I just wrote the following e-mail to the BBC (as it's public radio and a science programme, I didn't bother adding the great faith-objection against GM: playing God, as GM is NOT the same as 'selective breeding, but proactively in a lab mixing species; e.g. in the Quran: "so eat of the sustenance which God has provided for you, lawful and good" [16:114]):

Hello BBC Feedback team,

May this message find you in the best of health and spirits.

From the programme brief of Frontiers (7 Dec '09, 9pm) it is blatantly obvious that the programme 'Frontiers' to be aired on Monday 7 Dec '09 at 9pm will be a half hour free PR/ advertisement for the GM private industry. Even the links at the end of the brief make no attempt to be balanced (3 of the 5 are biotech companies or their industry promoters [e.g. objective "protect intellectual property"], only 1 link to environment organisation).

The programme takes the starting point that GM are positive and good, without questioning this info, e.g. their view that if the EU would relax its rules "developing nations will be more likely to accept them too". Many developing countries do NOT want them as it makes farmers MORE not less dependent on outside input, e.g. as GM seeds need to be bought every year anew due to IP rights of GM companies. A South-African farmer group even summarises the debate in the most succinct way: "There is enough food in the world to feed everyone on earth over a kilo of a good quality mixed diet daily. People go hungry because they do not have money, access to food, or land. GE will not change this. The problem is economic, political and practical, not technical. Most farmers will never be able to afford technology fees and the chemicals to grow these new GE seeds. It is even possible now to genetically engineer plants to produce sterile seeds, stopping farmers from saving their seeds for replanting the next year. About a third of humanity depends on saved seed for their survival. Genetic engineering in its present form cannot form part of the solution; it is part of the problem."

In 1998 a delegation representing EVERY AFRICAN COUNTRY except South Africa put a joint statement to a UN conference on genetic research. The delegates had been 'inspired' by a Monsanto campaign that used images of starving African children to plug its technology. The statement read "We strongly object that the image of the poor and hungry from our countries is being used by giant multinational corporations to push a technology that is neither safe, environmentally friendly nor beneficial to us. We do not believe that such companies or gene technologies will help our farmers to produce the food that is needed in the 21st Century. On the contrary, we think it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge, and the sustainable agricultural systems that our farmers have developed for millennia, and that it will undermine our capacity to feed ourselves."

Also UN research has found organic farming and using indigenous species are MORE effective/ promising than GM in increasing yields and sustainbility.

And then I haven't yet mentioned the objection (by farmers and consumers) to GM based on research (e.g. by Austrian Government) that it has negative health effects, so again objection is not about some kind of unwarranted fear or an argument by hair-shirted lefties.

BBC, PLEASE stop being the puppet of the GM industry and bring a fair debate instead - indeed something we don't have often enough!

In peace,

Rianne
Ms R.C. ten Veen MA (Law) MA (Int'l Politics) PGDipEnvPol
Birmingham, UK

SOURCES/ LINKS:
Farmers in Pakistan protest against Monsato's GM trials
http://www.hungerfreeplanet.org/news/pakistan-farmers-protest-against-gm

Farmers stage demo against GM crop trial
http://www.thehindu.com/2009/04/03/stories/2009040351880600.htm

A brief overview of SCIENTIFIC objections to GM by farmers
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2013

Canadian Farmers Against Corporate Serfdom
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/CFACS.php

South African Freeze Alliance on Genetic Engineering (SAFeAGE)
http://www.safeage.org/

1998 African request to UN
http://www.safeage.org/docs/issues/African-gm-res-aug05.doc

Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice
https://www.dafne.at/dafne_plus_homepage/download.php?t=ProjectReportAttachment&k=1292

American Academy of Environmental Medicine statement on GM
http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

Comparative Analysis of Organic and Non-Organic Farming Systems: A Critical Assessment of Farm Profitability (2009), UN FAO
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/ak355e/ak355e00.pdf

I love this summary of how the climate change debate is being conducted by Johann Hari of The Independent: "Imagine you are about to get on a plane with your family. A huge group of qualified airline mechanics approach you on the tarmac and explain they've studied the engine for many years and they're sure it will crash if you get on board. They show you their previous predictions of plane crashes, which have overwhelmingly been proven right. Then a group of vets, journalists, and plumbers tell they have looked at the diagrams and it's perfectly obvious to them the plane is safe and that airplane mechanics – all of them, everywhere – are scamming you. Would you get on the plane? That is our choice at Copenhagen."

Especially also as people of faith, by not living within our means, we are not abiding by our duty of care of Creation as commanded in all the world's faiths (even if different words are used).

That's why I'm joining 'The Wave' in London tomorrow!

For many religious communities, caring for the environment is an essential expression of faith. The upcoming Parliament of the World's Religions (taking place in Melbourne, Australia, from 3-9 December '09) will draw forth the sacred nature of the environment from all religious and spiritual traditions. It will also showcase the partnership between communities and other guiding institutions in pursuing practical approaches for reversing climate change and its effects.

If you have the good fortune to attend: "At the Parliament, you’ll experience dozens of keynote speakers, seminars, debates, workshops, discussions and more on topics including local farming, reducing energy consumption, mitigating climate change, the growth of green architecture, and more." Check out the theme: Healing the Earth with Care and Concern

The Lancet has just published a series of articles on health and climate change. Besides being informative, I love the following sentence in the executive summary: "Addressing climate change is not just an issue of international agreements, or economic costs; it is a choice of what kind of world we want to live".

Just back from a trip to Tunisia to support a Sphere Arabic Training of Trainers (ToT), hosted by IFRC N-Africa. One of the nice things I saw is during a 'social' day is water harvesting methods in mosques (or zaouias/ zawiyas, Sufi study places) in Kairouan about 1,000 years old... if we want to live sustainably, so many options are already out there, we just need to remember them and reuse them...because as the Grand Mufti of Egypt said in July 2009: "The development and the preservation of environment as well as human rights are one package. They also constitute a whole integrated vision."

And in other good news: the Faith & Climate Change project I helped initiate some years ago now and am fortunately still greatly involved with today got announced as winner of The Guardian Green Hero Awards for Best Urban Project at the Green Communities Conference. [added link on 2 Dec '09]

Happy to see the acknowledgement and hopely give our work more exposure and thus hopefully inspire others to do similar things in their localities.

According to an article in The Independent, the GLOBAL number of swine flu deaths so far is 6,250. Of course a tragedy for the affected families, no doubt. However, let's again put these figures in perspective: that's PEANUTS compared with the 20.5 MILLION who died of starvation, just so far in 2009. According to Jean Ziegler (the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food for 2000 to March 2008 in his book L'Empire de la honte, Fayard, 2007), mortality due to malnutrition accounted for 58% of the total mortality in 2006: "In the world, approximately 62 million people, all causes of death combined, die each year. One in twelve people worldwide are malnourished. In 2006, more than 36 millions died of hunger or diseases due to deficiencies in micronutrients.

And considering that, as economist Amartya Sen observed, in recent decades, famine has always a problem of food distribution and/or poverty (inability to exercise purchase/ procure food), as there has been sufficient food to feed the whole population of the world (so NO need to push GM - this will only make things worse, putting start of food chain in hands of global corporate behemoths), this is a collective disgrace in my opinion.

According to an article in The Independent, the total number of deaths from swine flu in the UK so far is 154. Though these are tragedies for the affected families, let's keep it in perspective: road traffic FATALITIES in the UK in 2008: 2,530; all road traffic casualties in the UK in 2008: 212,733. But do we stop driving? No, we focus on the MANY less affected by swine flu (and private corporate companies heat up swine flu PANIC).

On food: more than £12bn worth of food and drink that could have been consumed is thrown out every year by householders in the UK alone, according to new figures today that reveal the scale of the UK's food waste mountain.

According to an article in The Guardian, the world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit (according to a whistleblower at the International Energy Agency who claims it has been deliberately underplaying a looming shortage for fear of triggering panic buying). But going for nuclear is NO alternative in my view: for starters the UK is thinking of just burying the nuclear waste... out of sight, out of mind (just small matter of £18 bn price tag and morality of dumping consequences of our choices onto generations after us).

However, to not make you (and myself) too depressed to stay hopeful and take action (as is our God-given duty to look after Creation):
When thinking of Spain, do we have images of a country full of wind turbines? No, but, according to an article in The Times, Spain was yesterday celebrating its commitment to renewable energy after wind turbines dotted across the country produced more than half of all its electricity for the first time. If they can do it, why not others?

According to article in The Independent, the Peruvian empire of the Nasca went down due to a self-inflicted wound of cutting down the huarango tree, exposing the land to floods and drought and subsequent soil erosion, turning the lush agricultural land into desert. We CAN save ourselves (by stopping the cutting of trees for monocultures), but do we want it?

According to an article in The Times, research by TerraChoice, a US marketing company, the amount of goods sold as 'green' in the UK, US, Canada and Australia has risen by an average of 79 per cent since 2007. It also found that 98 per cent of products being advertised as green had some environmental failings. Do we realise this? Do we care? We CAN do it (change this fakery and push for true sustainability), but do we want it?

In more positive news:

Solar power from Sahara is a step closer: the German-led Desertec initiative believes it can deliver power to Europe as early as 2015, according to an article in The Guardian (but I've read about it for quite a while now...technology is there, what's stopping it is will – those who would lose out from deserting nuclear, oil and gas.

And in more good news: The Maldives announce windfarm plan to provide 40% of island's electricityAs Mark Lynas sums it up in The Guardian: "If a middle-income country can cut its emissions by a quarter through standard commercial partnerships, the rich world has little excuse for saying that carbon reductions are too expensive."

With less than 40 days to go before the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, representatives of several faiths present in the UK got together at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury on 29 October at Lambeth Palace. In the first statement of its kind, signed by leaders from every faith community (including Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Baha'i, Jain and Zoastrian) the signatories recognise "unequivocally that there is a moral imperative to tackle the causes of global warming" and that "Faith communities have a crucial role to play in pressing for changes in behaviour at every level of society and in every economic sector. We all have a responsibility to learn how to live and develop sustainably in a world of finite resources".

God willing we can all reflect on that, that God has given us so many blessings, but also a duty to behave responsibly in using those blessings and sharing them equitably (with all our brothers and sisters in the current generations, but also our brothers and sisters in time, those after us, who have just as much right to God's blessings/ Creation as us).

God has given us so many gifts, we tend to forget... for example, I like this article (which is not unique, though fossil fuel funded etc sources won't want you to know!) that indeed "shifting the World to 100 percent clean, renewable energy as early as 2030: here are the numbers" IS possible as "most of the technology needed to shift the world from fossil fuel to clean, renewable energy ALREADY EXISTS." (my emphasis, and this fact is contrary to some of the fancy suggestions regarding options on fossil fuel (e.g. so-called 'carbon capture & storage' - sound nice, but NOT proven beyond lab). The 'only' things that stops us is "implementing that technology requires overcoming obstacles in planning and politics." Might help to remind people that of the 100 biggest economic entities, MORE THAN 50 are COMPANIES (NOT countries!), and that of the 10 biggest companies, 7 sell cars and/ or oil... money talks & big money talks a lot...