En ny regering borde säga nej till GMO

Jag blev så glad när jag såg Naturskyddsföreningen, Miljöförbundet jordens vänner och en mängd andra företrädare från svenska och norska civilsamhället som i Dagens Industri igår uppmanar  (se också här) den svenska lantbrukarrörelsen att inte öppna upp för genmodifierade produkter (GMO). Jag delar oron och hoppas att svenska bönder håller fast vid en GMO-kritisk linje. Men det finns också ett politiskt ansvar att utkräva i detta.

Genmodifiering är en relativt ny teknik som vi ännu vet mycket lite om. I dag används GMO främst i Nord- och Sydamerika och då i soja, majs och bomull. I övriga världen är odlingen mycket begränsad på grund av den stora osäkerheten kring riskerna. Där GMO används har trenden varit tydlig. Det har varit till förmån för storföretagen inom agribusiness. Bönder blir beroende av hela kedjan av produkter; utsäde, konstgödsel, bekämpningsmedel och andra kemiska insatsvaror. Makten över vår mat centraliseras till ett fåtal jordbruksjättar som Monsanto, BASF och Syngenta. Konsumenterna – som oftast är mycket GMO-kritiska – får ännu mindre insyn i livsmedelsproduktionen. Möjligheterna att bedriva ekologisk produktion kan äventyras när GMO-grödorna kontaminerar näraliggande odlingar.

Under den borgerliga regeringens åtta år vid makten har regeringen verkat för ett närmande av GMO-konceptet på ett mycket oroväckande sätt. För ett par år sedan drev landsbygdsminister Eskil Erlandsson igenom att GMO-potatisen Amflora skulle få odlas för kommersiellt bruk i Sverige (något som sedan slutade som ett fiasko). Den borgerliga regeringen har också på EU-nivå röstat emot att enskilda länder ska kunna införa nationella förbud mot GMO. Regeringen har också försvårat för den ekologiska odlingen genom att avskaffa de tidigare konkreta målsättningarna för ekologisk produktion och konsumtion. Vi kan också se att svenskt jordbruk alltmer ersätts att ett utländskt industrijordbruk. Idag är hälften av all mat som konsumeras importerad. I det här läget behövs en politik som gynnar den lokalt producerade livsmedlen, inte för ökad centralisering och import. Ett öppnande för GMO skulle kunna ödelägga en stor del av svensk livsmedelsproduktion.

Därför finns det ett politiskt ansvar att utkräva i detta. Jag hoppas verkligen att svenska lantbrukare håller fast vid en strikt GMO-linje. Men vi politiker måste också ta vårt ansvar. Alla undersökningar pekar på att svenska folket, precis som folk i de flesta andra länder, inte vill ha genmodifierad mat. Därför borde en ny regering efter valet också ändra kursen i jordbrukspolitiken. Länder i EU ska ha friheten att införa nationella förbud mot GMO. Sverige borde klart och tydligt säga att vi ska bedriva ett jordbruk utan genmodifierade produkter. Jordbrukspolitiken borde i större utsträckning inriktas mot att upprätthålla en större nationell försörjningsgrad av livsmedel och understödja övergången mot ett mer ekologiskt jordbruk.

4 reaktioner på ”En ny regering borde säga nej till GMO

  1. Hej! Vad som klassas som GM och inte (ex. mutations- och hybridförädling) och hur det går till, vilka produkter som finns, etiska aspekter, etik och ekonomi finns att läsa i en ny bok, helt gratis i digital version!

    P,S, Allt är ju relativt, men genmodifiering som teknik utvecklades på 70-talet och de första grödorna började odlas kommersiellt i mitten på 90-talet…

  2. S government data shows that in the US, GM crops have produced an overall increase, not decrease, in pesticide use compared to conventional crops.

    “The promise was that you could use less chemicals and produce a greater yield. But let me tell you none of this is true.” — Bill Christison, President of the US National Family Farm Coalition.

    2. Have Been Shown To Be Dangerous To Your Health and Unsafe To Eat

    Genetic modification is a crude and imprecise way of incorporating foreign genetic material (e.g. from viruses, bacteria) into crops, with unpredictable consequences. The resulting GM foods have undergone little rigorous and no long-term safety testing. However, animal feeding tests have shown that GM foods have toxic effects, including abnormal changes in organs, immune system disturbances, accelerated ageing, and changes in gene expression. Very few studies have been published on the direct effects on humans of eating a GM food. One such study found unexpected effects on gut bacteria, but was never followed up.

    It is claimed that Americans have eaten GM foods for years with no ill effects. But these foods are unlabeled in the US and no one has monitored the consequences. With other novel foods like trans fats, it has taken decades to realize that they have caused millions of premature deaths.

    GM foods are an imminent threat to humanity’s food supply. Besides the ethical concerns, genetic pollution is self-perpetuating. It can never be reversed or cleaned up. Genetic mistakes will be passed on to all future generations of a species. Wind, rain, birds, bees, and insect pollinators have begun carrying genetically-altered pollen into adjoining fields, polluting the DNA of crops of organic and non-GM farmers. This has been happening all over the world for more than a decade. Theoretically, it genetic pollution continues, it could obliterate the world’s natural organic food supply. Use of herbicide-resistant crops will also lead to a accelerated increase in the use of herbicides, resulting in even greater pollution of our food and water with toxic agrochemicals.

    “We are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences.” — Dr Suzanne Wuerthele, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) toxicologist

    3. GM Foods Are Hidden In Animal Feed

    As a spokesperson for Asgrow, a subsidiary of Monsanto, said, “If you put a label on genetically engineered food, you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it.” The GM industry has got around the problem of consumer rejection of GM foods by hiding them in animal feed. Meat, eggs and dairy products from animals raised on the millions of tons of GM feed imported into Europe do not have to be labelled. Some studies show that contrary to GM and food industry claims, animals raised on GM feed ARE different from those raised on non-GM feed. Other studies show that if GM crops are fed to animals, GM material can appear in the resulting products and affect the animals’ health. So eating these “stealth GMOs” may affect the health of consumers.

    4. GM and non-GM Cannot Co-Exist

    GM contamination of conventional and organic food is increasing. An unapproved GM rice that was grown for only one year in field trials was found to have extensively contaminated the US rice supply and seed stocks. In Canada, the organic oilseed rape industry has been destroyed by contamination from GM rape. In Spain, a study found that GM maize “has caused a drastic reduction in organic cultivations of this grain and is making their coexistence practically impossible”.

    The time has come to choose between a GM-based, or a non-GM-based, world food supply.

    Alfalfa is the main forage crop for dairy cows and one of the principle foods for beef cows, especially grass-fed cattle. Alfalfa is a perennial, easily lasting five years once planted. And it’s bee-pollinated, which means each year, every non-GM alfalfa plant within five miles of every GM alfalfa plant will likely be contaminated by GM genes.

    “If some people are allowed to choose to grow, sell and consume GM foods, soon nobody will be able to choose food, or a biosphere, free of GM. It’s a one way choice, like the introduction of rabbits or cane toads to Australia; once it’s made, it can’t be reversed.” — Roger Levett, specialist in sustainable development.

    5. Long-term Economic Disaster For Farmers

    A 2009 report showed that GM seed prices in America have increased dramatically, compared to non-GM and organic seeds, cutting average farm incomes for US farmers growing GM crops. The report concluded, “At the present time there is a massive disconnect between the sometimes lofty rhetoric from those championing biotechnology as the proven path toward global food security and what is actually happening on farms in the US that have grown dependent on GM seeds and are now dealing with the consequences.”

    6. GM Companies Cannot Be Trusted

    The big biotech firms pushing their GM foods have a terrible history of toxic contamination and public deception. GM is attractive to them because it gives them patents that allow monopoly control over the world’s food supply. They have taken to harassing and intimidating farmers for the “crime” of saving patented seed or “stealing” patented genes — even if those genes got into the farmer’s fields through accidental contamination by wind or insects.

    Monsanto has been the largest player in the GM foods game. They have single handedly made the United States the world’s biggest producer of GM foods, pesticides and herbicides. Founded in 1901, Monsanto has manufactured industrial chemicals (e.g. sulphuric acid), plastics and synthetics, and saccharin, a carcinogenic artificial sweetener. It has also produced or granted production licenses for most of the world’s toxic PCB’s which are now mostly banned worldwide.

    “Farmers are being sued for having GMOs on their property that they did not buy, do not want, will not use and cannot sell.” — Tom Wiley, North Dakota farmer.

    7. GM Foods Will Never Solve The Food Crisis

    A 2008 World Bank report concluded that increased biofuel production is the major cause of the increase in food prices. Biofuels are crops grown for fuel rather than food. GM giant Monsanto has been at the heart of the lobbying for biofuels — while profiting enormously from the resulting food crisis and using it as a PR opportunity to promote GM foods!

    “The climate crisis was used to boost biofuels, helping to create the food crisis; and now the food crisis is being used to revive the fortunes of the GM industry.” — Daniel Howden, Africa correspondent, The Independent (UK).

    “The cynic in me thinks that they’re just using the current food crisis and the fuel crisis as a springboard to push GM crops back on to the public agenda. I understand why they’re doing it, but the danger is that if they’re making these claims about GM crops solving the problem of drought or feeding the world, that’s bullshit.” — Prof Denis Murphy, head of biotechnology, University of Glamorgan, Wales.

    Kelley Bergman is a media consultant, critic and geopolitical investigator. She has worked as a journalist and writer, specializing in geostrategic issues around the globe.
    Gilla · Svara · 2 · 4 tim

Kommentera

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Google+ photo

Du kommenterar med ditt Google+-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Ansluter till %s