.jpg)
North American orgs have sided with Mexico in trade dispute that challenges Mexico’s right to limit genetically modified (GM) corn and glyphosate and protect a deep cultural and religious legacy.
Johnathan Hettingern | The New Lede
More than a dozen North American organizations have weighed in to support Mexico in its trade dispute with the United States over Mexico’s ban of genetically modified (GM) corn, agreeing that the nation has the right to protect human health from food ingredients it considers hazardous.
“The burden of proof, so far generated for Mexico, [should] be reversed. It should be the United States that proves that there is no long-term risk to human health from the direct consumption of [genetically modified corn], in the particular case of the Mexican consumption pattern,” Mexico-based El Poder del Consumidor, a consumer rights association, wrote in comments filed earlier this month.
In the series of recent filings submitted to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement secretariat, only one group, the US-based Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) defended the United States’ position that Mexico is violating trade agreements by banning the corn for foods for human consumption. Bayer AG, which bought GMO crop developer Monsanto in 2018, is a BIO member as are other companies that make and sell GMO seeds and agrochemicals.
The Canadian government also defended the US position. Both Canada and the US accuse Mexico of failing to base its decision on GMO corn on valid scientific research. The governments say science shows GMO corn is not a threat to human health. Mexico disagrees, and says that solid research does show risks to humans from foods made with genetically altered corn. Mexico also objects to GMO corn for environmental and cultural reasons.
“There is a basis in the Mexican legal framework that makes it necessary for the Mexican government to transition away from GM corn to protect its people,” Javier Zuñiga, an attorney with Mexico-based El Poder del Consumidor, said in a webinar held on Tuesday. “It guarantees the right to live in a healthy way.”
Mexico is also working to ban glyphosate, the active ingredient in Bayer’s Roundup weedkiller and other herbicides. Glyphosate is commonly used on genetically modified crops, including corn. The ban on glyphosate in Mexico was set to go into effect April 1, but was delayed indefinitely last month.
The two moves by the Mexican government are separate, though they both arise out of human health concerns. Genetically modified corn is generally altered to tolerate being sprayed with weed killers such as glyphosate and to manufacture toxins that repel pests. This results in crops often having high levels of pesticides in them.
Five of the groups commenting were from Mexico, six were from the US and three were from Canada. Many of the Mexican groups commented about the history of maize in Mexico and argued that the government is right to protect that rich cultural history and local producers. The groups say that the cultural maize leads to a more healthy diet for Mexican citizens.
Those groups supporting Mexico largely argue that there is no scientific consensus that GM foods are safe and that the Mexican government’s concerns about adverse health impacts associated with GM corn are valid.
The US-based Center for Food Safety (CFS) commented about how Mexico is right not to trust the US regulatory system. Bill Freese, the science director for CFS, said in the webinar that US regulation of GMOs was designed by Monsanto, is not mandatory and is full of loopholes.
For example, the Food and Drug Administration has a voluntary consultation program for GMOs, through which it asks companies if their products are similar to other GM varieties and safe for human consumption.
“The whole idea is to reassure people and have a government rubber-stamp to help make people feel better about eating GMOs, not health and safety,” Freese said in the Tuesday webinar.
In 2020, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued a new rule largely deregulating GMOs, asking companies to self-determine if their crops are exempt from regulation. So far, 79 crops have been exempted.
Freese pointed out that in Nebraska, GM corn called Enogen has contaminated non-GM white corn, and farmers are suffering huge losses because tortillas made from masa flour that has been contained with Enogen’s starch-degrading enzymes are sticky, gooey and fall apart.
“What we have in the US is a Wild West of GMOs,” Freese said.
Freese also said that the way the United States subsidizes corn farmers makes the crops artificially cheap, which can undercut Mexico’s domestic farmers and drive them out of business.
In contrast, BIO said in its filed comments that for decades, Mexico has regulated genetically modified food products to protect the safety of its consumers, and the reversal by the Andrés Manuel López Obrador administration is not based on science, but politics.
“This system functioned in a relatively predictable and science-based manner, and was protective of Mexican consumers, for over two decades,” BIO’s comments stated.
“From BIO’s perspective, the primary issue at hand is that there is no scientific justification for the Mexican government to prohibit the use of GE corn in tortillas, or, for that matter in any other food or feed product,” the group wrote in its comments.
Mexico does not currently have a framework for allowing GM crops to be grown in the country. BIO pointed out that the issue at hand is consumption of GM corn, not cultivation.
“BIO member companies do not sell, nor have they ever sold, [GM] corn seed for cultivation in Mexico,” the group stated in its comments.
For Freese, he said that shows how imperialistic the US goals are.
“It’s actually the government people who are unreasonable. They insist as a matter of faith that GMOs are the greatest thing since sliced bread,” Freese said. “Mexico is saying, we don’t want genetically engineered white corn, and that’s too much for the United States to take.”
-30-
This story originally appeared in The New Lede, a news project of the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization devoted to conducting and communicating scientific research that helps inform public policy on human and environmental health issues.