16 October 1997 Edition
Protests against dangerous foods
Robert Allen reports on growing direct action action against global food corporations
Global Days of Action against the corporations who are attempting to control the production, distribution and consumption of our food are having an impact on public opinion.
Direct action is proving to be an important aspect of the two week campaign against companies ``testing'' genetically-modified (GM) crops while an intense week of action has rocked the foundations of McDonalds - the global corporation who naively thought they could silence those who are telling the truth about their junk food.
Today (Thursday), when many people are participating in the United Nations' sponsored World Food Day, many more are outside McDonald's stores in many countries around the world distributing leaflets as part of World Anti-McDonalds Day.
The corporation has 21,000 stores in 24 countries. Each year it spends $2 billion on advertising and promotions - now campaigners are providing an alternative point of view.
The destruction of a crop of genetically-modified oilseed rape in Australia marked the beginning of the Global Days of Action against genetic engineering. This was followed by the destruction of a crop of GM sugar beet in Carlow and a naked roof-top protest at Monsanto's ad-agency in London.
As street theatre, public debates and supermarket actions continued around the world this week, representatives of the British wholefood trade met on Tuesday with MEPs in Brussels. Commenting on the illegal destruction of the GM sugar beet in Carlow by a group called the `Gaelic Earth Liberation Front', the Green Party MEP, Patricia McKenna, said: ``If Monsanto, which was carrying out the sugar beet trials and the Environmental Protection Agency which licensed the trials, insist on playing games with the Irish Environment then fair play to those who challenge them through peaceful direct action.''
The action against Monsanto's advertising agency in Soho, London was also significant. The protesters intitially refused to come down from the agency's roof until Monsanto could fulfil three demands: that they give a ``guarantee that we will suffer no side-effects from eating genetically altered food produced by them, now or at any time in the future''; that they ``guarantee that mutant DNA will not leak into our environment''; and that if not, ``will they accept full financial and moral liability for any damage caused by these products to people or the planet?''
The agency was contracted a month ago by Monsanto to run a four-month project to look at consumers' perceptions of biotechnology and to investigate ``how to get the facts across most effectively'' in the face of strong opposition from environmentalists.
A statement by the protesters said: ``The naked truth is that the outcome of Monsanto's global experiment cannot be predicted in advance. Already, food which has been doctored with genes from viruses and bacteria is being sold, unlabelled and untested, in our shops. Other new crops being grown in our fields have already begun to spread mutant DNA to related plants in the wild. The natural world is being re-designed for private profit.''
Last Thursday more than one hundred people, representing over thirty groups from around Britain concerned with genetically engineered food and crops, lobbied the National Farmers Union (NFU) and to the British Ministry for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF). A spokesperson from the Genetic Engineering Network, Louise Simpson, said: ``It is clear that US trade pressures have so far dictated approval of GM foods by European advisory and regulatory bodies.''
US exports of soybeans to Europe are worth $2.5 billion annually. Herbicide-resistant genetically manipulated (GM) soya from the US has not been segregated from GM-free soya, thus contaminating soya food products in Irish and British shops. The introduction of mandatory labelling of such products that ``may contain genetically manipulated organisms'' (GMOs) and of those products that certainly ``do contain or consist of GMOs'' (from 1 November 1997 in Britain and the 6 Counties), will enable consumers to avoid some of these products and should confirm the lack of market for GM foods.
However, Louise Simpson warned: ``The fact that 60% of supermarket products contains soya derivatives means that it will be almost impossible for the majority of consumers to avoid those products that may contain GM soybean derivatives. It is also unclear how the labelling requirements will be enforced or whether all products containing US soya will be labelled.''
•Scientists at a United Nations convention in Canada have appealed to governments granting licences to companies producing genetically-engineered crops to evaluate health risks before making their decisions. The scientists, who were attending a meeting of The UN Convention on Biological Diversity - which runs until today (Thursday), implored ``all governments to use whatever methods available to them to bar from their markets, on grounds of injury to public health, Monsanto's genetically manipulated (GM) [herbicide-resistant] Roundup-Ready (RR) soybean.'' These new findings indicate that EU member nations should immediately invoke Article 16, the safeguard clause of Directive 90/220, banning the soya on the grounds of specific health risks.
Global Days of Action against the corporations who are attempting to control the production, distribution and consumption of our food are having an impact on public opinion.
Direct action is proving to be an important aspect of the two week campaign against companies ``testing'' genetically-modified (GM) crops while an intense week of action has rocked the foundations of McDonalds - the global corporation who naively thought they could silence those who are telling the truth about their junk food.
Today (Thursday), when many people are participating in the United Nations' sponsored World Food Day, many more are outside McDonald's stores in many countries around the world distributing leaflets as part of World Anti-McDonalds Day.
The corporation has 21,000 stores in 24 countries. Each year it spends $2 billion on advertising and promotions - now campaigners are providing an alternative point of view.
The destruction of a crop of genetically-modified oilseed rape in Australia marked the beginning of the Global Days of Action against genetic engineering. This was followed by the destruction of a crop of GM sugar beet in Carlow and a naked roof-top protest at Monsanto's ad-agency in London.
As street theatre, public debates and supermarket actions continued around the world this week, representatives of the British wholefood trade met on Tuesday with MEPs in Brussels. Commenting on the illegal destruction of the GM sugar beet in Carlow by a group called the `Gaelic Earth Liberation Front', the Green Party MEP, Patricia McKenna, said: ``If Monsanto, which was carrying out the sugar beet trials and the Environmental Protection Agency which licensed the trials, insist on playing games with the Irish Environment then fair play to those who challenge them through peaceful direct action.''
The action against Monsanto's advertising agency in Soho, London was also significant. The protesters intitially refused to come down from the agency's roof until Monsanto could fulfil three demands: that they give a ``guarantee that we will suffer no side-effects from eating genetically altered food produced by them, now or at any time in the future''; that they ``guarantee that mutant DNA will not leak into our environment''; and that if not, ``will they accept full financial and moral liability for any damage caused by these products to people or the planet?''
The agency was contracted a month ago by Monsanto to run a four-month project to look at consumers' perceptions of biotechnology and to investigate ``how to get the facts across most effectively'' in the face of strong opposition from environmentalists.
A statement by the protesters said: ``The naked truth is that the outcome of Monsanto's global experiment cannot be predicted in advance. Already, food which has been doctored with genes from viruses and bacteria is being sold, unlabelled and untested, in our shops. Other new crops being grown in our fields have already begun to spread mutant DNA to related plants in the wild. The natural world is being re-designed for private profit.''
Last Thursday more than one hundred people, representing over thirty groups from around Britain concerned with genetically engineered food and crops, lobbied the National Farmers Union (NFU) and to the British Ministry for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF). A spokesperson from the Genetic Engineering Network, Louise Simpson, said: ``It is clear that US trade pressures have so far dictated approval of GM foods by European advisory and regulatory bodies.''
US exports of soybeans to Europe are worth $2.5 billion annually. Herbicide-resistant genetically manipulated (GM) soya from the US has not been segregated from GM-free soya, thus contaminating soya food products in Irish and British shops. The introduction of mandatory labelling of such products that ``may contain genetically manipulated organisms'' (GMOs) and of those products that certainly ``do contain or consist of GMOs'' (from 1 November 1997 in Britain and the 6 Counties), will enable consumers to avoid some of these products and should confirm the lack of market for GM foods.
However, Louise Simpson warned: ``The fact that 60% of supermarket products contains soya derivatives means that it will be almost impossible for the majority of consumers to avoid those products that may contain GM soybean derivatives. It is also unclear how the labelling requirements will be enforced or whether all products containing US soya will be labelled.''
•Scientists at a United Nations convention in Canada have appealed to governments granting licences to companies producing genetically-engineered crops to evaluate health risks before making their decisions. The scientists, who were attending a meeting of The UN Convention on Biological Diversity - which runs until today (Thursday), implored ``all governments to use whatever methods available to them to bar from their markets, on grounds of injury to public health, Monsanto's genetically manipulated (GM) [herbicide-resistant] Roundup-Ready (RR) soybean.'' These new findings indicate that EU member nations should immediately invoke Article 16, the safeguard clause of Directive 90/220, banning the soya on the grounds of specific health risks.