Archived press release

Gm sweet corn may get green light in europe

5 December 2003

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is gearing up to give the green light to a new genetically modified sweet corn on Monday (8th). The FSA will represent the UK in the vote on approving the controversial food at a meeting of a European Regulatory Committee [1]. The move comes despite a damning report by the House of Commons public accounts committee, challenging the FSA to do more to protect public health [2]. Friends of the Earth has condemned the FSA decision and has issued ten reasons why the GM sweet corn should not be approved [3].

Friends of the Earth has revealed serious question marks about the safety studies carried out on Syngenta's GM sweet corn, known as Bt11. A new report by the Austrian Government gives a damning verdict for the application and the safety tests carried out by Syngenta, concluding that the safety of Bt11 is based on theoretical argument rather than evidence.

There are also grave concerns that GM sweet corn is being pushed through the old Novel Food Regulations even though new laws improving the approval process become applicable in April. Safety tests required by the new laws have not been carried out such as assessing the effects on subsequent generations, cumulative toxic effects and the effects on the health sensitive consumers.

British public opinion remains firmly opposed to eating GM food. 86% said they would not be happy to eat GM food in the recent GM Nation? public debate.

Friends of the Earth's GM Campaigner Clare Oxborrow said:

"The Food Standards Agency is supposed to be the consumer's champion yet it is gearing up to wave through this controversial GM sweet corn, using out-dated laws, whilst serious question marks still remain over its safety. The British public has clearly showed its opposition to GM foods -it is outrageous that the FSA is planning to vote for GM foods whilst the Government has yet to respond to the GM public debate . Instead of pandering to the biotech industry and the US, the FSA should look at the serious question marks over the safety testing, listen to the British public and vote against this GM sweet corn".

Notes

[1] The European Commission, which failed to gather sufficient support at a previous meeting in November, will push for a vote on the GM sweet corn at Monday's meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health. If approved, unprocessed GM sweet corn will be allowed into shops, breaking Europe's moratorium on GM food.

[2] This week an audit by the House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts—a group of members of parliament that scrutinises use of public funds—recommended that the agency should take a stronger stance as "the champion of the consumer." See `Food Standards Agency must do more to protect public health' British Medical Journal BMJ 2003;327:1308 (6 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7427.1308-c

Protecting Public Health and Consumer Interests in Relation to Food: The Food Standards Agency is available in the Committees section at http://www.parliament.uk

[3] The full list of 10 reasons:

1. Research by the Belgium authorities questions Syngenta’s work over the genetic modification.

The new research questions whether the genes had been inserted as expected. It found that there were “uncertainties concerning the molecular data”, unexpected DNA fragments present which need investigating and Bt11 might be contaminated by an earlier GMO (Bt176).

2. Austrian Government’s report on Bt11 application attacks safety research and concludes:

• there was no toxicological testing with the whole plant
• there were no tests on the long terms effects of eating the novel protein
• the test for allergic reactions are insufficient and many assumptions argued by Syngenta are false
• the safety of Bt 11 is based on theoretical argument rather than evidence.

This report seriously questions the quality of the work carried out by the EU’s old Scientific Committee on Foods (SCF) who gave a positive opinion to Bt11.

3. US Food and Drug Administration’s evidence indicates Bt toxins may have allergenic properties.

Scientists working for the US Food and Drug Administration also concluded the similarity between the amino acids of the Bt toxin and of a common egg yolk allergen “might be sufficient to warrant additional evaluation”. None were done. Furthermore, the allergy testing used would not meet the standards developed by the FAO/WHO. The EU’s SCF opinion fails to even mention allergies from the Bt toxin.

4. The EU’s scientific opinion raises unanswered questions with many arguments based on pure assumptions

Although the EU’s old Scientific Committee on Foods (SCF) gave a positive verdict, it raised more questions with many arguments based on pure assumptions. SCF concluded it was “of the opinion that despite the large number of studies, the company (Syngenta) did not commission systematic information on the composition of the genetically modified or control plants”.

The SCF states that the evidence provided by Syngenta “provide only limited evidence for safety”. In the absence of adequate data from the applicant, the SCF appears instead to have relied on:

• the fact that there were no “visible adverse effects” when livestock were fed Bt 11 maize for “a few weeks”
• a study conducted on Bt tomatoes
• an unpublished, two-week study on mice.

5. Bt11 maize is being pushed through the old Novel Food Regulations even though new laws improving the approval process become applicable in April. There is therefore no guarantee that a labelling and traceability regime will be in place when foods reach the supermarkets. The new regulations also require a post-approval safety monitoring plan.

6. Fails to meet new food safety criteria New EU food law requires that foods that are placed on the market are not injurious to health. Article 14(4) of EC Regulation 178/2002 explicitly states that not only the short- or long-term effects must be taken into account, but also effects on subsequent generations, cumulative toxic effects and also the effects on health sensitive consumers. Proceeding with the approval of Bt11 sweet maize under the Novel Foods procedures bypasses this level of scrutiny and precaution.

7. No transparency Improving openness and transparency in the approval process is a key step to building public trust in the decisions and recommendations made. The old Novel Foods Regulations allow the public no access to the dossiers submitted by the biotech industry. Proceeding with applications under these regulations allows decisions to be made in virtual secrecy.

8. Traceability and Labelling According to article 8 of the EC Regulation 1830/2003 concerning traceability and labelling of GMOs, a system for development and assignment of unique identifiers to GMOs has to be put in place. Such system does not exist yet. It might be a considerable time before it is applicable.

9. Animal Feed authorisation
The new Food and Feed Regulations bring in for the first time an approval process for GM animal feeds. It requires that GM animal feeds do not have adverse effects on animal health or the environment. No such consideration is required under the Novel Foods Regulation. New research has discovered the Bt toxin in the digestive system of pigs fed Bt11 corn which raises new safety questions . The SCF notes that for Bt11 “processing by-products are used as animal feedstuffs”. Under the old rules the safety of Bt11 for use as an animal feed will not have to be assessed.

10. Dangerous precedent
The quality of this application and the supporting safety research is clearly of a poor and insufficient standard. If this sweet corn is approved using this evidence then a dangerous precedent will be set for future approvals. The public demands the highest quality of research into the safety of their food.

http://biosafety.ihe.be/TP/MGC_reports/Report_Bt11.pdf (PDF†)
Detection of corn intrinsic and recombinant DNA fragments and Cry1Ab protein in the gastrointestinal contents of pigs fed genetically modified corn Bt11, J. Anim. Sci. 2003. 81:2546–2551

†To view PDF files you will need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader. Visually impaired users can get extra help with these documents from access.adobe.com.

If you're a journalist looking for press information please contact the Friends of the Earth media team on 020 7566 1649.

Published by Friends of the Earth Trust