|
Press Release of the Commission of Biomolecular Engineering: October 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Thursday, 11 January 2007 |
|
On Friday 17 November 2003, the President of the Commission of Biomolecular Engineering (CGB) [Ministries of Agriculture and Ecology] is organising a press conference to comment on the progress report for 2002, without the members of CGB being officially invited. This is a concern, as such an attitude undermines “transparency”, in a context where there was no consensus to lower the quorum of the said Commission. There has not been any hearing, in the monthly meetings of the Commission, of the representatives of the organizations for the protection of the environment for almost three years and almost two years have passed since a representative of the consumer associations took part in the vote. Yet, the President could have reacted after people had been absent three times in a row without justification and the Ministries do have the capability of finding citizens who are interested in the topic of GMOs. Whereas such positions are statutory, the proceedings of the reduced-CGB could be considered as not being legally acceptable. Besides, two meetings below the quorum in the same month are equal to one decisional meeting. Finally, the “transparency” does not prevail, the proceedings of the meetings have become confidential, whereas the President was hoping, in the foreword of his progress reports, “to offer the greatest transparency (...) on the proceedings of the meetings" in 1998 and the “public” proceedings in 1999. Could the jealously kept secrets of corporations have any bearing on the discussions about the necessity of conducting transparent and open toxicity tests of genetically modified organisms on rats and cattle, prior to the commercialization of GMOs? |
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 16 April 2010 )
|
|
A Mayor Bans GMOs: April 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Thursday, 11 January 2007 |
There is an opening for mayors to control GMOs in their constituency. The case was referred to the Court of Limoges by the Prefect of the Indre Département, following a decree from the Mayor of Coings allowing the cultivation of GMOs only in sealed up environments. The Admistrative Court of Limoges has just pronounced a decision which shall become jurisprudence. The decision cancels the decree on the grounds that there was no project or decision planning the cultivation of GMOs. The court recognizes therefore implicitly the competence of the Mayor to take such measures if is demonstrated that such elements exist “that make it possible to determine the scope, the surface area, the location and the type of crops that could be threatened on the territory of the village or town, or that the genetically modified organisms are presently cultivated within this territory or that an authorization application is being made, the proof of an imminent risk of genetic pollution originating from that territory”.
Therefore the Administrative Court indirectly acceded to the theory defended by the lawyer of the village, Maître Corinne LEPAGE, according to whom the proximity of organically grown fields makes it possible for the Mayor to ban the cultivation of GMOs in an open field.
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 16 April 2010 )
|
|
French Academy of Medicine’s Opinion: Impact of GMOs on Health: April 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Thursday, 11 January 2007 |
|
An Analysis of the Nature of the Documents Published by the French Medicine and Science Academies to Support their Opinion, especially on the Impact of GMOs on Health.
1 - Purpose
The following document is an analysis report, written in total independence from GMO manufacturers, of essential documents on which the French Medicine and Science Academies have based their official opinions on GMOs released in the environment. Given the competence of the members of these institutions in fields like biology and human health and the nature of their Press Releases on the matter, the purpose of the present document is not to discuss the potential or hoped for known economic impact, nor to enter into a controversy. We will essentially focus on the nature of the published documents that were used by the Academies to express an opinion on the effects or the absence of effects of GMOs on human health and the environment, and in particular on genetically modified plants for food.
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 16 April 2010 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
The So-Called Opinion Report on GMOs by the French Academy of Medicine Does Not Exist - Jan. 2003 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Thursday, 11 January 2007 |
The So-Called Opinion Report on GMOs by the French Academy of Medicine does not exist, say the Observatory for Ecological Vigilance and Alert (OVALE) and CRIIGEN, in a Press Release published last Friday. OVALE wanted to analysed the so-called report and tried to obtain it in vain from the Academy. Corinne Lepage, co-founder of OVALE with Michèle Rivasi, was told that no such report existed and that the only thing that existed was the communiqué that was published in December last year.
OVALE and CRIIGEN are astounded by such methods and consider that this is a fabrication unworthy of an institution as prestigious as the Academy of Medicine. Therefore, the communiqué is not only opened to criticism in terms of its content, but is also loses any credibility. In this communiqué, the Academy of Medicine was only highlighting the expected economic advantages of GMOs, to the detriment of the impact on human health. We can therefore wonder what the real designs are for such an “opinion”, knowing that no health assessment study was conducted to confirm or invalidate such a conclusion, which gives the green light to “an introduction and a reasonable production of GMOs”, according to an Opinion Report which does not exist!
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 16 April 2010 )
|
|
Press Releases