The Trump administration is going to attack us if we try to restrict the imports of US genetically-modified food in any way

Blog home
19
Posted Sep 14 2017 by Linda Kaucher of Stop TTIP uk

Linda Kaucher of Stop TTIP UK recently alerted us to the fact that the US government is determined to go into battle with any country that tries to restrict imports of its genetically-modified food.

Its position is that if there’s no concrete scientific evidence to show that it’s bad for human health, then it shouldn’t be restricted. We have two objections to that. The first is that research should be over the longer term if we’re going to find out just what the consequences of GM crops might be in terms of human health, but especially ecology. We’re tired of new technologies being accepted because they make money, and only later is the environmental problems that they cause revealed. But our second objection is much more important – it’s that GM crops are entirely unnecessary. There is no global food shortage, only a money shortage amongst some people. This will be made worse by the adoption of GM food, as the reason that it exists at all is to concentrate even more wealth (as well as control over our food supply) in the hands of multinational corporations. If we’re serious about providing healthy, sustainably-produced food for everyone, we should be concentrating on helping small farmers. Small farms produce much more food per acre than giant, monoculture, factory farms.

See here, here and here for much more information on this.

Over to Linda:

Here is an article showing the determination of the US Trade Representative to force countries to accept GMOs, via the World Trade Organisation or any other means. Actually the WTO already ruled against EU resistance to GMOs some time back. The US wants what it calls the ‘science-based’ approach, whereby if there is no proof of harm, then a GM product or a chemical etc is allowed onto the market – and, in trad terms, into others countries’ markets. Such positive ‘proof’ is difficult to achieve when effects are long term and difficult to isolate, as with the effects of foods, but especially when most research is carried out by the corporations or by industry-funded academics, as is the reality.

With regulators accepting this as the ‘evidence’ as is shown in the exposed ‘Monsanto papers’ to be the case, with much more, there is little chance of safety restrictions emerging to challenge corporate interests.

This corporate-captured approach to regulating means that safety regulations on food, chemicals and cosmetics are much weaker in the US, with much less banned, and GMOs are in 70% of what is sold in supermarkets.

Forcing acceptance of US GM exports is being framed as a counter to US rural poverty.

Anyway, the Agribusiness industry was the strongest voice in the now defunct TTIP negotiations.  And so we can expect huge pressure on our safety standards here especially in regard to GM and especially with a UK government (whichever) inclined to open the UK to GM products.

GM Freeze is the combined campaign here against GM, including for GM.2 to be included as ‘GMOs’. (GM.2 – whereby genes of same organism are manipulated, rather than genes introduced from another organism. The industry is arguing this is not ‘GM’ so should not be subject to GM precautions).

Contact GM Freeze to get their excellent quarterly newsletter on GM developments and campaigning

Linda