from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear all

We have some high quality stories for you this week, including a cool look by Dr Arpad Pusztai at some unsupported claims on the safety of GM foods (GM SAFETY FLAWS). There's also an update on the extremist 'LM' cult that has been busy taking over the science establishment in the UK (LM WATCHING). And there's a guide to US Ag Secretary Ann Veneman's possible successors (LOBBYWATCH).

The biotech industry continues its global meltdown, with Bayer's spectacular backdown in India (ASIA) and the withdrawal of its only two GM seeds still in the UK commercialisation pipeline. Syngenta also had a bad week - it had to abandon its GM trials in Germany because of the ferocity of the opposition (EUROPE).

Meanwhile, Monsanto, which has been desperately trying to maintain the fiction of consistent benefits and farmer popularity for its GM cotton in India, had the humiliation of actually having one of its officials taken hostage by 200 angry Indian farmers. The farmers would only be appeased by Monsanto's agreement to pay them compensation for the poor performance of its GM crop. This follows on from farmers going on the rampage in Andhra Pradesh over the same issue. (ASIA)

Other news this week supported a new report from Dr Robert Wisner, Professor of Economics at Iowa State University, who stated, "Consumer resistance remains strong in Europe and Asia, and consumers remain the driving force in countries where food labeling allows choice" (THE AMERICAS). Amongst much else, Japan's largest food-producing region is putting in place a GM crop ban (ASIA), new super-tough co-existence laws have been passed in Italy, and there's confirmation of strong consumer rejection of GM in Russia (EUROPE). In the US itself, the first city has adopted an anti-GMO ordinance (THE AMERICAS).

Finally, many thanks to those of you who have donated to GM WATCH. We rely on - and appreciate - your support. For those who haven't yet donated, if you like what we do and want us to continue, please help by going to http://www.gmwatch.org/donate.asp
For more on the appeal: http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4618
We desperately need your support.

Claire [email protected]
www.gmwatch.org / www.lobbywatch.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*COMPANY WATCH - Monsanto goes shopping
*BURKE BASHING - Talking sense to a GM Godfather
*GM SAFETY FLAWS - Pusztai special/New paper
*EUROPE
*ASIA
*THE AMERICAS
*LOBBYWATCH - Veneman goes, Monsanto stays
*LM WATCHING... Elton John, Power of Nightmares
*CAMPAIGN: GM trees

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPANY WATCH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

+ MONSANTO HIDES BEHIND TRUSTED LOCAL SEED COMPANIES
Monsanto is out shopping again, leading to a further concentration of seed ownership but this time it's adoptiung new tactics. It's announced the formation of American Seeds, Inc. (ASI), a new holding company established to support regional seed businesses with capital, genetics and technology investments. Carl Casale, executive vice president for Monsanto explained that this gave them "the brands and approaches that [the local seed companies'] customers know and trust".

ASI has already announced its first venture, acquiring Channel Bio Corp., a leading US seed company based in Kentland, Indiana. Casale said, "We view Channel as a cornerstone investment that will give us more opportunity for growth, accelerating the delivery of important technology advances to customers through the terrific relationships, local brands and quality service for which Channel and its management team are known."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4632

Note how the amiable local fronting of Monsanto's products ties in with the strategy the industry is adopting at a political level in the US, as in the recent Californian county ballots - getting local farming interests and "faces" to provide a persuasive front for the industry's campaign (http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4633).

It's a clever strategy for a company that has acquired more of a name for fleecing, spying on and suing farmers than for customer service!

As an article in the St Louis Post-Dispatch reports:
To the local growers who buy its corn and soybean seeds, Channel Bio largely will look and feel unchanged, said Monsanto spokeswoman Lori Fisher.

"The local customers are used to companies they're familiar with there, in their back yard. They know and trust those companies, and we don't want to destroy that".

In this deal, and future acquisitions envisioned for American Seeds, Monsanto gains the ability to reach farmers at a more granular level than it can with in-house seed brands Asgrow and Dekalb, said Kerry Preete, vice president of US Crop Production, the business unit under which American Seeds was formed. Monsanto expects to make further acquisitions through American Seeds.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4633

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
BURKE BASHING
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

+ TALKING SENSE TO A GM GODFATHER
Drs Andy Stirling and Sue Mayer have written a calm, rational and very persuasive response to the florid claims of pro-GM campaigner-scientists like Derek Burke.

Burke and his ilk present the GM public debate as merely a question of an ignorant public being stirred to hysteria against sound science, with its rigorous risk assessments, by a sensationalist media fuelled by fundamentalist and self-interested NGOs.

The latter is exactly the viewpoint put forward by Prof Burke in an EMBO report "GM foods and crops: what went wrong in the UK?" (Rep 5: 432-436). Burke is far from alone, of course, in holding and promoting such simplistic prejudices.

Here are excerpts from the Stirling/Mayer response in a new EMBO report (full text at http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4634 ):

In the GM field, as elsewhere, it is becoming increasingly clear that the results obtained by 'science-based' risk assessments are highly sensitive to the particular questions that are asked, the way in which they are posed and the assumptions that are made in answering them.

Just as we do not necessarily see someone who opposes a particular policy as being 'anti-policy', it makes little sense to interpret public misgivings about GM as a general anti-technology reflex. The real picture is much more complex, nuanced and diverse, with no shortage of detailed documentary evidence. The 'bottom line' for GM is that the focus and boundaries of the regulatory risk-assessment system offer a poor match to the full range of public values, priorities and concerns.

The problem lies in using scientific procedures as a way to understate persistent uncertainties, to neglect wider issues and so to help 'close down' criticism and debate. We need to recognize and address - rather than deny - the full diversity and subtlety of public aspirations and concerns about our technological future.

'How safe is safe enough?' is not a question for science alone, but depends on a wider judgement of the relative merits of a particular technology compared with its alternatives.

..public attitudes to NGOs should be seen as active and knowing, rather than passive and credulous. Although people might be critical about the details, they tend to share the broader perspectives of NGOs and value their role in raising concerns that are