Last year, out of concern for human health, Mexico outlawed GMO corn for human consumption. The restriction, issued as a Decree, applies to corn in tortillas or masa (dough). Immediately, American officials complained that this blocks imports, reports Ernesto Hernández-López, Professor of Law at the Dale E. Fowler School of Law, Chapman University in the US. No surprise, most American corn is GMO. The US officials said Mexico lacks a scientific basis for the restrictions, required by the USMCA, NAFTA’s successor. A dispute panel was established. This insistence on science grew, becoming standard talking points for trade and agriculture officers, members of Congress, and lobbyists. Mexico definitely offers scientific proof and lots of it in its reply, which was recently made public. It includes over 150 scientific studies, referred to in peer-reviewed journals, systemic research reviews, and more. Mexico incorporates perspectives from toxicology, pediatrics, plant biology, hematology, epidemiology, public health, and data mining, to name a few. So American leaders cannot claim there is no science supporting the Decree. They may disagree with or dislike the findings, but there is proof. Common Dreams

 

 

Iowa's Senate Appropriations Committee approved a bill Tuesday adding legal protections for pesticide manufacturers over failure to adequately warn consumers about the potential health risks associated with use of their products. Senate Study Bill 3188 would provide civil liability defence to pesticide manufacturers in lawsuits over adverse health impacts of products that meet US Environmental Protection Agency labelling requirements. These liability protections do not apply to Chinese state-owned companies — a move targeting Syngenta, an agriculture science and chemical company owned by the state-owned ChemChina. The legislation is supported by Bayer, the manufacturer of RoundUp, a pesticide linked with development of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In 2020, Bayer agreed to pay $10 billion to settle cancer lawsuits. Iowa Capital Dispatch

 

 

In a satirical article published in "Le Monde", researchers Marc Billaud, Julie Noirot and Pierre Sujobert, concerned about the massive release of toxic substances into the environment, expose the rhetoric used by certain industries to defend their activities, which are hazardous to health. Their "simple tools for selling poison" include:
* Emphasise hidden intentionality — your critics may advance their views with science but dismiss these troublemakers as activists, secret ideologues, or even terrorists!
* Use intimidation: Make yourself feared. Surround yourself with a host of lawyers threatening suits for defamation, and stir up trolls to saturate social networks. Have no qualms about tarnishing the scientific reputation of your opponents. Aim low, slander in all directions.
* State your noble purpose. Enriching yourself doesn't play well with detractors, so claim you're fighting world hunger (if you sell pesticides). You're also safeguarding the jobs of those who make your poisons. So now you look like a humanitarian concerned about social issues! GMWatch on X (@GMWatch), translating from French language article in Le Monde

 

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!