Friday, June 20, 2003

And in other problematic biotech news US pursues challenge against European ban on bio-engineered foods [AFP]: The United States said on Thursday it would press ahead with a WTO complaint over a de facto EU ban on genetically modified foods after talks failed to sway the Europeans. Washington said it would call for a World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel, after the European Union stuck by its guns at technical level talks in Brussels. The United States is leading a group of 12 countries, including Argentina, into battle at the WTO to overturn EU obstacles to GMO foods, in place since 1999.... The spat over biotech foods strains already tense US-EU ties. Just before the GMO case was filed, the EU obtained WTO approval for four billion dollars in trade sanctions against the United States in a long-running row over tax breaks for US companies. 8:20:28 AM    comment []  trackback []

And for some better news... [SF Chronicle]: McDonald's takes a stand against antibiotics in meat - Fast-food chain tells suppliers to phase out routine use of drugs.... Because of the company's size, the new McDonald's policy is expected to have a major effect in curbing the common agricultural practice, which has been criticized for decades. "Supply chain management" is becoming a major point of leverage for improving corporate environmental performance, more significant in many ways than traditional regulatory pressures. Some companies are even creating strategic supply chain partnerships to jointly build competivie advantage with their suppliers and distributors. 7:57:55 AM    comment []  trackback []

Fox + henhouse = Report Says More Farmers Don't Follow Biotech Rules. A new study shows that more farmers are failing to comply with standards governing the planting of genetically modified corn than the industry has claimed. By Andrew Pollack. [New York Times: Science] 7:40:32 AM    comment []  trackback []

Remember that old three monkey "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" thing... Report by the E.P.A. Leaves Out Data on Climate Change. After editing by the White House, a section describing risks from rising global temperatures has been whittled to a few noncommittal paragraphs. By Andrew C. Revkin with Katharine Q. Seelye. [New York Times: Science] If the White House really wants less government, think how much it could save by not trying to massage the science to reflect its politics. The New York Times editorial puts it more bluntly: The Bush administration is burying another E.P.A. report - and its head in the sand - on the issue of global warming. 7:38:51 AM    comment []  trackback []