NEWS : Bt cotton has failed admits Monsanto

US seed firm says pink bollworm has developed resistance to Bt cotton.

Dinesh C. Sharma

New Delhi, March 6, 2010 | UPDATED 10:39 IST

The ongoing debate on biotechnology crops in India took a new turn on Friday when American seed firm Monsanto disclosed that cotton pest--pink bollworm--has developed resistance to its much-touted Bt cotton variety in Gujarat.

The company has reported to the regulator, the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), that pink bollworm has developed resistance to its genetically modified (GM) cotton variety, Bollgard I, in Amreli, Bhavnagar, Junagarh and Rajkot districts in Gujarat.

This was detected by the company during field monitoring in the 2009 cotton season.

The Bt cotton variety in question was developed using a gene--Cry1AC--derived from soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis. It was supposed to be resistant to pest attacks. But, of late, the pest has developed resistance to the gene.

The same gene has been used in Bt brinjal to make it resistant to pests. Bollgard cotton was cited as a great success of GM technology by Union science minister Prithviraj Chavan in his July 2009 letter to former health minister A. Ramadoss.

"Resistance is natural and expected," Monsanto said in a statement. The company blamed pink bollworm resistance to Cry1Ac protein in Gujarat to "early use of unapproved Bt cotton seeds" by farmers and "limited refuge planting". Farmers are supposed to maintain a distance between Bt cotton farms and other farms as a "refuge". It also advised farmers to take up "need-based application of insecticide sprays" and "properly manage crop residue and unopened bolls after harvest". A second generation variety, Bollgard II, introduced by Monsanto in 2006, contains two proteins, Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab.

The company says no resistance has been observed in the variety anywhere in the country, including Gujarat.

The revelation has not surprised environment action groups. "This is the pattern Monsanto has been following everywhere. Once Bollgard 1 fails, they start pushing Bollgard 2 and tell farmers to apply more pesticides. This is a vicious circle that Indian cotton farmers have got into," Devinder Sharma of Forum for Biotechnology and Food Safety said.

"There is a lesson here for Bt brinjal because the arguments in favour of the crop are same as those given for Bollgard cotton," Kavita Kuruganti of Kheti Virasat said.

In a report submitted to environment minister Jairam Ramesh, K.R. Kranthi of the Central Institute for Cotton Research had cautioned about the likely failure of Bt cotton. "Farmers are not following the recommended 'refugia'. With about 90 per cent area under Bt cotton, bollworms can develop resistance soon. The concern needs to be addressed on priority before it is too late," the report says.

Not only has Bt cotton been rendered ineffective, it has also led to detection of some new pests never before reported from India. It is toxic only to bollworm and does not control any other pests of cotton. "New sucking pests have emerged as major pests causing significant economic losses", the report says.

At the same time, productivity of cotton has fallen from 560 kg lint per hectare in 2007 to 512 kg lint per hectare in 2009.

And pesticide expenditure has gone up from from Rs 597 crore in 2002 to Rs 791 crore in 2009.

SOURCE : http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Bt+cotton+has+failed+admits+Monsanto/1/86939.html

Cotton in India (survival of pink bollworm to first-generation single-protein Bollgard cotton)

Monsanto, 5 March 2010

During field monitoring of the 2009 cotton crop in the state of Gujarat in western India, Monsantoi and  Mahyco scientists detected unusual survival of pink bollworm to first-generation single-protein Bollgard cotton. Testing was conducted to assess for resistance to Cry1Ac, the Bt protein in Bollgard cotton, and pink bollworm resistance to Cry1Ac was confirmed in four districts in Gujarat – Amreli, Bhavnagar, Junagarh and Rajkot. Gujarat is one of nine states in India where cotton is grown. To date, no insect resistance to Cry1Ac has been confirmed outside the four districts in Gujarat.

This has been reported to the Indian Genetic Engineering Approval Committee.  Mahyco-Monsanto Biotechii in collaboration with the Central Institute of Cotton Research (CICR)  and other agricultural research institutes have been conducting field monitoring research across India since 2003, the second season of Bt cotton in India.

Single-protein Cry1Ac products continue to control bollworm pests other than pink bollworm in the four districts in Gujarat where pink bollworm resistance has been confirmed.   In addition, no instance of insect resistance in any of India’s cotton growing states, including the four districts in Gujarat, has been observed with Bollgard II, the 
second-generation Bt cotton technology. Bollgard II, introduced in 2006, contains two proteins, Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab.

Current monitoring efforts to manage insect resistance by an Indian-expert network will be expanded. The network is led by the Director of CICR who is nominated by GEAC. The network will continue to conduct extensive insect monitoring, encourage appropriate stewardship practices such as proper refuge planting through an intensified farmer education campaign, and explore new methods of refuge seed delivery.

Resistance is natural and expected, so measures to delay resistance are important. Among the factors that may have contributed to pink bollworm resistance to the Cry1Ac protein in Gujarat are limited refuge planting and early use of unapproved Bt cotton seed, planted prior to GEAC approval of Cry1Ac cotton, which may have had  lower protein expression levels.

While single-protein Cry1Ac cotton products continue to deliver value to Indian farmers, increasingly Indian farmers are planting two-protein Bollgard II cotton because it reduces the need for insecticide sprays compared to Cry1Ac products and increases yield. Over 65% of Gujarat cotton farmers chose Bollgard II cotton in 2009, and pre-season bookings indicate that over 90% of Gujarat cotton farmers are expected to plant Bollgard II in the 2010 season.  Overall, approximately 80% of all Indian cotton farmers are expected to plant Bollgard II in the 2010 season.

The findings in Gujarat are an important reminder to Indian farmers.  When using Bt cotton products it is essential to regularly monitor and scout fields throughout the season for insect presence and plant appropriate 
non-Bt refuge. Furthermore, farmers must adopt measures such as need-based application of insecticide sprays during the crop season, and properly manage crop residue and unopened bolls after harvest. Examples of such practices include tillage and cattle grazing to minimize the survival and spread of pink bollworm.

Continuous R&D and innovation to develop new value-added technologies is imperative to stay ahead of insect resistance. To support such innovation, Government policies should encourage investment in R&D which will result in Indian farmers having a wider choice of better and advanced technologies.

Monsanto is committed to developing new high performing products for farmers, and is currently working on a three-protein Bt cotton technology. Monsanto is open to collaborating with other technology providers in India 
to develop products that use the best available technologies for the benefit of Indian farmers. 

SOURCE: http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto_today/for_the_record/india_pink_bollworm.asp

Bt cotton flunks pest resistance test in Gujarat

Zia Haq, Hindustan Times   New Delhi, March 05, 2010

First Published: 23:56 IST(5/3/2010) | Last Updated: 01:58 IST(6/3/2010)

This cotton variety was genetically modified only to enable it to protect itself against pests, and it failed. The stunning disclosure has swerved the spotlight back on the debate over the efficacy and sustainability of GM crops.

No doubt, there were four different varieties of pests that Bt cotton was expected to resist — and has so far failed the test in only one.

Bt cotton is the only GM crop approved for commercial cultivation in India and 522 varieties, including those developed by state-owned institutions, are being farmed.

“During field monitoring of the 2009 cotton crop in Gujarat, Monsanto1 and Mahyco scientists detected unusual survival of pink bollworm to first-generation single-protein Bollgard cotton. Testing was conducted to assess for resistance to Cry1Ac, the Bt protein in Bollgard cotton, and pink bollworm resistance to Cry1Ac was confirmed,” the company said on Friday.

Monsanto said further studies were being conducted on why the crops lost their pest-fighting ability.

Responding to an e-mail question, the company said use of unapproved Bt cotton seeds, planted prior to approval, which may have had lower potency, and not following farming norms might have contributed to pink bollworm resistance. This has been reported to India’s biotech regulator, Genetic Engineering Approval Committee.

Does this put under cloud Bt technology itself? G T Gujar, who heads the insect science division of the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, said: “This is just a preliminary report and shouldn’t be viewed as failure of the technology. It’s a chance to understand it better.”

Gujar said some resistance was natural and therefore, farming Bt cotton according to government norms was essential.

Anti-GM groups said Monsanto’s disclosure proved the inefficacy of BT technology. “The shortcoming of any pest management technology that tries to kill an insect rather than control or manage it is apparent as has been predicted. This is true with Bt technology as well as with chemical pesticides,” said Kavitha Kuruganti of Faridkot-based Kheti Virasat Mission.

SOURCE: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/bt-cotton-flunks-pest-resistance-test-in-gujarat/article1-515648.aspx

Udupi's own plight in saving its Brinjal

By Rajat R., Mangalore [ Published Date: February 6, 2010 ]

• Fabled Matti Gulla comes under focus

This hallowed town of legendary proportions is now fighting its own battle over BT Brinjal. It is trying to save a special type of brinjal that has a heritage of 500 years. Known as Matti Gulla, it is a special vegetable endemic only to a place called Mattu near Malpe on Udyavar-Malpe road near Udupi. A small community of farmers who grow this unique type of Brinjal are now fighting against the bio-contamination of Matti Gulla.

Two eminent scientists Ramesh Bhat and M.N. Madhyastha have taken up the scientific study of this vegetable in an exclusive paper produced for this purpose have guided the farmers to save their crop. The paper that has been exclusively given to Mangalorean.com brings out different views about the Matti Gulla.

In a bid to get global patent, the Horticulture Department had also come forward to study this famous Udupi Brinjal. A team led by Additional Director of the Department, Dr Ramakrishnappa, had visited Mattu Area, where this special variety Brinjal was cultivated. The team is making a detailed study of this variety by collecting all available data.

Brinjal has been used as a vegetable in India, since time immemorial. The classic Ramayana contains reference to Brinjal. Early Buddhist and Jain works, Sutras like Uttaradhyana Sutra, Prajapana Sutra and Jatakas record Brinjal (Om Prakash 1961) Indian subcontinent (Indo- Burma region, probably Assam) is considered as the Centre of origin of Brinjal (Paroda and Aurora, 1999). The Sanskrit name Varthaku, Vrutanka, Vaantaki, Vantika or Vatinganah is responsible for a number of names in various languages such as Badhinjan in Persian and al-badinjan in Arabic. Arabs have carried the brinjal to Europe around 16th century. The Catalan nomenclature of albergia is responsible for the French and British name aubergine. In the North American continent it is known as egg plant since the fruit of some early varieties were all white and looked like hen's eggs. The Kannada name "Badane" appears to be closer to Persian Badinjan rather than to Sanskrit name Vatinganh. The Tulu/Kannada name Gulla seems to have evolved independently.

SOURCE : http://mangalorean.com/browsearticles.php?arttype=Feature&articleid=1603

 

Why Does Wearing Organic Cotton Matter If We Don’t Eat It?

by Lynda Fassa, Green Babies , 01/25/10   filed under: Ask a Designer, Eco-Textiles, Featured, Features,Green Designers, Interviews 

Fifteen years ago when I founded Green Babies, the term “green” was so disassociated from fashion (or anything else for that matter), that people would ask my husband and business partner: “Green Babies, what’s that?” And he’d answer, “It’s an adoption agency for Martian children.” “Oh”..they’d say, slowly nodding and backing away. Sometimes I’d tell them what it really was and they looked equally perplexed. Things have changed, for the much better and brighter, but the question still remains: Why does organic cotton matter?

COTTONING ON TO COTTON

Conventional cotton takes a much heavier toll than you might know. Consider this:

• Conventional cotton occupies only 3 percent of the world’s farmland, but uses 25 percent of the world’s chemical pesticides and fertilizers.


• Cotton is the second most pesticide-laden crop in the world (after coffee) and number one in the United States.


• Pesticides don’t just land on crops, but make their way into groundwater, which is drinking water for 60 percent of Americans.


• Cancer is the number one disease killer of children in the United States—and the second cause of death after accidents.

There just simply is no magic garbage barge taking these neurotoxins off the planet, our planet. We all cringe when we see the wicked witch handing poor Snow White the poisoned apple and yet, if we’re not choosing organic, we are doing the same. Can we really just close our eyes as our land is being bombed with poisons, some developed as chemical weapons during wartime?

COTTON IN THE FOOD CHAIN

If you eat potato chips, corn chips, [insert favorite salty snack food here], you’re most likely ingesting conventional cotton. Check that label: Cottonseed oil is right near the top in the list of ingredients, and it’s chances are, it’s not organic cottonseed oil.

If you eat salty snack foods, you’re most likely ingesting conventional cotton.

Conventional cotton and its toxic legacy makes it into our food supply in other ways, too. Hulls from cottonseeds are a common feed for beef cattle, so if you’ve got a hankering for a burger, you’re probably getting more than you bargained for in your own personal ecosystem, as well.

THE SILVER LINING

Here’s the good news: Organic cotton acreage is growing, not just here in the United States, but the world over. This is because of clever designers embracing the better promise of organic cotton, along with making appealing clothes that increase awareness and demand for greener textiles.

And more organic cotton not only makes a better quality of life for the farmer and farm workers, but it may also make your food bill cheaper, even in the short run.

Organic cotton could also make your food bill cheaper, even in the short run.

Organic acreage allows for more crop diversity and health. It also doesn’t allow genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that may be linked to Colony Collapse Disorder, a mysterious syndrome in bees that is confusing and killing them. Less bees means more cash at the grocery store, since struggling farmers have to “rent” worker bees and sometimes ship them long distances to pollinate their crops.

VOTING WITH OUR DOLLARS

Conscious consumerism is changing the way we think about our purchases and our relationship with “stuff.” We’ve begun to ask ourselves the questions big ad agencies get paid a lot of money to help us forget to ask:

• Where does it come from?


• Who made it?


• Who touched it?


• Under what conditions?


• What will happen to it when I’m done?

BECAUSE WE’RE WORTH IT

How good does it feel to look good, feel great, be connected to other people and the planet? How good does it feel to pick up a new shirt, smell it, and have it really smell like fresh fields and not a laundry detergent claiming to smell like fresh fields or volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the polymers new clothes are treated with?

New clothes often smell like VOCs from the polymers they’re treated with.

How good does it feel to know that the young woman who picked that cotton in Turkey with her toddler on her back does not have to worry about what’s been sprayed on the crop that became your shirt? The answer is really good.

Organic cotton matters and it’s worth the extra couple of bucks. Actually, when you think about it, it’s not so much that organic cotton is worth it. It’s that we’re worth it.

SOURCE: http://www.ecouterre.com/why-does-wearing-organic-cotton-matter-if-we-dont-eat-it/

WATCH: Genetic engineering: The world's greatest scam?

Uploaded on Sep 11, 2009

(French version -- http://www.greenpeace.org/ogm)
Genetic engineering is a threat to food security, especially in a changing climate. The introduction of genetically manipulated organisms by choice or by accident grossly undermines sustainable agriculture and in so doing, severely limits the choice of food we can eat.

Once GE plants are released into the environment, they are out of control. If anything goes wrong - they are impossible to recall.

GE contamination threatens biodiversity respected as the global heritage of humankind, and one of our world's fundamental keys to survival.

• Category

  • People & Blogs

• License

• Standard YouTube License

SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H9WZGKQeYg

Insect Resistance to GMO Corn and Cotton Bt Crops with Insect Protection

Home / Newsroom / Viewpoints / Monsanto Company / Insect Resistance to GMO Corn and Cotton Bt Crops with Insect Protection

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a naturally occurring soil bacterium that we use in some of our corn and cotton seed products to provide protection from damaging insects. While all of our Bt crops continue to be highly effective tools for farmers, our research team constantly reviews and monitors individual fields for resistance. We have expanded programs to monitor corn rootworms in the United States (2011 – Ongoing) and pink bollworms in cotton in India (2009 – Ongoing).
Since the advent of farming, people have searched for ways to save their crops from insect pests. Even ancient farmers were known to have collected seeds from high-yielding plants in the hope of producing crops the next year that could withstand insect infestation.
Bt, or Bacillus thuringiensis, is a modern solution to insect control.

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a bacterium that occurs naturally in the soil and produces proteins that kill certain insects. Through biotechnology, scientists can use these naturally occurring Bt proteins to develop insect-protected crops that help farmers protect against insect damage and destruction. When targeted insects eat the plant containing the protein, they ultimately die; but Bt is not harmful to humans, other mammals, birds, fish or beneficial insects.

Insect resistance to Bt proteins is natural and expected.
In any insect population, a small number of insects already exist that are tolerant of – or resistant to – certain Bt proteins. Over time, and especially with particular farming practices, it is possible that too many insects in a field could develop a tolerance to a Bt protein and cause significant damage or destruction.

Farmers can help prevent insect resistance through Insect Resistance Management (IRM) practices.
Farmers who choose to grow a Bt crop must plant a “refuge” – a block or strip of the same crop that does not contain a Bt trait, or the non-Bt refuge seed can be included in an EPA-approved seed blend product, which we refer to as “Refuge in the Bag” or RIB. The insects from the refuge are not exposed to the Bt protein and susceptible insects will survive, potentially mating with resistant insects from the neighboring field. This practice is known as Insect Resistance Management.

There are two instances where Monsanto entomologists have expanded their monitoring and review of insects for potential resistance.

• Corn Rootworm, United States (2011 – ongoing)
  In 2011, entomologists at Monsanto became aware of heavy rootworm infestation in isolated fields across the Corn Belt where there was a long history of corn-on-corn plantings. Our team continues to work closely with farmers to implement best management practices on those fields where resistance is suspected, and farmers are seeing excellent results. Extensive information about the corn rootworm and our ongoing efforts are available in different section of our web site: Corn Rootworm Management
• Pink Bollworm in Cotton, India (2009 – Ongoing)
  In 2009, our entomologists detected and ultimately confirmed pink bollworm resistance to Bt cotton (Bollgard I) in Western India; no pink bollworm resistance was ever confirmed outside this area. In 2006, we introduced a new cotton seed that contained two different Bt proteins – providing additional and more robust protection against the bollworm. This product – Bollgard II – has replaced Bollgard I in all of our cotton seed markets, and no instances of insect resistance have been observed.

Monsanto scientists are continually researching and developing insect protection products and recommendations for farmers.

Monsanto scientists continually research causes of Bt resistance, as well as conduct research and development of other genes that could help control insect infestation. In addition, we regularly evaluate the need for updating our crop management recommendations as new scientific data becomes available.

SOURCE : http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/insect-resistance-to-gmo-and-bt-crops.aspx

Pink Bollworm Resistance to GM Cotton in India

Home / Newsroom / Viewpoints / Monsanto Company / Pink Bollworm Resistance to GM Cotton in India

Pink Bollworm In Cotton In India (2009 – Ongoing)
In 2009, Monsanto entomologists detected and, ultimately confirmed, pink bollworm resistance to our first-generation single-protein (Bacillus thuringiensis) Bollgard^® I cotton in four states in Western India. We worked closely with farmers to contain the resistance and implement effective insect resistance management programs. Today, Bollgard II – a second-generation cotton seed that contains two different Bt proteins – has replaced Bollgard I in all of our cotton seed markets. It provides additional and more robust protection against the bollworm, and no instances of insect resistance have been observed.

---

Monsanto’s first-generation single-protein Bollgard I cotton (MON531) uses a naturally occurring Bt protein (Cry1Ac) to control insect pests. While resistance is natural and expected, the detection of pink bollworm resistance to Bollgard I in 2009 posed a significant threat to the nearly 5 million farmers who were planting the product in India.

We quickly equipped a team of experts to help farmers contain resistance to the Bt protein in Bollgard I cotton and to monitor the impact throughout India.

During testing, researchers determined that pink bollworm resistance to the protein was confirmed in four districts in the Indian state of Gujarat – Amreli, Bhavnagar, Junagarh and Rajkot. Among the factors that may have contributed to pink bollworm resistance are limited refuge planting and the early use of unapproved Bt cotton seed, planted prior to GEAC approval of Bollgard I cotton, which may have had lower protein expression levels. No insect resistance to Bollgard I has been confirmed outside these districts, and extensive monitoring throughout all of India continues to find that the resistance has been contained successfully.

The findings in Gujarat reaffirm it is essential to regularly monitor and scout fields throughout the season for insect presence and plant appropriate non-Bt refuge when planting Bt cotton seeds.

Measures to delay resistance are critically important. Adopting measures such as need-based application of insecticide sprays during the crop season, and proper management of crop residue and unopened bolls after harvest will help limit insects in cotton fields. Examples of such practices include tillage and cattle grazing to minimize the survival and spread of pink bollworm.

Research shows that pink bollworms are completely susceptible to the combination of two proteins expressed in second-generation in Bollgard II, which most Indian farmers choose to plant today.

We know it is imperative to stay ahead of insect resistance, and research continues to determine best management strategies to ensure the planting of refuges for Bollgard II and future products. In addition, we are committed to developing new high-performing products to give farmers a wider choice of insect-control technologies. We are currently working on a three-protein Bt cotton technology, and are open to collaborating with other technology providers in India to develop products that use the best available technologies for the benefit of Indian farmers.

SOURCE : http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/india-pink-bollworm.aspx

Why Organic Cotton Is Better

Organic cotton may cost more up front, but it has substantial benefits over the long term.

By Peyton Baldwin 
June 3, 2008

Cotton is often referred to as “the fabric of our lives,” and for good reason. We come in contact with items made from cotton every day. The clothes you wear, the sheets you sleep on, the diapers you put on your baby and even some of the food you eat have been made with cotton. But growing conventional cotton requires the use of enormous amounts of pesticides, which has a huge environmental impact and presents health risks for those working around it. It may cost less to manufacture and buy conventional cotton, but it’s better for the land, the farm workers and your well-being to choose organic whenever possible.

What Is Organic Cotton?

According to the Organic Trade Association, organic cotton is grown without the use of toxic pesticides or fertilizers. Methods such as beneficial insect releases, strip cutting of alfalfa and new weeding machinery help reduce the environmental impact of cotton crops. Third-party organizations certify that organic cotton farms use only these approved methods and do not spray toxic chemicals on their crops. In 2004,6,814 bales of organic cotton were harvested in the United States, which is about 3.2 million pounds. That is compared to this year’s estimate of total U.S. cotton production of 19.2 million bales — over 9 trillion pounds. Globally, it is estimated that 120.5 million bales of cotton will be harvested.

Cotton and the Environment

About 25 percent of the world’s insecticide use and more than 10 percent of the world’s pesticide goes to cotton crops. In 2003, that amounted to about 55 million pounds of pesticides being sprayed on 12.8 million acres of cotton, according to the Organic Trade Association. Some of these chemicals are considered to be the most toxic chemicals in the world. The health risks of pesticide exposure include birth defects, reproductive disorders and weaker immune systems.

In many countries, cotton is still hand picked; therefore anyone working in those fields is exposed to extreme amounts of toxic chemicals. The chemicals can also affect others in the community once they have seeped into the water supply. With so many products made from cotton, we are all exposed to these chemicals at some point. Even some baked goods, cookies and salad dressing contain cottonseed.

Water use is another issue with conventional cotton production. Crops use intensive irrigation and some estimates say cotton crops are the largest water user among agricultural crops.

Go Organic

Besides helping the environment, there are other benefits from organic cotton products. Working environments are better for those on farms and small-scale farmers save money by not having to buy large amount of pesticides. Consumers benefit too, some suggest that organic cotton products are softer and easier on your skin. Recent awareness of these benefits has increased demand of organic cotton and thus, lowered its cost.

Many companies now have organic cotton products. The Gap has introduced a baby Gap organic collection and in 2007 released a new line of men’s shirts. Women can find a variety of jeans and skirts made with organic cotton from Levi’s Eco. For your home, see Bed Bath & Beyond’s organic products. The Organic Cotton Directory is a great resource for finding other organic products.

SOURCE: http://www.motherearthnews.com/nature-and-environment/organic-cotton-benefits.aspx#axzz3ECPkyuev

GM foods 'not the answer' to world's food shortage crisis, report says

By SEAN POULTER

Last updated at 09:22 16 April 2008

Genetically-modified crops are not the solution to spiralling food prices or Third World hunger, according to a powerful international report published yesterday.

Questions remain over their effects on human health and the environment, it warns.

Sixty governments, private industry, scientists, consumer groups and social campaigners have delivered a blueprint for global agriculture for the next 50 years.

It delivers a remarkable snub to "Frankenstein Foods" and the industrialisation of farming while offering a boost to organic and small-scale agriculture.

The authors also warned against the rush to grow crops to be turned into fuel - biofuels - saying this could exacerbate food shortages and price rises.

This represents a direct challenge to government policy in the UK, Europe and the U.S. Publication of the report triggered an international row after the U.S. government, which has attempted to impose GM crops on the world, refused to sign up to the global initiative.

The row carries echoes of the Americans' refusal to sign up to initiatives to tackle global warming.

The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development has been working for five years to develop a new approach to world food production.

Its director, Professor Robert Watson, said the industrialisation of farming since the Second World War has failed to produce the food needed by the world.

As a result, while the families in the West have plenty to eat, some 850million people around the world go to bed hungry each night.

In recent months, GM companies, trade bodies and associated scientists have issued a deluge of propaganda suggesting biotech crops are the key to feeding the Third World.

Professor Watson and his team made clear that GM or transgenics - moving genes between plant species - was not the solution to providing plentiful cheap food.

He said: "Are transgenics the simple answer to hunger and poverty? I would argue, no."

He said much more research was needed to establish whether they offer benefits and do not harm the environment.

Professor Watson said the industrialisation of agriculture, of which GM is a part, has led to the heavy use of artificial fertilisers and other chemicals.

These have harmed the soil structure and polluted water ways.

The leeching of the soil of essential minerals means food is less healthy than 60 years ago.

The professor, a renowned expert on climate change and chief scientist at the UK food and farming department DEFRA, suggested organic farming practices offer many benefits.

UK GM crop trials have shown that associated farming practising destroy the weed population, removing food for bees, butterflies and other insects, and harm the food supply for birds.

There have been concerns the food could trigger unforeseen allergies.

Professor Janice Jiggins, of Wageningen University, questioned whether GM crops have been proven as safe. 

"There are many legitimate concerns about the presence of transgenics in food, as well as the safety standards that might be appropriate as these enter into animal and human food," she said.

This week the Government and EU imposed new laws that will require all fuel pumped into cars to contain 2.5 per cent of biofuels.

It is suggested that turning crops such as maize, wheat and sugar cane into a biofuel will help the world reduce the creation of greenhouse gases.

However, the IAASTD said this policy - driven by the U.S. government - could be misplaced.

Professor Watson said giving over land to biofuels was one of a number of factors driving sharp increases in food prices in the last year.

The report was published simultaneously in the UK, Washington, Delhi, Paris, Nairobi and a number of other cities.

The U.S. government was joined by Canada and Australia, which are also supporters of GM farming, in refusing to sign up to the initiative.

Bodies representing global biotech companies, which include the likes of Monsanto, also walked out of discussions on the report after failing to get their way.

The UK Government has not yet signed up the report but Professor Watson indicated it has the full support of the Prime Minister.

Genetically-modified crops are not the solution to spiralling food prices or Third World hunger, according to a powerful international report published yesterday. Questions remain over their effects on human health and the environment, it warns

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559965/GM-foods-answer-worlds-food-shortage-crisis-report-says.html