Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

86
Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops Klaus Ammann, University of Bern, Switzerland September 25, 2013

description

Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops Klaus Ammann, University of Bern, Switzerland September 25, 2013 Full plenary talk. The four talking points: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Page 1: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks andSocio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Klaus Ammann, University of Bern, SwitzerlandSeptember 25, 2013

Full plenary talk

Page 2: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

The four talking points:

1. Regulation too expensive, one of the main reasons: Wrong focus on transgenic Crops: Genomic Misconception: Natural Mutation (ie. Conventional breeding) and Transgenesis are the same on the molecular process level

2. Yield in Agriculture, a mixed Bag with a bright futureClimate Mitigation, towards a better Ag Economy

3. The role of the protest corporates, more science, less propaganda is needed

4. The consequences: Dialogue, Collaboration and Food Prices closer to Production costs: less protectionism and eco-imperialism

Page 3: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

1. Regulation too expensive, one of the main reasons: Wrong focus on transgenic Crops: Genomic Misconception: Natural Mutation (ie. Conventional breeding) and Transgenesis are the same on the molecular process levelTransgenesis NOT inherently morerisky than conventional breeding

Page 4: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

In the European Union (and the Cartagena Protocol decision making process is too complex, obscure and politically inefficient

The Canadian product oriented regulationwould solve many problems, big obstacle:Unscientific focus on transgenesis ofmost international biosafety laws, includingCartagena Protocol and European Union.

Ammann, K. (20120706), Genomic Misconception: A fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops, a plea for a process agnostic regulation New Biotechnology, in press, pp. 32, http://www.ask-force.org/web/NewBiotech/Genomic-Misconception-20120706-names-def.pdf

Page 5: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Ammann Klaus (20130415), Genomic Misconception. A fresh look at the biosafety regulation of transgenic and conventional crops: a plea for a process of agnostic regulation, open source, final version, in: New Biotechnology, 30, 50 and typeset 17, Ammann K., Neuchatel, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871678413000605 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/NewBiotech/Genomic-Misconception-20130415-names-links.pdf AND typeset corrected: http://www.ask-force.org/web/NewBiotech/Ammann-Genomic-Misconception-corrected-final-20130514.pdf AND German Abstract http://www.ask-force.org/web/NewBiotech/Ammann-German-Abstract-Highlights-20130415.pdf

Page 6: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Interestingly, naturally occurring molecular evolution,i.e. the spontaneous generation of genetic variants hasbeen seen to follow exactly the same three strategies as those used in genetic engineering14. These three strategies are (after W. Arber, Nobel Laureate 1978)

(a) small local changes in the nucleotide sequences,

(b) internal reshuffling of genomic DNA segments, and

(c) acquisition of usually rather small segments of DNAfrom another type of organism by horizontal gene transfer.

Arber, W. (2010)Genetic engineering compared to natural genetic variations. New Biotechnology, 27, 5, pp 517-521 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Vatican-PAS-Studyweek-Elsevier-publ-20101130/Arber-Werner-PAS-Genetic-Engineering-Compared-20101130-publ.pdf

Arber, W. (1990), 3 Impact of Human Civilization on Biological Evolution in SCOPE 44 - Introduction of Genetically Modified Organisms into the Environment, ed. H. A. B. Mooney, G.,, Vol., pp. COGEN, http://www.scopenvironment.org/downloadpubs/scope44/chapter12.html AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Regulation/Arber-Impact-Human-Civilization-1990.pdf

Page 7: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

«However, there is a principal difference between the procedures of genetic engineering and those serving in nature for biological evolution. While the genetic engineer pre-reflects his alteration and verifies its results, nature places its genetic variations more randomly and largely independent of an identified goal.After ca. 15 years of testing the GM crops are brought to the field by millions in a few years»Arber, W. (2002) Roots, strategies and prospects of functional genomics. Current Science, 83, 7, pp 826-828 http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Mutations/Arber-Comparison-2002.pdf

“With respect to biological evolution, recombinant DNA techniques hardly represent entirely new aspects. Leakiness of genetic isolation, spontaneous mutagenesis, and mechanisms to bypass selective forces are known to exist under natural conditions”Arber, W. (1990), 3 Impact of Human Civilization on Biological Evolution in SCOPE 44 - Introduction of Genetically Modified Organisms into the Environment, ed. H. A. B. Mooney, G.,, Vol., pp. COGEN, http://www.scopenvironment.org/downloadpubs/scope44/chapter12.html AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Regulation/Arber-Impact-Human-Civilization-1990.pdf

Page 8: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Arber, W. (2010)Genetic engineering compared to natural genetic variations. New Biotechnology, 27, 5, pp 517-521 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Vatican-PAS-Studyweek-Elsevier-publ-20101130/Arber-Werner-PAS-Genetic-Engineering-Compared-20101130-publ.pdf

Page 9: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops
Page 10: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

The spirit of the participants was inspired by the same approach to technology that Benedict XVI expressed in his new Encyclica, in particular that ‘Technology is the objective side of human action, Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem exercens, 5: loc. cit., 586-589. whose origin and raison d’être is found in the subjective element: the worker himself. For this reason, technology is never merely technology. It reveals man and his aspirations towards development, it expresses the inner tension that impels him gradually to overcome material limitations. Technology, in this sense, is a response to God’s command to till and to keep the land (cf. Gen 2:15) that he has entrusted to humanity, and it must serve to reinforce the covenant between human beings and the environment, a covenant that should mirror God’s creative love’. Caritas in veritate, § 69.

Page 11: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Two recent international conferences on the position of Islam towards modern agriculture yielded positive views:

1. The World Halal Forum 2010 sought to begin discussions on the Islamic stance of Genetically Modified Food. At the end of the workshop panelists and participants unanimously agreed to the a positive statement

2. Sharia Compliance conference 2010 came to the same positive conclusions

World Halal Forum (2010)GENETICALLY MODIFIED (GM) CROPS & HALAL WORKSHOP REPORT (eds W.H. Forum), pp. 35. World Halal Forum, Kuala Lumpur Convention Centerwww.worldhalalforum.org AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Islam/GM-Crops-World-Halal-Forum-Kuala-Lumpur-2010.pdf

Sharia Compliance (2010)International Workshop for Islamic Scholars: Agribiotechnology: Shariah Compliance, pp. 7. Members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)], Traders Hotel, Georgetown, Penang, Malaysiahttp://www.ask-force.org/web/Islam/Shariah-Compliance-Agribiotech-Resolution_Final-20101202.pdf

Page 12: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Bau

do, M

.M.,

Lyon

s, R

., P

ower

s, S

., P

asto

ri, G

.M.,

Edw

ards

, K.J

., H

olds

wor

th, M

.J.,

& S

hew

ry, P

.R. (

2006

)Tr

ansg

enes

is H

as L

ess

Impa

ct o

n th

e Tr

ansc

ripto

me

of W

heat

Gra

in T

han

Con

vent

iona

l Bre

edin

g. P

lant

B

iote

chno

logy

Jou

rnal

, 4, 4

, pp

369

-380

http

://w

ww

.bot

anis

cher

garte

n.ch

/Org

anic

/Bau

do-Im

pact

-200

6.pd

f

She

wry

, P.R

. & J

ones

, H.D

. (20

05)

Tran

sgen

ic W

heat

: Whe

re D

o W

e S

tand

afte

r the

Firs

t 12

Year

s? A

nnal

s of

App

lied

Bio

logy

, 147

, 1,

pp

1-1

4

http

://w

ww

.bot

anis

cher

garte

n.ch

/Org

anic

/She

wry

-Per

form

ance

-200

6.pd

f

Baudo: comparison in genomic disturbance: GM crops are less disturbed (black dots) than classic breeds

Scatter plot representation of transcriptome comparisons, Baudo et al. 2006transgenic vs. controlendosperm 14 dpa

28 dpa 8 dpg

2 conventionallinesEndosperm14 dpa

28 dpa leaf at 8 dpg

transgenic vs. conventional Endosperm14 dpa

28 dpa leaf at 8 dpg

Page 13: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Institute of Radiation Breeding Ibaraki-ken, JAPAN http://www.irb.affrc.go.jp/

100m radius

89 TBqCo-60

source at the centerShielding dike 8m

high

Gamma Field for radiation

breeding

Betterspaghettis, whisky1800 new plants

Radiation breeding as field experiments

Page 14: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Gamma Field for Radiation Breeding Radiation site for mutation breeding, Co-60 radioactivity source of 89 TBq in the center,

Radius of 100m.

In this radiation field a human being would receive 3 deadly Sievers units of radiation after the exposure times given below

89 TBq represents the 140-fold of all Radioactivity of material stored in the German permanent storage site of Morsleben insgesamt eingelagerten Radioaktivität.

3,5 min60 min

Was muss man sich darunter vorstellen?

Page 15: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Reuters, May 10, 2010 UN's International Atomic Energy Agency since 1963, 2,252 new plant varieties, including Italian durum wheat, have been created using radioactive substances such as cobalt and X-rays.

70% of the crops under cultivation worldwide are radiation mutation varieties

Charles Margulis of Greenpeace USA: "But now they tell us that scientists have been artificially hybridizing plants since the 1960s.That's, like, really uncool."

Page 16: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Activists, supported by Jane Rissler, called for a ban, since those irradiated varieties have never been tested for food safety, which would have wiped out 70% of the food products on shelfs.

Jane Rissler (Union of Concerned Scientists)“Compared to these plants, genetically modified food is about as dangerous as a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest.”

But excellent repair mechanisms working like zippers are reducing radiation damage considerablyAnd worldwide there has been no correlation established between radiation mutation and negative food safety facts. (Reuters 2001 continued)

Page 17: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Durum Wheat, Triticum durum: all major breedshave gone thoughmassive and inprecise radiation breeding, but withImportant successunnecessary fearmongering

FRANKENSTEIN

Page 18: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Tzotzos, G. T., G. P. Head and R. Hull (2009), Chapter 6 - Regulatory Frameworks in Genetically Modified Plants, ed., Vol., pp. 147-172 Academic Press, San Diego, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123741066000060 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Genomics/Tzotzos-Regulatory-Frameworks-2009.pdf

Page 19: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

European Biosafety and the Cartagena ProtocolThe biosafety protocol is based on the wrong Premises: See Genomic Misconception in this slides: Natural Mutationand transgenesis are the same on the molecular level.

www.strangevehicles.com

Page 20: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

System map of the principal issues, challenges and feedback loops in the risk management component of the legislation

EPEC-SANCO (2011)Evaluation of the EU legislative framework in the field of cultivation of GMOs under Directive 2001/18/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, and the placing on the market of GMOs as or in products under Directive 2001/18/EC Final Report, pp. 137. European Commission DG Sanco

http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/evaluation/docs/gmo_cultivation_report_en.pdf

Page 21: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

http://www.europabio.org/sites/default/files/44_years_of_delays_in_the_eu_approval_of_gm_products_europabio.pdf

Undue delays in Europe for the approval of GM crops, status November 5, 2012

Page 22: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

BRUSSELS | Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:45pm EDT

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Monsanto Co said on Wednesday it will withdraw all pending approval requests to grow new types of genetically modified crops in the European Union, due to the lack of commercial prospects for cultivation there.

"Madero said the decision would allow the company to focus on growing its conventional seeds business in Europe, as well as securing EU approvals to import its genetically modified crop varieties widely grown in the United States and South America.

Page 23: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Innovation in agbiotech. (a) Location and sector of organizations conducting R&D for the 558 transgenic product quality innovations identified. Private sector consists of corporate and privately held firms. Public sector consists of government research laboratories, universities and nonprofit research institutes. (b) Annual entry, exit and the numbers of innovations active in the R&D pipeline were calculated from observations of the 558 innovations tracked in the primary survey. The number of active innovations stopped growing in 1998, after which those new innovations that entered were more likely to be published and less likely to move toward commercialization. Fig.1 from (Graff et al., 2009b).

Graff, G.D., Zilberman, D., & Bennett, A.B. (2009)The contraction of Ag-biotech product quality innovation. Nature Biotechnology, 27, 8, pp 702-704 http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Regulation/Graff-Contraction-Agbiotech-Innovation-2009.pdf

Page 24: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

One of the main reasons for the regulatory stall and the difficult innovation climate in modern Agrivculture in Europe:the Genomic Misconception

Natural Mutation (ie. Conventional breeding) and Transgenesis (i.e. GM crops) are the same on the molecular process level

Giddings, V., I. Potrykus, Ammann K. and N. Fedoroff (2012), Confronting the Gordian knot, Opinion, Nature Biotechnology, 30, 3, pp. 208-209, http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v30/n3/abs/nbt.2145.html AMD http://www.ask-force.org/web/Regulation/Giddings-Confronting-Gordian-Knot-2012.pdf AND Editorial A. Marshall http://www.ask-force.org/web/Genomics/Marshall-Agnostic-About-Agriculture-2012.pdf

Ammann, K. (20120706), Genomic Misconception: A fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops, a plea for a process agnostic regulation New Biotechnology, in press, pp. 32, http://www.ask-force.org/web/NewBiotech/Genomic-Misconception-20120706-names-def.pdf

Page 25: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

The time has come for the scientific community to advance a new generation of international organizations that expressly promote scientific cooperation — agencies that can help foster technological cooperation for Africa’s economic transformation.

Juma, C. (2011) The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa Preprint 3 Chapters Oxford University Press (14. Januar 2011) IS: ISBN-10: 0199783195 ISBN-13: 978-0199783199, pp 296 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Governing-Innovation-2011.pdf and http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Growing-Economy-Ch-1-2011.pdf and http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Introduction-2011.pdf AND https://www.amazon.de/New-Harvest-Agricultural-Innovation-Africa/dp/0199783195/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1320909861&sr=8-1

Juma, C. (2011)Preventing hunger: Biotechnology is key. Nature, 479, 7374, pp 471-472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/479471a AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Preventing-Hunger-Nature-2011.pdf

Juma, C. (2011)Science Meets Farming in Africa. Science, 334, 6061, pp 1323 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6061/1323.short AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Science-Meets-Africa-20111209.pdf

Page 26: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

2. Yield in Agriculture, a mixed bag with a bright future.

climate mitigation, towards a better Ag Economy

Page 28: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

In the US maize yields have accelerated in the last ten years due to modern breeding methods

• actual breeding plus cultural practice gain

Source: March 2006. Crop Science. Ref# 46:528-543

Page 30: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Royal-Society (2009), Reaping the benefits: science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture, Royal Socienty, No. 11/09, pp. 89, London, AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Benefits/RS-Reaping-the-Benefits-200910.pdf

Ammann, K. (20120620), Chapter 27: Advancing the cause in emerging economies in Successful Agricultural Innovation in Emerging Economies, ed. Bennett David and Jennings Richard, Vol., pp. 27 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, http://www.ask-force.org/web/CUP-Success-GM-crops/Ammann-Advancing-Cause-Emerging-20120802.pdf

Page 31: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Type: GIF

Lagi Marco, K. Z. B., Yaneer Bar-Yam, (2011), The Food Crises and Political Instability in North Africa and the Middle East, Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph), NECSI 2011-07-01, pp. 15, arXiv:1108.2455v1 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Yield/Lagi-Food-Crises-Political-Instability-2011.pdf Slavo Mac (20110824)Complexity Theorists Predict Food Crisis, Riots and Civil Unrest By April 2013. In SHTFplan.com http://www.shtfplan.com/forecasting/complexity-theorists-predict-food-crisis-riots-and-civil-unrest-by-april-2013_08242011

Food Crises and Political Instability in North Africa and the Middle East

Time dependence of FAO Food Price Index from January 2004 to May 2011. Red dashed vertical lines correspond to beginning dates of \food riots" and protests associated with the major recent unrest in North Africa and the Middle East. The overall death toll is reported in parentheses [26{55]. Blue vertical line indicates the date, December 13, 2010, on which we submitted a report to the U.S. government, warning of the link between food prices, social unrest and political instability [56]. Inset shows FAO Food Price Index from 1990 to 2011.

Page 32: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

FAO Price Index at current prices (black) and constant prices (blue)

Lagi Marco, K. Z. B., Yaneer Bar-Yam, (2011), The Food Crises and Political Instability in North Africa and the Middle East, Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph), NECSI 2011-07-01, pp. 15, arXiv:1108.2455v1 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Yield/Lagi-Food-Crises-Political-Instability-2011.pdf Slavo Mac (20110824)Complexity Theorists Predict Food Crisis, Riots and Civil Unrest By April 2013. In SHTFplan.com http://www.shtfplan.com/forecasting/complexity-theorists-predict-food-crisis-riots-and-civil-unrest-by-april-2013_08242011

Time dependence of FAO Price Index at current prices (upper black curve) and constant prices (corrected for ination, lower blue curve) from January 2004 to May 2011. Red dashed vertical lines correspond to beginning dates of food riots and events associated with the major recent unrest in North Africa and the Middle East. Black and blue horizontal lines represent the price threshold above which riots are ignited in current and constant prices respectively. Index backgrounds are tted with a third-order polynomial; intersection with the threshold (July 2012 at current prices, August 2013 at prices corrected for world ination, [65]) represents the point of instability.

Page 33: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops
Page 35: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Mercosur consolidates as leading soybean region with 52% of world’s productionArgentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Bolivia harvest 136 million tons annually, compared to the 83 from the United States and the world’s 260 million tons (2011)

http://en.mercopress.com/2011/09/17/mercosur-consolidates-as-leading-soybean-region-with-52-of-world-s-production

Page 36: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

It is wrong to blame all mishap with GM crops to Genetic EngineeringSee a typical debate between scientists on this topic:

Broer, I., R. J. Busch, C. Jung, F. Ordon, M. Qaim, B. Reinhold-Hurek, U. Sonnewald, A. von Tiedemann, C. Moehring, P. Schmitz-Moeller and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (2009), Gruene Gentechnik, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, No. ISBN 978-3-527-32857-4, pp. 56, http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Regulation/DFG-Broschuer-Gruene-Gentechnik-2009.pdf

Taube, F., M. Krawinkel, A. Susenbeth and W. Theobald (2011), The booklet "Genetically modified crops" published from the German Research Foundation, does not meet the given claim Environmental Sciences Europe, 23, 1, pp. 1, http://www.enveurope.com/content/23/1/1 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Regulation/Taube-DFG-Genuegt-Nicht-2011.pdf

Broer, I., C. Jung, F. Ordon, M. Qaim, B. Reinhold-Hurek, U. Sonnewald and A. von Tiedemann (2011), Response to the criticism by Taube et al. in ESE 23:1, 2011, on the booklet "Green Genetic Engineering" published by the German Research Foundation (DFG) Environmental Sciences Europe, 23, 1, pp. 16, http://www.enveurope.com/content/23/1/16 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Regulation/Broer-Stellungsname-DFG-2011.pdf

Draft Summary of the Glyphosate Debate

Ammann, K. (20130915), Glyphosate Information, a Selection, draft September 15, 2013, in: ASK-FORCE AF-15, Klaus Ammann, Neuchatel, http://www.ask-force.org/web/AF-15-Glyphosate/Ammann-AF-15-Glyphosate-Information-20130915.pdf

Page 37: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Development of resistant weedswith herbicide use

Page 38: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Fig. 2. Relationship between nsecticide use and crop losses with and without Bt technology.Curves are predictions based on econometric estimation of a logistic damage-control function. See table S1 for details and results of the estimation procedure.Data was obtained from2001 trials.

Qaim, M. & Zilberman, D. (2003)Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Science, 299, 5608, pp 900-902 http://www.ask-force.org/web/BioEconomy/Qaim-Zilberman-Yield-Effects-2003.pdf AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/BioEconomy/Qaim-Zilberman-Yield-Effects-supplements-2003.pdf

Page 39: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Figure 2. Relationship between insecticide use and crop losses with and without Bt technology. Curves are predictions based on econometric estimation of a logistic damage-control function. See table S1 for details and results of the estimation procedure. Data was obtained from 2001 trials

Qaim, M. & Zilberman, D. (2003)Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Science, 299, 5608, pp 900-902 <Go to ISI>://WOS:000180830900055 AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/BioEconomy/Qaim-Zilberman-Yield-

Effects-2003.pdf AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/BioEconomy/Qaim-Zilberman-Yield-Effects-supplements-2003.pdf

Page 40: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Herring, R.J. & Rao Chandrasekhara N. (2012)On the ‘Failure of Bt Cotton’, Analysing a Decade of Experience. Economic and Political Weekly, XLVII, 18, pp 45-53 http://epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/17418.pdf AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Cotton/Herring-Rao-Failure-Bt-Cotton-Analysis-2012.pdf

Page 41: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Average cotton yields 1980-2007

Gruère Guillaume P., Mehta-Bhatt Purvi, & Debdatta Sengupta (2008) Bt Cotton and Farmer Suicides in India Reviewing the Evidence, IFPRI Discussion Paper 00808, Environment and Production Technology Division pp 64 IFPRI Discussion Paper 00808 Washington (Report)http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Cotton/Gruere-IFPRIDP200810.pdf AND http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/dp/IFPRIDP00808.pdf

Page 42: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Gruere Guillaume P., Mehta-Bhatt Purvi and Debdatta Sengupta (2008), Bt Cotton and Farmer Suicides in India Reviewing the Evidence, IFPRI Discussion Paper 00808, Environment and Production Technology Division, No. pp. 64, Washington, http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Cotton/Gruere-IFPRIDP200810.pdf AND http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/dp/IFPRIDP00808.pdf AND http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Cotton/Gruere-Farmer-Suicides-Slides-2008.pdf AND http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Cotton/Gruere-Farmer-Suicides-Slides-2008.ppt

Page 43: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

2. The role of the Protest CorporatesAppeal to basic fear instincts of population,making out of this good business: Income ofGreenpeace 2010 confirmed 62mio Euro

we demand more science, less propaganda

Page 45: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Bullshit award for Vandana Shiva

Page 46: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Greenpeace Billboard Campaign in Brussels

according to Filip Cnudde

32 500 euros/week (this price doesnt include the making of the poster, only the poster campaign)

+ 995 euros (taxes)

300 billboards (of which 195 billboards are around subway entrances).

Page 47: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops
Page 48: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops
Page 50: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Forgot what we are protesting

http://www.nearlygood.com/

We are programmed inmillions of years of evolution to be alarmed and act accordingly

What helps: Constant framingAnd moral self-licensing

Merritt, A.C., Effron, D.A., & Monin, B. (2010)Moral Self-Licensing: When Being Good Frees Us to Be Bad. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 5, pp 344-357 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Fundamentalists/Merritt-Moral-Self-Licensing-2010.pdf

Page 51: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Duke, S.O. & Powles, S. (2009)Glyphosate-Resistant Crops and Weeds: Now and in the Future. AgBioForum, 12, 3&4, pp 346-357 http://www.botanischergarten.ch/HerbizideTol/Duke-Glyphosate-Now-Future-AgBioforum-2009.pdf

Page 52: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Help Fundamentalists, Donate Brain

Page 53: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Sunflowers, Helianthus annuus cultivar, one of the most artificial horticultural plants as a symbol for the political party of the greens from Germany: Bündnis 90, DIE GRÜNEN. http://gruene-senden.de/schlagzeilen/archiv.html

the mythof naturalness

Page 54: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

http:

//cl

imat

eshi

ftpro

ject

.org

/wp-

cont

ent/

uplo

ads/

2013

/03/

Gree

npea

ce.p

ng

Page 56: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Marris, E. (2006)Environmental activism: In the name of nature. Nature, 443, 7111, pp 498-501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/443498a AND http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Discourse/Marris-In-the-Name-of-Nature-2006.pdf

Page 57: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Ingo Potrykus,Prof. em. ETHZInventor of Golden Rice

Time Magazine Cover July 31, 2000(not published in the in the European edition)

the original Times Magazine article:http://www.ask-force.org/web/Golden-Rice/Robinson-Times-Mag-Grains-Hope-20000731.PDF

Page 58: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops
Page 59: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

40 grams of Golden Rice a day can save life and sight.

After 13 years of product development:

Page 60: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/campaigns/food-agriculture/science/ge-crop-research/

Website location of downloadedPropaganda lie13. 9. 2013

To demonstrate the exaggerated claims of the GE industry, a Greenpeace volunteer is served the cooked equivalent of 3.7 kilos of mock Golden Rice, the amount needed to get the required daily intake of Vitamin A.

Page 61: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

https://twitter.com/DanGraur/status/381103280689934336/photo/1

Page 62: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

http://allowgoldenricenow.org/images/vancouver-11th.jpg

Page 63: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Genepeace,

Not Greenpeace

Page 64: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

van de Wouw, M., van Hintum, T., Kik, C., van Treuren, R., & Visser, B. (2010)Genetic diversity trends in twentieth century crop cultivars: a meta analysis. TAG Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 120, 6, pp 1241-1252 http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Biotech-Biodiv/van-de-Wouw-Genetic-Diversity-Trends-2010.pdf

Page 65: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Fig. 4 Wheat genetic diversity (a) and crop genetic diversity (excluding wheat) (b) in the twentieth century based on a weighted meta analysis of 20 publications. The diversity in the decade with the lowest diversity was set to 100

Ammann, K. (20120317)Biodiversity and the debate on GM crops - Can GM crops help to enhance biodiversity? . In ASK-FORCE AF-11, Vol. AF-11, pp. 103. K. Ammann, Neuchâtel http://www.ask-force.org/web/AF-11-Biodiversity/AF-11-Biodiversity-Biotechnology-20120317-numbered.dochttp://www.ask-force.org/web/AF-11-Biodiversity/AF-11-Biodiversity-Biotechnology-20120317-web.dochttp://www.ask-force.org/web/AF-11-Biodiversity/AF-11-Biodiversity-Biotechnology-20120317-web.pdfhttp://www.ask-force.org/web/AF-11-Biodiversity/AF-11-Biodiversity-Biotechnology-20120317-opensource.dochttp://www.ask-force.org/web/AF-11-Biodiversity/AF-11-Biodiversity-Biotechnology-20120317-opensource.pdf

Page 66: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Source: National Geographic, July 2011

A Century Ago

In 1930 commercial seed houses offered hundreds of

varieties as shown in this sampling of ten crops

80 Years Later By 1983 few of those varieties were found in

the National Seed Storage Laboratory

with completelywrong numbersbased on the old RAFI study

Fowler, C. & Mooney, P., R., (1990) US: Shattering : food, politics, and the loss of genetic diversity GB: The threatened gene: Food, politics and the loss of genetic diversity US: The University of Arizona PressGB: Lutterworth Press P.O. Box 60 Cambridge CB12NTPrinted Billing & Sons Ltd, Worcester, US: Tucson GB: Cambridge, IS: ISBN 0 7188 2830 5. , pp xvi, 278 p http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0816511810/sr=1-1/qid=1320748094/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1320748094&sr=1-1&seller= AND from the etc Group: http://www.ask-force.org/web/Biotech-Biodiv/Fowler-Mooney-The-threatened-Gene-1990.pdf

Page 67: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Heald, P.J. & Chapman, S. (2011)Veggie Tales: Pernicious Myths About Patents, Innovation, and Crop Diversity in the Twentieth Century. SSRN eLibrary, pp http://www.ask-force.org/web/IP/Heldt-Veggie-Tales-Pernicious-Myths-2011.pdf

Page 68: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Hea

ld, P

.J. &

Cha

pman

, S. (

2011

)Ve

ggie

Tal

es: P

erni

ciou

s M

yths

Abo

ut P

aten

ts, I

nnov

atio

n, a

nd C

rop

Div

ersi

ty in

th

e Tw

entie

th C

entu

ry. S

SR

N e

Libr

ary,

pp

ht

tp://

ww

w.a

sk-fo

rce.

org/

web

/IP/H

eldt

-Veg

gie-

Tale

s-P

erni

ciou

s-M

yths

-201

1.pd

f

Page 69: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

4. The consequences: Stop the propaganda and trade wars, it is dialogue, listening to advanced countrieslike Brazil, Australia, USA, collaboration and free trade which will bring European agriculture forward

Page 70: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Urban Myth

Organic Farming and ModernAgriculture including Genetic Engineeringcannot go together

Wrong:Organic farming needs cropsadapted to the special needs of agro-ecologyby modern biotechnological methods

Page 71: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Ammann, K. (2008)Feature: Integrated

farming: Why organic farmers should use transgenic crops, open source citations. New Biotechnology, 25, 2, pp 101 - 107

http://www.botanischergarten.ch/NewBiotech/Ammann-Opinion-Integrated-Farming-20080825-names-links-edited.pdf

Ammann, K. (2009)Feature: Why farming with high tech methods should integrate elements of organic agriculture. accepted, corrected proof, open links. New Biotechnology, 4, pp

http://www.botanischergarten.ch/NewBiotech/Integrated-Farming-Biotech-Org-20090803-openlink.pdf

Why high tech farmers should adopt Organic management

Page 72: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Ronald, P.C. & Adamchak, R.W. (2008) Tomorrow's Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food Oxford University Press, USA (April 18, 2008) IS: ISBN-10: 0195301757 ISBN-13: 978-0195301755 pp 232 Book review by J. Gressel 2009 http://www.botanischergarten.ch/Gressel-Book-Ronald-2009.pdf

Page 73: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Bauer de Jonghe in Holland, produziert Gemüse im Bio-Standard ohne PestizideFoto Claus Lange, Text Michael Miersch Weltwoche 06 2003

Page 74: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Amish farmers in biotech-debate: subsequent partial adoptionof transgenic crops: 1999, see: http://www.ifpri.org/2020conference/PDF/summary_ammann.pdf

Page 75: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Ammann, K. (20120620), Chapter 27: Advancing the cause in emerging economies in Successful Agricultural Innovation in Emerging Economies, ed. Bennett David and Jennings Richard, Vol., pp. 27 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, http://www.ask-force.org/web/CUP-Success-GM-crops/Ammann-Advancing-Cause-Emerging-20120802.pdf AND http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/18208928/948211079/name/BENNETTJENNINGS-AGRICULTURE.pdf

Page 76: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Reed, M. S., E. D. G. Fraser and A. J. Dougill (2006), An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities Ecological Economics, 59, 4, pp. 406-418, http://www.ask-force.org/web/Sustainability/Reed-Adaptive-Learning-Process-2006.pdf

Page 77: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

http://www.ask-force.org/web/Discourse/Huggins-Econpragmatists-Ecopragmatists-PERC-2013.pdfn

Page 78: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Giddings, V., Potrykus, I., Ammann K., & Fedoroff, N. (2012)Confronting the Gordian knot, Opinion. Nature Biotechnology, 30, 3, pp 208-209 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Regulation/Giddings-Confronting-Gordian-Knot-2012.pdf AND Editorial A. Marshall http://www.ask-force.org/web/Genomics/Marshall-Agnostic-About-Agriculture-2012.pdf

The world has seldom seen a greater discrepancy between the inherent hazard of a product and the level of regulatory burden imposed on it than exists today for crops improved through biotech. It is important, here, to be very clear:There is no basis in science for regulation specific to crops and foods improved through biotech or ‘GMOs‘.

Page 79: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

The time has come for the scientific community to advance a new generation of international organizations that expressly promote scientific ccooperation — agencies that can help foster technological cooperation for Africa’s economic transformation. Juma, C. (2011) The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa Preprint 3 Chapters Oxford University Press (14. Januar 2011) IS: ISBN-10: 0199783195 ISBN-13: 978-0199783199, pp 296 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Governing-Innovation-2011.pdf and http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Growing-Economy-Ch-1-2011.pdf and http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Introduction-2011.pdf AND https://www.amazon.de/New-Harvest-Agricultural-Innovation-Africa/dp/0199783195/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1320909861&sr=8-1

Juma, C. (2011)Preventing hunger: Biotechnology is key. Nature, 479, 7374, pp 471-472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/479471a AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Preventing-Hunger-Nature-2011.pdf

Juma, C. (2011)Science Meets Farming in Africa. Science, 334, 6061, pp 1323 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6061/1323.short AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Developing/Juma-Science-Meets-Africa-20111209.pdf

Page 80: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

http

://w

ww

.des

icol

ours

.com

/leon

ardo

-da-

vinc

i-quo

tes-

1280

x102

4-w

allp

aper

s/19

/03/

2011

Although nature commences with reason and ends in experience it is necessary for us to do the opposite, that is to commence with experience and from this to proceed to investigate the reason. Leonardo da Vinci

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/leonardo_da_vinci.html#ixzz1g8w6PNQO

Page 81: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

The acceptance/rejection of new biotechnologies is highly dependent on the way we perceive nature, the way we understand our place in nature, and how these impact upon the way people draw the boundaries between what is natural and unnatural.Result on a broad survey on the acceptance of Green Biotechnology in New Zealand

Coyle, F., J.,, Maslin, C., Fairweather, J., F.,, & Hunt, L., M., (2003) Public Understandings of Biotechnology in New Zealand: Nature, Clean Green Image and Spirituality Lincoln University. ISSN 1170-7682 ISBN 0-909042-XX-X pp 1-132 Studies in Innovation and Change, Research Report No. 265 November 2003 Canterbury, New Zealand (Report)http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/Documents/612_RR265FC_s2661.pdf AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Discourse/Coyle-Public-Understanding-Biotechnology-2003.pdf

Page 82: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Interest in “evolution” was waning when “DNA” came along (Fig. 5F).Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y.K., Aiden, A.P., Veres, A., Gray, M.K., Team, T.G.B., Pickett, J.P., Hoiberg, D., Clancy, D., Norvig, P., Orwant, J., Pinker, S., Nowak, M.A., & Aiden, E.L. (2010)Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books. Science, 331, 6014, pp 176-182 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Scientometrics/Michel-Quantitavive-Analysis-Culture-2010.pdf AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Scientometrics/Michel.SOM.revision.2-20110311.pdf

Page 83: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y.K., Aiden, A.P., Veres, A., Gray, M.K., Team, T.G.B., Pickett, J.P., Hoiberg, D., Clancy, D., Norvig, P., Orwant, J., Pinker, S., Nowak, M.A., & Aiden, E.L. (2010)Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books. Science, 331, 6014, pp 176-182 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Scientometrics/Michel-Quantitavive-Analysis-Culture-2010.pdf AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Scientometrics/Michel.SOM.revision.2-20110311.pdf

Page 84: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Quental, N. & Lourenco, J.M. (2012)References, authors, journals and scientific disciplines underlying the sustainable development literature: a citation analysis. Scientometrics, 90, 2, pp 361-381 http://www.ask-force.org/web/Overpopulation/Quental-References-Authors-Citation-Analysis-2012.pdf

Page 85: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

Field Destructions 2001 to 2009 in Germany (No of field destructions in DE: other criminal actions in orange, field destructions in green)

* Sonstige Straftaten: Sachbeschädigung an Gebäuden, Maschinen, etc.0

2468

1012141618202224262830

sonstige Straftaten

Feldzerstörungen

Stand 15.09.2009

The opponents of GM crops have lost their compas and their arguments, theydo not shy away from violence anymore, also Greenpeace is involved in violent activities

Da Silva, W. (2011)In Focus: the sad, sad demise of Greenpeace In Cosmos, Vol. Thursday, July 14, 2011. About Luna Media Pty Ltd, the boutique publishing company behind COSMOS, Sidney, Australia http://www.vision6.com.au/em/mail/view.php?id=1786158080&a=8123&k=998b861 AND http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/blog/4523/the-sad-sad-demise-greenpeace AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Field-Destruction/Da-Silva-Sad-Demise-Greenpeace-COSMOS-20110715.pdf

Kuntz, M. (2011)Academic and governmental research on GMOs has been the target of numerous acts of vandalism in Europe. In OGM, environnement, santé et politique. Prof. Marcel Kuntz, Grenoble http://www.marcel-kuntz-ogm.fr/article-news-55055856.html, news in English, French and Spanish AND http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/1/39/38/37/public-research-vandalized.pdf AND http://www.marcel-kuntz-ogm.fr/article-news-55055856.html AND http://www.ask-force.org/web/Field-Destruction/Kuntz-Public-Government-Research-Vandalism-Europe-2011.pdf

Page 86: Biosafety: Global Debate on Risks and Socio-Economic Benefits of GE crops

                                                             

bye bye Heliotisbye bye pesticides

Percentage GM cottonin the USA

Bt-toxin may be hazardous to your health, don‘t swallow and keep away from children

The Euro-Bills are made out of transgenic Bt - cotton