Journal or Publishing Institution: Növényvédelem
Study: https://web.archive.org/web/20180905165257/http://www.bdarvas.hu/tudomany/okotoxikologia/idn4006
Author(s): Darvas B., Székács A., Bakonyi G., Kiss I., Biró B., Villányi I., Ronkay L., Peregovits L., Lauber É. and Polgár A.L.
Article Type: Journal Publication
Record ID: 446
Abstract: The GMO panel of EFSA published a statement on June 8, 2005, regarding the temporary moratorium ordered by the Hungarian Minister of Agriculture on Jan 20, 2005, on maize variety based of MON 810 genetic event, and regarding the corresponding environmental analytical and ecotoxicological survey performed. In its statement the GMO panel debated whether the concerns from the aspect of environmental science, set forth in four areas, would be sufficient to enact such measure of precaution, and expressed their statement that registration of genetically modified organisms can be restricted in EU Member States only if it is justified with risk factors thouroughly proven scientifically. The GMO panel of EFSA ignored the fact that the Author of the decree is the Minister of Agriculture of the Hungarian Government, who has ascertained through his colleagues the profoundness of our methodology and credibility of our data, while the GMO panel has not even attempted to do so. It is unsubstantiated and in international diplomacy unusual that the competency and right of disposal of the Hungarian authority on gene technology on the unique habitat types and ecosystems in our region (the so-called Pannon biogeographical region) is questioned by a committee specified on food safety. At the same time the GMO panel of EFSA would have been obliged to propose that Monsanto, the owner of the maize variety, should supply the deficiencies regarding the environmental concerns raised. Yet this assignment of its own the GMO panel has not fulfilled.
In contrast to the statement of the GMO panel of EFSA, the Hungarian studies have not focused at all on monitoring effects on human health. Therefore, it is not adequate to relate them to this area in any context. As for the environmental and ecotoxicological effects, the GMO panel of EFSA promises – and later misses to fulfill – the evaluation whether the Hungarian (i.e. the Pannon basin) ecosystem differs from those in the neighboring countries. The Pannon basin is considered a substantive biogeograpical region, subject to right of disposal, by ecological sciences and by two EU directives on the protection of habitats and species (Wild Birds Directive, 79/43/EEC and Habitat Directive 92/43/EEC). In our general opinion the GMO panel of EFSA issued a superficial statement related to areas beyond its competency, therefore, its conclusions improper for scientific consideration are refused. Our answer specifies our detailed opinion.
Keywords: MON 810, EFSA, Hungarian ecosystem, Pannon basin, environmental effects, ecotoxicological effects, human health, Monsanto
Citation: Darvas B., Székács A., Bakonyi G., Kiss I., Biró B., Villányi I., Ronkay L., Peregovits L., Lauber É. and Polgár A.L., 2006. Authors’ response to the Statement of the European Food Safety Authority GMO Panel concerning Environmental Analytical and Ecotoxicological Experiments Carried out in Hungary. Növényvédelem, 42, 313-325.
