(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
There is certainly a lot of unfounded skepticism about eating genetically modified foods. For some, such skepticism appears as pure hysteria, while others view it as an understandable precautionary attitude.
the danger of extensive biological pollution with effects no one today can overlook.
Basta-resistant weed
the new rapeseed gene is tailor made for the weed remedy Basta. The genetically modified rapeseed plant can withstand the weed, and not much else does.
Then it turned out that this rapeseed plant can intersect with related weed plants. The hybrid that emerges is not very viable, but has the ability to intersect with more viable weed plants.
In this way, the gene that makes the rape tolerant to the weed can be transmitted to the weed. As a result, rapeseed growers are forced to use even stronger pesticides, while gene scientists are trying to develop gene rape that is resistant to the new toxins. So that weeds also become resistant, and thus a meaningless spiral is initiated, a spiral with clear long-term effects.
Corn with built-in risk
The genetic maize can cross with related weed species so that the crosses can also withstand Basta,
- the resistance to antibiotics can be spread to bacteria in the stomachs of animals and humans when the corn is eaten,
- the insect larvae can develop resistance to the toxin that the maize produces, and thus become more difficult to get rid of even in fields where no maize is grown.
Gene pollution
For a year, the alarm went off over much of Europe. It turned out that genetically modified rapeseed plants appeared on rapeseeds that should be free of such. These were seeds imported from Canada and sold under the condition that they were not genetically modified. The governments of several EU countries ordered the farmers to tear up the rapeseed plants,
Throughout the summer, it turned out that not only rapeseed were inoculated with genetically modified plants. Also fields with corn, soy and cotton were the same problem.
Seeds can be spread by wind and eaten by birds. They can therefore be spread over large distances. In the United Kingdom, in 1999, the agricultural authorities ordered farmers to have a distance of 200 meters between genetically modified and non-rapeseed rapeseed. But the Canadian rape, which was "mixed" with genetically modified rapeseed, was grown at least 800 meters from fields with genetically modified rapeseed.
Lead the Principle
Creating organisms that can reproduce is fundamentally different from inventing a technical aid. Since the traits are passed on from generation to generation, one must be fairly sure that what one has created is not also a carrier of traits that have completely different consequences than those one tried to achieve.
The precautionary principle is based on this very insight: We must be careful about initiating something over which we lose control.
It is not the consumers who have demanded that genetically modified rapeseed oil and genetically modified soybeans be used for the production of margarine. Rapeseed and soybean plants are genetically modified because the crops can be grown with the effective use of herbicides that only the genetically modified plants can tolerate.
It was also not a burning desire for knowledge that led researchers to create a rapeseed plant that can withstand the herbicide glufosinate. It was money to be made from it.
There are therefore no built-in barriers in the current production system against the development of genetically modified plants, insects and microorganisms over which we suddenly lose control.
23 applications
Here in Europe, applications have so far been approved for 23 genetically modified plants, ten varieties of maize, six varieties of oilseed rape, two varieties of potatoes, two varieties of chicory in addition to a tomato, a soybean and a turnips. The point of the genetic modification is to make the plants resistant to certain pesticides and / or antibiotics and insects. Most plants have been made resistant to pesticides, while almost half have been made resistant to antibiotics.
None of the 23 plants have been genetically modified with a view to providing a healthier diet – one of the arguments for how useful genetic modification can be.
The EU has approved 8 of these plants, Norway none, however. Among other things, Norway practices a total ban on plants that have been made resistant to antibiotics.
The EU received the first applications for approval in 1994 and approved everything that came without much discussion. Since 1999, the EU has in practice had a temporary approval ban, a moratorium, for new genetically modified products. This ban has recently been lifted.
Victory for Monsanto
On March 29, Monsanto earned nearly $ 100.000 in a lawsuit against a Canadian farmer. The ruling may also set a precedent outside Canada.
Monsanto sent "gene spies" out into the canola field to Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser. There they found many genetically modified canola plants – of the kind Monsanto has patented. But Schmeiser has never bought seeds from Monsanto and was accused of being a "free passenger" on genetically modified canola.
Schmeiser believes that pollen from neighboring fields must have blown into his own fields. In western Canada, almost half of canola growers use genetically modified seeds.
The court found no evidence that Schmeiser had purchased Monsanto seeds e.g. from neighbors, but he was still found guilty: it was a fact that Monsanto-produced genes were found in many of his canola plants.
It did not help that most of the canola plants in Schmeiser's field were ordinary, non-genetically modified plants, plants that would not have tolerated the pesticide (Roundup) to which the genetically modified plants have been made resistant. Schmeiser could thus not use the pesticide that could have contributed to a larger crop.
Schmeiser had neither purchased Roundup nor genetically modified seeds from Monsanto. Instead, he has to pay Monsanto almost $ 100.000 in compensation because Monsanto seeds still ended up in his fields.
Monsanto is now filing hundreds of similar lawsuits. Under Canada's patent law, each year a license is granted to the company that holds a patent for a genetically modified seed, if one uses genetically modified seeds from one's own or others' crops. The verdict against Schmeiser shows that it is useless to blame wind. In the judiciary, the doubts benefit Monsanto.
