THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VIII, Issue # 20, January 24, 2006
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
EUROPE'S BIOTECH FOOD BAN MUST END
By Alan Caruba
BIOGENETICALLY ALTERED FOOD CROPS, INTERNATIONAL TRADE, & HUMAN HEALTH: HOW DO GENETICALLY
MODIFIED FOODS BENEFIT CONSUMERS? HOW DO THEY BENEFIT THE WORLD'S FARMERS? WHY IS THE
EUROPEAN UNION REFUSING TO PERMIT THE IMPORTATION & USE OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS?
FULL STORY:
Since May, 2003, the United States of America, joined by Canada and Argentina, has pursued a World Trade Organization
(WTO) dispute settlement process against the European Union (EU) regarding its de facto moratorium banning biogenetically
altered food crops.
The main opponents of such crops include the usual environmentalist organizations for whom any progress toward
eliminating famine and disease is regarded as an increase in the Earth’s human population. If you’re a member of the Earth
Liberation Front, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the Center for Food Safety and the Organic Consumers Association, among
others, the scientific advances of biotechnology are bad news.
If you are a member of the human race, however, genetically-modified foods (GMOs) means (1) an increase in agricultural
productivity wherever such crops are grown; (2) crops that can resist the effects of drought, a common cause of crop failures;
(3) the bioengineered increase of nutrients and a decrease of saturated fats in various food crops; and (4) the reduction of the
use of insecticides and herbicides. Farmers will tell you GMOs, in addition to reducing the amount of water needed to grow
certain crops, contribute to the reduction of soil erosion caused by agriculture.
So, why is the European Union refusing to permit the importation and use of GMOs? Alex Avery of the Hudson Institute
probably said it best when he described it as “technological apartheid.” While the Europeans are well fed, the fate of people in
Africa and other Third World nations are of little importance to them for purely economic reasons. Avery points out:
“More than half of the EU’s collective budget is gobbled up by
farm subsidy costs, so Europe has done all that it can to avoid
productivity-enhancing technologies for cost savings.”
In the interest of keeping GMO crops from America and other nations out of Europe, the EU has declared that such crops may
pose a health risk. They say that genetically modified crops, if grown in Europe, might “contaminate” organic crops. Baloney!
For all the reasons stated above, GMO crops not only do not pose a threat to organic crops (except in terms of greater yields),
but also do hold the potential for the virtual elimination of famines that cause the deaths of millions worldwide every year.
The EU represents the fourth largest market for U.S. agricultural exports. The earnings were projected by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture at $7 billion for 2005, nearly 12% of all the U.S. agricultural exports. The main export products are soybeans,
tobacco and animal feed, including corn gluten.
To date, the EU has not offered a scintilla of scientific evidence to justify the market bans imposed by some member-states. The
whole point of the World Trade Organization is to end frivolous bans in order to facilitate, well, world trade! The WTO even has
an Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures that requires “sufficient scientific evidence” to
support trade-restrictive regulations on crops and food products.”
Speaking in May, 2003, U.S. President George W. Bush said:
“Our partners in Europe…have blocked all new bio-crops because
of unfounded, unscientific fears. This has caused many African
nations to refrain from investing in biotechnology, for fear that
their products will be shut out of European markets. European
governments should join, not hinder, the great cause of ending
hunger in Africa.”
The opponents of GMOs will tell you this is about consumers versus agricultural corporations or they will continue to
fear-monger about the safety of GMO foods. It’s a government-to-government confrontation over food exports, and more than
a dozen nations, including South Africa, Argentina, Chile, Canada, Australia, Columbia, El Salvador, Honduras, New Zealand,
Peru, Uruguay, Mexico and Egypt, have expressed support for the U.S. initiative currently waiting a still-delayed decision by
the EU.
Putting aside the financial aspects of the ban EU member states have imposed, the issue of GMO safety has long since been
decided. In 2004, the National Research Council, a division of the National Academy of Sciences, issued a report in which it
found that genetic engineering is “not an inherently hazardous process,” calling the fears of the anti-biotech crowd
“scientifically unjustified.” The report, in fact, repeated findings that date back to 1987.
The United Kingdom-based Institute for Food Science and Technology found:
“Genetic modification has the potential to offer very significant
improvements in the quantity, quality, and acceptability of the
world’s food supply.”
Not only is there no cause to fear GMO food products, since the WTO case was launched in 2003, the planting of biotech
crops has increased around the world at unprecedented rates. In 2005 alone, more than 81 million hectares were sown with
biotech crops by more than eight million farmers in 17 countries -- a 20% increase over the previous year. Biotech crops are
even being planted in European nations; farmers in Spain, France, Portugal, Germany, the Czech Republic, and Romania are
taking advantage of the benefits which biotech crops represent.
While a favorable decision by the WTO opening European markets to GMO food choices will be good for consumers, the real
winners will be the world’s farmers who have suffered the most under these de facto trade restrictions.
So now we wait for the EU to do, at last, the right thing, the moral thing, by ending the GMO ban it has imposed.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Science, Ethics, & Human Health
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
Government & the Economy
Europe, Europeans, & American Foreign Policy
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a
clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly commentary, "Warning Signs," posted
on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center, which is located at
www.anxietycenter.com.
© Alan Caruba 2006
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VIII, 2006
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues