A new scientific analysis prepared by CONAHCYT, Mexico’s National Council for Humanities, Science and Technology, argues there are unacceptable health risks for Mexican people who consume GM corn and glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide. The 200-page document with 1,200 references underpins Mexico’s 2023 decree to restrict the use of GM corn in tortillas and other minimally processed corn products, and to phase out the use of glyphosate. The US challenged those policies as unfair trade practice under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). A decision in that case is expected imminently. Whatever the ruling, Mexico’s new President Claudia Sheinbaum has said her government will not allow the cultivation of GM corn. Sheinbaum also recently announced plans to try to place GM corn restrictions in Mexico’s constitution; “this is the best defence we have for biodiversity as well as for our health,” she said. US Right to Know

 

 

The recent reports about the detection of GM contamination in the consignment of organic basmati rice in certain European markets have sparked concerns in the country and abroad and voices have gained strength against the reported renewed efforts to introduce GM maize and other cereal products in the country. Dr Gulzar Ahmad, Director General of the Cereal Crop Research Institute in Pirsabak, Nowshera, expressed dismay over the reports. “If true, it would be strange and unfortunate that GM rice, which is banned, has entered Pakistan and made its way into the export supply chain... GM food poses serious risks not only to local consumers but also to our export markets,” he said. GM maize has faced fierce resistance from agricultural experts and government officials. The News International

 

 

In a surprising development, the federal government has allowed the import of GMO soybeans from the United States without conducting risk assessments on 47 gene events in Pakistan's local conditions, as required by Article 15 of the Cartagena Protocol. This decision effectively changes Pakistan's non-GMO status to GMO, despite previous objections by former prime ministers. The exemption from risk assessments for local conditions appears to have been influenced by powerful industry players, allegedly including a politician from the ruling party. The decision has sparked widespread concerns among environmentalists, farmers, civil society, consumers, and agricultural experts. The Express Tribune

 

 

The Pakistan Poultry Association (PPA) welcomed the government's move to allow the import of GM soybeans (see above), describing it as crucial for maintaining steady protein supplies, especially after a prolonged ban on these imports. However, the decision was criticised by several local business organisations, which expressed concerns about the potential impact on local agriculture and the environment. Several government agencies, including the Ecology Ministry, fiercely opposed the withdrawal of the ban. Poultry World

 

 

The European Parliament has adopted eight resolutions against further import approvals for GM maize and cotton. Most of the plants are resistant to herbicides and some produce insecticidal proteins that were not part of the food chain prior to the introduction of genetic engineering. The European Parliament has used the resolutions to both address the environmental effects in countries where they are cultivated and uncertainties regarding health risks of food and feed produced from the crops. Around 100 different GM crops are already approved for import into the EU. These include soybeans, maize, cotton, oilseed rape and sugar beet, which are often engineered to be resistant to several herbicides. In addition, GM maize, cotton and soybeans may also produce insecticidal toxins. Testbiotech

 

 

Farmers in Burgundy-Franche-Comté are taking a stand. On November 25, 2024, an impressive convoy of tractors headed to the European Parliament in Strasbourg. At the origin of this action was a desire to understand and denounce European decisions perceived as threatening to French agriculture. Florian Dirant, president of the Rural Coordination of Haute-Saône, explained the motivations behind this mobilisation: "We want to obtain explanations on measures which, although rejected by the European Parliament, end up being validated by the European Commission." In the crosshairs is the recent decision concerning the importation of more GMO corn seeds, rejected by MEPs but finally approved by the Commission. Entrevue.fr

 

 

MON810 maize is the only transgenic GM plant authorised for commercial cultivation in the European Union. This authorisation was initially granted, via France, almost 30 years ago, in 1998, for an initial period of 10 years. A renewal application was submitted in 2007. Since then, no decision has been taken by the European authorities. How can this maize, for which the authorisation theoretically expired in 2008, still be grown legally in Europe? Simply because EU law accepts that, as long as the European Commission has not responded to a request for renewal, the initial authorisation remains valid. The Commission has failed to respond to Bayer/Monsanto’s request for the past 15 years. Inf'OGM

 

 

The US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is sharing its final notice describing additional genetic modifications plants can have and qualify for exemption from the biotechnology regulations on the claimed grounds that the the modifications could be achieved through conventional breeding. Also, GMO developers can now request a confirmation of exemption from regulation from APHIS. The USDA is now finalising two additional modifications to the rules that:
* provide additional flexibilities in how developers can use biotechnology to create GM plants that (theoretically) could have been achieved through conventional breeding; and
* increase the number of modifications a plant can contain, from one modification to as many as twelve modifications, and qualify for exemption from regulation. USDA

 

 

For why deregulating GMOs is a bad idea that's not supported by the science – and why it doesn't make sense to set an arbitrary figure for the number of modifications that a plant can have and still be exempted from safety assessment and regulation (see above), see our resources here and here. Spoiler: GMO safety is not a numbers game. Even a single small genetic modification can fundamentally alter a plant's biochemistry so that it becomes toxic or allergenic. It's not just the number of modifications that matter, it's what they do. And only a detailed case-by-case risk assessment based on hard data can begin to investigate that question. GMWatch

 

We hope you’ve found this newsletter interesting. Please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you!