Agnet Dec. 3/03 -- II
Labeling
genetically engineered foods - who wins?
GM sugar
beet 'far more environmentally friendly'
Bayer
CropScience AG and Max Planck Society announce new licensing deal
Monsanto
downplays European patent ruling
OGTR issues
licence for GM cotton
National
award for CSIRO crop scientist
Plants
database
Plant health
inspections
Agilent
Technologies announces improved method for screening genetically modified
content in food
Japan-Canada-Pears
Pesticide
delays sexual maturation
P A N U P
S: STOP Paraquat!
how to subscribe
Labeling
genetically engineered foods - who wins?
December 3, 2003
Commentary from the Food Safety Network
Brenda Cassidy
www.foodsafety.ksu.edu
The Consumers' Association of Canada (CAC) said today that the issue is simple:
stick a label on all genetically engineered (GE) foods and give people the right
to choose.
Public opinion polls, including the latest version from CAC, consistently show
strong public support for the concept. Many opposed to the use of new
technologies in food production point to the absence of mandatory labeling as
evidence of the grand conspiracy to foist GE foods down the unsuspecting throats
of a public held hostage by agri-food industry giants. So why not just label it
and move on?
Because the mandatory labeling that such groups demand, and that the public, at
least in response to questions carefully worded to engender the desired
response, supports, isn't about choice. It's inconsistent with current food
labeling policy in Canada, it implies substantial differences between food
products where none exists, and, if done honestly, it's prohibitively expensive.
The push for mandatory labeling by some groups has nothing to do with consumer
choice. Such groups have long made clear that their goal is to achieve a de
facto ban of GE foods through ongoing campaigns to create fear of unknown,
theoretical health or environmental risks. Mandatory labeling for GE foods
should be used in cases where the resulting food product differs from its
counterpart produced by more traditional production methods. That's already the
law in Canada. To date, however, no such products have been approved.
The GE foods and food ingredients currently on the market - mostly derived from
soybean, corn and canola crops - are nutritionally and compositionally
equivalent to their counterparts. They have the same fat, cholesterol and
carbohydrate content. They look, taste and cook exactly the same way. Even the
most sophisticated testing methods cannot differentiate highly refined products
such as oils and sugars produced from GE crops from those from conventionally
produced crops. For all intents and purposes, they are not different. Forced
labeling would be misleading in its implication of difference where none exists.
Granted, there are those who would prefer to choose food based on its production
method. Organic foods are a primary example. Despite a dearth of reliable
evidence to indicate any advantages of organic foods in terms of nutrition,
quality or taste, a growing number of people choose to pay premiums for organic
foods because of their support for the process by which such foods are produced.
But labeling foods based on a production method can be complex: it requires
segregation and traceability all along the food chain, from a farmer's field to
a grocer's shelf and every step in between. Documentation must be prepared and
available to verify the labeling claims and prove the product's purity. That's
one of the reasons that organic foods cost more. And the added costs are borne
by those to whom the information is useful. Under a mandatory GE labeling
regime, all food ingredients would require similar tracking mechanisms, and all
food costs would increase. Such an increase may be insignificant for those to
whom production information is important, but places undue burden on the many
who are confident that all foods approved for the Canadian market are safe. The
Canadian General Standards Board has worked with a broad stakeholder group
(including representatives from consumer organizations) to develop a standard
for the voluntary labeling of GE foods. Such a standard is essential to ensure
that the information provided to consumers is consistent, accurate and not
misleading. In development for more than two years, the draft standard was
recently approved and is expected to be finalized soon. Voluntary labels will
augment consumer choice in the marketplace for those who want to buy foods based
on their production method without imposing the added costs of segregation,
traceability and verification on the populace as a whole.
Of note, the Consumers' Association of Canada was instrumental in the
development of that standard, actively participating to ensure that the standard
would meet consumer needs, but chose to pull out of the process just before the
final vote.
The question is not about whether to label or not: it's how to best provide
food-related information to consumers. In a 2000 market trial conducted by the
Food Safety Network and recently published in the British Food Journal,
consumers chose GE sweet corn over its traditionally produced counterpart by a
ratio of 3:2. Follow-up studies showed even greater support for the use of GE
technology in 2001 and 2002. Many consumers cited the reduced use of pesticides
in the production of the GE sweet corn as the reason for their choice, although
quality and taste were also key concerns. But voluntarily labelling a whole food
like sweet corn is vastly different from a mandatory labelling regieme of an
ingredient in a processed food, especially when the label is designed to alarm
rather than inform. The biotechnology debate to date has involved superficial
stereotypes, caricatures and the mindless banter of pro versus anti. It misses
the point that providing food consumers are actually interested in buying
involves a series of trade-offs and considerations that are specific to
individual farms and locales.
Brenda Cassidy is a research assistant with the Food Safety Network at the
University of Guelph
GM
sugar beet 'far more environmentally friendly'
December 3, 2003
New Scientist
Andy Coghlan
http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns99994444
Richard Phipps of the School of Agriculture at the University of Reading in
Berkshire, UK. and colleague Richard Bennett were cited as concluding in a new
analysis that modified sugar beet is far more environmentally friendly than
conventional beet, with Phipps quoted as saying, "Overall,
herbicide-resistant GM beet was 15 to 50 per cent better for the environment,
depending on what impact was being measured."
The researchers said that the benefits arise mainly because farmers spray much
less weedkiller and pesticide onto GM beet, less often, thus saving a lot of
tractor fuel and reducing the impact on global warming.
The findings contradict the recently completed "farm-scale
evaluations" in the UK, the largest trials done to compare the effects of
GM and conventional crop systems on farmland wildlife.
Bayer
CropScience AG and Max Planck Society announce new licensing deal
December 1, 2003
Bayer CropScience AG
MONHEIM/MUNICH, Germany -- The Max Planck Society (MPS), a German research
funding organization, its technology transfer agency Garching Innovation GmbH,
and Bayer CropScience AG announced today a new licensing deal whereby Bayer is
appointed exclusive licensee of the Agrobacterium transformation technology
invented more than 20 years ago and which will result in a European Patent
claiming broadly transgenic plants on November 26, 2003.
The decision of the European Patent Office (EPO) to issue the patent closely
follows the unanimous decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences
for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) which awarded the team of
inventors of the MPS patent application priority of invention in the U.S. for a
modified version of the tumor-inducing plasmid of Agrobacterium. Therein, the
genes for the natural tumorigenic functions had been replaced by a plant gene of
interest. The USPTO decision also extends to related claims concerning plant
transformation processes and transgenic products which can be obtained using
such processes.
"We are delighted that the European Patent is finally being issued and that
the USPTO has resolved this dispute in MPS's favour" said Bernward Garthoff,
Chief Technology Officer for Bayer CropScience AG. "Although the USPTO
decision is contested, these decisions nevertheless constitute an important
milestone in the longest running patent battle in the history of plant
biotechnology. We're glad that the EPO and the USPTO have recognized the
contribution of Patricia Zambryski, Josef Schell, Jean-Pierre Hernalsteens, Marc
Van Montagu, Luis Herrera-Estrella and Jan Leemans, the inventors on the MPS
patent application, to the development of the agrobiotech industry".
Agrobacterium is a plant parasite that can cause tumor development on plants.
The invented technology has permitted researchers to exploit the natural genetic
engineering capacities of the bacteria into a practical and fundamental tool for
the production of transgenic plants, and marked the birth of modern plant
biotechnology.
"Beneficial products developed using our patented technology are important
to farmers and other companies involved in the improvement of crop plants, and
Bayer CropScience has a well-established track record of broadly licensing
technologies to other companies," Garthoff said.
The Max Planck Society (www.mpg.de), one of Germany's largest non-profit
research organizations, is comprised of eighty individual institutes each of
which conducts research in areas of the natural sciences and the humanities. As
the technology transfer agency for the Max Planck Society, Garching Innovation
GmbH (www.garching-innovation.de) fosters and manages relationships between the
Max Planck institutes and the biotech and pharmaceutical industry for the
commercialization of inventions and know-how discovered or created at the Max
Planck institutes.
Bayer CropScience, a subsidiary of Bayer AG with annual sales of some EUR 6
billion, is one of the world's leading innovative crop science companies in the
areas of crop protection, seeds and plant biotechnology, as well as
non-agricultural pest control. The company offers an outstanding range of
products and extensive service backup for modern, sustainable agriculture and
for non-agricultural applications. Bayer CropScience (www.bayercropscience.com)
has a global workforce of about 20,000 and is represented in 122 countries,
ensuring proximity to dealers and consumers.
Monsanto
downplays European patent ruling
December 2, 2003
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Rachel Melcer
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/stories.nsf/Business/AA4CF9D74742705E86256DF1001EB1A0?OpenDocument&Headline=Monsanto+downplays+European+patent+ruling
Monsanto Co. has, according to this story, lost one patent battle over a key
technology used in genetically modifying plants, but, the company said, the more
significant rulings are yet to come.
Last week, the European Patent Office issued a patent for agrobacterium-transformation
technology to the Max Planck Society, a German research organization. The
society promptly gave an exclusive license to Monsanto competitor Bayer
CropScience AG, based in Monheim, Germany. The story explains that the decision
ended a 20-year dispute - the longest-running patent battle in the history of
plant biotechnology, Bayer CropScience said. Agrobacterium transformation
technology allows scientists to transfer a gene into a host plant's DNA with
more precision and efficiency than other available methods. Scientists at
Monsanto and at the Max Planck Society claim to have invented it.
Spokesman Bryan Hurley was cited as saying Monsanto does not conduct
agrobacterium work in Europe - so it won't be affected by the ruling.
Hurley also noted that European patents expire 20 years after the original
application - which means, in this case, it expires at year's end. U.S. patent
rights to parts of the technology are up for grabs, however.
OGTR
issues licence for GM cotton
December 1, 2003
Office of the Gene Technology Regulator
The Gene Technology Regulator (the Regulator) has made a decision to issue a
licence in respect of application DIR 040/2003 from Dow AgroSciences Australia
Pty Ltd.
The application requests approval to undertake a limited and controlled release
of genetically modified (GM) insecticidal/herbicide tolerant cotton (referred to
as WideStrike cotton).
The trial will take place over one growing season at two sites, covering a total
area of 0.04 hectares in the shires of Gunnedah and Narrabri, New South Wales.
The decision to issue the licence was made after extensive consultation on the
Risk Assessment and Risk Management Plan (RARMP) with the public, State and
Territory Governments, Australian Government agencies, the Minister for the
Environment and Heritage, the Gene Technology Technical Advisory Committee and
the relevant local councils, as required by the Gene Technology Act 2000.
Issues relating to the protection of the health and safety of people and the
environment raised during the consultation process on this application were
considered in finalising the RARMP and in making the decision to issue the
licence.
The licence imposes specific conditions to ensure that the risk management plan
is implemented, including requirements for a pollen trap, restrictions on the
use of the GM cotton seed and post-harvest monitoring of the trial sites.
The Executive Summary and complete finalised Risk Assessment and Risk
Management Plan together with the licence conditions can be obtained on-line
from the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator's website.
National
award for CSIRO crop scientist
November 28, 2003
Australia CSIRO
Media Release Ref#2003/210
http://www.csiro.au/index.asp?type=mediaRelease&id=PrPoole
In recognition of his outstanding contributions to Australian agriculture, CSIRO
Plant Industry scientist, Mr Mick Poole, has been awarded the 2003 Urrbrae
Memorial Award.
As an active and successful research scientist, research team leader, manager
and administrator, Mr Poole has played significant roles in the discovery and
development of new technologies in cropping, pastures and farming systems.
He led ground-breaking research in pastures, the development of new crops and
crop varieties, the impact and management of weeds and weed/crop competition and
reduced tillage systems.
He has encouraged new industry development, particularly helping to establish
Australia's $500M million canola industry, $50 million oaten hay industry and
Western Australia's lupin industry - now the largest in the world.
In a career spanning 38 years Mr Poole has also been active in transferring
Australian farming systems technology to the Middle East and China where he is a
recognised expert in agricultural project assessment, development and design.
"I've been privileged to be a part of the Australian grains industry,"
he said. "The growth in size and diversity of products and expansion in
markets in recent years has been rapid and very exciting.
"The industry is enormously responsive to scientific advances, innovation
and change and I see a magnificent future for it in the years ahead."
Established in 1975 to commemorate the sacrifices of former Urrbrae Agricultural
High School students who served in the armed forces in World War II, the Urrbrae
Memorial Award is presented every two years to an individual Australian
researcher selected from a wide range of agricultural disciplines. Nominees are
judged according to the innovative nature of their work and its practical value
to the agricultural community.
Mr Poole was nominated by the Grains Research and Development Corporation. The
Award will be presented at a ceremony at the Urrbrae Education Centre on Friday
28 November.
Plants
database
December 2, 2003
USDA News Releases
The database can be viewed at:
http://plants.usda.gov/home_page.html
The PLANTS Database provides standardized information about the vascular plants,
mosses, liverworts, hornworts, and lichens of the U.S. and its territories. It
includes names, plant symbols, checklists, distributional data, species
abstracts, characteristics, images, plant links, references, crop information,
and automated tools. PLANTS reduces costs by minimizing duplication and making
information exchange possible across agencies and disciplines.
Plant
health inspections
December 1, 2003
The European Commission
http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/index_en.html
The complete document can be viewed from:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/inspections/pi/reports/germany/index_en.html
Final report of a mission carried out in Germany from 10 to 14 March 2003 in
order to assess the situation concerning phytophthora ramorum and the
implementation of Commission Decision 2002/757/EC (9118/2003)
Agilent
Technologies announces improved method for screening genetically modified
content in food
December 2, 2003
Agilent Technologies Press Release
http://www.agilent.com/about/newsroom/presrel/2003/02dec2003a.html
PALO ALTO, Calif. Agilent Technologies Inc. (NYSE: A) today announced an
efficient, high-resolution method for detecting genetically modified (GM)
content in food products. Researchers can use this method to rapidly screen
samples before running the expensive and time-consuming analyses required to
quantify GM content.
There remains an ongoing debate about how food products that contain GM
ingredients should be regulated, labeled and detected. Consumer concern about
the use of GM organisms in food is high, particularly in Europe. DNA analysis is
currently the most effective analytical approach for detecting GM ingredients in
a wide range of food, from raw to highly processed.
Real-time PCR (polymerase chain reaction) is the most widely accepted method for
quantifying GM DNA. However, this method is expensive (up to $300 for a single
analysis) and time consuming, requiring assay calibration for each sample lot
and multiple replicates of each unknown compound. Most laboratories, therefore,
conduct a generic GM content screen of samples before performing a complete
quantitative analysis.
The traditional method for testing these samples uses gel electrophoresis, which
is clumsy and less than optimal for screening multiplex PCR products. When gel
electrophoresis is optimized for rapid screening, only a marginal separation of
multiple analytes is achieved. For GM screening, the Agilent 2100 bioanalyzer
provides several advantages over gel electrophoresis in terms of resolution,
convenience and speed of analysis.
In this new method, Agilent scientists used an Agilent 2100 bioanalyzer with DNA
500 LabChip(r) to resolve and detect multiplex PCR products corresponding to GM
DNA segments in corn and soybeans. The multiplex products were produced using
Promega's Biosmart Allin 1.0 GMO Screening System, a nested multiplex PCR assay.
Resolution and sensitivity were sufficient to identify all the multiplex PCR
targets and to differentiate these targets from PCR artifacts.
www.agilent.com/chem.
Japan-Canada-Pears
December 3, 2003
Associated Press
TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Canadian Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Lyle Vanclief was
cited as telling Japanese agriculture minister Yoshiyuki Kamei in their talks
held Tuesday in Rome on the sidelines of the general assembly meeting of the
U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization that Canada has told Japan it will lift
an import ban on Japanese-grown pears imposed in 1997 due to a quarantine
problem.
The story says that the ministry hopes to resume pear exports to Canada
beginning with next year's harvests after working out new quarantine procedures
at working-level talks with Canadian officials.
Japan exported the "Twentieth Century" brand of pears produced in
Tottori Prefecture to Canada until 1997 before Canada suspended imports after
spotting spider mites in the quarantine process.
Pesticide
delays sexual maturation
December 2, 2003
Environmental Health Perspectives (NIEHS)
Male school children exposed to the pesticide endosulfan showed delayed sexual
maturity compared with similar children who were not exposed, according to a
study published today in the December issue of the peer-reviewed journal
Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP). Endosulfan also appears to interfere
with sex hormone synthesis, according to results of the study of males aged
10-19 years in a community of cashew plantations in northern Kerala, India.
Although endosulfan is no longer made in the United States, an estimated 1.4-2.2
million pounds are used in the United States on crops including squash, pecans,
and strawberries.
Researchers evaluated 117 boys in a village where endosulfan has been aerially
sprayed for more than 20 years and 90 comparable boys from a nearby village with
no such exposure history. For each group, the researchers performed physical
examinations and recorded clinical history, sexual maturity rating, and blood
levels of various hormones. The study found a higher prevalence of congenital
abnormalities related to testicular descent in the study group, but it was not
statistically significant due to a small sample size.
"Our study results suggest that endosulfan exposure may delay sexual
maturity and interfere with hormone synthesis in male children," the study
authors write. "The practice of aerial spraying of endosulfan was
discontinued in December 2000. Serum endosulfan residue levels were
significantly higher in the study population than in the control group even 10
months after the last aerial spray."
Endosulfan has been banned in several countries, including Cambodia, Colombia,
Germany, Sweden, Norway, Indonesia, and others. Its use is severely restricted
in at least 20 other countries.
Commenting on the study, Dr. Jim Burkhart, science editor for EHP, says,
"This is the first human study to ever measure the effects of endosulfan on
the male reproductive system. Decades of spraying this pesticide, and only this
pesticide, on the village provided a unique opportunity to analyze its impact.
Although the sample size is somewhat limited, the results are quite
compelling."
The lead author on the study was Habibullah Saiyed of the National Institute of
Occupational Health (Indian Council of Medical Research). Other authors were
Aruna Dewan, Vijay Bhatnagar, Udyavar Shenoy, Rathika Shenoy, Hirehall Rajmohan,
Kumud Patel, Rekha Kashyap, Pradip Kulkarni, Bagalur Rajan, and Bhadabhai Lakkad.
EHP is the journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences,
part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. More information is
available online at http://www.ehponline.org/.
Editor's note: Full copies of both reports are available by fax or e-mail (PDF
format) to media at no charge. Go to http://www.ehponline.org/press, call
919-541-2359, or e-mail adams6@niehs.nih.gov.
P
A N U P S: STOP Paraquat!
December 3, 2003
Pesticide Action Network Updates Service
http://www.panna.org
On the occasion of global "No Pesticides Use Day" this December 3rd,
the international Pesticide Action Network (PAN) calls for the global ban and
phaseout of the production and use of paraquat, one of the most dangerous and
controversial herbicides in the world.
The non-selective herbicide paraquat is sold by Syngenta and other producers in
more than 100 countries. Gramoxone(TN), manufactured by Syngenta, is the most
common trade name for paraquat. Paraquat is extensively used on bananas, cocoa,
coffee, cotton, palm oil, pineapple, rubber and sugar cane, both on plantations
and by small-scale farmers.
Paraquat has been heavily criticized for the adverse impacts on workers since
the 1960s. Globally, workers and farmers, who are regularly exposed to paraquat
experience serious problems with their health. Paraquat is an extremely
hazardous substance: it has been known to damage the lungs, heart, kidneys,
adrenal glands, central nervous system, liver, muscles and spleen, causing
multi-organ failure. The herbicide causes severe acute and long-term health
problems such as severe dermatitis, second degree burns, nosebleeds, rapid heart
rate, kidney failure, and respiratory failure. Some chronic effects have also
been identified: an association with developmental and reproductive effects, as
well as links to skin cancer and there is mounting evidence linking it to
Parkinson's disease. The high toxicity and lack of antidote leads to serious ill
health, and even death, from exposure.
Studies have also indicated that paraquat has lethal effects on hares and birds,
and is embryotoxic and teratogenic to frogs. It poses a risk to non-target
terrestrial and aquatic plants, and readily binds to soil particles and hence
accumulates in soils.
Due to these facts the notorious occupational poison paraquat has been on the
PAN international list of "Dirty Dozen" pesticides since 1985.
Conditions of use and realities in developing countries of the South -- high
temperature and humidity, lack of protective clothing, leaking knapsack
sprayers, illiteracy, lack of facilities for washing, or medical treatment, and
repeated exposure -- compounds the concern that safe use of paraquat is not
possible in these countries, in spite of "safety" claims by the
industry. Because of its high toxicity, paraquat is already either banned,
severely restricted or restricted in fourteen countries, including five EU
member states and the United States of America.
" Last year Malaysia was the first Asian country to ban and phase out the
use of paraquat. To prioritise global protection of human health and the
environment, a worldwide ban of the toxic herbicide paraquat has to follow
now," asserts Sarojeni V. Rengam, Executive Director of Pesticide Action
Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific.
Unfortunately, the EU decided in October 2003 not to ban paraquat. The European
Commission is aware of the dangers of paraquat, but nevertheless approved its
use, ignoring the growing number of member states who openly rejected an EU-wide
approval of paraquat, postponing a vote at the last four committee meetings. PAN
has emphasized that this controversial decision was made in the European
context, and therefore cannot have any implication for other regions, especially
developing countries.
On November 24, 2003, PAN Europe, PAN Asia and the Pacific and the Swedish
Society for Nature Conservation, sent an official "Open Letter" of
protest to the European Commission calling on the Standing Committee to take
urgent action following the inclusion of paraquat to the Annex 1 of the
Pesticides Authorization Directive 91/414. The Commission's authorization of 3
October 2003 is being used to challenge regulatory decisions taken to protect
human health in other countries (particularly in Malaysia), and to demand
registration even when local conditions will pose significant risks to pesticide
users.
Due to the serious health and ecological threats from paraquat use, on the
occasion of the global "No Pesticide Use Day" December 3rd, the
international Pesticide Action Network (PAN) demands that:
Syngenta, the main producer of paraquat, stop the production of paraquat.
Syngenta take full responsibility and assume liability for the severe health
effects on communities resulting from paraquat use.
The authorities in all countries ban the use of paraquat.
Paraquat be replaced with safer and more sustainable pest control methods.
Note: For the international PAN Position Paper on paraquat, please see the PANNA
website.
To view the joint Open Letter to the European Commission see: http://www.panap.net.
December 3 -- Reminder of the pesticide catastrophe 1984 in Bhopal The
international Pesticide Action-Network launched December 3 as the global
"No Pesticides Use Day" in commemoration of the world's worst chemical
disaster in 1984. That day in Bhopal (India) a pesticide factory exploded,
releasing a toxic gas that caused more than 500,000 injuries and 20,000 deaths
in the years since. Every year on December 3rd, campaigns are initiated in many
countries to remind of the hazardous effects of pesticides on human health and
environment.
This year the Bhopal Day of Action Against Corporate Crime is also taking place
on December 3, 2003, on the 19th anniversary of the Bhopal disaster. For more
information, visit http://www.bhopal.net or email globalaction@bhopal.net.
For more information, contact:
PAN Africa: Abou Thiam, panafrica@pan-africa.sn, tel: 00221-825-49-14; PAN
Asia/Pacific (http://www.panap.net): Sarojeni Rengam, panap@panap.net, tel:
0060-4-657-0271; PAN Germany (http://www.pan-germany.org): Carina Weber, presse@pan-germany.org,
tel: 0049-40-3991910-0; PAN Latin America (RAPAL) (http://www.rap-al.org):
Maria-Elena Rozas, rapal@rapal.cl, tel:
0056-2-3416742; PAN North America (http://www.panna.org): Monica Moore, panna@panna.org,
tel: 001-415-981-1771; PAN UK (http://www.pan-uk.org):
Barbara Dinham, admin@pan-uk.org, tel: 0044-207-274-88-95.
Agnet is produced by the Food Safety Network at
the University of Guelph and is sponsored by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture
and Food, Plants Program at the University of Guelph, Agricultural Adaptation
Council (CanAdapt Program), AGCare, Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors,
ConAgra Foods, Inc., Pioneer Hi-Bred Limited (Canada), Ag-West Biotech, Inc.,
Monsanto Canada, Meat and Livestock Australia, National Pork Board, Pew
Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Council for
Biotechnology Information, Canadian Animal Health Institute, Croplife Canada,
Syngenta Seeds Canada, Inc., Canadian Food Information Council, Saskatchewan
Agriculture, Food and Rural Revitalization, JIFSAN, National Cattlemen's Beef
Association, National Food Processors Association, Ontario Agri-Food
Technologies, Institute of Environmental Science and Research, Ltd., BC Ministry
of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Feedlot Health Management Services, Syngenta
Crop Protection, Ontario Corn Producers' Association, DuPont Canada, Inc.,
Office of Consumer Affairs, Burger King, Sobeys Ontario, McCain Produce Inc.,
Canadian Institute for Food Inspection and Regulation, Canadian Wheat Board,
National Meat Association, Seminis Vegetable Seeds, Ontario Soybean Growers,
Bunge, Ltd., UC Davis Biotechnology Program, Consumer Federation of America
Foundation, Optibrand, University of Idaho Department of Microbiology, Molecular
Biology and Biochemistry, Tactix Government Consulting, Inc., Plant Bioscience
Ltd., CanAmera Foods, Hospitality Institute of Technology and Management, Inc.,
Hartono and Company, Agri Business Group, Inc., and Global Public Affairs.
To subscribe to the html version of Agnet (subscription is free), send mail to:
listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
subscribe agnet-L firstname lastname
i.e. subscribe agnet-L Doug Powell
(replace agnet-L with agnettext to subscribe to the text version of agnet)
To unsubscribe to the html version of Agnet, send mail to:
listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
signoff agnet-L
(replace agnet-L with agnettext to unsubscribe to the text version of agnet)
For more information about the Agnet research program, please contact:
Dr. Douglas Powell
Associate Professor
dept. of plant agriculture
University of Guelph
Guelph, Ont.
N1G 2W1
tel: 519-824-4120 x54280
cell: 519-835-3015
fax: 519-763-8933
dpowell@uoguelph.ca
http://www.foodsafety.ksu.edu
The Food Safety Network's bilingual toll-free line for obtaining food safety
information: 1-866-50-FSNET (1-866-503-7638)
archived at "http://131.104.74.73:96/agnet-archives.htm