Linha orgânica da H&M e C&A está contaminada com algodão transgênico

Reportagem da Ecouterre esclarece a contaminação por algodão transgênico na linha orgânica da H&M e C&A.

Abaixo a reportagem em tradução livre para o português:

"A C&A e a Tchibo tiveram suas roupas com algodão orgânico contaminadas com algodão transgênico da Índia, de acordo com a edição alemão do Financial Times.

Cerca de 30% das amotras continham algodão transgênico, informou Lothar Kruser, um diretor da Impetus, um laboratório independente em Bremerhaven, que analisou o algodão em questão. O algodão transgênico foi trazido da Índia, a qual é responsável por mais da metade do suprimento de algodão orgânico global, com uma exportação de aproximadamente 107.000 toneladas da fibra em 2009, segundo o Organic Exchange.

Contudo, Sanjay Dave, a chefe da autoridade agrícola da Índia, Apeda, informou o jornal que a fraude ocorreu em uma "escala gigantesca" e as multas foram emitidas para as entidades certificadoras como a EcoCert e Control Union.

Mas quem culpar?

Com a difusão das culturas biotecnológicas em todo o mundo, a polinização cruzada com orgânico não é inédito. A culpa, no entanto, pode cair em cima das marcas e em seu acompanhamento inadequado das suas cadeias de abastecimento no exterior."As cadeias de moda não eram vigilantes o suficiente", Monika Buening da Agência Federal das Cadeias de Consumo, disse ao jornal Frankfurter Rundschau, acrescentando que tanto a H&M e a C&A precisam agir o mais rápido possível para minimizar os danos.

Um porta-voz da H&M disse à AFP que teve conhecimento do problema no ano passado e admitiu que o algodão GM poderia ter "escorregado" em coleções orgânicas. A C&A, entretanto, informou estar investigando o assunto.

Em um email para a Ecouterre,um representante da H&M insiste que a companhia não tem razão para acreditar que o algodão orgânico tenha sido cultivado com sementes GM.c

A entidade Control Union continua conduzindo auditorias em todas as propriedades de algodão orgânico certificadas da Índia. "Nenhuma das propriedades usaram sementes GM"."

CTNBio é criticada no Fórum Social Mundial

O Fórum Social Mundial (que ocorre em Porto Alegre) teve como tema nesta terça-feira as plantações transgênicas.

"De acordo com o pesquisador e ex-representante do Ministério do Meio Ambiente na CTNBio, Rubens Nodari, as decisões da CTNBio (órgão responsável por liberar e fiscalizar os organismos geneticamente modificados) ignoram estudos científicos. É o caso da norma que determina uma distância de 100 metros entre lavouras convencional e transgênica, o que é pouco para evitar a contaminação dos grãos.

“Isso cientificamente já está provado, há muito tempo, que um grão de pólen pode viajar desde 1 metro até 6 km. Então, cientificamente, a norma da CTNBio não tem a menor base. Ela [a norma] sustenta a estratégia das grandes empresas de trazer estas tecnologias para o país sem nenhum problema e ainda lapidado por normas insuficientes e vergonhosas do ponto de vista científico"."

Para saber mais acesse: Pratos Limpos. 

Produtores de Sinop avaliam acionar na justiça a Monsanto

Reportagem do Diário de Cuiabá mostra como produtores lidam com a cobrança de royalties da Monsanto. É necessário pagar 2 vezes. Uma na compra, cerca de 30% do preço da safra e outra na venda, onde é feito um teste para saber se a soja é transgênica ou não. Contudo, produtores que têm sua lavoura contaminada também são obrigados a pagar. Interessante... não deveria ser ao contrário? a Monsanto pagar pela contaminação da lavoura do produtor? 

Até quando os produtores irão querer plantar transgênicos, sendo que só têm a pagar e nada a ganhar?

Abaixo um trecho da reportagem. Para ver a reportagem completa entre no Diário de Cuiabá.

"A guerra dos produtores mato-grossenses à Monsanto – multinacional detentora da tecnologia de sementes transgênicas da soja, conhecida como RR (Roundup Ready) – está declarada. Depois de esgotadas todas as tentativas de diálogo com a empresa, os produtores já pensam em acionar a Justiça. Em Cuiabá, a Associação dos Produtores de Soja e Milho do Estado (Aprosoja) prepara ação judicial contra a Monsanto. E, em Sinop (500 Km ao Norte de Cuiabá), os produtores também estudam entrar na Justiça contra a empresa. 

... SINOP - Depois de várias conversações, sem resultado, o Sindicato Rural de Sinop estuda propor ação contra a Monsanto. Atualmente, cerca de 50% das lavouras da região Norte de Mato Grosso são cultivadas com variedades transgênicas. Estas se diferenciam das convencionais por serem tolerantes à herbicida à base de glifosato, usado para dessecação pré e pós-plantio, para eliminar qualquer tipo de planta daninha. 

... O presidente do Sindicato, Antônio Galvan, explicou que são feitas duas cobranças. A primeira delas na compra da semente, por meio de boletos. “Em janeiro, eles cobraram R$ 0,45 cada quilo de semente, o que equivale a cerca de 30% do preço da saca”. 

... O principal questionamento é quanto a segunda cobrança, que é feita na saída do produto. Ao chegar nos armazéns, o grão passa por um teste que vai apontar se é transgênico ou não. "O problema ocorre porque, em muitos casos, a oleaginosa convencional é contaminada e os produtores acabam tendo que pagar os royalties sem ter adquirido sementes transgênicas". "

Isso ocorre tanto na lavoura, por meio de polinização ou na hora do plantio, quanto na hora de estocar a safra. “Se tiver uma lavoura de soja transgênica ao lado de uma convencional, na época da florada, pode ocorrer a polinização. Se as máquinas, na hora do plantio, não forem bem limpas e ficar algumas sementes de transgênicos, também pode haver a contaminação. Desta forma, na hora dos testes, são consideradas transgênicas”. "

Curitiba tem o 1º mercado público de orgânicos

"O primeiro mercado público de produtos orgânicos do país foi inaugurado no início deste ano na capital paranaense. A partir daí, começou uma nova fase na comercialização de produtos agrícolas e agroindustriais diversificados, onde certificação é a palavra-chave, diz o diretor-geral da Secretaria Estadual de Abastecimento, Luiz Gusi. 

Todo o circuito de comércio dentro desse mercado tem certificação orgânica: uma para os produtos e outra para as lojas. “O nosso controle reforça e garante a procedência de produtos industrializados e naturais, além de certificar o espaço onde eles são comercializados.” A Rede Ecovida de Agroecologia, que atua nos três estados da Região Sul, é uma das principais certificadoras.

No projeto, consta a capacitação de técnicos e estudantes para atuar como consultores e auditores, fazer acompanhamento, análise e avaliação de estudos de caso de unidades familiares de produção orgânica. Orçado em R$ 2,5 milhões, o projeto prevê, ainda, a criação da Rede Paranaense de Certificação de Produtos Orgânicos.

De acordo com Gusi, o mercado oferece mais de mil tipos de produtos sem agrotóxicos e aditivos químicos. 

O mercado foi construído com recursos da prefeitura de Curitiba e do Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. O custo total foi de R$ 2,51 milhões".

Para saber mais acesse a Agência Brasil.

Michelle Obama comemora aniversário em restaurante orgânico

"O presidente dos Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, organizou uma festa surpresa para a mulher Michelle no último sábado (16). A primeira-dama, que completa 46 anos neste domingo, foi levada para um jantar de aniversário em um famoso restaurante orgânico de Washington. Ela chegou ao Nora sem as filhas, Malia e Sasha, com um vestido preto de manga comprida e sentou em uma mesa ao lado de parentes e amigos.

O Nora, que se descreve como o primeiro restaurante orgânico certificado dos Estados Unidos, tem um menu do chef de R$ 117 (cerca de US$ 66)."

Fonte: Notícias R7

Americanos querem ensinar italianos a "comida saudável"!

Os Americanos acham que podem ensinar os Italianos a se alimentarem bem. De acordo com o artigo que saiu na Agrimoney.com a Itália é o "ponto fraco das defesas européias anti-GM".

O artigo é um absurdo, diz que os italianos não são tão contra a biotecnologia como é dito. Aliás, 65% dos italianos apoiam a biotecnologia e o vaticano concorda que as culturas transgênicas são um caminho para diminuir a fome na África (!!!).

Como resposta a esse artigo, a ONG GM-Free Ireland mostra que Cynthia Barmore, citada no artigo da Agrimoney, na verdade é do Depto de Agricultura dos Estados Unidos, e é autora do artigo "How to Influence EU Public Opinion about Agricultural Biotechnology" (Como Influenciar a Opinião Pública Européia sobre a Biotecnologia na Agricultura). Além disso, citam que o artigo é um insulto à democracia italiana, aos produtores europeus e aos consumidores.

Abaixo, o primeiro artigo é o da Agrimoney, seguido pelo maravilho artigo da ONG GM-Free Ireland (que vale muito a pena ler).

"Italy is 'weak point' of EU's anti-GM defences"
"Italy is the Achilles heel of the campaign to maintain Europe's defences against genetically modified crops, a US report has said, adding that the region's consumers are not as opposed to the technology as is portrayed.
With 65% of Italians supporting biotechnology, and the Vatican a "vocal advocate" of GM crops as a way of easing hunger in Africa, the country was a "good place to start" a campaign to "educate" Europeans about GM crops.
"Italy may present uniquely valuable opportunity for improving public opinion about biotechnology in the EU," her report said.
Engaging Italy's consumers in the biotechnology debate could help battle the "minority composed of fringe groups and government officials [which] are responsible for Italy's ban on biotech crops and food", Cynthia Barmore, US Department of Agriculture attaché in Rome, said.
'Misperception'
Indeed, Europeans as a whole "may not be as intractably negative as it is often portrayed" about GM foods, the briefing added, quoting 2005 research.
"In fact, public opinion is fairly divided," Ms Barmore said.
"Part of the misperception about European public opinion is the disproportionate attention paid to fringe activists who are not representative of the general public.
"Most Europeans have heard of biotechnology, but they are not activists and their opinions are not very strong."
Price factor
The task of winning government consents to at least sell GM foods in retailers, rested in part on the battleground chosen, with arguments on environmental and pesticide considerations more likely to bear fruit than those based on value for money.
"When price becomes the salient factor, Europeans may believe the price comes at the expense of quality or safety," the report said.
Doctors and academics may prove more effective advocates than government or industry figures.
America is home to some of the world's biggest GM seeds group, including Dow Chemical, DuPont and Monsanto. European rivals include Germany's Bayer and, outside the EU, Switzerland's Syngenta."

......................................................................................................

COMMENT FROM GM-FREE IRELAND

19 January 2010:
http://www.gmfreeireland.org/news/index.php

This article refers to a report published last week by the US Department of Agriculture attaché in Rome, Cynthia Barmore, with the revealing title "How to Influence Public Opinion about Agricultural Biotechnology" [1].

Insult to European democracy

The report is an insult to Italian democracy, and to European farmers, food producers, retailers and consumers. It is also riddled with misinformation which AgriMoney.com failed to correct.

The USDA describes Italians who oppose GMOs as a "minority composed of fringe groups" and talks of the need for the US to "educate" Italian consumers about food!

The anti-GM "fringe groups" which the USDA hopes to educate include:

• The Italian Government, whose Minister for Agriculture, Luca Zaia [2] said "A new ethics for agriculture is needed if we truly want to feed the world. My opposition to GMOs is well-known, in fact I do not believe that they are the solution to the hunger problem. We are with the farmers and always with those who work." [3]
  

• 16 of Italy's 20 Regional Governments - together with 41 provinces and 2,446 municipalities - that have declared themselves as GMO-free zones; [4]
  

• Italy's main farming union Coldiretti, with 18 regional federations for 98 provinces, 765 area offices, 9,812 sections, and over 568,000 farms; [5]
  

• Italy's biggest retailer, CoopItalia; [6]
  

• leading Italian food brands that have adopted GM-free supply chains such as the giant meat and poultry producer BovinMarche [7], Amadori (one of Europe's biggest producers of chicken and turkey) [8], and the poultry producer Fileni; [9]
  

• the national multi-stakeholder initiative ItaliaEuropa Liberi da OGM [10] involving 28 organisations representing farmers, large distribution, small and medium sized businesses, consumer, environmental, scientific, cultural and international cooperation interest groups opposed to GM food and farming. During two months in 2007, ItaliaEuropa organised a National Consultation on GMOs which collected 3 million votes against GMOs; [11]
  

• the University of Gastronomic Sciences [12], a government-backed international research and education centre for the renewal of farming methods, the protection of biodiversity, and the development of an organic relationship between gastronomy and agricultural science;
  

• Slow Food International [13], the Italian-based globally influential eco-gastronomic network which campaigns for good, clean, fair and GM-free food and farming with 100,000 members in 132 countries - whose founder Carlo Petrini was described by the UK's Guardian newspaper as one of the "50 people who could save the planet."
  

USDA wrong about the facts

The USDA report describes a Eurobarometer survey from 2005 as "the most recent data" on EU public opinion towards agricultural biotechnology, and claims that 65% of Italians "support biotechnology".

In reality, Eurobarometer's most recent survey on GMOs was published in 2008: it found that 58% of Europeans - incuding 55% of Italians - are "personally opposed" to GM food and farming, while only 21% support their use [14]. The most recent Italian survey - carried out by Coldiretti-SWG in 2009 - found that 63% of Italian consumers believe that GM foods are less healthy than traditional foods, up from 52% in 2003. [14]

The report's claim that most Italians "support biotechnology" is also misleading, because the vast majority of Europeans have no objection to non-GM biotechnology applications such as Marker Assisted Selection (MAS) of beneficial crop traits, and the production of insulin and other medicines from the contained use of GM bacteria in sealed vats in biosecure laboratories. No objection to these forms of biotech does not indicate support for GM crops!

Vatican not in favour of GMOs

The USDA's claim that the Vatican is a "'vocal advocate' of GM crops as a way of easing hunger in Africa" is sheer propaganda that was first disseminated after GM industry-funded scientists infiltrated an organisation called the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in a failed attempt to convice the Vatican to endorse GM farming in 2009. [15]

Unless its diplomats are utter idiots, the USDA and the US embassy in Rome must surely know that the Pontifical Academy does not represent the views of the Vatican. Vatican policy can only be declared by the Pope, the Secretary of State, or the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, and none of these bodies have ever given the Vatican's endorsement to GM food and farming.

Far from endorsing GMO's, Pope Benedict XVI has stated "The campaign to promote GM sowing, that pretends to grant food security [...] risks to ruin small farmers and to suppress their traditional crops, making them dependent on GM production companies" [16]. The Pope reiterated this view on 1 January 2010 when he expressed his support for "suitable strategies for rural development centred on small farmers and their families" [17]. The official Instrumentum Laboris (agenda) of the Synod of Bishops' Second Special Assembly for Africa held on 3-4 October 2009 makes this opposition to GM crops explicit:

"Farm workers, on whom a great part of the African economy depends, are victims of injustice in marketing their products. They are often paid a very low price for their goods. Paradoxically, in some parts of Africa, the cost is even set by the buyers themselves. Populations already suffering from a disadvantage are thereby further impoverished. The seeding campaign of proponents of Genetically Modified Food, which purports to give assurances for food safety, should not overlook the true problems of agriculture in Africa: the lack of cultivatable land, water, energy, access to credit, agricultural training, local markets, road infrastructures, etc. This campaign runs the risk of ruining small landholders, abolishing traditional methods of seeding and making farmers dependent on the production companies of OGM [i.e. GMOs]". [18]

Scientific evidence of GM health risks

The claim that "Doctors and academics may prove more effective advocates [for GMOs] than government or industry figures" reflects the US Government's ignorance of science.

Medical and scientific groups and NGOs which have raised the alarm over the health dangers of GM feed and food include the Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), Consumers International, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the International Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture, the Independent Science Panel on GM, the African Centre for Biosafety, the Indian Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, the US Centre for Food Safety, the Canadian ETC Group, the British Institute of Science in Society, the German Foundation on Future Farming, the Norwegian Institute of Gene Ecology, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, GeneWatch, GM Watch, GM Free Cymru, GM-free Ireland, numerous other NGOs and university scientists around the world.

Despite suppression of scientific research and cover-ups by Monsanto and other agribiotech companies [19], at least 50 scientific papers have already reported on the health dangers of GM animal feed and food [20], including the hidden use of GM feed for the production of meat, poultry, eggs, fish and dairy produce that is still sold in the EU without a GM label to inform consumer choice [21]. As Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini of CRIIGEN points out, if the industry's secret risk assessment data on the health dangers of GMOs held by the European Food Safety Authority were made available for scientific peer review, all GM feed and food would be withdrawn from the market immediately. [22]

References

1. "How to Influence Public Opinion about Agricultural Biotechnology", USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, GAIN report number IT1003, prepared by Cynthia Barmore, Rome Italy:http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/How%20to%20Influence%20EU%20Public%20Opinion%20about%20Agricultural%20Biotechnology_Rome_Italy_1-11-2010.pdf

2. See Luca Zaia's profile on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luca_Zaia and his website athttp://www.lucazaia.it/en/

Zaia refuses to allow GM field trials of GM crops in Italy. He has strongly criticised the EU Commission's recent approval of Syngenta's new GM maize, and stated that GMOs are "not the solution" to world hunger at the recent FAO summit http://www.lucazaia.it/en/index.php?newsId=c4b7dc8a178bf07e992f312628a3487c&page=1 . The author of the USDA report, Ms. Blackmore, can not have been unaware of Minister Zaia's anti-GM policy, since it was reported by her own USDA Foreign Agricultural Service GAIN report "Agricultural News for Italy and the EU" of 12 January 2010:http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20News%20for%20Italy%20and%20the%20EU%20-%20December%202009_Rome_Italy_1-12-2010.pdf.

3. "Waiting for G8: Farmers union, Zaia to speculators: keep your hands off agriculture", 19 March 2009: http://www.lucazaia.it/en/index.php?newsId=2575f31deee3042f5d3cdf0b46166de1&page=2

4. For details of GM free zones in Italy, see http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/gmo-free-regions/italy.html

5. Coldiretti http://www.coldiretti.it

6. CoopItalia http://www.e-coop.it adopted a GM-free policy in 1997 and uses its own "NO OGM" GM-free label. Its policy "OGM in agricoltura. Le ragioni di chi dice NO. (GMOs in agriculture : Reason says NO) states that CoopItalia banned GMOs from its own brand products in 1998, and monitors its GM-free guarantee via two independent certification bodies.

7. BovinMarche http://www.bovinmarche.it

8. Amadori http://www.amadori.it/_vti_g2_home.asp?rpstry=14

9. Fileni http://www.fileni.it The company's policy states: "Our label clarifies one of the issues that most preoccupies consumers: None of our chickens or turkeys was fed on GM feedstuffs."

10. ItaliaEuropa Liberi da OGM http://www.liberidaogm.org. Members include Acli, Adiconsum, Adoc, Adusbef, Agci Agrital, Aiab, Alpa, Assocap, Avis, Cia, Cic, Città del Vino, Cna, Codacons, Coldiretti, Confartigianato, Consorzio del Parmigiano Reggiano, Coop, Copagri, Fedagri, Federconsumatori, Focsiv, Fondazione Diritti Genetici, Greenpeace, Legacoop Agroalimentare, Legambiente, Libera, Res Tipica, Slow Food Italia, Unci, Vas, and WWF.

ItaliaEuropa leaflet (in English):
http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/fileadmin/files/gmo-free-regions/italia_europa_leaflet.pdf

11. Description of the National Consultation:
http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/fileadmin/_temp_/italia_europa_description.pdf

Responsible Science for Sustainable Food appeal:
http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/fileadmin/files/gmo-free-regions/italia_europe_science_appeal.pdf

12. "I valori dell'agroalimentare italiano", (Values of Italian agri-food sector), report on a survey of 1,600 Italian households in October 2009: http://multimedia.coldiretti.it/Raccolta%20Documenti%20Forum%20Cernobbio%202009/Rapporto%20Coldiretti-Swg2009.ppt, PowerPoint presentation by Coldiretti at the VIII International Forum of agriculture and feeding, 16-17 October 2009, Villa D'Este, Cernobbio, Italy http://multimedia.coldiretti.it/Lists/Cernobbio/AllItems.aspx

12. The University of Gastronomic Sciences http://www.unisg.it/welcome_eng.lasso was founded in 2004 by Slow Food (see below) in cooperation with the Italian regions of Piedmonte and Emilia-Romagna. It is a ministerially recognized, private non-profit international research and education centre for those working on renewing farming methods, protecting biodiversity, and building an organic relationship between gastronomy and agricultural science.

13. Slow Food International http://www.slowfood.com/ is also the organiser of the Terra Madre Network http://www.terramadre.info which comprises 250 universities and research centres, including 450 individual academics throughout the world collaborating to protect and support small food producers, and to change the systems that put them in danger by bringing together those players with decision-making power: consumers, educational institutions, chefs and cooks, agricultural research entities, NGOs, etc.

14: "Special Eurobarometer 295: Attitudes of European Citizens toward the Environment" (published in March 2008): http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_295_en.pdf.Extract: "The majority of Europeans declare that they are opposed to the use of GMOs (58%) while around a fifth (21%) supports their use. A further 9% say they have never heard of GMOs. At country level we see that the absolute majority in most countries are opposed to the use of GMOs. This is particularly the case in Slovenia (82%) and Cyprus (81%). Respondents in Malta, Portugal and Spain hold the mildest opinions in this respect which is mainly explained by the high share of respondents in these countries spontaneously admitting that they have never heard of the concept or do not form an opinion for or against."

15. As the US National Catholic Reporter points out, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences is "a think tank that does not issue authoritative church teaching" http://ncronline.org/news/ecology/vatican-studies-genetically-modified-crops. In May 2009, the Academy organised a study week in the Vatican on the theme "Transgenic Plants for Food Security in the Context of Development." According to the UK watchdog group Spinwatch, the event was a "charade by vested interests" and a total farce", whose speakers are "all GMO supporters, with many well known for their extreme pro-GMO views or having vested interests in GMO adoption." A May 13 release from the group asserts that several speakers have financial ties to Monsanto, an American agricultural company that is the world's largest producer of genetically engineered seed: http://www.spinwatch.org/-articles-by-category-mainmenu-8/46-gm-industry/5283-spinwatch-condemns-vatican-gm-event-as-a-charade-by-vested-interests

16. Statement by Pope Benedict XVII in "Instrumentum Laboris", quoted in "When biotech business undermines science: the case of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences", press release by Guido Pollice, President of Verdi Ambiente e Società, and Fabrizia Pratesi, coordinator of Comitato Scientifico Equivita, 13 May 2009: http://www.antivivisezione.it/Academy_ignores_message_of_Pope.htm

17. "Message of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI for the Celebration of the World Day of Peace, 1 January 2010": http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/peace/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20091208_xliii-world-day-peace_en.html

18. "Agenda (Instrumentum Laboris) for the Second Special Assembly for Africa of the Synod of Bishops", 3-4 October 2009: http://www.jctr.org.zm/downloads/2ndsynodInstrumentum%20Laboris.pdf

19. "Do Seed Companies Control GM Crop Research? Scientists must ask corporations for permission before publishing independent research on genetically modified crops. That restriction must end". Scientific American, Editorial, August 2009 edition, published 21 July 2009:http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-seed-companies-control-gm-crop-research

20. A useful check-list of scientific papers on the health dangers of GM feed and food can be found at http://www.gmfreeireland.org/health/studies.php

"Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods" by Jeffrey M. Smith Publisher: Yes! Books; hardcover; 336 pages;; available by mailorder fromhttp://www.GeneticRoulette.com.

"Effects of GMOs and pesticides systematically underestimated CRIIGEN appeal to public authorities, July 2009" Committee for Independent Research and Genetic Engineering:http://www.criigen.org/images/stories/pressrelease-ijbs_080709.pdf

21. For info on the hidden use and dangers of GM animal feed, see the following:

Leaked memo from the US Deparment of Health & Human Services revealing concerns by the US Food and Drug Administration's Center for Veterinary Medicine that toxins from GM foods might bioaccumulate in farm animals, and the related lawsuit that forced the FDA to disclose some of its secret documents on the dangers of GMOs: http://biointegrity.org/list.html.

"Detection of Transgenic and Endogenous Plant DNA in Digesta and Tissues of Sheep and Pigs Fed Roundup Ready Canola Meal", Sharma, R. et al., J. Agric. Food Chem., Vol. 54, No. 5, 2006, pp. 1699-1709;

"Assessing the transfer of genetically modified DNA from feed to animal tissues", Mazza, R. et al., Transgenic Res., Vol. 14, No. 5, 2005, pp. 775-784.

"Detection of genetically modified DNA sequences in milk from the Italian market", Agodi, A., et al., Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health, Vol. 209, 2006, pp. 81-88 .

22. "Three Major GMOs Approved for Food and Feed Found Unsafe". Press release, CRIIGEN - Committee of Research and Information on Genetic Engineering [France], 11 December 2009:http://www.criigen.org/images/stories/pressrelease-3ogm-ijbs_1209.pdf

"A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health", Int J Biol Sci 2009; 5(7), 706-726: http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.pdf

"New Report highlights Monsanto's corrupt science in GM canola [oilseed rape] assessment", Dr Brian John, GM Free Cymru [Wales, UK], 14 January 2010: http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/canola.html