By Clive Wakely. The news that the Hungarian Authorities have destroyed 400 hectares of genetically modified maize suggests that at least one EU member state is taking this threat seriously.
Under a law passed in March all maize grown in Hungary has to be tested to ensure that it is free from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) before entering the food chain.
Furthermore, the onus for ensuring that maize is GMO free remains with the purveyors of seed.
As a result of inspections by Hungary’s Agricultural Office GMO contaminated maize has been discovered in several Hungarian farming districts; all of which have already, or shortly will be, destroyed.
According to reports the contaminated seeds were unwittingly purchased from a Romanian subsidiary of Monsanto, the controversial US multinational biotech corporation – growers believing them to be GMO free.
Following the discovery Monsanto representatives are reported as having appealed to the Budapest Municipal Court to have the destruction halted and have issued a statement claiming that all their products sold in Hungary are GMO free.
The court subsequently rejected the appeal as tests conducted by the Hungarian authorities confirmed the presence of GMOs in produce originating from that company.
Furthermore affected farmers are complaining over the loss of their crops as it is now too late in the season to replant for this year.
In a doubly whammy for growers it has been revealed that the Romanian company that sold them the contaminated seed has gone into liquidation and growers are therefore unlikely to receive compensation from that source for their financial loss.
More crop inspections are planned with the Hungarian authorities determined to identify and root-out all infected crops by the end of the month, after which the danger of contamination increases through natural dispersion.
A local government official, having a responsibility for environmental protection, has controversially stated that he considers it unimaginable that seed producers unknowingly brought GMO-infected seeds to Hungary; that being the case it begs the question – why?
This incident has also embarrassed the Hungarian government who only recently claimed that there were no GMO seeds in the country and that they are committed to keeping it that way.
One of the dangers identified with some GMO products is the unpredictability of gene manipulation; genes from pesticide-resistant maize can easily transfer to other plants.
If, for example, weeds were to acquire this gene then they could become pesticide-resistant – making their removal from cereal crops all but impossible.
A more important concern is that it remains unclear how eating GMO food affects human health in the long term as, by definition, side effects (if any) could take years or decades to manifest themselves.
The potential health risks to humans from directly or indirectly consumed GMO products are consequently a matter of much speculation.
The international biotech companies, as may be expected, have repeatedly given assurances that their products are safe and thoroughly tested.
They are also, nonetheless, remarkably reticent to entertain the concept of legal culpability in the event of unforeseen catastrophes – perhaps something similar, in genetic terms, to the Thalidomide scandal of the 1950s.
Worryingly, it remains – in theory at least, possible for allergenic genes to be transferred from GMO crops containing them to humans, causing dangerous reactions in people with allergies.
Indeed it is claimed that a very similar event has already occurred with an allergenic Brazil-nut gene being transferred successfully to a variety of soybean.
As a result of the Hungarian incident ecologists are calling on national governments to adopt further measures to safeguard against imported GMO pollution.
Measures suggested include making GMO seed producing companies, such as Monsanto, responsible for the cost of pollution clean-ups and for the compensation of farmers for the loss of both crops and environmental damage – in much the same way as the Obama administration held BP financially culpable for the clean-up in the wake of last year’s Gulf of Mexico disaster.
This is not a suggestion that has previously found much sympathy with either Monsanto or the Whitehouse.
To prevent a reoccurrence of this problem some Hungarian ecologists and producers are demanding “food sovereignty”, that is the sourcing of all seed from GMO-free Hungary itself.
One indignant ecologist has complained: “It’s unacceptable that foreign seed producers endanger the livelihood of Hungarian farmers and the good name of Hungarian agriculture by their irresponsible policies.”
One wonders whether the British government would have acted with such resolution had the incident occurred in this country; sadly our subservience to the US is such that we must assuredly answer in the negative.
3
An extremely interesting article. It shows that it IS possible to be a member of the EU whilst acting sensibly against foreign interference – providing your politicians are sufficiently genuine. Of course, nobody has yet publicised the one fact which would result in Monsanto-derived crops and foods being banned worldwide – their genetically modified crops make use, amongst many other secret ingredients, of certain pig-derived chromosomes. Any follower of Islam who eats a Monsanto-derived product is unknowingly eating part of a pig! Strange why this has never been widely publicised.
The outgoing labour government had a paper that recommended Britain start growing GM crops.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/food/6924216/Britain-must-produce-more-food-government-to-warn.html
Although for some strange reason we weren’t supposed buy the homegrown stuff because it might hurt emerging markets.
The first GM food experiment was carried out some 6,000 years ago when grasses were continuously selected so those carrying the genes for larger ear production became dominant. With modern rise in genetic science the work has accelerated with the introduction of organisms into the GM food production.
So far, and perhaps through good fortune, no deaths have been reported in the USA where millions have been eating some GM foods for a decade or more. However, there is still no detailewd study on the long term effects and I believe that the BNP would be supported if it backed such a study rather than just joining in condemning the ‘mad scientists’who are playing God.
The key problem for the world is over population. As Islam and the Catholic Church will not, at present, support birth control, then we must increase food production world-wide.
GM foods are shown to increase yields substantially, while at the same time curtail the use of toxic chemicals . After a long-term study has been completed, it may turn out that GM foods will solve some of these food shortage problems. In the meantime, I agree that our dictum should be: if we can’t grow it by conventional methods then we can consider GM.
I can’t confirm this is true as I read it in Pravda, but allegedly Russian scientists fed a GM corn to hamsters. There were no problems until the third generation which showed massive infertility and bizarrely had fur growing in their mouths making eating painful and dangerous.
Other obvious potential problems are that plants engineered to make their own pesticide could genetically combine with gut bacteria in humans and animals, with potentially toxic consequences.
We are not hamsters. Ban GM and demand international fines if trade winds bring their seeds and pollen to our lands. Promote organic. Yes it means a smaller population, but then these cold islands can only feed about 40 million people and we don’t want all the African and Muslim invaders here anyway.
The real problem as I see it is that the GM seeds are sterile. You have to keep buying from the company who sold them to you every year.
This means the company has complete control and if they decide to withhold seeds one year that’s it. Starvation.
One thing which I believe to be missing from the discussion so far is another danger that is potentially present with GMO’s and companies like Monsanto – which is featured on the image that accompanies the article.
It is argued by some people that large companies (like Monsanto) are going to end up using food production as a means of control, as a means of fiat currency and debt slavery to their product.
I am not well informed enough as to offer explanation of the mechanics and theories of this though.
Monsanto (for example)are reported to be well embedded into American politics – which has even led to “America” (on behalf of a “corporation”) to sanction and “punish” European countries (such as France) for rejecting their product into their nations. Surely, this cannot be acceptable.
The company is reportedly pushing their product into India too, where it is claimed that seeds may eventually need to be bought by them on a perpetual basis because the seeds do not reproduce.
I do not know the validity of these claims, but if this is true, India could potentially end up enslaved to these seeds and thus the whims and demands of these companies.
I am not talking from an insightful perspective here, so please forgive me if I have some of these things wrong (or all of it wrong). You can hear all sorts of things and all sorts of theories on these kinds of issues.
For example, what about the concept of copyright on “product” too?
If some corporation has made a “product” – ie, a certain modified and manipulated corn, say “Corn F1675” – and they alone own the rights to that product and thus license out who can grow it – what happens if (through a process of cross contamination) a neighbouring yield is found to have those GMO traits within it?
Could it be feasible (in the future) for such a company to either make the growers pay fines for using “their” technology – or confiscate or burn that yield as an infringement of copyright?
This could make it so there is little alternative to using the products of corporations rather than natural produce of the land.
They could also come to dominate the marketplace and leave farmers with little financial and organisational room for alternatives than GMO.
Aside from the potential health risks, the idea of us having less and less choice over how we can operate as a society without needing them does worry me.
I do hope I am very wrong on these kinds of dangers to all this.
Of course, when it comes to food safety and selective breeding we have tinkered with nature along the way, but perhaps things are now going to excess. Although it may be silly to say, I think mother nature has ways of punishing us for ‘playing God’ too much.
Generally speaking, I do not currently think that messing with the planets food supply in this way is a good idea, especially if it ends up being the case later down the line that we cannot go back.
I would like us to aim to eventually get in the position where we grow and consume organic food locally.
This seems to be the healthiest, safest, and less potentially slave driven method to adopt – plus it could help provide jobs and self sustainability as a nation. Whether that idea is flawed and pie in the sky is indeed open for discussion!
The recent e.coli scare in Europe, suspected to be from Egypt, perhaps goes to show what global food dependency can bring. One product from one part of the world could harm millions of people around the world overnight.
Having the current concept of bumper yields – Russia for supplying wheat, China for supplying corn (or whatever), Spain for tomato’s etc…. we are left at risk and at the whims of these nations – as we found out when the Russian crops failed recently.
Not only that, but how would we propose to ensure that we are not inadvertently eating things which are not good for us?
We have little say over other countries and how they conduct their affairs, but we also have increasing dependency on importing their food crops – seeing as we are already around double the recommended capacity in Britain.
Halting dependency, stabilising the population, along with growing and selling locally would surely reduce such a risk to humankind and all the extra troubles and tribulations which may arise….?
Food supply is an essential thing, it is potentially a form of power, like water supply has become in certain parts of the world. Unlike iPods and TFT televisions, we cannot live without it.
The idea of “food sovereignty” like Hungary has set in motion therefore sounds like a good move to me.
Of course, I may be able to be persuaded otherwise and I will gladly concede that I may be talking a load of nonsense on this particular issue as it not really my area of interest!