Researchers at a top Mexican agricultural university have showed the progress they made in producing more non-GM yellow corn seeds to help replace imported grain from the United States that is at the centre of a major bilateral trade dispute. Experts at the Autonomous University of Chapingo unveiled advances in developing seeds for planting to offset corn imports as Mexico battles with the US, its top trading partner, over its plan to limit use of GM corn. Three-meter-high corn stalks rose from the soil across an extensive field at Chapingo, early signs of a potential future alternative for food producers like Kellogg and Mexican brand Maseca, researchers said. The fields were generating new strands of hybrid seed varieties to be tested in 2024 with release for planting in 2025, they said. The project aims in two years to develop enough non-GM seed varieties cultivable in Mexico to replace about 6 million of the 18 million metric tons of corn that the country imports from the US annually, most of which is GM yellow corn. Reuters

 

 

A coalition of activists has urged the Supreme Court to impose a permanent ban on GM mustard and pointed to a conflict of interest, obfuscation of facts, unscientific statements and "outright lies" in the central government's submission in defence of the GM crop. The apex court, which stayed the government's move allowing cultivation of GM mustard, is set to take up the case on Tuesday. The coalition said the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee violated the Supreme Court order directing all biosafety data to be published on its website as well as the chief information commissioner's orders. "In fact, in both cases, the regulator gave an undertaking that it will publish the said data, but this has been kept hidden to this day," it added. Activists also pointed to the undermining of the state governments' rights by bypassing the consultation. Deccan Herald

 

 

The activities and standards of the GMO-free soy industry organisation Donau Soja contribute to all 17 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), according to a new report developed by the Donau Soja organisation together with the independent Swiss institute, Sustainable Food Systems (SFS). “The report is intended to help all partners and members addressing the social, environmental and economic challenges of soya production and processing and to be able to demonstrate the concordance of Donau Soja with the SDGs," said Donau Soja President Matthias Krön. In the last eleven years, European farmers produced more than four million tonnes of sustainable soy according to the Donau Soja/Europe Soya standards. [GMW: This finding is interesting in light of the European Commission's claim that it wants to deregulate new GM crops on the basis that they could contribute to sustainability.] Donau Soja

 

 

Biologicals are farm inputs that come from living organisms like plants and bacteria rather than from fossil fuels, the source of nearly all modern pesticides and fertilisers. To make "biologicals", companies are genetically engineering microscopic living creatures in the soil, like bacteria and fungi, to enhance their ability to kill pests or to generate nutrients like nitrogen. A report from Friends of the Earth explores the potential implications of this novel use of genetic engineering, something that is fundamentally different from the GM crops that have been the centre of debate for decades. Microbes can share genetic material with each other far more readily than crops and can travel great distances on the wind. The genetic modifications released inside GM microbes could move across species and geographic boundaries with unforeseen and potentially irreparable consequences. The scale of release is also far larger, and the odds of containment far smaller. An application of GM bacteria could release 3 trillion genetically modified organisms every half an acre – that’s about how many GM corn plants there are in the entire US. Food Tank

 

 

Organic Farmers & Growers (OF&G) is urging farmers to heed warnings from a new Friends of the Earth report (see above). "Genetically engineered soil microbes: Risks and concerns" highlights the threat posed by introducing bacteria-based biological products. The passing of the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023 earlier this year in England gave a green light to pesticide and biotech companies to develop and release GM microbes, such as bacteria, viruses and fungi found in soil, with the claim of enhancing agricultural capabilities. OF&G’s chief executive, Roger Kerr, believes the emergence of a GM approach that alters essential biology raises huge practical and ethical concerns under the guise of what he describes as "regenerative greenwashing". He said, “We’re all now well versed in the damage caused by traditional pesticides and fertilisers that were marketed as ‘completely safe’. The same level of corporate involvement in promoting these so called ‘precision-bred organisms’ (PBOs) is frankly terrifying." Cornish Times

 

 

Bee-killing pesticides have been found at dangerous levels in English rivers, as the government considers allowing the use of one that is banned in the EU. Environmental groups and farmers are waiting to hear whether a toxic neonicotinoid, thiamethoxam, will be approved by the government for English sugarbeet farms for a fourth consecutive year. Wildlife campaigners say it is “unacceptable” that ministers have “ignored the science” and allowed the use of these dangerous chemicals. While the pesticide has been banned in the EU for years, it was allowed for emergency use until this year, when it was banned entirely. Now the UK has left the EU it is able to make its own rules on pesticides. Recent research found that 36 pesticides banned by the EU are not ruled out for use in the UK. The pesticides are toxic for bees but are also, at certain levels, toxic to aquatic life, and build up in river systems. The Guardian

 

 

A research director from INRAE France who is a pesticide specialist and toxicologist said she is outraged by the EU Commission's decision to recommend glyphosate's re-approval for a further 10 years. This proposal follows a report by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) which found that the level of risk did not justify a ban on this controversial herbicide. Laurence Huc said, "When 90% of the scientific literature showing that glyphosate has toxic effects on human health and biodiversity is ignored, yes, this does not meet any scientific criteria. The health authority cannot claim that there is no effect on health." As a researcher, says she is left "speechless". The pesticide specialist blamed "extremely strong and powerful lobbying". She said the proposal to re-authorise glyphosate "is not based on health data, but on economic and political decisions". Franceinfo (French text)

 

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!