It's finally happened. At last a government agency has rejected a genetically modified crop on the basis of a lack of conclusive scientific evidence that it is safe for consumers and the environment. The moratorium on the genetically engineered (GE) product also came about, in no small measure, as a prudent response to overwhelming public concerns regarding GE crops.
The only twist is that this crop, Bt eggplant, was not rejected by the U.S. government, but by the government of India.
"Public sentiment is negative. It is my duty to adopt a cautious, precautionary, principle-based approach," said Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh at a press conference earlier this month. Ramesh announced that more studies were needed to make sure that Bt Eggplant -- genetically engineered to contain insecticide derived from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) -- can be declared safe for consumers and the environment.
Minister Ramesh said that the Monsanto-produced eggplant would stay off the market until independent third-party scientific tests are concluded and the product's safety from the points of view of both environmental integrity and long-term human health are confirmed.
These tests would have to satisfy not only the professionals, but also the public. Mr. Ramesh characterized his decision as a difficult one, since there was much at stake and he needed to approach the issue to balance the concerns of commerce and food security against those of science and public sentiment. He concluded that "the decision is responsible to science and responsive to society."
Remarkable!
Unfortunately, that's not how we do things in the United States. Bowing to pressure from Monsanto and the other biotech companies, our federal agencies approved Bt corn and cotton without requiring any mandatory testing for environmental impacts. And the expected happened: a few years later, independent university researchers -- again not the government -- discovered that this Bt pesticide was potentially fatal to Monarch butterflies and other pollinators. After a public outcry, that particular version was taken off the market. But just recently new independent research showed that Bt was also potentially devastating to caddis flies, a major food source for our freshwater fish. Without mandatory government testing, we're clueless about the universe of keystone pollinators and other species that are being decimated as the Bt plants continue to proliferate in our fields.
Then there's the human health problems the US has experienced. Remember the Starlink scandal, one of the largest food recalls in recent US history? It turned out that a Bt corn plant could be a human allergen and had contaminated food products like Taco Bell tacos and a huge percentage of our seed supply. Farmers lost tens of millions of dollars as the contaminated seed had to be destroyed and contracts were lost. And the company had to fork over millions to consumers to settle class action health claims.
So given the disastrous US experience with Bt crops, it really was only prudent for Minister Ramesh to declare this moratorium in India. This sensible rejection, unexpected to those unfamiliar with India's approval processes, is being noted by business journalists as a move likely to seriously hamper Monsanto's expansion into the creation of GE food crops outside the U.S. Currently, India does allow the growing of Bt Cotton, but GE food crops and animal forage have not been heretofore accepted there. Those products are overwhelmingly rejected in the European Union and countries around the globe. Bt eggplant acceptance in India was for Monsanto an important business victory, a Trojan horse of sorts for getting its other crops into India. The country is the world's largest producer of eggplant, which is a staple of people's daily diets. Once India's farmers started growing eggplant, other varieties would follow in this potentially huge market.
With this moratorium, there is a real question now of whether any of the myriad GE vegetable and grain varieties Monsanto is creating for India can ever make it to the market. Clearly, given the problems we have had with these crops in the US, Monsanto's prospects are not good if India's overriding concern remains on assuring its citizens safe food that does no harm to an increasingly fragile environment.
Many of India's agriculture and food security experts are saying this was the right decision, and endorsing the calls for more science to examine the ecological and health impacts of these controversial new crops. Here in the U.S., we might take a lesson from the Indian approach and their public officials' adherence to the precautionary principles that Minister Ramesh so admirably has held himself to. There, officials seem to think that their job is to protect consumers and the environment. Here it seems like our federal agencies have been more interested in protecting Monsanto's and the biotech industry's bottom line.
Loading comments… 
First of all, I know of no farmer in the USA who plants GM with a gun held to their head. Most do it because GM works. What nearly is always ignored in this type of post is the fact that most farmers are going to use some herbicides
I do believe if American consumers want to reject GM food that is their right. What I think they need to understand is that might result in more chemicals being used, not less.
You can question my claims all you want. I farm for a living, have done so nearly 25 years, and know first hand that on my farm as well as those of my neighbors we are using less chemical than we were in the late 1980s early 1990s before the advent of RR technology
Just a little dig here at the end, too bad for Huff posters that the practical experience of actual farmers is never an authoritat
interestin
Monsanto web site claims “The Worlds population is growing,” “to keep up with population growth farmers will have to produce more food…more food in the next 50 years then in the past 10,000 years combined”
World Health Organizati
"The plant is native to India.[1][
What the FDA did, I seems almost criminal -- specially because Monsanto benefitted so much while the public got a substandar
Is it that those in charge are stupid?
Or that they're in the pocket$ of Corporatio
The whole financial crisis occurred because pro- corporate forces in government (the republican
This group has absolutely no connection to the federally-
Check it out. You'll discover that the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition has NO CONNECTION to Kimbrell and his cohorts. A small amount of extra effort will reveal that these folks have no expertise on anything except public relations.
You're welcome.
Is there anything wrong with this judgement?
I keep thinking the solution to this is every time a farmer is sued for this, they should sue the farmer whose pollen entered their field for the entire amount of the settlement with Monsanto-t
Still, Monsanto is the reason we need seed banks, they pollute as much area as they can with their genes (via pollen), hoping eventually to be able to claim all crops belong to them!
Decide for yourself. Here's a link to the Canadian Supreme Court ruling that held Schmeiser lied when he claimed he hadn't deliberate
scc.lexum.
If you aren't interested in all the legal mumbo-jumb
www.access
Andrew Kimball begins by writing this: "At last a government agency has rejected a geneticall
But then he goes to great lengths to show that public opinion - not science - was behind India's decision. India's politician
A small amount of research shows that India's scientific reviewers clearly, unambiguou
I applaud the government of India and the EU nations for protecting consumers from the USA's geneticall
To answer Z's question, my whole point is that this post is based on a falsehood. Both sides in this debate agree that public opinion - not science - motivated the decision to postpone approval of GMO eggplant. This is easily confirmed, and the text in Kimbrell's post acknowledg
Still, the second sentence in the post makes the clearly false assertion that science played a role, something that Indian officials and scientists unanimousl
In the meantime, thanks again for clarifying that facts play no role in your judgement. Those of us who live in the reality-ba
Cheers,
Whatevah
Former US Secretary of Health,Tom
John Ashcroft
The two congressme
More Ties
In order for the FDA to determine if Monsanto's growth hormones were safe or not, Monsanto was required to submit a scientific report on that topic. Margaret Miller, one of Monsanto's researcher
Shortly before the report submission
Easy enough to understand what's happening from the perspectiv
In one of my other comments I provide a link that exposes the organ failure bunk.
The reality is that the Indian government recommende
For an objective view of this subject, read what the Indian government had to say:
www.guardi
In the meantime, it would be good if folks would stop spreading this myth. Misinforma
In Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms, No. 09-475, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case which could have an enormous effect on the future of the American food industry. This is Monsanto's third appeal of the case, and if they win a favorable ruling from the high court, a deregulate
Here's where it gets a bit dicier. Two Supreme Court justices have what appear to be direct conflicts of interest.
Stephen Breyer
Charles Breyer, the judge who ruled in the original decision of 2007 which is being appealed, is Stephen Breyer's brother, who apparently views this as a conflict of interest and has recused himself.
Clarence Thomas
From the years 1976 - 1979, Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto. Thomas apparently does not see this as a conflict of interest and has not recused himself.
Monsanto has succeeded in insuring that government regulatory agencies let Monsanto do as it wishes.
Take a look:
Clarence Thomas
Prior to being the Supreme Court Judge who put GW Bush in office, Clarence Thomas was Monsanto's lawyer.
Anne Veneman
Former US Secretary of Agricultur
Donald Rumsfeld
Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was on the Board of Directors of Monsanto's Searle pharmaceut
Monsanto is the biotech version of Goldman Sachs and will likely be just as destructiv
Clarence Thomas is a joke. Ive never seen a judge that had less integrity than him. He will probably live on in history as the only justice who made it to the supreme court by a mere two senate votes. How dare a disgrace to the court like thomas replace thurgood marshall? Thomas isn't worthy of holding Marshall's robe. Marshall had more honesty and respect for the law in his finger than thomas has had throughout his entire career.