risk assessment

[img_assist|nid=174|title=|desc=|link=none|align=right|width=100|height=43]The report presented here shows the many ways Bt maize impacts the environment. Even after more then a decade of commercial growing of Bt maize crops, the risk assessment studies are still few and most of them tend to raise more open questions than solving concerns.

A. Lorch & Ch. Then, Greenpeace, June 2007.

[img_assist|nid=107|title=|desc=|link=none|align=right|width=100|height=43]In the growing season 2006, Greenpeace sampled leaves from commercially cultivated MON810 in Germany and Spain and found that Bt contents were very variable and often very low, but also that even 10 years into the cultivation of Bt crops, there is no standardised method to determine Bt contents. The results are published in this report.

A. Lorch & Ch. Then. Greenpeace Germany report, May 2007.

[img_assist|nid=172|title=|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=100|height=43]Scientists in the UK put 16 lines of three different GM potatoes under a range of stress situations and then studied the quantities of two main groups of secondary, toxic metabolites. They found significant differences. An argument why it is necessary to study GM crops under realistic conditions.

[img_assist|nid=107|title=|desc=|link=none|align=right|width=100|height=43]Some more details on recent findings on the EFSA opinions about the MON863 hybrids MON863xMON810, MON863xNK603 and MON863xMON810xNK603 (EFSA 2005):

A. Lorch, Background paper for Greenpeace, September 2005

[img_assist|nid=175|title=|desc=|link=none|align=right|width=100|height=43]This new report, written on behalf of Greenpeace, shows that no serious investigation was conducted on the effects of Bt11 maize on the environment and on animals feeding on it. Why does EFSA accepts a notification that lacks so much information, and why does it discard the existing scientific literature?

A. Lorch, Greenpeace Report, September 2005