Advisory body deals blow to UK gene editing plans foodingredientsfirst.com/news/advisory-… “Not fit for purpose,” is the response from the UK Regulatory Policy Committee (RPC) to govt attempts to deregulate food editing of crops and animals. #GMOs
The RPC gives a “red” (or failing) grade to the UK govt regarding the new gene-editing bill’s impact on businesses. It also says more discussion is needed on “impacts, labeling & traceability”. It also says that consumer sentiment toward gene-editing has to be further considered
The RPC says the govt’s impact assessment didn’t rely on independent evaluations: “Much of the evidence re risk discussed in the impact assessment is drawn from interested parties, or based on scientific trials that don't replicate real-world conditions (incl farmers’ behavior).”
The report also raises concern for “devolved administrations” as the legislation will apply only in England, with the govt's impact assessment having NO analysis on the trade of modified goods between the nations (Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland all want to stay #GMO-free).
In a joint statement over 30 organisations (including the RSPCA, Friends of the Earth & the Soil Association), call for major revisions to the bill. They say, “Crucially, the bill proposes to remove all requirements of traceability, including labelling, from these technologies.”
“All surveys, polls and consultations show that people and businesses in the UK believe these technologies and their products should be regulated, traceable and labelled.”
Last year’s public consultation showed 85% of respondents wanted to see gene-editing regulated as #GMO.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1st-generation #GMO crops were introduced over 20 years ago with the same promises of pesticide reductions now being made for #newGMO crops. Due to the adoption of GMO herbicide-tolerant crops in the US herbicide use from 1996-2011 INCREASED by an estimated 239M kg—239000 tonnes!
In Argentina🇦🇷after #GMO herbicide-tolerant soy was authorised in 1996, they saw a 60% increase in herbicide use (figures 2000-2014) with accompanying reports of increased rates of cancers and birth defects friendsoftheearth.eu/wp-content/upl…#GMOs
💣 If you haven't yet read this @Fakir_ article, now is the time!
We learn how a journalist wrote articles under false identities to influence public opinion, including articles aimed at discrediting @IARCWHO after it classified #glyphosate as a probable carcinogen 🧐
@Fakir_@IARCWHO These ghostwritten pieces on #glyphosate contain the usual pesticide lobby talking points:
👉Comparison with table salt
👉Glyphosate prevents world hunger
👉@IARCWHO's view is at odds with regulatory agencies
👉Suspect links with environmental groups
The Bill's exemption from regulation of certain #GMOs is very wide, applying to ALL plants (not just crops), including algae, wild plants & trees, and ALL multiple-celled animals, including pets, farmed and wild animals, some of which are highly mobile (e.g. fish and insects).
Exempt #GMOs (such as forestry trees, pets or wild animals, including insects) will not be required to have ANY environmental risk assessment before open release into the environment, and there is NO provision to stop, destroy or clean-up such releases if anything goes wrong.
U.S. Supreme Court rejects Bayer bid to nix Roundup weedkiller suits uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme… The Supreme Court's action dealt a blow to Bayer as the company maneuvers to limit its legal liability in thousands of cases. #glyphosate
The decision frustrates Bayer’s plan to stem the wave of litigation it has faced since its $63bn takeover of #Monsanto. More than 30,000 claims remain outstanding, for which Bayer set aside $4.5bn in addition to the approximately $11.5bn Bayer had already been forced to set aside
Last month, Bayer’s stock fell 6.2% the day after the Biden administration recommended the Supreme Court decline to hear Bayer’s appeal. That move by the U.S. Justice Department appeared to diminish the chances of the court hearing the case wsj.com/articles/supre…#glyphosate
German ministry warns on risks of new #GMO products gmwatch.org/en/106-news/la… And even the European Commission's representative expects gene-edited organisms will be traceable and labelled. #GMOs
The German environment minister @SteffiLemke emphasised that there's no need to regulate new #GMOs differently. But she said if new regulation is introduced in the EU, we need risk assessment and mandatory labelling (both of which are missing from #GMO deregulation in the UK)
@SteffiLemke The German environment minister also warned that that new GMO techniques (involving gene editing) have unintended effects, that new #GMO products may pose risks for health and the environment, and that the claimed benefits are not proven: "There is a high risk of greenwashing."
Leading molecular geneticist warns about the impact of #GMOs (including gene editing) and glyphosate gmwatch.org/en/106-news/la… His deep familiarity with gene editing makes him concerned about its deregulation. And his cutting-edge research makes him concerned about #glyphosate
Dr Michael Antoniou says deregulation "will make it almost a free-for-all", which he views with great concern because gene editing technologies are "nowhere near as precise" as claimed – "in fact, they are imprecise, and they carry major risks to both health and the environment."
Dr Antoniou contrasts the highly regulated, highly contained, carefully monitored & targeted use of gene editing in a clinical context, with agriculture where deregulated novel engineered organisms carrying unintentional genetic damage will be freely released into the environment