[Nanotechnology Law] The EU has argued that a sovereign body like the EU and its Member States, or indeed any country in the world, has the right to enact its own regulations on the food that its citizens would eat, providing that the measures are compatible with existing international rules and based on clear scientific evidence.The US also opposes GMO traceability rules because it considers that they constitute an obstacle to US commodity exports, despite the fact that US traders can in fact meet those requirements without difficulties. The US is also adamantly opposed to labelling rules for food products produced from GMOs, even though these rules are designed to help ensure that customers are well-informed about what they are buying.
[Previous] Protons crunchy tofu snacks...
[Next] Sweetriot makes chocolate peaces...
Some related posts from Technorati and Google.
[Nanotechlaw.blogspot.com] Nanotechnology Law: Existing labelling requirements on cosmetic products would need to be revised to accommodate this. The feasibility of labelling needs to be fully investigated and we will work with the public and other interested parties to consider whether manufactured free nanoparticles contained in consumer products should be identified as such on lists of ingredients and under what circumstances." (emphasis and italic added).
[Organicconsumers.org] Monsanto & Gene Giants Spread Genetic Pollution: Kevin McCarthy, an analyst at Banc of America Securities, New York, figures that crop farmers around the world paid a $2.2 billion premium for biotech crops this year, up from $1 billion in 2001.
Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, GMO, The Green Files