FOODprint action: 100,000 people want food without genetic engineering
by Leo Frühschütz (comments: 0)
For ten months, organic food producer Rapunzel, supported by 30 companies and associations from the organic sector, has collected confessions against genetic engineering in the field and on the plate. Now representatives of the organic movement handed over the colorfully printed fabric sheets and signature lists of the FOODprint initiative to Federal Environment Minister Svenja Schulze. 108,000 people participated.
Elke Röder, member of the board of the organic umbrella organisation BÖLW, emphasized during the handover of the fabric and signatures that genetic engineering plants or animals from nature can hardly be retrieved. That's why it is crucial “that the German government enforces the precautionary principle in new genetic technologies such as 'Crispr-Cas' or 'targeted mutagenesis'”. The federal government had committed itself to this in the coalition agreement. Röder also clarified what precaution means in this case from the point of view of the organic sector: “Before the market launch, genetic engineering must continue to be assessed for risk in the future; there must be verification procedures for the new constructs, monitoring, traceability and liability rules for the event of damage. And so that customers can continue to choose freely what they grow or eat, labelling must ensure transparency on the label.”
FoodPrint position paper with several requirements
FOODprint was launched in September 2017 at the One World Festival by Rapunzel. The manufacturer collected further footprints and handprints at the organic trade fairs, while the signature lists were displayed in the organic specialist trade. The action was linked to a position paper with several demands: New genetic engineering methods should “be regulated by law in the same way as classical genetic engineering. With risk assessment, approval procedures, traceability and labelling.” In addition, the polluter pays principle is to be applied consistently, in that users and opertors of genetic engineering processes “bear all additional costs, e.g. separation of the flow of goods and analyses arising from genetic engineering applications.” FOODprint called for public funding for independent risk research and organic seed breeding.
Even after the transfer, the claims can still be supported by a signature of the petition.
Video © Rapunzel/FOODprint