08/December/20

 

A new opinion from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) dangerously underestimates the risks posed by gene-edited crops and paves the way for their de-regulation – envisioning a future in which few or no safety checks would be carried out. GMWatch has published our analysis of this opinion, divided into two parts: Part I is an overview for those who want the broad picture, while Part II is a detailed scientific analysis (with technical terms explained). GMWatch

 

 

EU governments are worried that GM gene-edited plants cannot be distinguished from similar, non-GM plants and therefore cannot be regulated. Based on such “practical questions”, they asked the Commission to assess, by April 2021, whether these plants should continue to be regulated under EU GMO law. In September, a coalition of scientists, NGOs and non-GM food retailers announced an open-source detection method for the first commercialised gene-edited crop, Cibus’ SU Canola, an oilseed rape grown in Canada and the US. A webinar on this development has been organised for 10 December by the Greens/EFA in the European Parliament. Register now! Greens/EFA in the EU Parliament

 

 

University of Missouri weed scientists, who led the charge on early investigations of dicamba volatility and temperature inversions, have turned their attention to the herbicide 2,4-D as its use on GM 2,4-tolerant Enlist crops ramps up. Results from their research show that dicamba was detectable in rainwater throughout the season at some sites. In the sites located in the southern corner of Missouri, known as the Bootheel, the dicamba amounts in the rain were high enough to injure sensitive crops, especially with multiple exposures. The researchers also detected 2,4-D in some of the rainwater samples. DTN Progressive Farmer

 

 

We have no idea how COVID-19 erupted in the central Chinese city of Wuhan last year. But having seen the destructive impact of this pandemic from a virus with comparatively low fatality rates, everything possible must be done to find its origins to guard against subsequent eruptions of possibly worse infections. Yet there are fears the World Health Organisation is appeasing China, which desperately wants to blame other nations as the source, while the scientific establishment is closing ranks to protect some key figures. iNews