Consumers Union of Japan – Page 52 – Sound and Healthy Future for Our Children

Do Not Approve Genetically Modified Salmon!

Consumers Union of Japan opposes GM salmon, and sent the following appeal to US FDA as part of their Public Comment (deadline Feb. 25, 2013):

Re: Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0899 Genetically Engineered Salmon

We the consumers in Japan are strongly opposed to the approval of genetically modified (GM) salmon. This GM fish has been said to pose no risks to the environment or as food, according to the December 12, 2012 evaluation by FDA. However, we regard it to be very unsafe. We ask that you do not approve it, for the following reasons.

If this GM salmon escape to the environment in large quantities, it will cause genetic contamination. Although the company that developed this GM salmon claims that it can be bred safely, it cannot be said that the technology to produce infertile eggs is 100% certain, and the possibility that the reproductive ability recovers is high. Consequently, there is a high probability that diffusion of the GM trait will occur.
It is our understanding that this GM fish will not be sold as such, but rather the eggs. It will then almost certainly spread to other countries around the world. Should this happen, the risk of contamination will be further amplified, as recovery is difficult once the fish have been released into the environment.

This GM salmon will eat more fish at a faster rate than ordinary salmon because its growth is faster. It means that this GM salmon will increase the risk of damaging fishing resources and cause damage to biological diversity. In addition, growing fast means that this GM salmon will accumulate the toxic concentration of growth hormones in the environment faster and it has higher growth hormones. How will you assess the risks that consumers will be exposed to when eating fish with higher levels of growth hormones? We are concerned about the negative health effects this may have on the people eating GM salmon.

Japan imports large amount of fish. If this GM salmon is approved and starts to appear in markets around the world, it will create confusion among Japanese consumers. We do not want to eat transgenic fish, and we sincerely ask that you do not approve this GM salmon.

Note: Please sign the petition over at Center for Food Safety, asking US FDA to not approve GM salmon!

By fridfrid | 08/02/2013 | Biodiversity, Biotechnology, Food |

BSE In Brazil

Open letter: Our demands regarding mad cow disease in Brazil

To: Agriculture Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi
From: Food Safety Citizens’ Watch
January 9, 2013

Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) announced on December 8, 2012 on its homepage that beef from Brazil was infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and that import of beef products from Brazil were banned from that same day. The following are problems regarding the slow response which we would like MAFF’s Risk Management Agency to reply to before January 21, 2013.

1) Why was the news about the Brazilian cow that died from BSE in December 2010 (at age 13 years) not announced until December 8, 2012?

2) Between 2010 and 2012, Brazilian beef products were imported for two years. 935 tons of heat-processed products were imported in 2010, and 1435 tons in 2011, an increase from 17% to 21% of the total imports. Please clarify how the beef products were distributed and consumed around Japan.

3) Please respond to the public regarding your ideas about taking responsibility for the risks associated with BSE and vCJD.

4) The import ban for beef products from Brazil will be kept in place until March, 2013 but until the results are presented and the consultation of the Food Safety Commission has reduced the risk, the import ban should be maintained. We also note that OIE still puts Brazil in the category of “negligible risk countries” and wonder why OIE is reluctant to change Brazil’s status. In addition, we strongly urge Japan to require all imported beef products to be fully investigated as soon as possible.

By: Kamiyama Michiko, FSCW

By fridfrid | 08/02/2013 | BSE, Food, North-South, Trade |

After the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: The Roles of Consumers and Farmers

Symposium: What Can We Eat? Farmers and Consumers Reaching Out to Each Other

The Three Mile Island nuclear accident that took place in the United States on March 28, 1979 had some impact on Japan and influenced the anti-nuclear movement here, especially in areas with nuclear power plant construction sites. Media, however, continued to treat nuclear issues only as regional issues, and did not give much attention to the overall, nationwide concerns.

The April 26, 1986 disaster at Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union was an even bigger shock for Japan. The radioactive clouds reached the country and caused pollution of Japanese agricultural products.

Contaminated food is a particularly serious matter for young children and pregnant women, with possible consequences for coming generations as well. The consumer movement and anti-nuclear power plant activists have pointed out similar problems resulting from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant disaster after the March 11, 2011 eartquake and tsunami in northeastern Japan.

However, there is another aspect to the meltdowns here in Japan. After Chernobyl, farmers and consumers in Japan did not take steps to cooperate and deal with radioactive contamination, in spite of the fact that agricultural lands and the ocean were polluted. After the Fukushima disaster, farmers and consumers have ended up divided on the issues, as the perpetrators – the government and TEPCO – have strongly continued to promote nuclear power over the years.

For over 40 years, the consumer movement demanded Japan to abolish nuclear power plants in order to avoid accidents. What is our role now? Even I could never imagine such a situation after an accident has actually occured.

Our biggest challenge is how to protect the children. We need to think clearly about how to deal with the issues that divide the producers and the consumers regarding the crops and foods that have been contaminated with radioactivity. This means we need to pursue the responsibility of the government and TEPCO, and at the same time realize a nuclear-free future for everyone.

The consumer movement is not simply a movement for buying, but also a movement to actively support producers, support Japan’s agriculture and fisheries, who can provide farm-fresh food, through partnerships that provide locally grown ingredients. We are on the verge of a crisis. The question that many are asking is how we can rise to the challenge and continue to ensure that we have safe and reliable food, while also continuing to support the farmers?

Will it be possible to create solid relationships between farmers and consumers? The purpose of this symposium is to involve many people who want to discuss the future of food and agriculture in Japan.

Amagasa Keisuke (CUJ Co-chair)

Symposium: What Can We Eat? Farmers and Consumers Reaching Out to Each Other
Time: January 19, 2013, 13:30-17:00 (Sat.)
Place: Bunkyo-ku Shimin Center 2 Floor (Room A)
Map: http://www.cadu-jp.org/notice/bunkyo_city-hall.htm

Entrance: 800 Yen
Panelists:
Ono Kazuoki (Agriculture Journalist)
Tenmyo Nobuhiro (Farmer from Niigata)
Ishige Emi (Farmer from Yamanashi)
Ito Fumika (Consumer)

By fridfrid | 09/01/2013 | Food, Nuclear |

Proposal for a Basic Law to Abandon Nuclear Power!

Action for an election to get rid of nuclear power reactors: How you can participate

It is time for another general election in Japan. Let’s turn this into an “Abandon Nuclear Power Election” and spread the message about the election candidates and their views about nuclear power. You can participate by asking the candidate on your town to approve a Proposal for a Basic Law to Abandon Nuclear Power and help us release their reply.

In August, 2012, Nobel literature laureate Oe Kenzaburo and others launched a nationwide network seeking the abolition of nuclear plants in Japan. Consumers Union of Japan also joined this network together with many civil society organizations (NGOs). As a result, some 103 members of Japan’s parliament have so far supported and approved the Proposal for a Basic Law to Abandon Nuclear Power. This bill is now waiting for deliberation during the next session of the House of Representatives.

It is regrettable that even though 80% of the population in Japan supports reducing nuclear power to “zero,” the views of legislators have not reflected this percentage number. Thus, we need to act now to get many more candidates to support the Proposal for a Basic Law to Abandon Nuclear Power. We can achieve this by monitoring which of the candidates have clear views about this important issue, and who will work for this goal. It is worth noting that all political parties have expressed some opinion or other regarding the “reduction” of nuclear power plants. The nuances in their views vary among the different political parties, and we need to carry out the campaign to get the individual candidates’ views. Asking the candidates to sign a “policy contract” before the election on December 16, 2012 will ensure that the Proposal will be enacted as we elect candidates who agree with the Proposal.

For more information and the list of names of the candidates who support or oppose the policy contract will be added to the Datsu Genpatsu Hou Seitei Network website (J) and the Soshi Net website (J):

http://www.datsugenpatsu.org/
http://www.soshinet.org/home

By fridfrid | 07/12/2012 | Civil Rights, Nuclear |

Highlights From The Negotiations In Hyderabad About Biological Diversity

Updates about GMOs from the Convention of Biological Diversity

It is not always easy to follow the details of the discussions and negotiations of international agreements… Media pays scant attention or ignores important concerns. Governments provide a massive amount of information but it is not easy to find or digest. Fortunately, NGOs are usually present both in the conference hall and in the corridors. For the current round of negotiations in Hyderabad, India, groups like CBD Alliance publish a newsletter called ECO with easy-to-understand updates.

ECO MOP6
ECO COP11

Here are some highlights:

For the initial meeting, MOP6, many worried that the so-called Roadmap about genetically modified organisms would not be endorsed. This Roadmap deals with risk assessment, to make sure that countries know what they are getting into if they import certain GMOs that may disturb or pose a threat to their local biological diversity. Without proper risk assessment, countries will not have the tools necessary to take into account recent developments in risk research.

There was anger that the United States (not a Party to the Convention of Biological Diversity) has voiced its opposition to work regarding the consideration of socio-economic consequences of genetically modified organisms. Philip L Bereano, Washington Biotechnology Action Council, notes that the US has sponsored literally thousands of socio-economic assessments as part of government policy to aid decision-making. Why not for GMOs?

During the main meeting of the COP11, there was also great concern that the negotiators would suddenly “rewrite history” by editing out an earlier text that many NGOs and governments feel strongly about, regarding so-called “Terminator” crops. These are genetically modified to not be able to produce new fertile seeds, thus undermining the ancient right of farmers to save their own seed from their harvest. Such GMOs, dubbed “Terminator” back in the late 1990s, would give biotech companies like Monsanto (that holds the patents to the Terminator technology) immense power over global food production. Activists in Hyderabad were indignant that instead of deleting old decisions, countries should implement what they agree on at the CBD meetings! Finally, it was agreed to retain the text, after swift action from six countries.

Regarding genetically modified organisms, ECO published the following list of countries in the Asia Pacific region and how they deal with genetically modified organisms (GMO) by 2012:

Read our proposals to the Japanese government before the Hyderabad conference:
Protect Biodiversity From GMOs: Hyderabad MOP6 Meeting

By fridfrid | 24/10/2012 | Biodiversity, Biotechnology, North-South |