BM_discussion
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion
[email protected]

Today's topics:

* Launching Webzine - Simply Yuva - 1 messages, 1 author
 
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/6dda708abea0f568
* Mail to Health Ministry, India, opposing policy on GMO/LMO - 1 messages, 1 
author
 
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/74bd2f3133a8b192
* For your information - 1 messages, 1 author
 
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/8a830d90600d8f86

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Launching Webzine - Simply Yuva
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/6dda708abea0f568
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 26 2006 9:44 pm 
From: "Amit Kumar Srivastava"  

Dear Friends,

Finally, the first issue of *'Simply Yuva'* has been published. It can be
assessed at-

*http://www.globalmedia.in/simplyyuva/*<http://www.globalmedia.in/simplyyuva/>

I hope you will like it. All my efforts are to to provide a platform for
youth's voice.
*

Contact & Feedback:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Also join e-group and discussion at
*

www.groups.yahoo.com/groups/simplyyuva
Since, I am managing it by my own resources and efforts any help in terms of
Volunteering  for editing, contribution and management is most welcome.

Regards,

Amit Kumar Srivasatva
JNU, New Delhi
contact-
09911059101
www.amitk.tk
---------------------------------------
A few heart-whole, sincere, and energetic person can do more in a year
than a mob in a century
-Swami Vivekanand





==============================================================================
TOPIC: Mail to Health Ministry, India, opposing policy on GMO/LMO
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/74bd2f3133a8b192
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 26 2006 6:15 am 
From: Jagannath Chatterjee  

Dear Aruna :   I fully agree with the contents of your letter below and as such
  have subscribed my name as required. I am circulating this widely 
  including to the so-called consumer organisations/activists
  some of whom are sold out to GM food lobby. Big money you see.
  Liquor bills, party bills, office expenses are high you see.
  Who bothers about future generation, liquor has clouded our
  thinking you see !!! 
  
  But do NOT worry Aruna, I am with you and on the internet there
  are any number of right-thinking persons who will NOT allow the 
  hidden manipulations to take place.
  
Best, Leo
  
  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  April 25, 2006
  
  
  The Secretary
  Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
  Government of India
  Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 011 
  
  
  
  
  
  Dear Madam/Sir,
  
  Sub: Response To The Labelling of GMOs and LMOs  [DRAFT RULES TO AMEND 
PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION   Rules 1955:  
(Copy of notification dated 10th March ‘06)]
  
  We, the undersigned, have gone through the draft rules notified to amend the 
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1955 which seek to make the labelling of 
GM foods mandatory in the country. 
  
  Unfortunately, we cannot accept your Ministry’s draft rules. It is clear, 
that they have been devised to accommodate a GM policy for India based on an 
‘approval’ agenda for genetic engineering (GE), including LMOs (Living Modified 
Organisms, i.e. animals including aquatic life), by the regulatory bodies of 
the GEAC and DBT. These will open the floodgates of GM contamination of this 
country. It is therefore, evident, from the ‘Draft Rules’ that your Ministry 
cannot have arrived at an independent assessment of the hazards of this risky 
technology, which include serious health-safety concerns with GM foods and 
animal feed. Yet, your Ministry has independent responsibility and commensurate 
with this, the authority to oversee and ensure food safety and public health. 
  
  It is an established fact that there can be no co-existence between GM and 
Non-GM crops. Contamination is a biological and physical certainty.  Our 
well-founded fears, with regard to the proposed draft rules for labelling GM 
crops, food/feed and the listing must logically include LMOs, are based on the 
fact that plans for a full-scale launch of GMO/LMO products both within India 
and through imports are part of the GEAC/DBT ‘approval agenda’.  Labelling, 
then, instead of being a restrictive and safety mechanism for the Indian 
people, to safeguard the countryside, the wildernesses and the food chains from 
transgenic contamination, becomes the means for legalising contamination 
through underpinning a regulatory system that is deeply flawed, from the 
view-point of both logic and science. In other words, the proposed draft rules 
for the compulsory labelling of GMO/LMO products, “without exception”, will 
essentially serve to provide the legal face to GEAC approvals for GM/LMO
 imports and locally produced GM crops, (both food & feed) and LMOs.
  
  Furthermore, there is now proven contamination of organic and conventional 
farms in the US, Canada, Argentina and Spain. The threat to its own organic and 
non-GM export trade has prompted the US to attempt to change the definition of 
organic to include GM content. India cannot subscribe to this kind of 
chicanery, where the law is constantly undermined to serve biotech interests. 
Again, your Ministry has particular responsibility for Ayurvedha and other 
Indian systems of alternative medicine, in which the purity of organic 
standards allows for no compromise. It is absolutely essential therefore for 
India to ‘hold the line’ on certified organic standards. The issues raised by 
GE transcend the definitions of authority & responsibility of individual 
Ministries. India’s public policy to guard the country’s significant 
comparative and competitive advantage in an exploding world demand for 
‘organic’ also dictates that India must ensure a NO-GMO/LMO policy. 
  
  Thus, the ‘draft rules’ do not address or promote food/feed safety, food 
security and health. They will also negate consumer choice, because of the 
certainty of transgenic contamination.  By supporting a thoroughly erroneous 
“end-of-the-pipe” approach rather than precautionary, “clean production 
technologies” to use an appropriate analogy, the ‘draft rules’ showcase the 
faulty and dangerous assumptions of India’s proposed rules for GMO/LMO 
labelling. The points below clarify the dangers of the proposed labelling for 
GMOs/LMOs.
  
  1.       Imports
  
  1.1            The current draft rules do not address widespread 
contamination in a GM producing nation, that has no labelling laws, as for 
example, in the US and Canada. Up to 85% of soy, corn and rape in foods/feed 
including processed foods is GM or contaminated with GM content. Similarly, 
Argentinian imports of soy crude and oil is also GM and unlabelled. This is 
well known by both the Ministry of Agriculture and the regulatory authority, 
the GEAC; it has been going on for years and has contaminated cooking oils sold 
in India, despite the illegality of these imports. This is the official 
Nelson’s eye.  Given the evident ‘approval’ agenda of the GEAC and DBT, such 
imports will no doubt be approved, heading a long line of approvals, to provide 
various and proven multiple violations of EPA rules the garb of legality. 
  
  Is the Ministry proposing to fall in line with such contamination in such 
countries through the use of a mere GM label?
  
  1.2               Furthermore, no GM crop has been formally approved as safe 
for human consumption in, for example, the US, where the FDA merely 
acknowledges the crop developer’s assurance that “foods marketed by the firm 
are safe, wholesome and in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory 
requirements”. By the most lax yardstick for bias and ‘conflict of interest’ 
this is unacceptable. 
  
  Is India therefore planning to accept the crop developer’s assurance of 
safety, or even the EU’s safety approval process, which is demonstrably 
compromised, through the inclusion of the words as required by the draft rules: 
“cleared for marketing and use in the country of origin”?
  
  2.       The Production Of GMOs/LMOs In The Country
  
  2.1               The Draft Rules do not acknowledge that faulty Bt cotton 
approvals, the complete laxity of the regulatory process and the resultant 
non-compliance with even minimum biosafety safeguards, has resulted in the 
certain contamination of the food chain through derivatives of Bt cotton. The 
GEAC maintains that no GM food has been approved for production and release in 
India. This is of course disingenuous and may not be accepted on grounds of 
health safety by your Ministry. Cottonseed oil contamination from Bt cotton 
means that vanaspati, pickles and food containing cottonseed oil have GM 
content; so also, milk and a huge multi-million crore trade including export in 
milk and milk-based processed foods. Cottonseed cake is the 2nd highest source 
of animal feed in the world and in India cottonseed is traditionally valued as 
feed for milch cattle to increase the fat content of milk. The cotton textile 
and clothing industry on grounds of allergenicity is also
 affected. The most serious cases of contamination involve medical bandages, 
sanitary towels etc, because of direct contact with the blood stream.
  
  What labelling and testing is the Ministry proposing?  Is it the Ministry 
position that ‘baby foods’ contaminated with GM content can be presumed safe?
  
  2.2               The amendment pre-supposes co-existence between GM and 
Non-GM and therefore, that segregation of GM and non-GM would offer benefits to 
consumers through labelling. However, given that co-existence is a proven 
impossibility and even a token attempt at segregation in India to slow down the 
process of transgenic contamination, a pipe dream, the draft rules burden 
non-GM producers with the cost of testing and labelling. This is true for India 
based producers as well as exporting countries.  Thus, non-GM producers lose 
either way – if they cannot bear the cost of testing for a non-GM label, then 
their products must necessarily be labelled as GM! 
  
  2.3               The “MAY CONTAIN” option is untenable. There is every 
danger of all produce from India getting labelled as “MAY CONTAIN, because of 
cost considerations as a direct result of the impossibility of co-existence: 
and it may well suit  producers and traders at various levels of the 
distribution chain to mark in this way, almost all food/feed including 
processed and packaged food products.   In such a situation, consumer choice is 
negated and the only option may well be an imported Non-GM product.
  
  2.4               The draft rules in any case, are incomplete as they stand 
as they do not for example, address trade losses, liability, including loss of 
premium organic markets and tort laws, for farmers, and traders, which require 
time and discussion with civil society in an inclusive way, in order to arrive 
at fair and comprehensive legislation whose aim must be the serious 
discouragement of GM contamination of India and of non-GM farmers’ fields, 
through punitive measures.
  3.       Consumer/Trader Rights and  Choices
  
  3.1               The objective of labelling is to provide and secure 
consumer choice about GM foods. Thus a food that carries no label (for Indian 
produce), should mean that it is free of GM content and there must be such a 
choice. However, given the complete breakdown in the regulatory mechanism in 
India, and the lax approach to GM safety, this clearly is and will not be the 
case.  
  
  3.2               To reiterate, the “MAY CONTAIN” label is the predicted fall 
out which would both deny consumer choice with regard to ethical and healthy 
food choices. It would also lead to the rapid contamination of the food chain 
without the possibility of redressing the situation. 
  
  3.3               The amendment pre-supposes a particular level of knowledge, 
information and awareness amongst both consumers and producers on the issue of 
GM foods; however, this is manifestly not so. 
  
  3.4               As importantly, much of the consumption in this country 
would be outside the ambit of labelling.  
  
  How does the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare propose to protect the 
health and welfare of consumers and producers in such a case, leave alone 
protect their right towards choice?
  
  
  Amendments Sought: The Basis
  
  The draft rules for the labelling of GM food/feed and LMOs, imported and 
locally produced, pre-suppose in essence, that GM crops are a foregone 
conclusion. It is acknowledged by us that this ‘foregone conclusion’ is clearly 
the objective of a regulatory body that has paid no heed to the evidence placed 
before it by farmer and civil society groups, of serious concerns with genetic 
engineering.  
  
  On the other hand, your Ministry must safeguard public health and food safety 
as a first order of priority, because this is your Ministry’s clear duty and 
‘raison detre’. There is well-established evidence from 10 years of the 
commercialisation of GM crops in the US and India’s experiment with Bt cotton, 
of serious health and biosafety concerns including well-documented evidence for 
the toxicity of GM crops, particularly Bt crops and that they must be tested 
like pesticides and/drugs.. 
  It is a truism that the goal of health safety-assessment is that a “food 
should not cause harm when prepared, used or eaten according to its intended 
use” (Codex Alimentarius guideline 2003). We are sure that this is also the 
objective of India’s food laws and particularly the ‘Prevention of Food 
Adulteration Rules’. Thus, if GMOs cause cancer in rats, as has been firmly 
demonstrated along with other significant health risks, then, eminent world 
scientists are absolutely right to call for stringent, independent and 
peer-reviewed long-term animal feeding studies to determine the health safety 
of GM crops. Until then, they have called for a global moratorium.  It is 
impeccable logic, which we fully endorse for India. Therefore, it is the 
‘Precautionary Principle’ that is the superior scientific principle that must 
be followed most urgently for GMOs/LMOs, because their spread will alter the 
molecular structure of the world’s food in PERPETUITY.  Even if eventually, for 
the
 sake of argument, the evidence against GE were proved wrong on all dimensions 
of health and biosafety, it would still prove to be ‘right action’ based on 
prudence, for India to apply the precautionary principle in the SHORT TERM in 
order to be reasonably sure of the safety of GMOs/LMOs. 
  Therefore, our national laws and rules, including labelling rules for 
GMOs/LMOs must reflect the unique risks of genetic engineering. This is the 
secure ground for our insistence that the draft rules for labelling products 
derived from genetic engineering products should therefore serve to safeguard a 
moratorium and underpin the precautionary path, pending a rigorous protocol of 
safety testing of each GMO/LMO that is to be released into the environment.   
  Required Amendments 
  Therefore, we require:
  On all agricultural commodity imports, including seeds & plants: LOs 
including animals/marine life: also food/feed, processed &/ packaged,  into the 
country:
  a.             A ban on the import of any product, including derivatives of 
such products  (whether obtained as part of trade or aid and whether it is 
primary or processed and as listed above), that is GE or derived from genetic 
engineering, unless it is certified and labelled to have “NO GMO/LMO CONTENT” 
by the exporting country/agency. It is also required that the ‘country of 
origin’ is specified for the product and derivatives of products. Such a ban is 
particularly critical for infant and baby foods.   
  b.             A blanket ban on the import of a listed range of products, 
like for example, soy, corn and rape, and derivatives of these products, 
including cosmetics, and as specified above, from GM producing countries of 
these GM crops, which have no GM labelling laws in place for GM content. Due 
diligence on a continuous basis of a country-wise update with regard to new 
releases of GMOs/LMOs is imperative and will be required, to secure the ban on 
such imports.   
  c.             There must be zero tolerance for transgenic contamination, 
particularly from GMOs/LMOs of   pharm products and primary products’ imports 
[seed and planting materials], which would put at risk, the country’s seed 
stock and genetic diversity. Such products must carry additional certification 
that they have been tested for, “Zero GM Content” by the Exporting Country.  
Such imports must also be subjected to independent sample testing in India 
where our labs must be upgraded as necessary, to be routinely capable of 
testing to 0.01% of GMO/LMO content, matching the current performance of the 
best international laboratories.
  On all products derived from Bt Cotton in India:
  a.             An immediate cleanup of the contamination from Bt Cotton: 
farmlands, cotton, seed and seed cake, to halt on-going contamination of the 
food chain and cotton products including wearing apparel and medical products. 
Pending such a clean-up, strict and compulsory labelling of all food/ feed 
products and derivatives, indicating that the product has GM content. 
  A ban on the release of any GMO/LMO into the Indian Environment and into the 
food/feed  chain.
  
  Therefore, it is our demand that the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare 
take an approach to labelling for GMO/LMO content, as provided in this 
response, which underpins and secures a GMO/LMO-Free policy for India. There 
can be no wishful thinking that the ‘Draft Rules’ as devised for labelling, 
will protect India’s sovereign interests of public health safety, farmer and 
consumer rights and choice to grow, produce and consume non-GM food/feed 
including LMOs, and derivatives of GMOs like cosmetics, cotton apparel and  
medical products. 
  
  
  
          S NO    NAME
    ORGANISATION
      1
    Aruna Rodrigues    Sunray Harvesters
      2. 
    Dr. Leo Rebello 
    Natural Health Centre,  Bombay 
      3.
     Jagannath Chatterjee 
    Bhubaneswar.
      
    
    
      
    
    
      
    
    
      
    
    
      
    
    
      
    
    
  
  
   
  ANNEXURE: INFORMATION ON THE DRAFT AMENDED RULES
  
  
  DRAFT RULES TO AMEND PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION RULES, 1955
    
  Copy of NOTIFICATION dated 10th March 2006 
          
  The following draft of certain rules further to amend the Prevention of Food 
Adulteration Rules, 1955, which the Central Government, after consultation with 
the Central Committee for Food Standards, proposes to make, in exercise of the 
powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 23 of the Prevention of Food 
Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954), is hereby published, as required by the 
said sub-section, for the information of all persons likely to be affected 
thereby, and notice is hereby given that the said draft rules will be taken 
into consideration after the expiry of a period of sixty days from the date on 
which copies of the Official Gazette in which this notification is published, 
are made available to the public. 
  
          
  2. (1) Objections or suggestions, if any, in respect of the draft rules, may 
be addressed to the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, 
Government of India, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 011. 
          
  (2) The objections and suggestions, which may be received from any person 
with respect to the said draft rules before the expiry of the period so 
specified, will be considered by the Central Government.                   
                                                                                
   
  DRAFT RULES 
          
  1.(1) These rules may be called the Prevention of Food Adulteration 
(Amendment) Rules, 2006. 
  (2)    They shall come into force on the date of their final publication in 
the Official Gazette. 
  
  2. In the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred 
to as the said rules,) after rule 37D, the following shall be inserted, namely, 
- 
          
  (i) “37- E Labeling  of  Genetically  Modified  Food – Genetically engineered 
  or modified  Foods  means  food and  food  ingredients composed of or 
containing genetically modified or engineered organisms obtained through modern 
biotechnology, or food and food ingredients produced from but not contained 
genetically modified or engineered organisms obtained through modern 
biotechnology; 
          
  In addition to the labeling provisions as prescribed under these rules, the 
Genetically Modified Food shall also conform to the following labeling 
requirements:-
  
  (a) a GM Food, derived there from, whether it is primary or processed or any 
ingredient of food, food additives or any food product that may contain GM 
material shall be compulsorily labeled, without any exceptions; 
  
  (b) the label of all package (s) of GM Food(s) or foods containing 
ingredients, derived from Biotechnology or Bioengineering or food additives or 
any food product that may contain GM material shall indicate that they have 
been subject to genetic modification.  These provisions will be applicable to 
all such products both imported or domestically produced; and 
  
  (c) the label of imported GM Food or derived there from, whether it is 
primary or processed or any ingredient of food, food additives or any food 
product that may contain GM material shall also indicate that the product has 
been cleared for marketing and use in the country of origin so that the 
verification, if needed can be taken up with that country without having to 
resort to testing.” 
          
  (ii) After rule 48-E of the said rules, the following shall be inserted, 
namely, - 
          
  “48-F Restriction on Sale of Genetically Modified Food: - No person shall 
except with approval of and subject to the conditions that may be imposed by 
the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) constituted under the 
Environment Protection Act, 1986, manufacture, import, transport, store, 
distribute or sell raw or processed food or any ingredient of food, food 
additives or any food product that may contain GM material in the country: 
  
  Provided that in case of imported genetically modified foods, the importer 
shall submit documents supporting the purported clearance at the time of 
import.”   
                                                                                
   
                       Sd/- 
                                                                                
   
                     (Rita Teaotia) 
                                                                                
   
                                Jt.Secretary 
        G.S.R.152(E) 
        F.No.P.15014/14/2005-P.H. (Food) 
        Issued by: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare 
        (Department of Health) New Delhi. 


    "Our ideal is not the spirituality that withdraws from life but the 
conquest of life by the power of the spirit." -  Aurobindo.




                
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! 
Messenger with Voice.




==============================================================================
TOPIC: For your information
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/8a830d90600d8f86
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 26 2006 1:15 am 
From: lucky verma  



ashish roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:    Hi All,
   
  I thought I should share this with you all because it's everyone's concern.
   
  ---------------------------
   
  Have you heard about LPG gas cylinder's expiry date ?
  Most of us do not know this. Someone learnt this today
  from a gas stockist after an accident occurred and
  Human Life was extinguished.
  Expired Cylinders are not safe for use and may cause
  accidents. Please be cautious at the time of accepting
  any LPG cylinder from the vendor.
  Here is how we can check the expiry of LPG cylinders
  :On one of the three side stems of the cylinder the
  expiry date is coded alpha-numerically :
  A or B or C or D and a two digit number following this
  e.g. D06.The alphabets stand for quarters - 'A' for
  Jan.-March (1st. Qtr), 'B' for Apr.-June (2nd. Qtr),
  'C' for Jul.-Sept (3rd. Qtr) and 'D' for Oct.-December
  (4th. Qtr). The digits stand for the year till it is
  valid. Hence D06 would mean December qtr of 2006.
  Share this message with everyone you know.
  A little effort may save lives of many innocent people
  and create awareness among the public, particularly
  women who are more at risk in the kitchen using the
  Gas Cylinders.


"We have only one passion,
The rise of a Great Nation." 
- Bharat Uday Mission

Visit Bharat Uday Mission at http://bharatudaymission.org/

Jai Hind    
---------------------------------
  Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket
Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time.

  thanks a lot,lot,lot !
   
  keep up the good work...........I'll also try to find somthing like this .
   
  lucky


'Those who condemn politics to be the last resort of a scoundrel are 
bound
to be ruled by scoundrels' - Plato

If you agree with above quote, then be a part of second freedom 
struggle of
India, Bharat Uday Mission, at http://bharatudaymission.org

"We have only one passion,
Th

Bharat Uday Mission
Rise of a Great Nation
Website : http://bharatudaymission.org
There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all 
the way, and not starting.
- Lord Buddha
e rise of a Great Nation."
                
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.



==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"BM_discussion"
group.

To post to this group, send email to [email protected] or visit 
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/subscribe

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com

Reply via email to