 |
|
|
|
|
|
1. BASF company profile
BASF Plant Science GmbH is an affiliate of the world's largest chemicals & drugs corporation BASF - Badishe Analin und Soda Fabrik, whose net profit jumped by 50% to €3.007 billion on sales of €42.745 billion in 2005.
Based in Germany, BASF is a former member of the notorious IG Farben conglomerate which was the financial core of the Hitler régime. IG Farben owned the patent and was the main supplier of the cyanide-based insecticide Zyklon-B, used by Nazi Germany to murder millions of Jews in concentration camps. IG Farben built a factory at Auschwitz using 83,000 slave labourers. After the war, IG Farben split into its original companies some of which survive today as Agfa, BASF and Bayer, while Hoechst merged with the French Rhône-Poulenc Rorer to form Aventis. After the war, IG Farben co-founded the Chemagrow Corporation to develop and test chemical warfare agents in collaboration with the U.S. Army Chemical Corps. In 1967, the IG Farben Trust entered into a joint venture with Monsanto. BASF, Bayer, Aventis and Monsanto are leading producers of GMO crops. None of the above is meant to denigrate the scientists who work at BASF today, who no doubt believe GM crops are good for humanity. The point is that the agribiotech and weapons industries are historically linked.
Bayer CropScience L.P. is currently being sued in US Federal Court along with Monsanto Co. and Delta & Pine Land Co. by 90 Texas cotton farmers who say they have suffered widespread crop losses because the companies failed to warn them of a defect in their GM cotton. The lawsuit, filed in Federal Court in Texas, seeks an injunction against what it calls a longstanding campaign of deception and asks the court to award both actual and punitive damages. One of the plaintiffs, farmer Alan Stasney, said the crop failure cost him $250,000 in lost sales and forced him to refinance his farm.
In November 2001, the European Commission imposed fines of € 833.23m on BASF and several other companies for running a series of cartels in 12 vitamin markets between 1989 and 1999. BASF was fined a total of € 296.16 m. for its part in eight cartels (vitamins A, E, B2, B5, C, D3, beta-carotene and carotenoids); the fine was subsequently reduced to € 236.9m. Separate charges were brought in the US, resulting in fines of more than $2 bn to federal and state governments and private plaintiffs.
|
|
2. Aim of this experiment
BASF's stated aim is to generate patented GMO potatoes with improved resistance to the late potato blight fungus Phytopthora infestans. BASF intends to plant up to 45,000 of 430 different kinds of GMO potatoes each year from 2006 to 2010, up to 450,000 GMO potatoes in total.
Increased blight resistance is a desirable trait, but at least two varieties of blight-resistant potatoes, produced by safe non-GMO traditional breeding methods, are already available to Irish farmers.
Since potatoes are a staple of the Irish diet, the introduction of patented GMO varieties could be part of a long-term BASF strategy to take control of the entire Irish potato market (in the same way that Monsanto aims to control the entire European maize market through it patented GMO maize).
BASF may also have selected Ireland as the location for its GMO potato experiment in hopes of appropriating the well-known tragedy of the Irish famine as the emotionally compelling spin for its global GMO potato marketing strategy. Note that the blight responsible for Ireland's mid-19th century potato crop failure might have been prevented if farmers had access to the natural diversity of potato varieties used in South America. Moreover, the famine was not caused by any lack of food; while a million people died of hunger, and millions more were forced to emigrate, Ireland exported vast quantities of food to England throughout the famine period.
|
|
3. Patent rights
These GMO potatoes have a world patent (publication no. WO/2003/066675 [or WO/2003/066675A1 ?], international application no. PCT/NL2003/000091) requested by the Dutch company KWEEK- EN Researchbedrijf Agrico B.V. Details available on the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) web site at www.wipo.int.
Under the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement – a cornerstone of the World Trade Organisation's so-called "free trade" agreement put in place by Irishman Peter Sutherland – a GMO patent may enable the patent owner to claim ownership of any farmers' crops contaminated by its patented genes, to file patent infringement lawsuits against contaminated farmers, and force any farmers found growing the potatoes (whether by contamination or not) to pay annual patent royaties. This is part of the transnational corporate strategy to control the food supply through GMO crop patents.
According to the Irish Patent Office, the global TRIPS agreement now superceeds EU and Irish patent law and the latter offer no protection to Irish farmers who may be sued for patent infringement after becoming contaminated by GMO crops.
For more on this, see our interview with Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser who lost ownership of his crops after being contaminated by Monsanto's patented GMO seeds in 1996.
|
|
4. How are these GMO potatoes different from ordinary spuds?
These GMO potatoes have been modified by introducing mixtures of foreign genetic material:
|
| • |
genes from a wild Mexican potato variety Solanum bulbocastanum (Ornamental nightshade) that provides some resistance to the late potato blight fungus Phytopthora infestans;
|
| • |
marker genes from mouse-ear cress Arabidopsis, a plant related to cabbage and mustard that conveys tolerance to "Imazamox" herbicide (which contains banned Imidazolinones);
|
| • |
two vector genes from pathogenic bacteria called Agrobacterium tumefaciens.
|
|
It appears that no animal feeding studies have been done, and that no environmental or health impact studies are planned.
|
|
|
5. General dangers of GMO crops
|
| • |
See our separate sections on the health, environmental, and legal risks of GM food and farming.
|
| • |
Irish farmers contaminated by GMO crops may lose ownership of their own produce, face patent infringement lawsuits, and be forced to play annual patent royalties. See our interview with Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser.
|
| • |
Modified genes can escape and contaminate other crops, wildlife, and produce "superweeds". Visit www.gmcontaminationregister.org for info on GM contamination of seeds, food and feed around the world.
|
| • |
There is growing scientific evidence that GM foods and crops pose unacceptable health and environmental risks, including overwhelming evidence of deaths attributable to GM products among laboratory and farm animals and in the human population. The biotech industry and regulatory bodies have attempted to cover up the evidence:
New evidence of harm from GM food triggers call for immediate ban, by Dr. Brian John.
Most Offspring Died When Mother Rats Ate Genetically Engineered Soy, by Jeffrey M. Smith.
GM Potatoes in County Meath, by Séan McDonagh SCC.
|
| • |
Since GMO potatoes must carry a GM label and there is no market for GM food in Europe, contaminated farmers will lose market share. See No market for GM-labelled food in Europe (download as large 2mb PDF file).
|
|
6. |
Independent risk assessments of this GMO field experiment
by Professor Joe Cummins and Dr. Arpad Pusztai
|
|
|
| A. |
Joe Cummins
Emeritus Professor of Genetics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada:
|
|
Prof. Cummins has kindy provided detailed scientific comments on the dangers of this GMO experiment:
Genes from a wild plant Solanum bulbocastanum
used to resist potato blight fungus (154kb PDF file).
Professor Cummins warns that the environmental release of these GMO potatoes is unwise because BASF makes specious assumptions that could lead to contamination, with toxic effects on humans and wildlife. He says "the people and wildlife of Ireland should not be exposed to inadequately tested genetic constructions". His findings include:
|
| • |
There is clear risk of cross-contamination of Irish potatoes.
|
| • |
The transfer of genes between the potato Solanum tuberosum and its wild relative Solanum bulbocastanum may lead to novel proteins with powerful or fatal immune responses, potential inflammation as well as allergenicity effects.
|
| • |
If the GM potato proves to be immunologically active, the impact on both human and animals may be severe.
|
| • |
It appears that no animal feeding studies have been done.
|
| • |
It appears that no environmental or health impact studies are planned.
|
| • |
The expression of the modifiying genes in glasshouse experiments was not studied under real outdoor weather conditions such as drought, waterlogging, heat, cold, nitrogen excess or starvation which could lead to unexpected toxicity.
|
| • |
Risk assessments of the impact of the experiment on non-target organisms seem to be based on an assumption of safety, and do not provide for an adequate monitoring scheme.
|
| • |
The isolation distance 20 meters to cultivated potatoes does not seem adequate.
|
| • |
Post-release treatment of the test site does not seem adequately monitored nor will it achieve a clean post-harvest site.
|
| • |
The considerations of human and environmental safety seem primarily based on wishful thinking rather than on on any serious efforts to gather or obtain factual information on the safety of the GM constructs.
|
| • |
Monitoring also seems based on wishful thinking rather than serious efforts to detect negative impacts.
|
| • |
Field testing of broad spectrum NBS-LRR genes has begun with the potato blight resistant strains. Broad spectrum pest resistant strains of rice, maize, soybean, and numerous food crops will soon follow. It is imperative that the safety of these genetic modifications to humans and the environment be fully evaluated before the GM crops are commercialized.
|
| • |
The proposition that the NBS-LRR family of plant pest resistance genes and their products provide safe transgenes for human consumption and for environmental release because they are found in food crops (and for that reason require no further testing) is simply foolhardy.
|
| • |
The suggestion that NBS-LRR genes can be assumed safe until proven hazardous certainly appeals to greedy promoters of GM crops but does not serve the public good.
|
|
Professor Cummmins has also provided comments on the further information provided by BASF in response to detailed questions by the EPA concerning the original Notification. He raises the following issues:
|
| • |
BASF should provide a karytopye (microscopic picture) of the potato chromosomes.
|
| • |
BASF should provide information on the segregation of particular genes in the potato "volunteers" for consideration by the EPA.
|
| • |
BASF's claim that "there are no compoments of the vectors [genes] known to code for harmful substances" can not be justified only by comparison of data bases for evidence of toxicity, because inflammation (a potent immune response) is not considered in allergy data bases, and would likely be ignored because available data bases do not include information about inflammation from plant proteins.
|
| • |
Regulatory genes in the GMO potatoes may produce a strong response without producing a great deal of protein, which may contribute to pest resistance. This should have been studied in glasshouse rather than field experiments to provide a controlled study environment.
|
| • |
BASF claims that the occurence of epigenetic and pleiotropic effects (control by a single gene of several distinct effects and changes in cellular biochemistry) caused by the introduded genetic material is "remote". Prof Cummins says the modified DNA is bound to produce both of these phenomena because they govern a range of responses leading to cell death, and that such impacts need to be considered.
|
| • |
BASF admits that none of the GMO potato lines intended for release in Co. Meath have been analysed for the main toxic and anti-nutritional substances found in potatoes, but that this does not matter because none of the genes introduced from the wild potato species are "known to exert any toxic or allerenic effects on human health." But Prof. Cummins points out that "inter-specific gene transfer has led to the formation of a toxin causing inflammation in mammals", and that "it seems unwise to ignore that finding and proceed based on blind supposition. Certainly the regulatory proteins are known to be immunologically active but these and toxic effects of the proteins from S. bulbocastanum have not been studied adequately regarding their impact on mammals."
In response to BASF's claim that "the overall impact on human health is negligible", Prof Cummins point out that "The Canadian Food Inspection Agency reviewed a mutant ahas gene used to confer resistance to imidazolinones in spring wheat. That mutant was not a transgene but was a mutation selected in spring wheat. There is no real justification in implying that the mutation and its consequences are the same as the results of an inter-species transgene transfer between Arabidopsis (bearing a different mutation) and potato. At any rate the Canadian Agency assumed that mutant and natural ahas were substantially equivalent but did not do nay experiments to support their superstition. BASF was wrong, I believe, not in mentioning the Canadian review but in failing to mention what ahas mutation had been studied in spring wheat."
|
| • |
In response to BASF's admission that no animal feeding trials have been carried out on any of the GMO potatoes intended for the release, Prof Cummins writes: "Have animals feeding experiments been initiated or completed using material from the Swedish field trials? Those trials should have provided more than enough material for animal feeding studies and would have provided useful information about the impact of two of the three genes."
|
| • |
In response to BASF's claim that "none of the genes are known to exert any toxic or allergenic effects to human health" Prof Cummins states "the search of DNA sequence data is necessary but not sufficient to establish safety of transgenes. Even interspecies plant gene transfers can lead to toxic products. In one reported case the plant to plant gene transfer led to protein modifications that cause immunotoxicity leading to inflammation. Common sense leads us to the need for direct animal feeding experiments for all of the transgenic crops, whether plant to plant, bacteria to plant, fungus to plant or human to plant."
|
| • |
The ERA has asked BASF "Please comment on whether the introduction of your GM blight resistant potatoes might alter the pathogenicity of the potato blight fungus under Irish soil conditions thus facilitating the dissemination of infectious diseases and/or creating new reservoirs or vectors."
BASF replied that the likelihood of a change in the pathogenicity of the late potato blight fungus "is considered negligible." Prof Cummins comments: "The basic question is 'how soon will the fungus grow resistant to the transgenic potato?' Appropriate glasshouse experiments should provide a useful estimate as to the time to resistance. Turning to the S. bulbocastanum-S.tuberosum somatic hybrids. I understand that the hybrids proved too unstable to produce commercial lines. If the lines were stable then there would not likely be any need for BASF to promote transgenic lines."
"It is worth pointing out that there do not appear to be any published reports on the experiments where the somatic hybrid potatoes were fed to mammals in a laboratory situation. Since breeding clones of blb2 have been grown in the Netherlands since 1999 it is surprising that no effort has been reported on the tests of such clones in animal feeding experiments. Of course, it would be negligent to withhold such studies, should they exist."
|
|
Prof. Cummins' conclusion is that the BASF proposal to release transgenic potatoes to the Irish environment seems premature because of the need for "fuller laboratory and glasshouse studies to insure the safety of the recombinant organisms. In particular, there was little or no reference to evidence that plant to plant gene transfer may lead to formation of proteins toxic to mammals."
|
|
|
| B. |
Dr. Arpad Pusztai, FRSE
Biochemist, Norwegian Institute of Gene Ecology.
Former Senior Research Fellow, Rowett Research Institute, Scotland:
|
|
Dr. Pusztai has also kindy provided a detailed submission on the dangers of this GMO experiment (160kb PDF file). His findings include:
|
| • |
"Although the permission sought only for the field trial of these GM potatoes, if the
field trial is deemed successful, they are obviously intended for human (and animal)
consumption."
|
| • |
"In view of this, it is regrettable that although the purpose of the release is 'to compile data on agronomical performance and environmental effects and evaluate resistance against Phytophthora infestans and collect material for further (and unspecified) analyses...', none of the scope of these studies, nor the methods to be employed are detailed."
|
| • |
"This serious omission is further compounded by the fact
that the only reference to possible toxic or allergenic effects of the GM potatoes is
described in a scientifically totally unacceptable sentence that 'no toxic or allergenic
effects are expected on the basis of... the expressed AHAS protein'. Indeed, under [the Summary Notification provided by BASF], subsection F: 'Summary of planned field trials designed to gain new data on the environment and human health impact of the release' is dismissed as not applicable."
|
| • |
"This sort of cavalier treatment of the regulatory authorities and consumers is totally unacceptable particularly in view of the accumulating worrying evidence for the potential negative health effects observed with many other GM potato lines. Every part of the potato plant is toxic for human and animals and even the tuber may become toxic when exposed to sunlight, etc. Thus because all cells of the potatoes
carry the same genetic information, the importance of the exclusion of possible
unintended alterations resulting from gene-splicing ought to have featured
prominently in the submission. It is not even mentioned."
|
| • |
"This is further aggravated by the fact that most experimental work reported in science journals is full of negative findings and most GM potato lines do not even satisfy the conditions of substantial
equivalence with their isogenic parent lines."
|
|
Dr. Pusztai concludes: "In view of all the accumulating data showing that GM potatoes of all kinds investigated to date have shown unacceptable compositional, metabolic,
immunological effects and potentially toxic behaviour, it is imperative for the Irish
EPA to reject this request by BASF for field trial of their GM potatoes until and
unless they are first subjected to independent environmental and health risk
assessments using a scientific protocol openly agreed and approved by independent
scientists and representatives of the public and consumer groups."
|
|
|
7. Related documents
|
| • |
Employing a composite gene-flow index to numerically
quantify a crop's potential for gene flow: an Irish perspective
By Marie-Louise Flannery (Teagasc), Conor Meade and Ewen Mullins (Gene-flow Laboratory, Institute of Bioengineering and Agroecology, National University of Ireland, Maynooth.
According to this study: "The dispersal of potato pollen is an issue in
certain regions of Ireland where potato is cultivated for
both tuber and true potato seed (TPS) production.
Dispersal distances for potato pollen are typically less than
10 m (McPartlan and Dale, 1994; Tynan et al., 1990) and while most commercial varieties are sterile, hybridization
can occur, hence a potential exists for the resulting TPS (true potato seed)
to establish into a viable population: CPC (crop pollen-to-crop) = 5. The
appearance of potato volunteers emerging from overwintered
groundkeepers is a serious problem for potato
growers and hence a feasible mechanism for seedmediated
gene flow: CSV (seed-to-volunteer) = 3. Similarly, groundkeepers
can develop into viable ferals if they evade typical control
measures applied within the confines of cultivation:
CSF (crop seed-to-feral) = 3."
The notion that GMO potato pollen would only disperse 10m is absurd, given Ireland's gale force winds, abundant wildlife, roaming insects and migratory birds, not to mention farmers who travel all around the country and across the border to and from Northern Ireland.
|
|
|
8. Related documents published on the EPA web site (www.epa.ie) as of 26 February 2006
|
| • |
Advertisement in the Irish Independent of 26 January 2006
|
| • |
Register of GMO Users in Ireland, Notification Ref. No. B/IE/06/01
(3-page Word document)
|
| • |
Summary notification format for the release of genetically modified higher plants
According to Council Decision 2002/81/EC.
Notification number B/IE/06/01.
(4-page Word document from BASF Plant Science GMbH).
|
| • |
Notification
for the release into the environment of genetically modified potatoes with improved resistance to Phytopthora infestans (2006 - 2010)
(52-page Word document from BASF Plant Science GmbH.)
|
| • |
General information note
in relation to the making of representations to the EPA
regarding a notification under the Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) Regulations - S.I. No. 500 of 2003.
(2-page Word document from the EPA).
|
| • |
New: Further information provided by BASF Plant Science GmbH.
in response to detailed questions by the EPA concerning the original Notification.
(19-page Word document from the EPA).
See also Professor Joe Cummins' comments on the above.
|
|
|
9. Related objections sent to the EPA (partial list)
|
| • |
We are informed that, as of 19 March 2006, the EPA has received 95 submissions objecting to the experiment, one submission in favour, together with a further 25 submissions which the EPA has rejected (presumably because they were either received after the 22 February deadline set by the EPA and/or did not include the requisite €10 submissison fee.
|
| • |
Professor Joe Cummins (download as 6-page 164kb pdf file)
|
| • |
Futher comments by Joe Cummins (download as 7-page 48kb pdf file)
|
| • |
Dr. Arpad Pusztai (download as 5-page 160kb pdf file)
|
| • |
GM free Ireland Network (download as 15-page 1.5MB pdf file)
Attached document: NBS-LRR proteins signalling (download as large 4.4MB pdf file).
|
| • |
Doolough Conservation Group (download as 11-page 276kb pdf file)
|
| • |
Leitrim Organic Farmers Cooperative 27 February 2006 (download as 124kb Word file)
|
|
|
10. Related media coverage
| • |
Irish print media coverage
|
| • |
Irish Organic Farmers and Growers Association press release
|
| • |
Euro-Toques press release
|
| • |
Joint press release by GM-free Leitrim, Leitrim Farmers Coop, the Organic Centre Rossinver, and Cavan Leitrim Environmental Awareness Network (CLEAN).
|
| • |
GM-free Kerry press release
|
|
|
11. GM-free Ireland press conference of 22 February 2006
|
| • |
List of speakers
|
| • |
Transcript (download as 204kb pdf file)
|
|
|
12. National protest against the GMO potato experiment, 22 February 2006
|
| • |
About the protest
|
| • |
Protest photographs
|
|
|
13. Useful background information on the dangers of GM food and farming
|
| • |
The Future of Food video / DVD
Available for mailorder credit card purchase from www.thefutureoffood.com.
This award-winning documentary provides an in-depth look at the genetically modified foods controversy. Shot on location in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, the film examines the complex web of market and political forces that are changing what we eat as huge multinational corporations seek to control the world's food system through patented GM crops which invade conventional and organic crops and require contaminated farmers to pay annual patent royalties or face patent-infringement lawsuits. The film explores alternatives to large-scale industrial agribusiness, placing organic and sustainable agriculture as solutions to the global farm crisis. Produced by Deborah Koons Garcia. 90 minutes.
|
| • |
Seeds of Deception:
exposing corporate and government lies about the safety of genetically engineered food
Web site: www.seedsofdeception.com.
On sale at the Cultivate bookshop, Essex St. West, Temple Bar, Dublin, tel (01) 491 2327.
This briliant book by Jeffrey M. Smith has a foreword by former UK Environment Minister Michael Meacher MP who said it "combines shrewd dissection of the true nature of GM technology, a devastating critique of the health and environmental hazards of GM crops, and scarifying examples of the manipulation of both science and the media by the biotech industry. It is a call to arms, not only to prevent the contamination of the nation's food supply, but even more to tackle the poisoning of the nation's decision-making system by the undercover wielding of economic and financial muscle and PR manipulativeness of Big Biotech."
|
|
|
14. Maps of the GMO experiment site:
|
| • |
Wide area map.
|
| • |
Local area map.
|
|
|
15. What you can do to prevent the GMO invasion
|
| • |
Read the transcript of our press conference (download as 204kb pdf file).
|
| • |
Sign the GM-free Ireland petition.
|
| • |
Use our
protest materials (downloadable placards, posters and flyers) to organise a protest, for example as part of your local St. Patrick's Day parade.
|
| • |
Tell our Minister for Environment (Dick Roche) and Minister for Trade (Michael Ahern) to stand up to the WTO and protect our right to restrict GM crops and food: http://www.bite-back.org/objection/our_food.php.
|
| • |
In County Meath:
Contact Séan McDonagh SCC • tel (087) 236 7612 • email: smcdonagh10@hotmail.com
|
| • |
On the national level:
See the what you can do section of our home page and/or contact us at this address.
|
|
|
