In a recent development that has stirred concerns over food safety and regulatory compliance, the European Union's Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) flagged a batch of Chinese rice noodles for containing unauthorised genetically modified (GM) ingredients. The RASFF report detailed the detection of unauthorised GM ingredients in the rice noodles, prompting immediate action by Dutch authorities. The product, which had not yet been placed on the market, is now subject to either redistribution or destruction. This proactive measure reflects the commitment of European nations to uphold food safety regulations and protect consumers from potential health risks. BNN

 

 

Since 2006, GMO rice has been regularly found in the European Union despite there being supposedly almost zero commercial cultivation of GMO rice anywhere in the world — apart from a small amount in the Philippines in the last year. Read Inf'OGM's article on this topic. GMWatch comment on Inf'OGM article

 

 

In its amendments adopted on 7 February 2024, the European Parliament drew a distinction between products derived from New Genomic Techniques (NGTs), which it wanted to exclude from patentability, and the NGTs used to obtain these products, which could still be the subject of so-called process patents. In addition to the legislative obstacles that this decision would create, particularly at the level of the European Patent Office, it would still leave farmers and small/medium-sized plant breeders at the mercy of infringement proceedings, contrary to what the Parliament’s “reassuring” proposal suggests. Inf'OGM

 

 

For Guy Kastler of the French peasant farmers' union Confederation Paysanne, the European Commission's proposal for a new regulation on “plant reproductive material” is presented as a response to the demands of many farmers, small seed companies, consumers and civil society. Their aim is to put an end to the drastic erosion of cultivated and food biodiversity resulting from the requirement for varieties to be uniform and stable. But abandoning the monopoly of these catalogue standards and plant variety rights does little to conceal the introduction of a new form of market control, provided by patented modified genes. The proposal will also impose obligations on those exchanging seed to produce it in artificial pathogen-free conditions – an attempt to chemically and genetically control the collapse of the health of “improved” and genetically modified industrial plants. Inf'OGM

 

 

Labour will end exemptions for bee-killing pesticides that have already been outlawed in the EU but which the UK government has approved for four years in a row, the shadow environment minister said. This week, the government authorised the use of thiamethoxam on sugar beet crops – against the advice of its scientists, who said it would pose a threat to bees. Prof Dave Goulson, a bee expert at the University of Sussex, has warned that one teaspoon of the chemical is enough to kill 1.25 billion honeybees. The former environment secretary Michael Gove promised in 2017 that ministers would use Brexit to stop the use of the pesticide, which can destroy bee populations. Instead, the EU banned all emergency authorisations of neonicotinoid pesticides, while since 2021 the UK government has allowed the emergency use of thiomethoxam every year. The Guardian

 

 

Global wealth, power and privilege are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few hyper-billionaires. Some, including Microsoft founder Bill Gates, come across as generous philanthropists. But, as investigative journalist Tim Schwab shows in his latest book (reviewed by Andy Stirling), charitable foundations led by billionaires that direct vast amounts of money towards a narrow range of selective "solutions" might aggravate global health and other societal issues as much as they might alleviate them. In The Bill Gates Problem, Schwab explores this concern compellingly with a focus on Gates. The Gates Foundation spends billions of dollars each year (US$7 billion in 2022) on global projects aimed at a range of challenges, from improving health outcomes to reducing poverty — with pledges totalling almost $80 billion since its inception. Schwab offers a counterpoint to the prevailing popular narrative, pointing out how much of the ostensible generosity of philanthropists is effectively underwritten by taxpayers. The dispersal of these funds is being driven mainly by the personal interests of a handful of super-rich individuals. By entrenching particular pathways and sidelining others, philanthropy is restricting progress towards the global Sustainable Development Goals by limiting options. Nature

 

 

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!