Stephen Leahy* - Tierramérica

BROOKLIN, Canada, Apr 20 2005 (IPS) — The case of a genetically engineered variety of maize that escaped detection by U.S. and European Union authorities for four years illustrates weaknesses in the safety and regulatory systems on both sides of the Atlantic, say critics.

Syngenta AG, the Swiss agrochemical and seed company at the centre of the controversy, has been fined 375,000 dollars by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for selling Bt10, an unauthorised genetically modified (GM) variety of maize, to U.S. farmers from 2001 to 2004.

Syngenta’s transgenic maize contains a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) which acts as a pesticide to control a common insect called the European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis).

The Bt11 variety has had approval from the United States and other countries for several years, but Syngenta produced and mistakenly sold its Bt10 variety as if it were Bt11.

The most worrying difference is that Bt10 also contains a gene that creates resistance to the antibiotic ampicillin, which is widely used to treat bacterial infections.

”U.S. regulators don’t test the seeds that farmers plant. They’re at the mercy of companies to report any mistakes themselves,” Joe Mendelson, of the Washington-based non-governmental Centre for Food Safety (CFS), told Tierramérica.

”No one would have known about this without Syngenta coming forward,” he said.

Some of the estimated 150,000 tonnes of maize grown with the illegal seed was also exported to the European Union, where it is not approved for use in food or human or animal consumption.

The EU announced on Apr. 11 that it is considering suspending U.S. imports of maize gluten animal feed, worth around 450 million dollars a year.

Syngenta acknowledges that small amounts of Bt10 maize may have been exported to other countries as well. According to the New York Times, the seed was also sold to farmers in Canada and Argentina.

”It’s a labelling mix-up,” a Syngenta spokesperson told Tierramérica. ”There are no health or safety issues and the ampicillin gene is inactive in the plant.”

Several varieties of GM maize grown in the United States, Canada and elsewhere have similar antibiotic resistance markers. However, these do not have the approval of European regulators.

Syngenta learned of the mix-up late last year after it acquired a new technology for batch testing the transgenic varieties it produces. The company conducted an internal investigation and informed U.S. regulators – the USDA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – in mid December.

The issue became public when Nature, the prestigious science publication, published a story Mar. 22.

Syngenta says it was not up to them to inform the public while regulators were conducting their investigation. The USDA/EPA evaluation concluded ”there are no human or animal health or environmental concerns with Bt corn,” according to Syngenta.

Officials at the USDA did not respond to requests for an interview.

Food safety activist Mendelson pointed out that Syngenta claims Bt10 is safe ”even though it’s never been regulated or thoroughly tested.”

But Val Giddings, vice-president for food and agriculture at the Biotechnology Industry Organisation (BIO), in Washington D.C., says Mendelson’s allegations don’t stand up to scrutiny.

”We’re approaching the 500 billionth acre of crops improved by biotechnology being grown around the world over the past decade_ and we’ve not had a single solitary experience of damage to the environment or to human or animal health,” Giddings said in a Tierramérica interview.

”The U.S. regulatory agencies have paved the way for the entire world’s regulatory agencies,” he said, though he admits the regulators do not test seeds to see if they are approved varieties.

”No one looks into the bags of seeds to see if what’s inside is the same as what’s on the label.”

To be able to precisely identify genetically engineered varieties would require sophisticated genetic testing equipment that is only found in a few laboratories.

Companies have their own quality controls and there are penalties if problems are found, Giddings says.

In addition to the 375,000 dollar fine for its mistake, Syngenta will have to sponsor a seminar on compliance training. The EPA’s investigation is not yet complete and it may levy additional sanctions.

(* Originally published Apr. 16 by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network. Tierramérica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Environment Programme.)