Misleading report published on behalf of the EU Parliament

13 October 2022 / On 20 October, the ‘Panel for the Future of Science and Technology’ (STOA) at the European Parliament will host a presentation of a new report on plants derived from new genomic techniques (NGT, also New Genetic Engineering or genome editing). The authors of the report “Genome edited crops and 21st century food systems challenges” and their institute, the Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnologie (VIB), are actively lobbying to deregulate agricultural plants derived from new genomic techniques (NGTs). However, the report fails to make this background transparent.

Together with 39 organisations we have sent a letter to EU Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides to express our serious concerns over the way in which the Directorate-General for Health (DG Sante) is organising the impact assessment on new GMOs – new genomic techniques (NGTs) – and in particular, the consultations that will feed into the assessment. The outcome of this assessment could have far reaching impacts on consumer choice, food safety, organic and conventional farming and the environment.

The EU’s green ambitions are in great jeopardy. The agribusiness industry is using the cost-of-living crisis as an excuse to push stronger EU environmental legislation off the table and weaken already existing legislation. For instance, they are pushing against tighter pesticides rules and in favour of relaxing GMO rules. But the lobby is increasingly driven by GM researchers and institutes with links to industry or with vested interests. The Commission seems to be listening to these pro-deregula

The main differences between targeted mutagenesis (=new GMOs) and conventional breeding

Targeted mutagenesis is the term for new GMOs that are produced with new genetic engineering methods, such as CRISPR/Cas, TALENs and others. As a rule of thumb no genetic material from other species is permanently integrated.

Targeted mutagenesis is the term for new GMOs that are produced with new genetic engineering methods, such as CRISPR/Cas, TALENs and others. As a rule of thumb no genetic material from other species is permanently integrated.

Reducing pesticide use by 50% by 2030 is a central goal of the EU Farm to Fork strategy, which aims to improve the sustainability of food and farming systems and reverse environmental degradation. However, there are claims that new genetically modified (GM) plants can help achieve this.

First-generation GM crops were introduced over 20 years ago with the same promises of pesticide reductions that are now being made for new GM crops. However, the data show that this first-generation of GM crops has increased pesticide use in countries where they are widely grown. The huge majority of GM crops are either herbicide tolerant or insect-resistant. In both cases, either weeds from the GM crop’s ecosystem or plant pests have in their turn evolved to become resistant or tolerant, leading to an increase in pesticide use.

How the EU Commission and EFSA are paving the way for deregulation of New GE

30 June 2022 / Testbiotech recently participated in an European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) consultation on guidelines for the risk assessment of ‘cisgenic’ plants, which ended at the beginning of this week. The ‘cisgenic’ plants are genetically engineered, but, in contrast to transgenic plants, contain no genetic material from other species. EFSA suggests that most applications of CRISPR/Cas can be put into this category. The consultation is, therefore, generally relevant to the risk assessment of plants derived from New GE (also called new genomic techniques, NGT). However, the way in which EFSA deals with this issue appears to be completely inadequate.

Reducing pesticide use by 50% by 2030 is a central goal of the EU Farm to Fork strategy, which aim to improve the sustainability of the food and farming systems and reverse environmental degradation. The European Commission claims that new genetically modified (GM) plants can help achieve that and is moving ahead with plans to deregulate this new generation of GMOs.

This briefing examines the history of first-generation, currently grown GM crops, as well as the new GM crops that are commercialised and in the pipeline. Based on the evidence, new GM crops will not reduce pesticide use. Some are even designed to increase it.

Pursuing false GM promises for pesticide reduction distracts from proven approaches. This briefing provides an overview of system-based solutions to effectively achieve pesticide reduction goals.

Tell your national ministers and your Members of the European Parliament to keep new GMOs strictly regulated!

Sign the petition now!

The EU GMO safety rules are under threat. Big chemical and seed corporations are pushing the EU to allow new genetically modified organisms (GMOs) onto the market without safety tests, monitoring nor consumer labeling. These companies have been lobbying the European Commission for years to exclude new GMOs from the European GMO regulation, making unsubstantiated claims on the supposed benefits for sustainability. But as they also hold patents on the seeds engineered with these techniques, their true motivation remains to increase their profits. Such an industry takeover of seeds would seriously threaten farmers’ seed autonomy and agricultural biodiversity as a whole. Following industry pressure, the European Commission is now taking the first steps to deregulate new GMOs.

In order to tackle the grave threat of the biodiversity crisis, the EU will table a proposal for targets for the reduction of pesticide use. This has put the pesticide industry into survival mode. A newly leaked document from pesticides lobby group CropLife Europe shows that while it talks a big talk about backing the Green Deal, in reality it is employing a wide variety of lobbying tactics to undermine ambitious, binding targets.