said that no independent feeding tests or independent assessments of company data are necessary and confidential company data are fine for safety assessments.”
“The new information shows that the FSANZ approach does not treat risk seriously enough, and MON 863 corn should be immediately withdrawn, with an apology to New Zealand consumers.”
Ministerial Review
“The ministerial review, recently requested by Food Safety Minister Annette King, of FSANZ’s draft decision to approve another Monsanto GE Corn (High-Lysine LY038), is a necessary change to the FSANZ once over lightly and she’ll be right mate approach to novel foods that have obvious health risks. The Minister now needs to review all GE foods with a view to the corrupt processes and risks to the health of New Zealanders,” said Mr Browning.
“NZFSA’s appalling acceptance of untested LL601 rice shows another agency’s predisposition for not rocking commercial interests, although consumer surveys consistently show that New Zealanders do not want GM food.”
Disturbing research that has been ignored to date by food safety authorities includes foods well established in New Zealand: GE soy and canola. Ten-year feeding studies on GE peas showed significant health risks and the peas were destroyed. However, most studies are short term and not independent, but more are finding a dangerous link between chronic illness and GE foods, says Soil & Health.
Syngenta
Giant seed company, Syngenta is also involved with cover-ups, illegal plantings, and contaminated shipments. Syngenta is responsible for the largest case of GE contamination in the world, with at least 185,000 tonnes of Bt-10 GE corn, which although approved only for animal feeds, was mixed with US grain meant for human consumption between 2001 and 2004, and sent around the world.
According to The Lancet, “BT10 contains certain synthetic genes and proteins which are not easily broken down by stomach enzymes. In some cases, such proteins may survive in the gut for ten to twenty times as long as most ‘natural’ proteins, and this may account for the lesions and other physiological abnormalities observed in animal feeding studies involving GM crops.” There are concerns that allergic reactions may follow, and that some abnormalities may lead to cancerous growths.
According to Dr. Brian John of GE Free Cymru, “Syngenta knew about the contamination of Bt11 corn by the illegal Bt10 variety several months before the story was broken by Nature magazine in March 2005. For at least four months Syngenta and the US regulatory authorities, including the USDA and USEPA, connived to keep the contamination incident under wraps, while contaminated grain continued to be distributed on the world market. Dr John maintains Syngenta at first failed to reveal that Bt10 contained antibiotic resistance marker genes, but then had to admit it under pressure from independent scientists.”
Soil & Health says that it is time for Syngenta products to be dropped. Syngenta was the company behind Corngate and withheld information from that inquiry, and all four sweet corn varieties implicated with the 2006 contamination event were Syngenta seeds.
USDA
Last month the USDA was found violating the law and called ‘cavalier’, by a U.S. District Court Judge for failing to adequately assess possible environmental impacts before approving GE Roundup Ready alfalfa developed by Monsanto.
Less than two weeks before, another judge found that there is ‘substantial evidence that the field tests (of GE Roundup Ready Bentgrass) may have had the potential to affect significantly the quality of the human environment’, and that the USDA could not process any further field test permits without conducting a more thorough review.
“New Zealand should ban seed import from companies and administrations with such a shonky record,” said Mr Browning. “GE Free alfalfa has particularly high potential as a high value export crop for New Zealand, according to a successful plaintiff in the USDA alfalfa case. The US alfalfa grower, Mr Phil Geertson, who visited New Zealand recently, told me that the US was contaminated due to Monsanto and the USDA’s incompetence, and New Zealand had huge potential as an exporter of varieties already in the country.”
“These revelations of corrupt corporate and closely connected US agencies, supplying misinformation and poor judgement, must mark a turning point for New Zealand agencies charged with food safety, health and environmental sustainability,” said Mr Browning.
“It is time for New Zealand to turn around from risky and unnecessary GE experimenting, and create a truly sustainable nation with an international point of difference: GE Free, clean and green, and heading to an Organic 2020.”
Former Crop & Food Scientist says GE Brassica field test approval lacked scrutiny
/in Food, GE, Health, Media ReleasesA former Crop & Food GE scientist, Dr Elvira Dommisse, said today that proper scrutiny by ERMA of evidence would have prioritised the need for food studies over fund-wasting field trials.
The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) has once again approved an application to field test genetically engineered (GE) crops, namely GE brassicas – cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower and forage kale for stock feed.
This decision, which gives Crop & Food Research in Lincoln the go ahead, has angered groups with scientific and environmental safety concerns, who note the lack of scrutiny ERMA has shown in its decision.
At the public hearing in April this year, a number of scientific submitters with referenced evidence, stressed that it was important to first carry out rat feeding experiments with these GE crops to establish that they were safe to eat, according to Dr Elvira Dommisse of Soil & Health.
“One thing that needs to come through very clearly is the huge waste of public money if, at the end of ten years, rat feeding trials take place and the crops are found to be toxic or allergenic.”
“This is quite possible, given the past record of other GE crops. We only have to look to Australia, where GE peas modified with a harmless bean protein produced immunological problems in mice. The GE brassicas to be field tested at Lincoln are modified with a highly altered bacterial protein, which produces a pesticidal toxin. This is all the more reason to believe that such crops will be toxic or allergenic to mice or rats and ultimately humans and other animals.”
Yet when asked about rat feeding experiments on National Radio Dr Mary Christey, the leader of the GE brassica project said, “we do not think that food safety experiments are necessary.” [Our Changing World, Thurs 3,10 May, 2007]
“Apparently in support and bypassing solid food safety evidence ERMA have said, “She’ll be right Crop & Food, have your play at taxpayers expense, and we’ll worry about the real point of all this later,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Food safety scares in other parts of the world have increased the international demand for organically grown produce, which has much stricter criteria about what crop protection measures can be taken to deal with plant pests and pathogens.”
“Organic certifiers BioGro and Organic FarmNZ are receiving increased applications for organic certification with BioGro receiving a record number last week. This is indicative of the huge worldwide growth in consumer demand for safe, natural and nutritious produce. GE crops are excluded from that demand for good reason. It is time for ERMA and government to listen.”
GE brassica decision lacks justification
/in GM, Health, Media Releases, Organic CommunityToday’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.
Organic Means Certified Organic
/in Food, Health, Media Releases, OrganicsSoil & Health is celebrating that the Fair Trading Act is being interpreted to mean that products called organic should be certified organic, following the release last night of Food Standards Australia New Zealand’s Review Report, again recommending the introduction of folic acid fortification to all but organic bread.
“The recommendation appears to mean that foods labelled ‘organic’, but not certified to be organic, will not be exempt. FSANZ has said that foods labelled ‘natural’ will not be exempt as they are not subject to certification criteria. However organic foods are to be exempt, as there are certification criteria against which they can be checked”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
The FSANZ Review states;
Exemption of wheat bread-making flour represented as ‘organic’ will allow the organic milling and bread industry to comply with fair trading legislation[1], which takes precedence over the Code.
Approach:
* FSANZ consulted the New Zealand Commerce Commission and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on the status of products labelled ‘organic’ and ‘natural’ under mandatory fortification in relation to fair trading legislation.
Conclusion:
* Under fair trading legislation mandatorily fortified foods would not be able to be labelled as ‘organic’ or ‘all natural’.
* It is proposed that foods represented as ‘organic’ be exempt from mandatory fortification.
Foods labelled ‘natural’ will not be exempt from mandatory fortification as there is no certification criteria for ‘all natural’ foods, and manufacturers are able to use labelling descriptors which indicate the type of product without misleading consumers.
“This is a long awaited and clear message that anything from pork to pickles, if it’s to be called organic, it is on the premise that it is certified organic”, said Browning. “This is significant for consumers who are too often sold products as organic, even though the producer is not subject to any checks that their claim is authentic, and comes at a time when access to organic certification has never been easier.”
“The recently launched Organic Advisory Program, managed through Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, is currently assisting producers with a subsidised consultancy to convert to organics. BioGro New Zealand, Organic FarmNZ, Demeter, Agriquality, or Te Waka Kai Ora, can all give consumer assurances not available with uncertified produce,” said Browning. “ The potential use of Standards New Zealand’s National Organic Standard as the minimum requirement for organic production also needs exploring,” he added.
The proposed changes to the draft variations to the Food Standards Code
a) require the mandatory addition of folic acid to wheat flour for bread-making;
b) exempt wheat flour for bread-making represented as ‘organic’ from this requirement;
c) retain the voluntary permissions that allow voluntary fortification of non-wheat breads and flours;
d) allow a transition time of two years for implementation.
This is expected to reduce the number of Neural Tube Defect (NTD)-affected pregnancies by a further 14-49 (or up to 14%) in Australia and by 4-14 (or up to 20%) in New Zealand. NTD’s often present as spina bifida.
“ Soil & Health is hopeful that the folic acid education program, to educate about spina bifida risks and prevention, also recommended by FSANZ, will put significant emphasis on a complete and preferably organic diet. Certified organic food disallows pesticides linked with birth defects, and nutritional properties including folate are generally superior”, said Browning.
Soil & Health had submitted to the FSANZ Issues Paper;
“Soil & Health has some degree of concern that foods labelled ‘natural’ may not be exempt, however unless those foods are reasonably certain to be pesticide and additive residue free, as expected with organic foods, the ‘natural’ claim may be spurious.
Foods labelled ‘natural’, are without the benefit of standards and certification processes as in the organic sector, however should a food supplier be able to provide evidence of the ‘naturalness’ of its product, for example wild harvested and organic ingredients with no synthetic additives, Soil & Health would expect that it should also be exempt.”
The exemption for organic bread will give all consumers a choice of a fortification free product while still accessing a healthy option.
[1] In Australia, Trades Practices Act 1974; In New Zealand Fair Trading Act 1986.
MAF dinosaurs must stop robbing sustainability budgets
/in Media Releases, Organic Community, OrganicsSoil & 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.”
Improved market access good for NZ sustainability
/in Media Releases, Organic Community, OrganicsSoil & Health is grateful for the efforts of New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) staff in supporting BioGro New Zealand’s drive for better access for New Zealand organic produce into the demanding Japanese market.
It was announced on Friday that BioGro NZ Ltd received Recognised Foreign Certification Organisation (RFCO) status with Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).
Previously, New Zealand organic producers exporting to Japan needed approval by a Japanese certifier, as well as inspections in NZ by BioGro. BioGro’s new RFCO status with Japan MAFF will allow direct certification to Japan’s organic standard, JAS, using BioGro staff without the need of the Japanese certifier and the extra bureaucracy. NZFSA and BioGro had worked together for the outcome.
“Better access to high value organic markets means more environmentally sustainable New Zealand food production, and increased healthy organic food available for New Zealand consumers as extra production builds’, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, “the sustainability benefits for New Zealand by improved organic market access at this time cannot be overestimated. Reports show fertilizer use in conventional production remaining at highly unsustainable levels, causing off farm pollution”, he added. “Organic production is significantly more sustainable”.
BioGro was formed in 1983 through the efforts of the Soil and Health Association, The Bio Dynamic Farming and Gardening Association and the Henry Doubleday Research Institute, to promote organic production and to develop a set of credible standards against which production of organic produce could be measured. BioGro remains New Zealand’s leading organic certification agency.
“Soil & Health knows that BioGro and NZFSA have worked hard to achieve the improved access, and sees the outcome as an example of how the organic sector and government agencies can work together,” said Mr Browning. “This is in contrast to the recent MAF discussion paper, Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change, that totally missed the opportunities afforded by organic production to address climate change mitigation”.
“It is important that MAF Policy acknowledge and embrace the opportunities that organic production can give New Zealand in added value, high premium returns while enhancing New Zealand’s environmental sustainability and market image”.
“Clearly NZFSA has appreciated those advantages. A truly sustainable New Zealand primary production sector with top value branding, will be achieved more easily when government embraces the Organic 2020 target”, said Mr Browning.
Food tests before field tests
/in Food, GE, Health, Media ReleasesSoil & Health is calling for more integration of environmental and food safety analysis on GE and pesticide applications, following last weeks Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) Bt Brassica hearing.
ERMA denies food safety responsibility, as Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) develops food standards covering the content and labelling of food, and the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) administers the legislation covering food for sale.
“Soil & Health and others, through submissions and questions of clarification at last week’s hearing, pointed out the nonsense of ERMA considering field trials of GE food crops ahead of food safety tests of those same intended crops”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, “The agencies and legislation need a shot of commonsense”.
“It is ludicrous to be field testing a vegetable that carries pesticide in every cell, without testing its safety as a food thoroughly first, particularly when there is vast opposition to GE in food and the environment in the first place. A 10 year field study of GE peas in Australia, had to be discontinued when it was found that they were harmful as food. Valuable New Zealand research money would be better spent on safe high value organic production”.
“Significant evidence of human and animal health suffering from plants genetically engineered in a similar way to those being experimented with at Crop & Food, was presented at the ERMA hearing”.
“Crop & Food, the applicant for the GE Brassica field trial, intends to test outdoors a range of cabbages, cauliflower, broccoli, and forage kale, all modified with synthetic genes modified from the Bascillus thuriengensis bacteria (Bt), yet in India, workers are sick from handling GE Bt cotton, and livestock are dying from eating it, and rats in only 3 months of feeding studies of Monsanto’s Mon 363 maize, also modified with a Bt toxin, have shown signs of liver and kidney toxicity, as well as differences in weight gain between the sexes”.
“Long term feeding trials on Crop & Food’s GE Brassicas should happen ahead of any outdoor tests, saving the tax payer the expense of the CRI’s unwanted field tests”, said Mr Browning, “such tests and experiments do not belong as part of clean green New Zealand”.
Soil & Health has a target of an Organic 2020, which would not allow any GE crops or animals in the New Zealand environment.
Yes to Organic Exemption from Mandatory Folic Acid Fortification
/in Food, Health, Media Releases, Organic CommunityThe Soil & Health Association is pleased that efforts to have organic bread exempted from mandatory fortification with folic acid appear to be successful.
As part of Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) review, released last night, of its 2006 Final Assessment Report which proposed mandatory fortification of bread with folic acid, FSANZ is proposing that bread in New Zealand represented as organic be exempted from mandatory folic acid fortification, should fortification be implemented as intended.
“An exemption allows organic products to remain free of synthetic ingredients, maintaining the integrity of the organic label, and also provides consumer choice”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Thanks to efforts by Soil & Health, Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, The Green Party and others, Food Safety Minister Annette King brought up the issue of organic products at the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council meeting in October 2006”.
As part of the Review initiated by the Ministerial Council, FSANZ was tasked with examining and providing further advice on a range of issues relating to the mandatory fortification proposal.
Mandatory fortification with folic acid is seen by the Ministerial Council as a possible means of reducing the incidence of neural tube defects (NTDs).
The proposal would mean nearly all bread in New Zealand would be synthetically fortified in order to reduce by 20%, the estimated 70 pregnancies affected by NTDs.
Soil & Health had submitted that organic products must remain free of synthetic ingredients, consumers must have choice, and that mass medication is not a suitable alternative to a strong healthy diet campaign and education regarding risks of NTDs.
Soil & Health had also pointed out the difficulty in compliance with mandatory fortification by small organic flour millers and bakers.
The Issues Paper which is open to further submissions by April 18 includes advice to FSANZ from the New Zealand Commerce Commission and its Australian equivalent, “that consumers are likely to expect that foods labeled ‘organic’, or ‘certified organic’ have ingredients derived from living organisms without the use of chemical fertilizers and/or pesticides, and would not contain synthetic vitamins such as folic acid”.
“With regard to organic representations of foods, it is the opinion of the NZCC and the ACCC that the use of the term ‘organic’ in relation to foods fortified with folic acid (without clear and meaningful qualification) may mislead consumers into believing that the product is the result of organic processes and thus may risk breaching the New Zealand Fair Trading Act 1986 or the Trade Practices Act 1974.
“Australia and New Zealand have a number of national organic certification bodies, none of which have identical standards. Organic standards however generally do not currently allow synthetically produced substances into organic production systems, and vitamins and minerals are generally not permitted.”
“Soil & Health remains opposed to the mandatory fortification of all bread, but is pleased that the integrity of organics is being supported by the Food Safety Minister Annette King, the Commerce Commission and FSANZ”, said Mr Browning.
Breast cancer pesticide to be reassessed this year
/in Food, Health, Media ReleasesCombined mMedia Release: Safe Food Campaign, Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa, The Soil & Health Association of NZ
The reassessment of a pesticide linked with cancer is great news, according to the Safe Food Campaign, Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa and Soil and Health Association. The three groups all commend today’s announcement by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) to give priority to the reassessment of endosulfan this year.
ERMA today released a report listing 20 pesticides it will reassess and the four it will reassess to begin with. The other three pesticides are two organophosphates (azinphos methyl and methyl-parathion), and the wood preservative pentachlorophenol (PCP).
The three groups are pleased about the reassessment of endosulfan, which is banned in at least 20 countries, but are very concerned by the delayed reassessment of some very high risk pesticides such as chlorpyrifos and 2,4-D.
“Usage of endosulfan remains high in New Zealand, in spite of research linking it to adverse health and environmental effects,” commented Dr Meriel Watts of the Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa. “Apart from breast cancer, this highly toxic insecticide has been linked to hormonal disruption, mimicking oestrogen and producing infertility, as well as foetal, gene, neurological, behavioural and immune system damage at very low doses. We have one of the highest rates of breast cancer in the world and we must do everything we can to reduce exposure to chemicals that increase the risk of breast cancer,” she added. “This pesticide has caused many deaths overseas and we want it completely banned here.”
“We also urgently want to get chlorpyrifos and all other organophosphates banned,” stated Alison White of the Safe Food Campaign. “Research published last year shows that 3-year-old children exposed to chlorpyrifos suffer nerve and mental damage as well as increased attention deficit disorder. A lot of very recent research reveals disturbing damage to the prenatal brain. Several overseas authorities, including the USA, EU, Canada and Australia, impose stringent restrictions on this insecticide and other organophosphates,” she commented. “We cannot accept the ongoing risk to our children of brain damage from this insecticide.”
“An urgent priority for reassessment is 2,4-D, the other half of Agent Orange, which is still aerially sprayed and used a lot in New Zealand,” said Steffan Browning, Soil and Health Association spokesperson. “It causes a lot of spraydrift complaints and needs to be banned. It has caused severe economic losses and serious health effects to a number of farmers and their families, resulting in some of them giving up farming. Research has linked this herbicide to prenatal brain damage, breast and other cancers, and to have an effect on hormones, with continuing dioxin contamination of 2,4-D causing even further effects.”
“Soil & Health urges increased Government resourcing to speed up reassessments from the ERMA Chief Executive initiated priority list reported today, as well as an urgently needed review of all pesticides available at retail outlets,” said Mr Browning.
“While we are pleased ERMA is going to reassess the announced four pesticides this coming year, at this rate of reassessment, it will take at least another five years for just the 20 worst pesticides to be looked at,” concluded Ms White. “In the meantime pesticides with known adverse effects on health and the environment continue to be used. We look forward to working with ERMA to speed up reassessments by looking at groups of substances together, such as organophosphates and pesticides which are aerially sprayed.”
Withdraw GE and apologise FSANZ (Food Safety Australia New Zealand)
/in Food, GE, Media Releases, Organic CommunitySoil & Health wants a ban on seed imports of alfalfa, soy, corn & maize, as well as GE foodstuffs, from the USA and other GE producing countries, following shonky environmental and food safety appraisals by overseas agencies coming to light.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Monsanto have both been found wanting in the last month, with implications for New Zealand’s environment and food supply, according to Soil & Health.
“Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA), MAF, and the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) have all accepted pseudo science or untested recommendations from Monsanto, Syngenta, USDA, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and others, rather than the concerns of cautious New Zealanders”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Now with US courts and independent scientific peer reviews showing up flaws, including environmental and human health risks, in previously accepted data and institutions, it is time to smarten up clean green New Zealand’s controls.”
A number of genetically engineered foods have been allowed into our food supply without adequate testing, and the risk of environmental contamination from GE contaminated seed or microbes remains high, according to Soil & Health.
Following the release of previously blocked Monsanto data on rat feeding studies of MON 863 corn, approved by FSANZ in 2003 for use in food and feed in New Zealand, it was found that the rats fed with the GM corn showed signs of toxicity in the liver and kidneys compared with those fed non-GM corn. Possible hormone alteration was also shown.
“FSANZ and NZFSA are too quick to accept GE company pseudo science and have consistently ignored the concerns of those providing precautionary advice,” said Mr Browning.
“A FSANZ staff member has said that no independent feeding tests or independent assessments of company data are necessary and confidential company data are fine for safety assessments.”
“The new information shows that the FSANZ approach does not treat risk seriously enough, and MON 863 corn should be immediately withdrawn, with an apology to New Zealand consumers.”
Ministerial Review
“The ministerial review, recently requested by Food Safety Minister Annette King, of FSANZ’s draft decision to approve another Monsanto GE Corn (High-Lysine LY038), is a necessary change to the FSANZ once over lightly and she’ll be right mate approach to novel foods that have obvious health risks. The Minister now needs to review all GE foods with a view to the corrupt processes and risks to the health of New Zealanders,” said Mr Browning.
“NZFSA’s appalling acceptance of untested LL601 rice shows another agency’s predisposition for not rocking commercial interests, although consumer surveys consistently show that New Zealanders do not want GM food.”
Disturbing research that has been ignored to date by food safety authorities includes foods well established in New Zealand: GE soy and canola. Ten-year feeding studies on GE peas showed significant health risks and the peas were destroyed. However, most studies are short term and not independent, but more are finding a dangerous link between chronic illness and GE foods, says Soil & Health.
Syngenta
Giant seed company, Syngenta is also involved with cover-ups, illegal plantings, and contaminated shipments. Syngenta is responsible for the largest case of GE contamination in the world, with at least 185,000 tonnes of Bt-10 GE corn, which although approved only for animal feeds, was mixed with US grain meant for human consumption between 2001 and 2004, and sent around the world.
According to The Lancet, “BT10 contains certain synthetic genes and proteins which are not easily broken down by stomach enzymes. In some cases, such proteins may survive in the gut for ten to twenty times as long as most ‘natural’ proteins, and this may account for the lesions and other physiological abnormalities observed in animal feeding studies involving GM crops.” There are concerns that allergic reactions may follow, and that some abnormalities may lead to cancerous growths.
According to Dr. Brian John of GE Free Cymru, “Syngenta knew about the contamination of Bt11 corn by the illegal Bt10 variety several months before the story was broken by Nature magazine in March 2005. For at least four months Syngenta and the US regulatory authorities, including the USDA and USEPA, connived to keep the contamination incident under wraps, while contaminated grain continued to be distributed on the world market. Dr John maintains Syngenta at first failed to reveal that Bt10 contained antibiotic resistance marker genes, but then had to admit it under pressure from independent scientists.”
Soil & Health says that it is time for Syngenta products to be dropped. Syngenta was the company behind Corngate and withheld information from that inquiry, and all four sweet corn varieties implicated with the 2006 contamination event were Syngenta seeds.
USDA
Last month the USDA was found violating the law and called ‘cavalier’, by a U.S. District Court Judge for failing to adequately assess possible environmental impacts before approving GE Roundup Ready alfalfa developed by Monsanto.
Less than two weeks before, another judge found that there is ‘substantial evidence that the field tests (of GE Roundup Ready Bentgrass) may have had the potential to affect significantly the quality of the human environment’, and that the USDA could not process any further field test permits without conducting a more thorough review.
“New Zealand should ban seed import from companies and administrations with such a shonky record,” said Mr Browning. “GE Free alfalfa has particularly high potential as a high value export crop for New Zealand, according to a successful plaintiff in the USDA alfalfa case. The US alfalfa grower, Mr Phil Geertson, who visited New Zealand recently, told me that the US was contaminated due to Monsanto and the USDA’s incompetence, and New Zealand had huge potential as an exporter of varieties already in the country.”
“These revelations of corrupt corporate and closely connected US agencies, supplying misinformation and poor judgement, must mark a turning point for New Zealand agencies charged with food safety, health and environmental sustainability,” said Mr Browning.
“It is time for New Zealand to turn around from risky and unnecessary GE experimenting, and create a truly sustainable nation with an international point of difference: GE Free, clean and green, and heading to an Organic 2020.”
$2.1 million Organics Advisory Service Launch
/in Media Releases, Organic Community, OrganicsThe Soil & Health Association welcomes the launch of the Green Party initiated $2.1 million Organic Advisory Program, and sees the program as part of New Zealand’s aim of being a truly sustainable nation.
The Organic Advisory Program, operated through Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, is an outcome of the post election negotiations between Labour and the Greens, and will be launched on Thursday March 15 at Lincoln University.
The highlight of the program, according to Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, is the ‘Smart Start’ service, providing growers a subsidised on-farm consultancy when considering conversion to organics.
Smart Start’s personalised focus is a significant initiative that for $200 allows producers access to a one-on-one consultancy on their own property, looking at the property’s potential for conversion to certified organic production.
While the Smart Start program will be available to most producers, Soil & Health hopes for a future even more affordable program, extending to the smaller and part-time producers that may supply only a roadside or Farmers Market stall.
The current criteria for Smart Start require the producer to have commercial organic aims in excess of $20,000.
“For consumer protection it is important to get all market stall-holders, who claim organic status, to become certified,” said Mr Browning.
Soil & Health is excited about other initiatives getting underway from the Organic Advisory Program, including the 0800-Organic Helpline, a website and various regional and sector initiatives.
Serious commitment by government can build on the Organic Advisory Program through even greater support and by implementing a target of 5% of land area in organic primary production by 2012, said Mr Browning.
Targets in several other countries have allowed significant growth in organics and sustainability benefits, while benefiting huge growth in international and domestic consumer demand for organic products.
For Soil & Health, this week’s launch of the Organic Advisory Program and, in particular, the on-farm Smart Start service are milestones towards an Organic 2020 and a truly sustainable nation.