Farmers in Kano State have urged the government to place a ban on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), citing their environmental and health detriments.

The call is an aftermath of a farmers’ dialogue meeting organized by the Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), on the food and farming systems.

Speaking on behalf of the farmers, HOMEF’s Programme Manager, Joyce Ebebeinwe, noted that the farmers prefer a natural method of food production and preservation.

This, she stated, was due to the numerous adverse effects of GMOs on health, environment and the economy.

She's been called the "Gandhi of grain", the "rock star" of the anti-GMO movement and an "eco-warrior goddess". For more than 40 years, the Indian physicist turned ecologist and food rights advocate Vandana Shiva has taken on big agriculture, arguing that we can end world hunger and help save the planet while also preserving the unique cultural and culinary traditions that make our world so wonderfully diverse.

(.....)

Colonialism and industrialism have destroyed the Earth and indigenous cultures through four false assumptions.

First, that we are separate from nature and not a part of nature. Second, that nature is dead matter, mere raw material for industrial exploitation. Third, that indigenous cultures are inferior and primitive, and need to be “civilised” through civilising missions of permanent colonization. Fourth, that nature and cultures need improvement through manipulation and external inputs. Green Revolution, GMOs, gene editing are rooted in this false assumption.

I wrote Earth Democracy to show that globalisation had created deregulated commerce and unleashed limitless greed, which was leading to economies of ecocide and genocide.

Talk with—not at—the public, or risk losing the argument again, says Jack Stilgoe

British scientists are, it’s safe to say, pro-EU. However, during the Brexit spasms, one corner of the scientific community could see a possible upside.

(......)

Gene-editing also raises new possibilities for modified animals in agriculture, which raises additional concerns about animal welfare. Liz O’Neill, director of GM Freeze, has argued that the process of consultation and public debate looks careless.

A new public debate is welcome, but if the government isn’t careful, it risks having—and losing—the same arguments it lost last time around.

European “Stop Gene Drives” campaign demands global moratorium

Brussels, 27.01.2021

Should humanity release genetically engineered gene drive organisms into nature? The response of a majority of citizens in eight European countries is: “No, the risks are too high”. This first opinion poll on the subject shows high levels of opposition to (46% - 70%) and very low levels of support for (7% - 16%) the use of Gene Drive technology in the environment. The survey of nearly 9,000 people is representative of 280 million EU citizens from eight EU countries. It was commissioned by nine NGOs demanding an informed and inclusive public debate and a global moratorium on the environmental release of this new type of genetically modified organisms. The survey also reveals that a large proportion of respondents were still undecided (14% - 27%) or did not know how to answer (1% - 24%).

"Sterile" insects revert back to being fertile, resulting in resistant GM populations persisting in the environment. Report by Third World Network

Genetic engineering techniques designed to make insects "sterile" for disease vector or pest control, have been tested in field releases by the company Oxitec, including in Malaysia, the Cayman Islands and Brazil. A GM mosquito trial was also recently approved in the US for release in 2021-2022. These strategies involve developing so-called "genetic switches" where essential genes can be either turned on or off in the presence or absence of antibiotics, controlling whether the insect survives or not.

Mission Statement

ENGA is the voice of the non-GMO food and feed sector at the EU level.

ENGA secures and supports the expansion of non-GMO production that has developped an established and trusted quality standard and has become an important European market factor.

ENGA advocates for the strict regulation of old and new GMOs – in order to keep untested and invisible GMOs from entering the EU food and feed chains.

ENGA represents national non-GMO industries and economic operators (agriculture, food and feed processing, retail, certification) as a single European association.

ENGA supports consumers in their choice for a GMO-free agriculture by promoting food that excludes GMO plants in production chains.

Tomato is designed to have biological effects on consumers – but there's no safety data or GMO labelling

A gene-edited tomato that is intended to have a biological effect on consumers has been approved in Japan for commercial sale – without safety checks or GMO labelling. The tomato is genetically engineered to contain higher than usual amounts of GABA, a substance that is said to have the ability to lower blood pressure.

The EU executive looks set to press ahead with a “new approach” to genetically modified (GM) crop authorisations in the wake of persistent lack of political support for the technology in the European Parliament.

In December, MEPs voted for a further five objections against authorisations of GM crops for use as food and feed in the EU, including one GM soybean and four GM maize varieties. This has brought the overall number of objections to GM crop authorisations to 51 in five years.

In response to criticisms from the Parliament over authorisations of GM crops, a Commission spokesperson told EURACTIV that the executive is “reflecting on a new approach regarding authorisations of GMOs that is aligned to the political ambition set by the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy.”

As Europe's farming sector faces up to the combined challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss and an increasingly globalised market, a new generation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is being portrayed as a magical solution.

Some have suggested that these new genetically modified crops, animals and microbes should be exempt from GMO safety legislation, introduced to protect consumers and the environment from the risks posed by GMOs.

This paper argues that these new forms of genetic modification (including techniques such as gene editing) would not make the farming system more resilient to extreme weather, reduce biodiversity loss, or result in healthier food and fairer incomes for farmers, and because of the risks they pose, must be controlled by the existing laws.

It asks key questions as to who will benefit from this new generation of GMOs, who does the technology empower, who does it disempower and who owns it? It also argues for support for genuine solutions that will benefit farmers, consumers and nature in our crisis-engulfed world.

When we think of agricultural technology, what often comes to mind is tractors and harvesters. But, in today’s world, we now have drones that hover over crops to detect pests, sensors that monitor soil temperature or moisture, algorithms that advise on the amount of fertilizer or pesticide to use and blockchain systems that allow a product to be traced from origin to consumer.

Technology is rapidly expanding in the agricultural sector, with the digital farming market expected to reach the US$15 billion mark (around €12.5 billion) in 2021, according to PA Consulting, three times more than the US$5 billion generated in 2015. Included in this growth is the value of the software, algorithms, platforms and links between farming and technology hardware, the consulting firm explains. And one of the keys is big data, the gathering of vast amounts of information, in this case about crop characteristics, growing conditions and processes.