Unapproved GM Wheat Discovered Again in the U.S.

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE

Dear Friends and Colleagues

GM wheat that has not been approved for sale or commercial production in the U.S has been found growing in a field in Washington state. No GM wheat has ever been commercialised, but GM wheat was authorised for field trials in the U.S. between 2000-2003. The GM wheat had previously been discovered growing in Oregon in 2013, and in Montana in 2014.

With best wishes,

Third World Network
131 Jalan Macalister
10400 Penang
Malaysia
Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/
To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net
________________________________________________________________________


http://www.mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/
content/news/articles/ap/2016/07/29/GMO_wheat_found_in_Washington_state_could_affect_US_trade.html

GMO wheat found in Washington state could affect US trade
By PHUONG LE,
July 29, 2016

Survey: Organic Farmers Pay the Price for GMO Contamination

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/news/survey-organic-farmers-pay-price-gmo-contamination

Washington, D.C. — This week, as the U.S. Department of Agriculture wraps up its comment period on the feasibility of genetically engineered (GMO) and non-GMO crops to coexist, Food & Water Watch in partnership with the Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing (OFARM) releases survey results that clearly show contamination from GMO crops is happening and it’s non-GMO farmers who are paying the price.

The survey of farmers across 17 states, but primarily in the Midwest, is an effort to fill the data gap that was used to justify an inadequate policy recommendation by the USDA Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21stCentury Agriculture (AC21). Heavily weighted with biotech proponents, the committee gathered for a series of meetings in 2011 and 2012 to establish a protocol for coexistence and to design a compensation mechanism for farmers who are economically harmed by contamination from GMO crops. Unfortunately, the committee was unable to estimate the costs associated with GMO presence on non-GMO and organic farms due to a lack of data. Their final suggestion for a compensation mechanism was a form of crop insurance that included, in one proposal, a premium to be paid by producers of non-GMO crops.

Contaminación transgénica con premeditación, alevosía y ventaja

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2016/01/09/opinion/023a1eco#st_refDomain=www.facebook.com&st_refQuery=/

Por Silvia Ribeiro

A más de dos años de la suspensión contra la siembra de maíz transgénico en México, las trasnacionales se desesperan y en el alud de argumentaciones de todo tenor –medias verdades, datos fuera de contexto o falseados, mentiras descaradas– Monsanto y Syngenta admitieron que con la siembra de maíz transgénico, habrá contaminación del maíz campesino nativo. En su rescate, Sagarpa afirma cínicamente que la contaminación transgénica será buena para el maíz nativo, aunque admite que la presencia de transgenes persistirá por varias generaciones y que esto modificará el entorno.

Son algunas de las afirmaciones que empresas y autoridades entregaron en documentos a los tribunales, contradiciendo sus propios dichos de que los transgénicos pueden coexistir con el maíz nativo y que no afectarán el medio ambiente o la biodiversidad. Sagarpa admite además que el maíz transgénico no está diseñado para aumentar la producción y en una opinión enviada por la Secretaría de Salud, ésta afirma que no es de su competencia expedirse, mostrando por tanto que ¡no hay evaluación de riesgos a la salud sobre la siembra de maíz transgénico!

Nueva contaminación transgénica en Uruguay: entrevistamos a uno de los investigadores del estudio

http://www.radiomundoreal.fm/8234-historia-repetida

 

16 de abril | Entrevistas | Soberanía Alimentaria

Historia repetida

 

00:00|33:44

Descargar: MP3 (23.3 MB)

La Red Nacional de Semillas Nativas y Criollas de Uruguay hizo llegar este jueves a la Comisión para la Gestión del Riesgo (CGR) y a los miembros del Gabinete Nacional de Bioseguridad (GNBio), que resuelven sobre transgénicos en el país, una carta y un nuevo estudio que dio cuenta de la presencia de proteínas transgénicas en semillas de maíz de productores de la propia Red

(Acceda abajo al informe técnico del estudio).

Los agricultores reclamaron que se garantice el derecho a la producción no transgénica y advirtieron que la política del gobierno de “coexistencia regulada” (entre cultivos transgénicos y no transgénicos) es claramente inefectiva.

Nuevos análisis realizados en la Cátedra de Bioquímica de la Facultad de Química detectaron proteínas transgénicas en muestras de semillas de maíz criollo de los departamentos de Canelones y Treinta y Tres. Las muestras habían sido recolectadas por los técnicos y productores de la Red de Semillas durante 2014. La carta enviada a las autoridades adjuntó el informe técnico del estudio.

La Red está conformada por más de 200 emprendimientos familiares, que involucran a más de 350 productores y productoras en 13 departamentos del país. Nació en 2004 a iniciativa de la Asociación de Productores Orgánicos del Uruguay (APODU) y REDES – Amigos de la Tierra Uruguay, con la participación de la Facultad de Agronomía a través del Centro Regional Sur. El principal objetivo de la Red es el rescate, revalorización y mantenimiento de los recursos fitogenéticos del país, para contar con semillas criollas de calidad.

Radio Mundo Real realizó una extensa entrevista a Pablo Galeano, licenciado en Bioquímica e investigador y docente de la Cátedra de Bioquímica de la Facultad de Química de la Universidad de la República, integrante además de REDES – Amigos de la Tierra Uruguay. Galeano fue uno de los investigadores que realizó el estudio.

Imagen: www.redes.org.uy

(CC) 2015 Radio Mundo Real 10 años

GM Contamination Register Logs 396 Incidents over 17 Years

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1118

November 26, 2014

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE     Article 17 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety addresses unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures to be taken in the case of such movements. The Protocol requires Parties to take appropriate measures to notify affected or potentially affected States when it knows of a release leading to an unintentional transboundary movement of an GMO that is likely to have significant adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health.  Many cases of unintentional transboundary movements have taken place since the introduction of GMOs. Some of these are also illegal transboundary movements, which are addressed by Article 25 of the Protocol.  In the absence of a global monitoring system, GeneWatch UK and Greenpeace International launched the GM Contamination Register database (www.contaminationregister.org) in 2005 to record all publically documented incidents of contamination arising from the intentional or accidental release of GM organisms as well as illegal plantings of GM crops and reported adverse agricultural side-effects. An analysis of the Register database has been recently published. From 1997 to the end of 2013, 396 incidents in 63 countries were recorded. There have also been nine cases of contamination associated with GM lines with no authorisation for cultivation anywhere in the world, hence these have not been risk assessed. An analysis of the data concludes that “GM contamination can occur independently of commercialisation”, as evidenced by GM rice which has never been grown commercially but which records the highest number of contamination incidents. GM maize, soya and oilseed rape, all grown commercially, rate next.  Once GM contamination has happened, it can be difficult to contain it. However, the detection of GM contamination is dependent on routine and targeted regimes, which is inconsistent across countries. Furthermore, the lack of analytical methodology to detect GM crops at the field trial stage poses an obstacle to detecting any arising contamination. The Abstract and Conclusions of the paper are reproduced below.  With best wishes  Third World Network 131 Jalan Macalister 10400 Penang Malaysia Email: twnet@po.jaring.my Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/ To unsubscribe: reply ‘unsubscribe’ to news@biosafety-info.net To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net http://www.foodcontaminationjournal.com/content/1/1/5 THE GM CONTAMINATION REGISTER: A REVIEW OF RECORDED CONTAMINATION INCIDENTS ASSOCIATED WITH GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS (GMOS), 1997–2013  Becky Price and Janet Cotter International Journal of Food Contamination 2014, 1:5 doi:10.1186/s40550-014-0005-8 Abstract Background Since large-scale commercial planting of genetically modified (GM) crops began in 1996, a concern has been that non-GM crops may become contaminated by GM crops and that wild or weedy relatives of GM crops growing outside of cultivated areas could become contaminated. The GM Contamination Register contains records of GM contamination incidents since 1997 and forms a unique database. By the end of 2013, 396 incidents across 63 countries had been recorded.

Monitoring of GMOs released into the environment

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1121

December 02, 2014

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE  A report published by GenØk-Centre for Biosafety in Norway proposes a framework for monitoring of GMOs released into the environment. Specifically, it provides information and considerations for monitoring carried out under the Norwegian Gene Technology Act, which is at the same time robust, comprehensive and useful for safeguarding the environment and human and animal health. The framework is adaptable to biosafety frameworks in other regulatory contexts. GMO monitoring is the observational science undertaken when a GMO is to be released into the environment, which aims at detecting the occurrence of changes (e.g. in the receiving environment(s) or in the GMO) that could lead to adverse effects. Monitoring aims to detect both anticipated and unanticipated effects that are direct and indirect, immediate and delayed, by observing changes in the environment or in human or animal health and determining whether these changes are related to one (or more) GMO(s). GMO monitoring may serve three principle functions: 1. Monitoring can be a science-based means for confirming the conclusion on hazards anticipated in the risk assessment; 2. Monitoring can survey for adverse effects that were not identified in, or could not have been anticipated in, a singular risk assessment; 3. Monitoring may be used to evaluate the effectiveness of selected risk management strategies. The report distinguished between the two main types of monitoring: case-specific monitoring and general surveillance. Case-specific monitoring deals with monitoring for potential adverse effects that were identified and evaluated in the risk assessment of a specific GMO, or to verify the effectiveness of risk management strategies that were enacted with the GMO release, based on specified protection goals. General surveillance surveys for unanticipated adverse effects that were not identified in the risk assessment. This includes monitoring for interactive or cumulative adverse effects that by definition could not have been anticipated in a singular risk assessment and is particularly useful where there is a limited understanding of persistence, accumulation or exposure of the GMO or its products in the environment, or where different GMOs may interact, or new agricultural management strategies may be employed. The report recommends a monitoring plan that is clear in its requirements, detailed in its description, practical and feasible in its management, robust in its analysis and interpretation, and consistent in its reporting. With this aim there are a number of general considerations that may be kept in mind in the development of a monitoring framework: 1. The monitoring plan should be flexible and adaptive to respond to new information, realities, and/or monitoring needs; 2. The collection of baseline data in both the specific GMO and the potential receiving environment is critical to detect changes and establish causal relationships; 3. Review and assessment of monitoring should ensure scientific quality and integrity in the conduct of monitoring, and ensure that the objectives set forth at the beginning of the monitoring are met; 4. Additional risk assessment studies may be deemed necessary based on the results from monitoring; 5. Monitoring should begin early in the development of a GMO; 6. Observation and management of long-term, indirect and cumulative effects; 7. The capacities to carry out the required monitoring activities should be taken into account when designing a plan or determining its feasibility, in order to identify and estimate any additional resources needed to carry out the activity; 8. Monitoring for human and animal health impacts may require additional methods and/or information sources; 9. The competent authority may request, as appropriate, the exporter to carry out the implementation and coordination of monitoring activities. The full report is available here: http://genok.no/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/GenOk_Biosafety_Report_2013_02.pdf With best wishes, Third World Network 131 Jalan Macalister 10400 Penang Malaysia Email: twnet@po.jaring.my Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/ To unsubscribe: reply ‘unsubscribe’ to news@biosafety-info.net To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net Biosafety Report 2013/02 GenØk - Centre for Biosafety, Tromsø, Norway December 2013 Monitoring of GMOs released into the Norwegian environment: A case study with herbicide-tolerant GM rapeseed David Quist Summary Monitoring GMOs approved for release into the environment is a requirement under both EU and Norwegian legislation, in order to safeguard desired protection goals from potential adverse effects arising from their use. Achieving this objective requires that monitoring be practical and feasible, its use of resources effective, and that its outcomes are useful for producing new knowledge. This report aims to help ensure monitoring carried out under the Norwegian Gene Technology Act (NGTA) is robust, comprehensive, and useful for meeting the stated aims of safeguarding the environment and human/animal health.

Charting the GMO threat

TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE:
http://ejfood.blogspot.com/2014/11/geo-watch-data-base-for-gmo-crop.html

Charting the transgenic threat

A TOOL FOR ACTIVISTS AND FARMERS

Devon G. Peña | Seattle, WA | November 4, 2014

Note: In the world of seed saving and plant breeding, this is the biggest news all year. A new peer-reviewed scientific journal, Food Contamination, has just published a meta-analysis of the GM Contamination Register that was compiled over the past ten years by Genewatch and Greenpeace.  Janet Cotter (Greenpeace) and Becky Price (Genewatch) were the lead compilers of this important database. Here is my take on the significance of this sort of data mapping for  farmers concerned with protecting the genomic integrity and organic or biodynamic status of their land race and heirloom crop varieties.

Image courtesy of Transgenic Study Blog

One of the most significant issues in the debate over the environmental impacts of transgenic[1] crops is the irrefutable scientific fact posed by gene flow.  As a farmer, seed librarian, and plant breeder, I am deeply concerned with the threat of genetic contamination posed by transgenic crops to center of origin land race varieties grown across all of the indigenous First Nation territories of Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Other farmers and scientists who share this concern have been presenting evidence of this transgenic threat since 2001 when Ignacio Chapela and David Quist of the University of California-Berkeley documented introgression of transgenes in native land race populations of Zea mays (maize) in Oaxaca, Mexico.

It has been a challenge to keep track of the growing number of such events in which genetic materials from GMO/GE cropsintrogress[2] (contaminate) the native genome of land race crop varieties. Transgenic introgression is a real, verified, direct, and immediate threat to the genomic integrity of center of origin land race varieties.

Monsanto settles with wheat growers over GM contamination

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15763-
monsanto-settles-with-wheat-growers-over-gm-contamination

 15 November 2014.

GM wheat developed by Monsanto was discovered on farmland in Eastern Oregon

EXCERPT: Soil Association Policy Director Peter Melchett said, "No one could possibly believe that GM crops would benefit English farmers when they see the extraordinary costs that GM brings in unwanted contamination. Only an ideological fixation on GM, disregarding economic realities and more modern and effective crop breeding technologies… can explain why some English farming organisations and politicians continue to promote this out of date and dangerous technology."

Monsanto settles with wheat growers over GM contamination

Farming Online, 13 November 2014
http://www.farming.co.uk/news/article/10642

GM Contamination Register

Dear All,

Genewatch and Greenpeace have, for about 10 years, run a GM Contamination Register (www.contaminationregister.org). We have analysed the cases on the Register and a resulting paper has now (this week) been published in a journal (attached). It's an open access journal so no problems with copyright.

The GM Contamination Register database contains cases dating back to 1997 (the start of GE crops). We have nearly 400 cases (to the end of 2013). We analysed the cases by crop and by country (some graphs and tables). Finally, we focussed on cases of contamination arising from unauthorised GM crops (i.e. those without any authorization for commercial growing anywhere in the world).

I hope the paper makes a useful reference for these GM contamination cases. The main points are:

1)      GM contamination happens.
2)      GM contamination from field trials/illegal plantings happens – we have 9 cases of GM contamination of unauthorized (non-commercialised) GE crops that haven’t undergone any environmental or food safety analysis.
3)      GM rice tops the league table of contamination cases by crop, accounting for about a third of cases. This is despite the fact that there is no GM rice grown anywhere in the world. We suggest the high rate of GM contamination might be related to routine testing of imports of GM rice at national borders.
4)      Once GM contamination has happened, it can be difficult to contain it. E.g. GM papaya, GM Chinese rice (but US LLrice appears to have stopped – for now at least).
5)      From these data, it’s not clear what the main factors affecting contamination rates are. It’s not only the GM contamination itself (x-pollination, mix ups etc.) that contributes to the number of cases, but also the the testing regime (both routine and targeted). The highest rates of contamination are in imported foodstuffs to Germany but this is probably because they do a lot of testing! All EU countries have high rates because they report their findings of the RASFF database. We have the data for contamination – but not the factors to analyse what influences contamination!
6)      Finally, although (of course) field trials of GM crops shouldn’t happen, the fact that for most (all?) of these experiments there is no protocol for testing available, makes detection of any GM contamination difficult, if not impossible.

Best

Janet Cotter (Greenpeace) and Becky Price (Genewatch)

The GM Contamination Register: a review of recorded contamination incidents associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs), 1997–2013

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40550-014-0005-8

Abstract

Background

Since large-scale commercial planting of genetically modified (GM) crops began in 1996, a concern has been that non-GM crops may become contaminated by GM crops and that wild or weedy relatives of GM crops growing outside of cultivated areas could become contaminated. The GM Contamination Register contains records of GM contamination incidents since 1997 and forms a unique database. By the end of 2013, 396 incidents across 63 countries had been recorded.

Results

Analysis of the Register database reveals rice has the highest number of GM contamination incidents of all crops (accounting for a third of incidents), despite there being no commercial growing of GM rice anywhere in the world. The majority of these incidents derive from two distinct cases of contamination of unauthorised GM rice lines, LLRICE from the USA and BT63 rice from China. Maize accounts for 25% of GM contamination incidents, whilst soya and oilseed rape account for approximately 10% of incidents. Although factors such as acreage grown, plant biology, designation as a food or non food crop and degree of international trading can potentially affect the frequency and extent of contamination, it is not possible to determine which are dominant.

The Register records a total of nine cases of contamination from unauthorised GM lines, i.e. those at the research and development stage with no authorisation for commercial cultivation anywhere in the world. An important conclusion of this work is that GM contamination can occur independently of commercialisation. Some of these cases, notably papaya in Thailand, maize in Mexico and grass in USA have continued over a number of years and are ongoing, whilst other contamination cases such as Bt10 maize and pharmaceutical-producing GM crops occur only with a single year. The route(s) of contamination are often unclear.

Conclusions

The detection of GMO contamination is dependent on both routine and targeted monitoring regimes, which appears to be inconsistent from country to country, even within the EU. The lack of an analytical methodology for the detection of GM crops at the field trial stage (i.e. pre-commercialisation) can hamper efforts to detect any contamination arising from such GM lines.

Genetic fallout in bio-cultural landscapes

http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/10/11/0306312714548258.abstract

Genetic fallout in bio-cultural landscapes: Molecular imperialism and the cultural politics of (not) seeing transgenes in Mexico

1. Christophe Bonneuil
   1. Centre Alexandre Koyré (CNRS-EHESS-MNHN), Paris, France
2. Jean Foyer
   1. Institut des Sciences de la Communications CNRS/Université Paris-Sorbonne/UPMC, Paris, France
3. Brian Wynne
   1. Centre for the Study of Environmental Change, Department of Sociology, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

1. Christophe Bonneuil, Centre Alexandre Koyré (CNRS-EHESS-MNHN), 27, rue Damesme, Paris 75013, France. Email: christophe.bonneuil@cnrs.fr

Abstract

This article explores the trajectory of the global controversy over the introgression (or not) of transgenes from genetically modified maize into Mexican indigenous maize landraces. While a plurality of knowledge-making processes were deployed to render transgenes visible or invisible, we analyze how a particular in vitro based DNA-centered knowledge came to marginalize other forms of knowledge, thus obscuring other bio-cultural dimensions key to the understanding of gene flow and maize diversity. We show that dominant molecular norms of proof and standards of detection, which co-developed with the world of industrial monocropping and gene patenting, discarded and externalized non-compliant actors (i.e. complex maize genomes, human dimensions of gene flow). Operating in the name of high science, they hence obscured the complex biological and cultural processes that maintain crop diversity and enacted a cultural–political domination over the world of Mexican landraces and indigenous communities.

Insect Pollinators a Significant Factor in Transgene Flow in Rice

Oryza sativa with small wind pollinated flowers

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1103

Oct 17 2014

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE     It has generally been assumed that, because rice is largely a self-pollinated crop and dispersal of its pollen by wind is limited, there is low risk of gene flow between cultivated GM rice plants and other cultivated or wild rice. Few studies have, however, paid attention to the impact of insect pollination on gene flow in rice. A large-scale study conducted in China has found that over 510 insect species visited rice flowers and several of these carried away large amounts of pollen, some up to 500 metres away. In a field-cage experiment with GM and non-GM rice, using honeybees as pollinators, the screening of over 1-5 million germinated offspring seeds over three years revealed that honeybees increased transgene flow in rice significantly. The researchers concluded that “the potential exists for long-distance gene escape due to the abundance of insects that carry rice pollen”. They stressed that this factor must form part of the ecological risk assessment for GM rice as well as for other GM crops.  The summary of the research report published in the Journal of Applied Ecology is reproduced below.   With best wishes Third World Network 131 Jalan Macalister 10400 Penang Malaysia Email: twnet@po.jaring.my Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/ To unsubscribe: reply ‘unsubscribe’ to news@biosafety-info.net To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net FLOWER-VISITING INSECTS AND THEIR POTENTIAL IMPACT ON TRANSGENE FLOW IN RICE Journal of Applied Ecology 2014 doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12299  1. Rice is one of the most important crops in the world. Several transgenic varieties of rice have been developed, and some have recently entered pre-production trials. One concern with genetically modified (GM) crops is transgene escape, but prior studies suggest this risk is low for rice because it is self-pollinated and the dispersal of pollen by wind is limited. 2. Little is known about the impact of pollen transport by insects. We characterized the insects visiting rice plants during anthesis and considered the effects of insect pollination on gene flow. 3. We conducted a 2-year nationwide survey in China and identified more than 510 insect species that visited rice flowers. Honeybees, hoverflies and several other species carried large amounts of pollen. The European honeybee Apis mellifera visited rice flowers regularly with daily foraging activity peaking between 12.00 and 13.00 h. 4. We monitored 20 European honeybee colonies located 100–1000 metres away from rice fields in mixed agricultural landscapes and found the honeybees carried viable pollen at least 500 m away from the rice pollen source. 5. We used four GM rice lines as pollen donors, their non-GM parental varieties as pollen recipients and the European honeybee as the pollinator in field-cage experiments to assess whether honeybees increase the frequency of gene flow in rice. Results from screening over 1-5 million germinated offspring seeds over a 3-year study period showed that honeybees significantly increase transgene flow in rice. 6. Synthesis and applications. Our results indicate that a remarkably high diversity of insects visit rice flowers in China and that hundreds of species including honeybees carry large amounts of rice pollen. European honeybees carry viable pollen over long distances, forage on rice flowers regularly and increase the frequency of transgene flow. Insects mediate gene flow in rice more than previously assumed, and this should be taken into consideration during the ecological risk assessment of transgene flow in self-pollinated and/or anemophilous crops.

Second Discovery of Unapproved GM Wheat in the U.S.

 14 October 2014
 

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE

  

Unapproved genetically modified (GM) wheat developed by Monsanto has recently been found growing at a research facility of Montana State University, which ended field trials on it over a decade ago. This is the second such finding of GM wheat, following the discovery of another unapproved Monsanto GM wheat variety in an Oregon farm last year. Both varieties are resistant to Monsanto’s herbicide, Roundup. (See Items 1 and 2). 

GM wheat has not been approved for commercial release anywhere in the world. The Oregon discovery resulted in countries like South Korea and Japan temporarily stopping imports of U.S. wheat and there are concerns that the Montana incident will trigger the same reaction. Several Oregon farmers sued Monsanto for failing to protect the market from contamination and the parties have agreed to a settlement. “Genetic contamination is a serious threat to farmers across the country,” says Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director for the Center for Food Safety.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has released its final report on the Oregon case. While admitting that it did not know how the contamination occurred, it has dismissed it as an “isolated incident” and declared that the GM wheat was not found in commercial supplies. It is currently investigating the Montana event. (See Item 3). 

With best wishes

Third World Network

131 Jalan Macalister

10400 Penang

Malaysia

Email: twnet@po.jaring.my

Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/

To unsubscribe: reply ‘unsubscribe’ to news@biosafety-info.net

To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net

 

 

 

Item 1

USA: UNREGULATED GM WHEAT FOUND IN MONTANA
Mary Clare Jalonick, The China Post
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/art/food/2014/09/28/418168/Unregulated-GM.htm

Item 2

USA: UNAPPROVED GM WHEAT FOUND IN MONTANA
by Carey Gillam, Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/26/us-usa-monsanto-wheat-idUSKCN0HL23J20140926

Monsanto Co's experimental genetically engineered wheat, never approved for sale, has been found growing in a second U.S. state, and regulators said on Friday they could not explain how the plants escaped field trials that ended almost a decade ago.

Item 3

USDA ANNOUNCES CLOSE AND FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE DETECTION OF GENETICALLY ENGINEERED WHEAT IN OREGON IN 2013

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2014/09/pdf/ge_wheat.pdf

After conducting a thorough and scientifically detailed investigation into the detection last year of genetically engineered (GE) wheat growing in a single field on a single farm in Oregon, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has concluded that the presence of the GE wheat appears to be an isolated incident. The GE wheat found on the Oregon farm was developed by Monsanto to be resistant to the herbicide glyphosate, also known as Roundup.

Troubling inspection reports reveal vast outdoor experimentation in the US with GMO crops

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15633-troubling-inspection-
reports-reveal-vast-outdoor-experimentation-in-the-us-with-gmo-crops

 06 September 2014.

Investigative reporter Bill Lambrecht uncovers a trail of mistakes and violations in GMO field trials

EXCERPT: Companies and universities conducting field trials usually are eager to remedy problems and avoid further scrutiny. That apparently wasn't the case last year at the University of Florida, which received a formal letter from APHIS about its failings after a tomato researcher told an inspector that he didn't plan to monitor adjacent land for unwanted volunteer plants and intended to lie about it if asked.


Gene-altered apple tested in Washington state

By BILL LAMBRECHT, HEARST NEWSPAPERS

seattlepi.com, September 5, 2014
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Gene-altered-apple-tested-in-Washington-state-5736742.php

GMO experiments receive questionable oversight, by Bill Lambrecht

http://m.sfgate.com/science/article/GMO-experiments-receive-questionable-oversight-5740478.php

GMO experiments receive questionable oversight
Central Coast corn used for varied experiments

Bill Lambrecht | September 7, 2014

At a secret location among the vineyards of California's Central Coast, a plot of genetically engineered corn is producing proteins for industrial and pharmaceutical uses, including an experimental vaccine for hepatitis B.

The altered corn is growing with federal approval 100 feet from a steelhead stream in San Luis Obispo County, in designated critical habitat for the threatened California red-legged frog. Agriculture Department inspectors have reported two "incidents" at the site, including conventional corn sprouting in a 50-foot fallow zone, but the findings did not rise to the level of a fine or even to a formal notice of noncompliance for the company that planted it, Applied Biotechnology Institute Inc.

******

The founder and president of Applied Biotechnology, John A. Howard, previously founded another company that was permanently banned from trials of genetically modified organisms - GMOs - after creating such contaminated messes in the Midwest that a half-million bushels of soybeans and more than 150 acres of corn had to be destroyed.

Contamination, what is being done about it?

Unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1066

Publication date: April 24, 2014

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE       We are pleased to share below a submission from Third World Network on the issue of unintentional transboundary movements of living modified organisms (LMOs). Article 17 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety outlines the obligations of Parties in this regard.   The TWN submission highlights important considerations that should be the basis of determining the scope and elements of possible guidance or tools that may facilitate appropriate responses by Parties to unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs.   Considerations for Parties from where unintentional transboundary movements may originate (which could include exporting Parties, and/or Parties that develop and produce or grow LMOs) are:compliance with the domestic regulations of importing Parties’ and those of affected or potentially affected States, including zero tolerance policies for unapproved LMOs; prevention of unintentional transboundary movements at the potential source; segregation, identity preservation and testing; timely notification; and provision of information, detection methods and reference materials.  Considerations for affected or potentially affected States (which could include importing Parties) are: the right to have zero tolerance policies for unapproved LMOs; capacity for sampling, testing and detection; and mechanisms for implementing responses, actions and emergency measures.  The Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties (COP-MOP) to the Cartagena Protocol will address this issue at its seventh meeting in September 2014 in Pyeongchang, South Korea. Submissions are invited from Cartagena Protocol National Focal Points (or CBD National Focal Points) and relevant organizations, and the deadline for submission is 2 May 2014. The notification is available at http://bch.cbd.int/protocol/e-doc/?notification=2183

Transgene Spread Poses Risks to the Environment

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1049

Publication date: March 04, 2014 Posting date: March 04, 2014

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE It has been about 20 years since genetically modified (GM) crops were introduced commercially. There have been many known cases in different countries where transgenes have crossed with plants such as local crop varieties and wild relatives and spread beyond their areas of cultivation.  A new study published by the journal, Environmental Sciences Europe, examines scientific reports of such occurrences. Important examples are bentgrass, oilseed rape and cotton. The report highlights factors that favor transgene escape; in particular, wild relatives that can cross with the crop plants are a major factor in the unintended spread of the transgenes. The report stresses that there are “significant uncertainties in predicting which transgenes will escape and how they will interact with the environment”.   The authors warn that the Precautionary Principle can only be applied where efficient measures to ensure the removal of GM organisms from the environment are available. Otherwise, it will not be possible to mitigate any undesirable effects. Because of the implications of this and the gaps in knowledge, the authors call for stricter regulations to be implemented immediately to reduce the incidence of transgene escape into the environment. The full article is available at: http://www.enveurope.com/content/25/1/34. The abstract and conclusions are reproduced below. With best wishes  Third World Network 131 Jalan Macalister 10400 Penang Malaysia Email: twnet@po.jaring.my Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/