The IFOAM Seeds Platform has published the Global Safety and Risk Assessment Protocol for New Genomic Technologies, a new guidance for governments and the private sector for the assessment and regulation of new GMOs (also called NGTs or new genomic techniques). IFOAM says, "This new and highly disruptive technology is an existential threat to organic and agroecological systems worldwide and poses widespread risks to human health, biodiversity, and environmental stability. This new Risk Protocol proposes a sound and scientific approach that fills a huge gap in the regulatory landscape and the public understanding of the potential danger of unintended negative effects of NGTs." Among the recommendations of the protocol is: "All products of genetic engineering shall be disclosed so that regulatory oversight is enabled and consumers can make informed choices. Labelling shall transparently and clearly divulge in commonly understandable terminology the changes made through the genetic engineering." IFOAM

 

 

A study published in Science of the Total Environment finds glyphosate can adversely impact sensory and cognitive processes in bumblebees (Bombus terrestris). Glyphosate exposure impairs bees’ learning of aversive stimuli like electric shocks paired with specific colour discrimination. Additionally, the pesticide reduces attraction to UV (ultraviolet) light, specifically the colour blue, and temporarily impacts locomotion and phototaxis (movement in response to light). These impairments to sensory and cognitive processes render foraging difficult for these glyphosate-exposed pollinators and vulnerable to unavoidable predators. The study highlights that symptoms of widespread chemical exposure may reduce foraging efficiency and adversely affect ecosystems, especially those dependent on insect pollinators. Beyond Pesticides

 

 

In March 2020, Nature Medicine published a Correspondence entitled “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2”. The paper assessed the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 and concluded, “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus” and “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.” The paper played an influential role — indeed, the central role — in communicating the false narrative that science established that SARS-CoV-2 entered humans through natural spillover, and not through research-related spillover. Email messages and Slack direct messages among authors of the paper obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or by the US Congress and publicly released show that the authors did not believe the core conclusions of the paper at the time it was written, at the time it was submitted for publication, and at the time it was published. Now scientists and technology experts have written and published an open letter demanding that Nature Medicine retract the paper, on the grounds that it is "a product of scientific misconduct". Biosafety Now

 

We hope you’ve enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible by readers’ donations. Please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you!