Ammann, K. (2004) - entsteht die Website


6 Δεκ 2012 (πριν από 4 χρόνια και 4 μήνες)

138 εμφανίσεις

Public Research & Regulation
Foundation with the objective to involve the public research sector in regulations
and international agreements that are relevant

First meeting March 3-4, 2005 of the Initiative

Klaus Ammann
Some Impressions about Science,
Regulation and Politics in Europe
We live in a risk minded society; see
Adams, J. (1994)
Risk Ucl Pr Ltd (August 1, 1995), IS: 1857280679, pp 228
Adams 1994, amended
Distorted Risk Perception I
Distorted Risk Perception II

November 1, 1999
The Ordinance on the release of organisms into the environment
enters into force.

November 17, 2000
Application for an experimental release by the Swiss Federal Institute
of Technology at Zürich (FITZ) (Dr. Christof Sautter). The Swiss
Agency for Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL) rejects the
file, because it is incomplete

January 4, 2000
The revised application is submitted.

February 13, 2001
Publication of the application in the Federal Law Gazette

February 2001
Additional information is required to the FITZ by the SAEFL, the Swiss
Expert Committee for Biosafety (SECB) and the competent authorities
of the canton Zürich.

July / October 2001
The required additional information is submitted by the FITZ.
The absurd regulation history of a 8m2 experiment
of GMO wheat in Switzerland I

November 20, 2001
The application is denied by the SAEFL release by the
SAEFL Decision of the SAEFL

December 31, 2001
The FITZ files a complaint to the SAEFL decision of
November 20, 2001 at the Federal Department of
Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications

September 12, 2002
The DETEC approves the complaint of the FITZ. The SAEFL
must re-examine the deliberate release application of
genetically modified wheat.Press release of the DETEC
Decision of the DETEC Press release of the SAEFL

December 20, 2002
The application of the FITZ is granted under conditions by
the SAEFL.Press release of the SAEFL Decision of the
The absurd regulation history of a 8m2 experiment

of GMO wheat in Switzerland II

January 29, 2003
The residents of the trial site in Lindau (ZH), as well as IP-
Suisse and Greenpeace file a complaint to the SAEFL
decision of December 20, 2002 Press release

February 21, 2003
The DETEC withdraws the suspensive effect submitted
against the granted authorization of the SAEFL.Press release
of the DETEC

March 3, 2003The concerned residents file a complaint at the
Federal Tribunal against the DETEC decision of February 21,
2003.February 28, 2003Constitution of Support Group by the
SAEFL for the follow-up of the release trial.

March 12, 2003
The Federal Tribunal approves the complaint and restores
the suspensive effect.Decision of the Tribunal Federal Press
release of the DETEC
The absurd regulation history of a 8m2 experiment

of GMO wheat in Switzerland III

June 13, 2003The DETEC approves the complaint of the
residents. The application returns to the SAEFL for a
renewed evaluation.

July 22, 2003
The ETHZ submitted a new application for experimental
release of genetically modified wheat.Press release of the
SAEFL Official publication

October 30, 2003
The trial is authorized under conditions. Press release of the
SAEFL Decision

December 1, 2003
The residents of the trial site in Lindau (ZH), as well as IP-
Suisse and Greenpeace file a complaint to the SAEFL
decision of October 20, 2002
The absurd regulation history of a 8m2 experiment

of GMO wheat in Switzerland IV

February 27, 2004
The DETEC denies the complaint.Press release of the

March 8, 2004
Constitution of an accompaying group for the follow-up of the
field trial.

March 18, 2004
Sowing of the transgenic wheat seeds in field in Lindau.

The ETHZ harvested on July 14 the transgenic wheat
planted in field in Lindau. The first results are expected for
the end of the year.

July 14, 2004
End of field trial of genetically modified wheat by the the
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology at Zürich (ETHZ).
The absurd regulation history of a 8m2

of GMO wheat in Switzerland V
Minister Kühnast refuses to support 14 biosafety projects, which
have already been approved and granted, those projects are all
planned for the sake of biosafety and coexistence (2005-2007)
Minister Kühnast cuts the activity of Dr. Joachim Schiemann and
other researchers, ordering them to withdraw from research on
Biosafety projects which are already under way.
Dr. Schiemann is the president of the International Association
for Biosafety Research
Fundamentalistic attitudes I
in Germany
(headline by K.A.)
Fundamentalistic attitudes II
in Germany?
(headline by K.A.)
German ordinance Draft: 1000m safety distance for GM corn
proposed, based on a publication from Salamov 1940
After an expert decision, that 150m maximum would suffice
The government does not know the original paper and
has, see next slide, totally misinterpreted the text
Intervention in the German
Parliament about Salamov 1940
See full text:
The figures stated in the table show that the more or less effective flight of
the pollen of the pollinating variety into the plot of the pollinated variety in
pollen competitive conditions in the case described occurs only at
. It
should be taken into consideration that the pollen of the yellow-grain
varieties flew into the white-grain plots much further than 12m and even
200m, but its effectiveness was suppressed by the majority of white-grain
Therefore at 50 m from the plot boundary foreign pollination
practically did not exist
For the breeding of new varieties under strict isolation measures the
author recommends a maximum isolation distance of 200-300m.
Here one of the key paragraphs of the Salamov Study
(still a raw translation)
Salamov, A.B. (1940)
About Isolation in Corn. Sel. i. Sem., 3, pp 25-27
Precautionary Approach:
the original wording in the protocols
Term coined at Rio 1992
Convention of the Biological Diversity
Term based on REAL negative data,
trends difficult to project into the future
Precautionary Approach:
In the Biosafety Protocol:
Term in its concept changed
Now based on mainly unknown risks
difficult to project into the future


Hazard / Chance
Widespread definition, but onetrack-minded
Risk = Hazard x Likelyhood
Or worse:

Risk = Social bla bla x media frenzy
Ammann, K. (2004)

The Role of Science in the Application of the Precautionary Approach,.
In Molecular Farming, Plant-made
Pharmaceuticals and Technical Proteins
(eds R. Fischer & S. Schillberg), Vol. 1, pp. 291-302. Wiley-VCH
Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim,
Familiarity Approach
some more precise definition:
Regional differenciation
Monitoring basic research
Differenciation according
to new traits
The OECD Familiarity Approach or,2665,en_2649_37437_1_1_1_1_37437,00.html
Article 14:
Parties may enter into bilateral and multilateral agreements
and arrangements regarding international transboundary
movements of LMOs, consistent with the objective of this
Protocol and provided that such agreements and
This is where the
Familiarity Approach
could be introduced in
new interpretations:
Bt strategy in crops
: hundreds of high quality papers
have shown that there are
no major problems
left to be solved.
Even toxicological studies in the lab have shown that the effects
many non-target insects are minor (example of the lacewings)
Romeis et al. 2004.
Candolfi et al. 2004: Baseline comparison shows clear benefits
of Bt-crops over pesticide spraying
Orius, Wirkung von Karate (Pestizid)
Candolfi, M.P., Brown, K., Grimm, C., Reber, B., & Schmidli, H. (2004)
A faunistic approach to assess potential side-effects of genetically modified Bt-corn on non-target
arthropods under field conditions. Biocontrol Science and Technology, 14, 2, pp 129-170
Titel der Arbeit von Romeis et al.
Romeis, J., Dutton, A., & Bigler, F. (2004)
Bacillus thuringiensis toxin (Cry1Ab) has no direct effect on larvae of the green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea
(Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Journal of Insect Physiology, 50, 2-3, pp 175-183
and evaluation F1000:
See also the overall report on the impact of agricultural biotechnology on biodiversity:
Ammann, K.

Electronic Source: the impact of agricultural biotechnology on biodiversity, a review, published by: Klaus
Ammann, accessed: 2004
Vergleichs-Resultate der Fütterungsstude v. Romeis
Romeis et al. 2004
Make sure that you check every week at least 3 times the website:
Ammann, K. & Papazova Ammann, B. (2004)

Factors Influencing Public Policy Development in Agricultural Biotechnology.
(ed S. Shantaram), Vol. 9, pp. 1552. Wiley and
Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
P. Christou & H. Klee: Handbook of Plant Biotechnology,
For a text, Klick
Ask Force
The original link behind:
Contact Kim Meulenbroeks via
Our goal: promote Life Sciences in Europe
Information hub 
and networking 
young scientist
Career services 
and opportunities
Being a platform 
for independent 
The Young European Biotech Network

A dynamic community of young Life Scientists
Current selected projects

public communication of life sciences
and biotechnology by students and young

funded by the Framework Programm 6
of the EU

Job migration:
publish a call from Young Scientists
for European Leaders on how to create a more
favourable business and regulatory climate in Europe
in order to stop the migration of Europe’s young

Job matching platform:
a pan-European job matching
database for job-search in the field of Life Sciences,
co-operation with the Swiss Biotech Association,
funded by the Swiss KTI
Not this kind of future, PLEASE
Demonstration of
Swiss Researchers
Amish farmers in biotech-debate: subsequent partial adoption
of transgenic crops: 1999, see: