Slashdot Mirror


Majority of EU Nations Seek Opt-Out From Growing GM Crops

schwit1 writes: Nineteen EU member states have requested opt-outs for all or part of their territory from cultivation of a Monsanto genetically-modified crop, which is authorized to be grown in the European Union, the European Commission said on Sunday. Under a law signed in March, individual countries can seek exclusion from any approval request for genetically modified cultivation across the 28-nation EU. The law was introduced to end years of stalemate as genetically modified crops divide opinion in Europe. The requests are for opt-outs from the approval of Monsanto's GM maize MON 810, the only crop commercially cultivated in the European Union, or for pending applications, of which there are eight so far, the Commission said.

4 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Crops vs. Crop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The headline says "crops". The articles specifies one crop (MON 810). Adjust your level of outrage/rejoicing accordingly.

  2. Re:How do they define GM? by bjwest · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's only a thin line if you want to be a facetious ass and make it one. Genetically modified crops are just that, They're crops that have had their DNA altered with DNA from other species. Cross pollinating a grapefruit with a tangerine to make a tangelo is not GM. Adding the DNA from a jellyfish to a potato pant, just to make it glow when thirsty, is.

    --

    --- Keep the choice with the user..
  3. Re:How do they define GM? by penandpaper · · Score: 4, Informative

    His point doesn't address what the OP said.

    He is making a line you can't cross in the taxological tree because reasons. Why can we manipulate the genes in species but not Kingdom? Oh, I know... God did it, right? That was the whole point of OP when he said: "It's a very hazy line there... is it just stuff made by Monsanto or *all* GM stuff, like... say just about *all* corn that's grown on the planet?" There are concerns with Monsanto, (see below in thread) that seem legitimate. But to label "ALL GM is bad" is proclaiming ignorance. Just like the GP misunderstanding what a species is.

    "DNA that's totally foreign." What is foreign? When do you define DNA as foreign? How far up the taxological tree do you have go when it becomes foreign? how far back in evolutionary history do you have to go? How do you define that line in taxonomy? As if our DNA does not have the remnants of endogenous retroviruses, or the 60% of DNA we share with a banana plant.

    The misinformed nature of his post is modded (as of now) +4 informative. It just shows you that the anti-GMO camp is mostly uninformed. If you want to talk about specific ecological effects, or copyright, or monopoly on agriculture then I am all ears. But to say "this potato plant with a specific jellyfish DNA sequence is bad" is just as dumb as saying a tangelo is not GMO. It is an arbitrary line that he created to suit his political compass.

  4. Re:Hogwash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative


    Every single non-industry-funded study on GMOs has returned absolutely horrifying results about what their consumption does to, specifically, the digestive system and the immune system.

    Bullshit. I am a food scientist for Agriculture Canada and earlier worked at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

    There are no properly executed studies showing what you claim.

    Zero. Nada. Zilch.