TOPICS

President Chávez's No to GMOs

President Chávez's No to GMOs


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

By Miguel Angel Núñez

Since June 2003, a publication from the United Kingdom has been circulating, from a Group of Independent Scientists, where they warned about the different dangers of GMOs. Five years later this shocking compendium appears which, without a doubt, puts the biotechnology and / or transgenic food industry in check

The safety of transgenic crops?

Since June 2003 a publication from the United Kingdom has been circulating, edited by the Institute of Science in Society & Third World Network, entitled "The Case for AGM-Free Sustainable World", whose complete translation a year later the organization called International Action for Genetic Resources (Grain) is entitled "In defense of a Sustainable World."


This unique work has been organized by a Group of Independent Scientists, where some of its members were among more than 600 scientists from 72 countries, who signed an "Open Letter from the Scientists of the World to all the Governments of the World" in 1999, where They warned of the different dangers of genetically modified or transgenic crops, proposing for that moment the need to establish moratoriums or precautionary initiatives once these foods were available to the consumer. Five years later this shocking compendium appears, which undoubtedly, due to its relevance and scientific-technical diligence, puts the biotechnology and / or transgenic food industry in check. From this extensive bibliography on laboratory animal tests, field evaluations; new biological phenomena found in crops; international legal complaints, among other things, have convinced us that transgenic crops are not, nor have they been necessary, nor are they desired by consumers since they have not been able to meet the scientific-technical production expectations that were predicted years ago. On the contrary, they increasingly pose problems in agriculture and urban society.

The evident and new contamination that transgenics produce shows us that the crops in question are not biologically safe. Genetic products introduced into food and other crops such as pesticides have been found to be strong immunogens and allergens. Other work shows that transgenic crops cause male sterility in the plant. These crops spread through both pollen, herbicide tolerance genes, and suicide genes for male sterility, increasing genetic erosion and irreversibly affecting agricultural and natural diversity.

Approximately 75% of transgenic crops grown worldwide are tolerant to one or another broad-spectrum herbicide: glufocinate ammonium and glyphosphate are both metabolic and systemic poisons, confirming that they can produce a wide range of harmful effects in humans. and in other living organisms. Glufocinate ammonium is associated with neurological, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and hematological toxicity with congenital effects in humans and other mammals. Glisphosphate confirms the risk of late spontaneous abortion and a high degree of neurobehavioral alterations in children. At another high level of knowledge, scientific evidence, especially in horizontal gene transfer, shows genetic mutations in random insertion; different types of cancer, reactivation of dormant viruses and generation of new viruses. All these tests and others, present us with well-founded and solid arguments, in favor of promoting a global ban on the release of transgenic crops in our environments, which allows us to provide a profound change to agriculture and may well move towards agroecology, sustainable agriculture and agroecological livestock production.

GMOs in Venezuela

The use of transgenic crops in Venezuela dates back a few years, which has evidenced a historical irresponsibility on the part of ministers, agricultural boards, various professionals, researchers, agri-food businessmen, distributors of agricultural inputs and large producers, who have not been concerned with advancing in the development of agricultural scientific knowledge to generate healthier agri-food policies and in accordance with our agroecological realities. This pseudo-national agri-food leadership that has been shielding itself and has acquired, at present a new partisan political garb, continues to reiterate its cognitive backwardness and strives and recreates itself by consolidating itself with this model of transgenic agriculture without caring that it is causing food havoc , environmental, social and technical anarchy in the Venezuelan countryside.


This Venezuelan agri-food leadership succumbs to this productive technical scientific reality, who is only interested in money earnings and is put at their service, justifying to the national government the financing for the purchase of their transgenic inputs, especially seeds, origin, the genesis; which subjects the country to the technocratic dynamics that progressive poisoning transnationals such as Monsanto, Agroevo, Siygenta, among others, have subordinate us. Acceding also to the loss of control of the seeds and the patenting of the same, converted into legal and exclusive property of the transnationals. Another irresponsibility that the national agri-food leadership maintains has to do with ignorance, mistrust, disqualification and shameful discrimination that it submits to the International Agroecological Peasant Movement; regardless of the evidence; the true fact, demonstrated on different continents, throughout the world: the production of healthy, uncontaminated food, in abundance, with acceptable yields and a high biological use. Also allowing the conquest of technical scientific independence to agri-food sovereignty and security.

Amount of Additional Nutrients in Organic Foods
18% more protein
28% more vitamin C
19% More natural sugars
18% more potassium
10% more calcium
13% more phosphorus
77% more iron

Amount of Harmful Substances Found in Organic Foods
93% less nitrate
42% Less free amino acids
12% Less total solids

Source: José Maria Tardis. III Agroecology Conference, Paraná, Brazil 2004.

The advancement of this movement is so notorious, especially in Latin America that many cooperatives, peasant organizations, social and support movements are trying to enter the international market in order to cooperate with other peasant organizations, producers, and institutions from countries that have not been able to establish a minimum of strategic policies such as seed production, being the Venezuelan case.

The NO of President Chávez

The declaration of President Chávez on the NO to GMOs in the agri-food policy in Venezuela: NO pronounced last April at the II Meeting of Solidarity for the Venezuelan Bolivarian Revolution, has several readings: the first, based on ethics, the revolutionary values ​​and principles. In other words, the Venezuelan people cannot be allowed to continue poisoning themselves progressively through food, for respecting the right created by the agrochemical transnationals to enrich themselves even at the cost of the health and life of our peoples. The second reading of this historical and correct NO lies in the defense of sovereignty, by NOT accepting that it is the transnationals of progressive poisoning, who guide and impose the strategic guidelines of our agri-food policy. The contradictions and fears expressed in the enforceable conduct of the national agri-food leaders, who have the responsibility of drawing up this policy, cannot continue.

That one has NO reasons to spare. Let us remember the Secretary of Agriculture of the Bush Administration, the billionaire Ana Veneman, comes from the top management of Agrifood Corporations such as Calgene, acquired by Monsanto. It is well known throughout Latin America that the transnational corporation in question, historically with its technocratic bribes, corrodes and corrupts the different political leaderships at all levels, not allowing progress in the development of an authentic agri-food policy inherent to sovereignty national.


The third reading of the NO is located in the field of solidarity between the peoples who struggle to find ways of dignity, relying on work, mutual cooperation, participatory peasant research and technological development that does not harm nature, that preserves the life of the planet starting from the seed. The seed is key, it is priority A.1. in the elaboration of an agri-food policy oriented to the defense of life and sovereignty; hence the need to create SEED BANKS as the new fronts of agri-food resistance.

The International Agroecological Peasant Movement has the answer, that is the necessary alliance to strengthen our fields and we are sure that this singular connotation would awaken in the Venezuelan National Peasant Movement, the real possibility of understanding and being able to assume the proposal of agroecology, for how these agroecological seeds necessarily have to have an agroecological management of the soil and rely on the biological inputs to be produced and incorporated into the planting proposals. That is, to change the Venezuelan agricultural technocratic structure to lead an original revolution in the Venezuelan countryside.

The Revolutionary Reason for the Bolivarian Missions.

Not to mention the last reading and NOT being less important than the ones outlined, the NO of President Chávez has to do with the genuine revolutionary process that he is leading, we synthesize it in the implementation and consolidation of the different missions that eagerly They seek to institutionalize themselves to create and shape new forms of social relations of production, particularly in Venezuelan agriculture, and to be able to advance in the construction of a social economy as part of a new economy of their own, for the reality itself, that the revolutionary process demands to create and consolidate. In this context, the Vuelvan Caras Mission, aimed at overcoming social inclusion through productive diversification, has as its goal on its agricultural front, to group 600,000 patriots in an organized, cooperative manner in new forms of social organization of production.

These patriots are concentrated in farm sizes between 1 to 20 hectares. These are excluded small producers where, in their production dimension, the use of agrochemicals, NOR transgenic, is NOT scientifically and technically justified, which must continue to contribute to the deterioration of soil, water and biodiversity resources.

This great challenge that the Mission Vuelvan Caras prints to the revolutionary process is followed and protected by the International Agroecological Peasant Movement, as it presages from there, some of the bases for agroecological policies that Venezuelan agriculture is demanding above the contradictions flourish of its national agri-food leadership. The other thing that the International Agroecological Peasant Movement expects and follows with secrecy is the elaboration of the decree that prohibits in Venezuela the release into the environment, the import, the production, the commercialization and the transit through the country of transgenic crops.

This otherwise historic and irreverent action would be in solidarity with the many Presidents and Peoples of Africa, who since the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in South Africa in 2002 in conjunction with the anti-globalization movement, once again rejected transgenic crops. as blackmail to humanitarian food aid promoted by the World Trade Organization. Action that to some extent motivated, later in the World Forum of Porto Alegre Brazil 2002, the unstoppable sentence of "Another World is Possible" and to echo one of the world demands such as "the seeds" be declared heritage of humanity and preserve them in their entirety by the peasant communities.

* Member of the IPIAT
Venezuela


Video: No presidential inauguration for Chavez (June 2022).


Comments:

  1. Clifford

    I apologise, but, in my opinion, it is obvious.

  2. Gorn

    We are sorry, but it could give you more information.

  3. Waldmunt

    There is something in this. I used to think differently, thanks a lot for the info.

  4. Maneet

    I think he is wrong. We need to discuss. Write to me in PM, it talks to you.

  5. Stein

    Bravo, this admirable phrase has to be precisely on purpose

  6. Ellder

    yourself, you have invented such incomparable phrase?



Write a message