Documents received via Access to Information show that the biotechnology and pesticide industry lobby group CropLife Canada worked in a joint committee with federal government departments called the “Tiger Team” to design new regulatory guidance on genetically engineered foods and crops. The new guidance removes government oversight, including government safety assessments, from many new GMOs. Radio-Canada reports that CropLife Canada steered changes to regulatory guidance on GMOs through a corporate-government committee called the “Tiger Team” that met frequently and discussed regulatory proposals. “The regulatory departments worked together in constant communication with the biotechnology industry towards a decision that ended government regulation for many of the industry’s own products,” said Lucy Sharratt of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN). “This shift to corporate self-regulation of GMOs is dangerous and now we can clearly see that the process to get there was driven by industry itself. Government oversight over all GMOs should be immediately be reinstated, to ensure food safety and transparency.” GMWatch

 

 

n a submission to the Vienna Public Prosecutor's Office, GLOBAL 2000 and other member organisations of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe revealed that the consortium led by Bayer - like Monsanto before it - failed to submit unfavourable studies and/or data on the carcinogenic and neurotoxic effects of glyphosate in the application for re-approval of glyphosate. The complainants argue that this may have influenced the risk assessment conducted by authorities that concluded in favour of reauthorisation. They are calling on EU member states to reject the reauthorisation of glyphosate in the upcoming vote on October 12. The EU Pesticide Regulation requires pesticide manufacturers to report all studies on harmful effects of glyphosate in their authorisation applications, including studies commissioned by them and those from the scientific literature. However, Bayer's current authorisation application lacked the majority of publications that indicate harmful effects on the nervous system (neurotoxicity) from glyphosate, including an epidemiological study that found an increased risk of autism spectrum disorders in children when their mothers were exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy or in their first year of life. Of particular concern is the point raised by two Swedish scientists and confirmed by EFSA, that a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study commissioned by a member of the consortium (Syngenta) was withheld from EU authorities. This showed behavioural impairment in young rats when their mothers were exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy. Pesticide Action Network Europe

 

 

GMWatch and other concerned groups and individuals are still engaging with the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) to provide input on its proposals for the regulatory oversight of new GMOs. The FSA is determined to avoid demanding labelling in the face of farm ministry DEFRA's declaration that this must not happen. The FSA's proposals for risk assessment are extremely weak and ensure that traceability, in case something goes wrong with a new GMO, won't happen. Enforcement of FSA's proposals depends on civil law and does not provide protection or certainty. As a food safety expert on the FSA board said: “If I were designing a system where I wanted to ensure there would be no enforcement, this is what I would design.” His concerns, along with others raised at the board meeting, were ignored. You can read questions to the FSA board from Claire Robinson of GMWatch, Pat Thomas of Beyond GM, Prof Erik Millstone of the University of Sussex, and others here. GMWatch

 

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!