Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Monsanto Co. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rob C. who wrote (1241)	2/19/1999 11:26:00 AM
From: Anthony Wong	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2539

02/19 09:48 Greens and growers wide apart on bio-tech food CARTAGENA, Colombia, Feb 19 (Reuters) - Fears of mutant maize and "Frankenstein food" have been pitched against promises of a horn of plenty to end world famine at a United Nations conference on genetically-modified crops this week. More than 500 delegates from 130 countries are meeting in Colombia's colonial port city of Cartagena to hammer out rules for the import, export and use of crops and food engineered in laboratories by scientists mixing genes and DNA from plants and even animals. Environmental activists accuse bio-technology companies of trying to make a fast buck in what is already a multibillion-dollar industry at the risk of sparking a huge ecological disaster and damaging human health. The manufacturers of genetically-modified foods accuse the pressure groups of using "bogus, metaphysical" arguments in a bid to wrap the industry up in red tape. U.N. officials hope government representatives will adopt a protocol by the end of the meeting on Tuesday but concede that any agreement would likely be "based on moral suasion rather than punishment" -- effectively a dog with no teeth. "It's now possible to do stuff that only writers could imagine before and build up completely new life forms. The argument that we need genetically-modified food to feed the world is complete bull," Mika Raila, a Greenpeace spokesman at the conference, told Reuters. "The U.S. government has said it sees the bio-tech industry as the second most promising after information technology ... and it's been bullying everybody to please the U.S. bio-tech industry," he said, adding that other major grain exporters including Canada, Argentina and Australia were also lobbying for as few controls as possible on genetically-modified food. Last year, about one-quarter of all maize, or corn, grown in the United States was transgenic, together with about 35 percent of soybeans and some 45 percent of cotton, according to industry estimates. The bio-technology industry says their advanced techniques ultimately will allow the world to feed its ever-growing population by boosting crop quality and yields on existing farm land without encroaching on hitherto uncultivated areas. But alarm over the potential environmental and health risks of genetically-engineered produce has reached fever-pitch in parts of Europe, leading the British press to dub it "Frankenstein food". This week environmental activists dumped four tons of genetically-modified, U.S. soybeans on British Prime Minister Tony Blair's doorstep, after he said he had no worries about eating the hi-tech food. Raila argued that genetically-modified crops could cross- pollinate with wild species causing unwanted changes or even wiping out plants, insects and animals right up the food chain. The health risk to humans of eating such foods is as yet unknown but there are signs it could cause allergies, resistance to certain medicines and possibly even affect internal organs, he said. "Nobody has more of a vested interest than ourselves to make sure these products are safe for the consumer. Bio-technology gives us the possibility to modify plants with precision," Val Giddings, vice president of the Washington-based Bio-Technology Industry Organization, told Reuters. "The argument that gene exchange is problematic is bogus. Greenpeace and its likes have made a decision for metaphysical reasons that it is opposed to bio-technology," he added. Environmentalists and industry experts appear to be poles apart on the issue, but only government representatives are taking a direct part in this week's talks in Cartagena. Michael Williams, spokesman for the U.N. Environment Program said the discussions, which began last Sunday, had been tough. "This is a very complex issue and negotiations have been difficult. But we're optimistic we will have a reasonable protocol at the end," he said. Controversy has centered on whether new rules should just apply to modified seeds or extend to products made from genetically-modified crops. There has also been argument over who should be liable if a genetically-modified crop produces unwanted side effects or environmental damage. "There's a potential incompatibility between environmental and trade interests here," Williams said. moneynet.com@NEWS-P2&Index=0&HeadlineURL=../News/NewsHeadlines.asp&DISABLE_FORM=&NAVSVC=News\Company