 |
|
|
Donation of Transgenic Food Denounced |
|
By Alfredo Aparicio*
The alleged presence of genetically modified maize and soy in food donations has sparked heated controversy in Bolivia.
LA PAZ – The debate on whether it is safe for humans to consume genetically modified foods has been reopened, this time in the Andes, as transgenic soy and maize reportedly have been found in food donations sent from the United States to help Bolivia's poor.
The non-governmental Bolivian Forum on the Environment and Development (Fobomade) said that samples from the food aid shipments were sent to the Genetic ID laboratory in Fairfield, Iowa, in the United States for analysis.
The test results show that more than 10 percent of the maize and 10 to 13 percent of the soy are genetically modified varieties.
Fobomade reports that, since 1955, 90 percent of the food aid arriving in Bolivia has come through the Public Law 480 Food Aid Program (PL-480), an amendment to the US Constitution that allows that government to provide food resources to developing countries.
Food assistance arrives in Bolivia primarily in the form of wheat flour, bulgur and fortified bulgur (cracked wheat with soy), as well as low-fat powdered milk and cooking oils.
Food aid from the US government is channeled through private institutions such as CARE-Bolivia, Food for the Hungry, and the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), all based in the United States.
The food is distributed in different ways throughout several regions in Bolivia, but particularly those that have had difficulties arising from extreme weather, including the high plains, valleys and tropical areas.
But Carlos Brockmann, executive director of PL-480, assures that since 1994 his office has not imported any food from the United States and that it is private firms that have been doing so through an international bidding process.
The US embassy in La Paz, meanwhile, confirmed in a bulletin that ''some of the donated foods are indeed genetically modified.''
However, the communiqué stresses that it is ''completely false that the United States is 'using the poor countries of Latin America as guinea pigs to promote a dangerous and unnecessary new technology','' as some members of the local media had suggested.
In January 2001, the Ministry of Agriculture enacted Ministerial Resolution 001, which establishes a one-year restriction on genetically modified organisms, ''in spite of the lack of scientific certainty'' about their potential dangers.
The decision came about under pressure from the Confederation of Bolivian Peasants, which in April and October 2000 kept the government in check with roadblocks and massive protests throughout the country.
The farmer-government tensions ended with the signing of more than 50 agreements, including one for protecting local biodiversity and suspending the experiments with transgenic varieties of soy, potato and cotton that big companies like Monsanto had been conducting here since 1998.
Despite the resolution, Agriculture minister Hugo Carvajal last month sent a letter to the US ambassador in Peru explaining that ''this provision does not affect the acceptance of donations from other countries and international entities with which Bolivia has traditionally maintained relations.''
He added that ''the appraisals of some individuals and private organizations about the quality and safety of North American food donations do not compromise the national government or state policy on this matter.''
The letter triggered an immediate reaction from Felipe Quispe, the peasant confederation’s maximum leader, who declared that ''we farm workers are going to burn all transgenic donations.''
Quispe said he was not surprised by the position that President Hugo Banzer has taken because ''it is a racist government that does not care what we eat.'' The peasant leader has demanded that the authorities prove that genetically modified foods are not harmful to human health or the environment.
For his part, Oscar Mendieta, head of the Association of Agro-Ecological Producers of Bolivia (AOPEB), pointed out that the government’s decision ‘’is a humiliation that we will not tolerate.’’
Some specialists, however, believe that biotechnology has been demonized in Bolivia.
''The debate is not following the appropriate path, and it seems that there is an attempt to 'satanize' new technology, without providing an opportunity to establish whether the risks, if they do exist, are as great as they believe, '' Mario Boudoin, director of biodiversity at the Ministry of Sustainable Development, told Tierramérica.
''We have no reason to cut ourselves off from an interesting possibility for achieving greater crop yields, nor should we ignore the fact that for the last 20,000 years, since man invented agriculture, we have been manipulating nature to obtain food in different ways, '' Boudoin said.
* Alfredo Aparicio is a Bolivian journalist and Tierramérica contributor
|
