FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Scotland Bans Growing GM Crops

Independent evidence shows GM foods and ingredients harm human health. All nations should ban them.

UN General Assembly measures and international humanitarian laws say all nations are responsible for protecting the health, safety and welfare of their people.

Harmful to human health GMOs should be universally banned. Scotland acted responsibly. More on its action below.

Monsanto and other GMO producers own Congress and US administrations – no matter which party holds power. In late July, House members overwhelmingly passed the Orwellian Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act (HR 1599) critics call the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act by a nearly two-to-one margin (275 – 150).

It prohibits state and local authorities from requiring GMO labeling – so consumers can make informed choices whether to buy or avoid them. Center for Food Safety director Andrew Kimbrell said in response:

“Passage of this bill is an attempt by Monsanto and its agribusiness cronies to crush the democratic decision-making of tens of millions of Americans. Corporate influence has won and the voice of the people has been ignored.”

Arguably the measure is unconstitutional – along with permitting the sale of GMO foods and ingredients. Its Preamble mandates “promot(ing) the general welfare” – impossible by allowing the sale of foods and ingredients known to harm human health without at least requiring labels telling consumers what they need to know.

HR 1599 requires Senate approval and Obama’s signature to become law. It looks certain without overwhelming public opposition against it.

EU regulations on GMO foods are stricter than America’s. Proposed new European Commission rules would let individual member states opt out of an EU-approved system.

Competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager said “(t)he objective is to give national governments’ view the same weight as scientific advice in the authorisation of GMOs in their territory.”

“This proposal, when it is adopted, will enable member states to address at national level considerations covered by the decision-making process that we use right now.”

“These are new measures and they will provide member states with tools to decide on the use of EU-imported GMOs based on reasons other than risks for health and the environment which will remain assessed by the European Food and Safety Authority (EFSA).”

Europe is divided on GMOs. Britain favors them. France, Austria and other EU countries oppose them. Germany’s Environment Ministry wants an unconditional GMO ban.

Minister Barbara Hendricks wants all genetic engineering backdoors blocked. She calls the technology “the wrong track. It is risky for nature and the environment and is not desired by consumers.”

Polls show Western consumers overwhelmingly reject them. Monsanto’s maize MON810 is the only GM crop grown in Europe – in Spain and Portugal.

Greenpeace called the European Commission proposal “farc(ical) because it leaves the current undemocratic system untouched. It would allow the Commission to continue ignoring major opposition to GM crops, despite president Juncker’s promise to allow a majority of EU countries to halt Commission decisions on GMOs.”

Consumers Union asked “what are they afraid of?” Polls consistently show around 90% of Americans favor labeling – 85% say GMO products should never be called “natural.”

It means pure and wholesome from nature – not a corporate scientist’s laboratory. Prohibiting GMOs is threatened by trade agreements like TPP and TTIP.

For now, Scotland intends banning GM crops grown on its soil. Officials call the move environmentally friendly. Minister for the environment, food and rural affairs Richard Lochhead said his nation “is known around the world for our beautiful natural environment – and banning growing genetically modified crops will protect and further enhance our clean, green status.”

“There is no evidence of significant demand for GM products by Scottish consumers and I am concerned that allowing GM crops to be grown in Scotland would damage our clean and green brand, thereby gambling with the future of our £14 billion ($22 billion) food and drink sector.”

Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) Alison Johnstone said “(o)pting out of growing genetically modified crops is the right move for Scotland. Cultivation of GM crops would harm our environment and our reputation for high quality food and drink.”

“GM is not the answer to food security, and would represent further capture of our food by big business. Scotland has huge potential with a diverse mix of smaller-scale producers and community food initiatives, and we need to see those grow further.”

In April, the European Commission OK’d importing 10 new GM crops for the first time since 2013 (for human food and animal feed) – including corn, soybeans, cotton and rapeseed oil.

Universally banning these products along with commonly used toxic chemicals is the only way to keep world food supplies safe to eat.

More articles by:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
Weekend Edition
January 24, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
A Letter From Iowa
Jim Kavanagh
Aftermath: The Iran War After the Soleimani Assassination
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Camp by the Lake
Chuck Churchill
The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It?
Robert Hunziker
A Climate Time Bomb With Trump’s Name Inscribed
Andrew Levine
Trump: The King
Jess Franklin
Globalizing the War on Indigenous People: Bolsonaro and Modi
James Graham
From Paris, With Tear Gas…
Rob Urie
Why the Primaries Matter
Dan Bacher
Will the Extinction of Delta Smelt Be Governor Gavin Newsom’s Environmental Legacy?
Ramzy Baroud
In the Name of “Israel’s Security”: Retreating US Gives Israel Billions More in Military Funding
Vijay Prashad
What the Right Wing in Latin America Means by Democracy Is Violence
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Biden’s Shameful Foreign Policy Record Extends Well Beyond Iraq
Louis Proyect
Isabel dos Santos and Africa’s Lumpen-Bourgeoisie
Nick Pemberton
AK-46: The Case Against Amy Klobuchar
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Promtheus’ Fire: Climate Change in the Time of Willful Ignorance
Linn Washington Jr.
Waiting for Justice in New Jersey
Ralph Nader
Pelosi’s Choice: Enough for Trump’s Impeachment but not going All Out for Removal
Mike Garrity – Jason Christensen
Don’t Kill 72 Grizzly Bears So Cattle Can Graze on Public Lands
Joseph Natoli
Who’s Speaking?
Kavaljit Singh
The US-China Trade Deal is Mostly Symbolic
Cesar Chelala
The Coronavirus Serious Public Health Threat in China
Nino Pagliccia
Venezuela Must Remain Vigilant and on Guard Against US Hybrid Warfare
Robert Fantina
Impeachment as a Distraction
Courtney Bourgoin
What We Lose When We Lose Wildlife
Mark Ashwill
Why Constructive Criticism of the US is Not Anti-American
Daniel Warner
Charlie Chaplin and Truly Modern Times
Manuel Perez-Rocha
How NAFTA 2.0 Boosts Fossil Fuel Polluters, Particularly in Mexico
Dean Baker
What Minimum Wage Would Be If It Kept Pace With Productivity
Mel Gurtov
India’s Failed Democracy
Thomas Knapp
US v. Sineneng-Smith: Does Immigration Law Trump Free Speech?
Winslow Myers
Turning Point: The new documentary “Coup 53”
Jeff Mackler
U.S. vs. Iran: Which Side are You On?
Sam Pizzigati
Braggadocio in the White House, Carcinogens in Our Neighborhoods
Christopher Brauchli
The Company Trump Keeps
Julian Vigo
Why Student Debt is a Human Rights Issue
Ramzy Baroud
These Chains Will Be Broken
Chris Wright
A Modest Proposal for Socialist Revolution
Thomas Barker
The Slow Death of European Social Democracy: How Corbynism Bucked the Trend
Nicky Reid
It’s Time to Bring the War Home Again
Michelle Valadez
Amy Klobuchar isn’t Green
David Swanson
CNN Poll: Sanders Is The Most Electable
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Our Dire Need for “Creative Extremists”—MLK’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”
Jill Richardson
‘Little Women’ and the American Attitude Toward Poverty
David Yearsley
Watching Star Wars in Berlin
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail