Publication Date: September 21, 1999

 Pesticide safety limit raised by 200 times 'to suit GM industry' DAILY MAIL
 CAMPAIGN/GENETIC FOOD WATCH
 Daily Mail

 THE limits on pesticide residues allowed in soya have been
 increased 200-fold to help the GM industry, according to one
 of the country's leading food safety experts.

 Malcolm Kane, who has just taken early retirement as head of
 food safety at Sainsbury's, warned that higher levels of pesticide
 residues could appear in a range of foods from breakfast cereals to biscuits.

 He raised concerns that although the toxin levels are low, there may be
 dangers associated with long-term consumption.

 The claims were rejected by the Government's GM spin unit but are bound to
 fuel hostility to the tainted technology.

 The fact that the warning comes from such a respected source is highly
 embarrassing for the Government and biotech firms.

 Previously, UK and European rules stated that residues of the pesticide
 glyphosate left on a crop of soya beans should not be higher than 0.1 parts 
 per million.

 But according to Mr Kane, the Government has increased this figure by 200
 times to 20 parts per million specifically to smooth the path of GM soya into the 
 national diet.

 The soya has been modified to withstand spraying by glyphosate which is
 sold by the giant U.S. biotech firm [ Monsanto ] under the brand name Roundup.

 This means it can be sprayed more heavily without any of the soya plants
 being harmed. But one negative result could be that higher residues of the 
 chemical are left on the plant when it is harvested.

 Mr Kane believes that rather than force the industry and farmers to meet
 the existing safety levels, officials have instead relaxed the rules to 
 ensure GM crops remain legal.

 While soya is sprayed with glyphosate, other crops, specifically maize or
 corn, have been manipulated to contain their own insecticides. These are 
 designed to kill off pests which attack the plants so leading to bigger 
 crops, but Mr Kane raises the possibility that these pesticides will also
 find their way into human food. A major loophole in the regulatory system
 means there is no way of monitoring or policing levels of pesticide which 
 are effectively injected into plants through GM technology.

 Mr Kane argues that the development of crops which are herbicide- resistant
 and pesticide-resistant was a major mistake by the biotech industry because
 these do not offer any benefits to consumer.

 He believes that a better handling of the technology with an emphasis on
 the production of foods which are higher in important vitamins or other 
 chemicals which promote a more healthy lifestyle could have produced a much 
 more positive reception.

 'One does not need to be an activist or overtly anti-GM to point out that
 herbicide-resistant crops come at the price of containing significant 
 chemical residues of the active chemical in the commercial weedkiller,' 
 said Mr Kane. 'Conventional food crops will have no such residues.' He
 added: 'Consumers are understandably concerned about chemical residues in
 the food supply, and it is the responsibility of food industry professionals 
 to protect and defend their requirements.

 Undoubtedly, GM offers longer-term benefits in food quality and nutrition.
 However, the two most significant GM food developments currently being
 exploited, herbicide-resistance and insect-resistance, offer no consumer 
 benefits.' A spokesman for the Government's GM spin unit said that the 
 residue level had been changed in 1997, after GM soya was approved in Europe.

 'The change was made because of a change in farming practice for all soya,
 both conventional and GM, it was not done to suit the GM industry,' said 
 the spokesman.

 While in the past the crops had been sprayed early in the growing season,
 farmers had now decided to spray them before harvest to speed up the drying 
 process, she said.

 However, Mr Kane, who now runs his own food safety con-sultancy, Cambridge
 Food Control, described this explanation as a red herring.

 'This whole debate has been dogged by misinformation,' he said.

 'There is absolutely no good reason for raising the residue limit on soya
 other that to satisfy the GM companies.' Friends of the Earth biotech expert 
 Adrian Bebb said glyphosate was a suspected 'gender bender', adding: 'It is 
 extremely long lasting in the food chain and has been  implicated in changing 
 hormone levels in humans and reducing sperm counts in men.'