Does public opinion on genetically modified crops influence the decision making of the government? Today's UK environment minister Michael Meacher came close to suggesting the answer is "it doesn't matter". According to the minister, the key and sole criteria for taking action in regard to GM crops is: are they a harm, a risk to health or the environment? Read the report of Donald MacLeod in the Guardian Unlimited.
15-1-2003 Nearly 6 million farmers chose biotech last year. Biotechnology continues to be a growing choice among farmers worldwide as global acreage of crops enhanced through biotech increased by 12 percent, or 15 million acres in 2002, according to a new report released today from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA).
13-5-2003. The US announced today their intention to request WTO consultations on the EU's authorisation system for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The European Commission regrets this move as legally unwarranted, economically unfounded and politically unhelpful. EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy said: "The EU's regulatory system for GMO's authorisation is in line with WTO rules: it is clear, transparent and non-discriminatory. There is therefore no issue that the WTO needs to examine. The US claim that there is a so-called "moratorium" but the fact is that the EU has authorised GM varieties in the past and is currently processing applications. So what is the real US motive in bringing a case? "David Byrne, EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer protection stated: "We have been working hard in Europe to complete our regulatory system in line with the latest scientific and international developments. The finalisation process is imminent. This is essential to restore consumer confidence in GMO's in Europe." Mr. Byrne recalled that it is the lack of consumer demand for GM-products that accounts for the low sales of GMOs in the EU market. "Unless consumers see that the authorisation process is up to date and takes into account all legitimate concerns, consumers will continue to remain sceptical of GM products." EU Commissioner for the Environment Margot Wallstrom added: "This US move is unhelpful. It can only make an already difficult debate in Europe more difficult. But in the meantime, the Commission strongly believes that we in Europe should move ahead with completing our legislation on traceability and labelling and on food and feed, currently before the European Parliament. We should not be deflected or distracted from pursuing the right policy for the EU."
13-5-2003. The US files a long-anticipated case in the World Trade Organisation for refusing to allow the sale of genetically modified (GM) food or crops. "The EU's persistent resistance to abiding by its WTO obligations has perpetuated a trade barrier unwarranted by the EC's own scientific analysis, which impedes the global use of a technology that could be of great benefit to farmers and consumers around the world," said Robert Zoellick, US Trade Representative.
21-4-2003. Scientists report for the first time that “baby” teeth, the temporary teeth that children begin losing around their sixth birthday, contain a rich supply of stem cells in their dental pulp.The researchers say this unexpected discovery could have important implications because the stem cells remain alive inside the tooth for a short time after it falls out of a child’s mouth, suggesting the cells could be readily harvested for research.
18-3-2003. Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe. A strong movement of opposition to GMOs developed in the late 1990s in many countries, especially in Europe, although these technologies were presented from the outset as highly promising and their advantages were often highlighted. How can this rejection be explained?
14-3-2003. Commission surveys published today indicate that, while most Europeans are in favour of medical applications of biotechnology, they are still sceptical about agricultural and food-related biotech. This, combined with an uncertain legal situation and doubts on future commercial markets, is leading to a sharp decrease in biotech research in
14-4-2003. The commercial exploitation of inventions concerning certain types of human embryonic stem cells is not contrary to public policy or morality in the UK and so they should not be excluded from patentability, according to a Patent Office announcement last week.
8-5-2003. Scientists at Duke University Medical Center in North Carolina developed a genetic test which helps predict the spread of breast cancer and a woman's chances of surviving the disease.
14-4-2003. In the future doctors will be able to personally tailor drugs in the treatment of patients by using DNA tests. The developers at Roche claim the patients don't need to try out a series of drugs when using the chip, thereby reducing the risk on side effects or reactions, before finding the right one for them.
4-4-2003. Nexia is going to develop Protexia(TM), a bioscavenger, in the milk of transgenic goats in cooperation with the US Army Medical Research Materiel Command (USAMRMC). Protexia(TM) is a recombinant form of butyrylcholinesterase (BChE), BChE is a natural bioscavenger which may be used to prevent the toxic effects of nerve agents and other organophosphate (OP) compounds.
Heidelberg, February 7, 2003. The European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) announces the signing of a contract for EURO 710.000 with the European Commission to coordinate a project under the title "Continuing Education for European Biology Teachers".
The first calls for proposals for the European Union's 6th Framework Programme (FP6) for research and technological development, which will run from 2002 - 2006, have been launched 17 December 2002.
This article on the arguments for and against the use of genetic engineering, written by Roger Straughan and Michael Reiss, appeared 15 november 2002 in Times Educational Supplement's Teacher Magazine.
A report written by Abdallah S. Daar, Douglas K. Martin, Shauna Nast, Peter A. Singer, Alyna C. Smith & Halla Thorsteindottir from the University of Toronto Joint Center for Bioethics.
