» WELCOME
» AN INTRODUCTION
» PROFILES
» LM WATCH
» CONTACT
» LOBBYWATCH LINKS
»


GM vultures feed off Africa (13/10/2005)

1.GM vultures feed off Africa
2.Dr Luke Mumba - a profile
3.The truth about the image
4.Fake Blood on the Maize
---

1.GM vultures feed off Africa

We recently posted an article about an international conference on Genetic Engineering and Sustainable Agriculture in Lusaka, Zambia, where regional and international scientists, government representatives, and other stakeholders, had "hailed" the southern African states that had stood up and demanded non-GMO food aid despite the arm-twisting of the US.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=5821

But not all those at the conference supported the stance of Zambia and others. One of the contributors, Dr Mae-wan Ho, sent us an image which had been made use of at the conference by two pro-GM scientists, Luke Mumba from Zambia and Joseph M Wekundah, his counterpart from Kenya.

You can see this shocking image here:
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/kevincarter.htm

It shows a starving African infant crawling along the ground with a vulture watching over it. Mae-wan Ho tells us that people were given the impression that the child was crawling towards food aid. The child, the audience were also told, had managed to survive. The photographer had soon after committed suicide.

However, neither of the pro-GM scientists made it clear to their audience that this picture was taken back in the early 1990s in Sudan, long before GM food aid became an issue. Instead both GM proponents used it emotively with the clear implication that any blocking of GM food aid or, for that matter, of GM technology, could result in the tragedy of a child being unable to find the relief it desperately needed.

In fact, the whole context of this picture was misrepresented, as can be seen from the information about the picture, the child and the photographer who took it, below (item 3). Even without knowing about the misrepresentation, though, Mae-wan reports that the use of the image "disgusted a number of the Africans there, basically because it so crudely exploited the terrible suffering of African children in an attempt to peddle GM crops for Africa."

In case anyone has forgotten, its important to remember that there is absolutely no credible evidence that any child - or adult come to that - died as a result of the concern among southern African countries over GM food aid. And even if - God forbid - such a tragedy had occurred, the responsibility would have lain squarely with the US which largely took the attitude 'eat GM or starve' (to quote a Reuters headline), and the World Food Programme which tried to face down Zambia by leaving the unwanted GM grain unreplaced inside warehouses for months.
http://ngin.tripod.com/forcefeed.htm

The reality of what happened has not, however, stopped the biotech industry and its lobbyists and supporters from conducting the most disgusting disgusting black propaganda campaign - a campaign aimed at painting the critics of GM as responsible for mass murder in southern Africa - see item 4: 'Fake blood on the maize'.

As for Dr Mumba, he has said that the priority of his lobby group is the conducting of an 'aggressive awareness campaign' (item 2). His use of this image would certainly seem to fit that bill!

One way or another, vultures feeding off the suffering of Africa may not be such an inappropriate image.
---

2.Dr Luke Mumba - a profile
http://www.lobbywatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=189

Dr Luke Mumba is Dean of the University of Zambia's school of natural sciences. In July 2003 he became the interim Chairman of the newly launched Biotechnology Outreach Society of Zambia. According to reports, those attending the Society's inaugural meeting expressed cautious optimism that the Zambian government will change its negative attitude towards GM crops 'once the society launches a campaign in the country'. An 'aggressive awareness campaign', according to Dr Mumba, is 'our priority'. Although Zambia still has no biotechnology policy in place that would allow the introduction of GM crops, 'Dr. Luke Mumba of the University of Zambia gives a promise: "The document is at Cabinet level, being discussed. I am one of those who sit on the Committee and the policy will be in place soon".'

In January 2003 Mumba travelled to London and Brussels as part of a lobbying trip organised by the biotech-industry funded lobby groups EuropaBio and CropGen. In the party with Mumba were a series of GM lobbysists actibve in Africa: Monsantos favourite South African farmer T J Buthelezi, two lobbyists from ISAAA, James Ochanda of the African Biotechnology Stakeholders Forum, JocelynWebster of AfricaBio, plus an Intellectual Property Management consultant from Kenya.

Mumba's visit was used as the basis for an attack on the British Medica Association which has urged caution over GMOs. One of the UK's most fiercely pro-GM science journalists Andy Coghlan wrote an article for New Scientist headlined, 'GM food fear traced to UK'. According to the article, 'Doubts over the safety of genetically modified foods voiced by the British Medical Association were the main reason behind Zambia's decision to reject food aid in 2002, says a Zambian scientist who visited Europe this week.' Later in the article the scientist is identified as Luke Mumba.

The article goes on to quote from a BMA report which says that 'We cannot at present know whether there are serious risks to the environment or to human health involved in producing GM crops or consuming GM food products ... and adverse effects are likely to be irreversible.' Ironically, Dr Mumba has himself warned about the problem of irreversible contamination from GMOs in much stronger terms than the BMA.

An article in The Times of Zambia, March 12, 2002 reported, 'University of Zambia School of natural sciences Dean Dr Luke Mumba says, unlike chemical or nuclear contamination, gene pollution cannot be cleaned up. He adds, toxic effects of genetic mistakes, will be passed on to all future generations of species. "Once released, it is virtually impossible to recall genetically engineered organisms back to the laboratory or the field. Genetically engineered products carry more risks than traditional foods," points out Dr Mumba.'

By summer 2002, however, Mumba was sounding a very different note. 'All of us who consider ourselves to be experts in biotechnology must accept that we have not done enough to guide our policy makers on the subject. Each time we are afforded a forum we are invariably issuing contradictory statements on GM maize and biotechnology in general. Little wonder that ou

Go to a Print friendly Page


Email this Article to a Friend


Back to the Archive