articles & dossiers

  • R.A. Steinbrecher with A. Lorch; Federation of German Scientists, May 2008

    This report by Ricarda Steinbrecher (German Federation of Scientists, VDW and Econexus) with Antje Lorch provides an overview of risk assessment and risk management issues of genetically engineered trees. It was prepared for the Ninth Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity (COP9) in Bonn, May 2008.

  • A. Lorch & Ch. Then, 2007. Greenpeace Report, June 2007.

    The report presented here shows the many ways Bt maize impacts the environment. Even after more then a decade of commercial growing of Bt maize crops, the risk assessment studies are still few and most of them tend to raise more open questions than solving concerns.

  • A. Lorch, 2007. Transgener Treibstoff. GID 182: 29-32

    Since it became common knowledge that fossil oil supplies won't stretch endlessly, a hectic search started for other sources of oil. Especially the debate about so-called 'biofuels' or 'agrofuels' was high on the agenda in the last months, even though problems become obvious. GM agrofuels will also bring their own problems.

  • A. Lorch & Ch. Then. Greenpeace Germany report, May 2007.

    In the growing season 2006, Greenpeace sampled leaves from commercially cultivated MON810 in Germany and Spain and found that Bt contents were very variable and often very low, but also that even 10 years into the cultivation of Bt crops, there is no standardised method to determine Bt contents. The results are published in this report.

  • A. Lorch, 2007. GID 180: 23-27

    On 20 February 2007, the EU Environmental Ministers are supposed to decide on an application by BASF for the cultivation of a genetically modified potato. BASF seems to be optimistic that this application will be approved: the company already registered in January more then 150 hectares in the German states Brandenburg and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern for commercial cultivation. But somehow nobody seems to raise this issue, nobody seems to oppose it. Five good reasons to act against the approval of BASF's GM potato Amflora.

  • Edited version of comments submitted to EFSA's 'Open consultation on Starch potato EH92-527-1', December 2006.

    BASF applied for approval for the cultivation of the GM starch potato Amflora, as well as for its use as food and feed. Even though the application does not include any sufficient information to evaluate its environmental and food/feed safety, the EFSA gave a positive opinion.

  • A. Lorch, 2006. GID 178: 5-11.

    Gentechnisch veränderter Reis ist in den Handel gelangt, obgleich er weder in den Vereinigten Staaten noch in der Europäischen Union eine Zulassung besitzt. Wie es dazu kommen konnte, ist derzeit noch nicht geklärt.

  • Lorch A 2005. In: Potthast et al. (eds.): Die richtingen Maße für die Nahrung. Ethik in den Wissenschaften 17: 227-243.

    GM plants are often put forward as a chance for developing countries to combat hunger. However, the evaluation of GM plants grown in developing countries or developed for them show that they fail to reach this goal. The examples of virus-resistant sweet-potatoes, pro-vitamin A rice and Bt maize show that these GM crops are an inappropriate approach to solve the issues that cause hunger and poverty. GM crops are a technology and supply-driven approach to development cooperation, instead of an demand-driven approach, and their introduction is often against the outspoken wishes of developing countries.

  • A. Lorch, 2005. Greenpeace report.

    Some more details on recent findings on the EFSA opinions about the MON863 hybrids MON863xMON810, MON863xNK603 and MON863xMON810xNK603 (EFSA 2005):

  • Greenpeace International Report by A. Lorch, September 2005.

    This new report, written on behalf of Greenpeace, shows that no serious investigation was conducted on the effects of Bt11 maize on the environment and on animals feeding on it. Why does EFSA accepts a notification that lacks so much information, and why does it discard the existing scientific literature?
    The report shows that no serious investigation was conducted on the toxicity of this GM maize or its impact on the environment, such as detrimental effects on useful or protected insect species. Furthermore, already published scientific results on possible negative environmental consequences of this GM maize were widely ignored by EFSA.