GMO Russia

GMOs in Russia: 

GMOs in Russia Victoria Kolesnikova Ecological Club «Eremurus» of The CIS Biosafety Alliance +7-910-423-88-54 eremurus@mtu-net.ru Moscow, Russia January 2005

GMOs in Russia: 

GMOs in Russia GM crops in Russia: food, fields GM-lobbyists Legislation Labs, test methods Public control Conclusions

GM crops in Russia: food, fields: 

GM crops in Russia: food, fields GM-crops, approved for human consumption: Soy (1 line) Maize (4 lines) Potato (2 lines) Sugar beat (1 line) Rice (1 line) GM-potato was studied in the Institute of Nutrition of the Russian Academy of Medical Science, all negative information was unavailable for public, all positive was submitted to higher authorities and open to public.

GM-crops in Russia: food, fields: 

60% of food import contains GMOs (Monastyrskiy, 2004). The majority of it is soy. Import of GM-soy has grown in 150 times since 2000 (customs statistics). GM-soy is used in dozens of product types: meat, dairy, sweets, babyfood. GM-food is a problem of Russian cities. Rural regions mostly produce local natural products. GM-crops in Russia: food, fields

GM-crops in Russia: food, fields: 

As Russia still does not plant GMOs the CIS Biosafety Alliance calls for national moratorium. No permission has been granted to GM-plants. Field trials took place: in 1997 - 2002 – potato, soy, maize, sugar beat, apple, strawberry, pear. There is no official ban on growing GM-crops. GM-crops in Russia: food, fields

GMO lobbyists: 

GMO lobbyists In Russia the following biotech TNCs present: Monsanto (soy, potato, maize – for human consumption; in 2003 claimed that leaves Russia) Syngenta (maize – for human consumption) Aventis Crop Science (sugar beat – for human consumption) Bayer Crop Science (only chemicals) DuPont (only chemicals)

Legislation: 

Legislation Law On State Regulation Of Genetic Engineering (1996 ). Consumer Law (December 2004 г. – any amount of GMO content must be labeled). Law On State Environmental Assessment (GMOs are subject to a mandatory environmental assessment) State standards on qualification (2) test methods – PCR and bio-chip Russia did not sign Cartagena Biosafety Protocol. Other documents: Ecological Doctrine of Russia (August 2002). Priorities of State Biosafety Policy (December 2003)

Labs, test methods: 

Labs, test methods State (Sanitary control Inspection, the Institute of Nutrition) Commercial – in Moscow more than 10, most of them list GMO testing in their offer among other analysis the can provide. Scientific (on the base of Institutes) – for research purposes and partly on commercial basis. Available for public.

Public control: 

Public control Since 1997 the following public campaigns are run: ISEU Biosafety Campaign (1997) Regional campaigns of local NGOs, for instance the one in Tatarstan Republic of Russia: Do we need bigmac if we have echpochmak!? (tatar pie with meat inside) Genetic Campaign of Greenpeace-Russia (2002) All-national Association of Genetic Safety (2004) CIS Biosafety Alliance (2004)

Public Control: 

According to the results of independent tests conducted in 2004 practically ALL large Western babyfood manufacturers use GMOs in Russia (they may know about it or not) 2004 "Frisosoy" soy protein for baby food (Friesland Nutrition, Netherlands) 50% "Beby" soy and rice mix cereal (Kolinska, Slovenia) 100% "Nestogen" dry milk mix (Nestle, Switzerland) 50% "Alfare" nutritious dry mix (Nestle, Netherlands) 100% "Tip-top", vegetable mix puree, (Nutricia, Poland-Netherlands) 20% Puree "Vegetables with beef“ (Nestle, Finland) 5% Puree "Maize with potato" (Semper, Sweden) 100% "Tutteli" dry milk mix (Valio, Finland) 100% "Lamb" puree (Gerber, USA) 50% "Beby" chocolate and hazel-nut cereal (Kolinska, Slovenia) 100% Public Control

Public control : 

“Positive” labeling has being introduced This is an example of famous Ostankino meat unit (label is saying “genetically safe product”) Public control

Public control : 

First GM Court Case in Russia: June 2004 – publication of the results of independent babyfood tests: 7 largest producers found “GMO contaminated”) Nestle brings a reputation case against All-National Association of Genetic Safety (initiator of tests) July-August – wide public campaign started by ISEU and CIS Biosafety Alliance; August – beginning of case consideration; November – court rejects the suit of Nestle December - Nestle refuses to appeal. Public control

Conclusions: 

Conclusions Positive: Public awareness is growing. Independent labs start to appear and be available for public. NO GMOs are grown. Negative: Absence of any biosafety legislation. No act on GMO free zones or moratorium. Wide presence of GMOs in food. Labeling requirements are not implemented. Weak presence of Russian position on international level Public control activities still weak to make decision-makers and TNCs transparent.