GE & NZ'S National Party

Propaganda v Reality

Home | All Posts | Notes | Clips | Cards

1. National's Plan & Propaganda

The National Party of NZ intends to relax the regulations surrounding gene technology. In the process, are they whitewashing the truth about gene editing (GE)/gene modification (GM)?

In my opinion, the National Party's 13 page booklet on Harnessing Biotech is 13 pages of propaganda and reflects industry interests and NOT the interests or wishes of the people of New Zealand.

You can read an overview of their policy here and their booklet Harnessing Biotech here. It is a narrow-minded view and only includes quotes from people with vested interests. National also has this article on their website: National will end ban on GE and GM to benefit N.Z.

National says it will enable the safe use of gene technology in agriculture, health science and other sectors; and streamline approvals for trials. They also say certain gene technologies will be exempt from regulations.

How does reducing regulations enable the safe use of gene technology? How does exempting some NEW gene technologies enable safety? Such measures will obviously INCREASE RISKS. That's just plain commonsense; that's reality.

2. National's Reasons—Unrealistic!

National says their ending the effective ban will unlock enormous benefits for climate change, agriculture and health science. New Zealand will then benefit from the huge advances in gene technology, which will help protect the environment, safeguard water quality, help grow the economy, boost agriculture productivity, improve crop yields, reduce pesticide use, boost exports, reduce the cost of living, and lift incomes.

When something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Other countries who have few if any regulations have failed to realize the above.

On Reality Check Radio with Paul Brennan, Prof. Michael Antoniou Prof. of Molecular Genetics and Toxicology Kings College London, discussed why deregulation is NOT the way forward.

In this five minute clip, Prof. Antoniou explains why National’s reasons are unrealistic pipe dreams. He then goes on to explain why building on traditional techniques is the safe, beneficial, logical and doable way to go.

You can listen to the full interview here.

3. Outside-of-the-Lab Research—Danger Alert!

National says the present regulations make research outside the laboratory in NZ all but impossible. They say as other countries have relaxed or are relaxing regulations, we risk being left behind if we don't follow suit.

National points out, at present our scientists go overseas to conduct outside-of-the-lab research. Therefore, I claim there is NO compelling reason to take risks here in NZ for such research. Let them do it overseas!

Actually, there is NO ban on gene technology in NZ. It is possible to do field trials etc. if certain safety conditions are met. But the actors in this field obviously do not want to do the safety testing. Under the proposed regulations, the current safety conditions will be relaxed. This is NOT enabling safety; it is enabling endangerment.

There have been 13 field trials in New Zealand and NOT one of them have shown benefit. For instance, in the trials, the GE brassica plants got bacterial rot, the GE onions performed poorly, and experiments with GE animals resulted in so much suffering and deformity, the poor animals had to be killed.

After 15 years, these transgenic animal experiments have been an expensive failure. Members of the public have expressed serious concerns about the cruelty and unnecessary suffering the sentient animals have endured…

Read the Government’s Rosy View on Biotechnology Doesn’t Match Export Demand for Non-GMO food

And listen to Claire Bleakley talk about the above and more on Reality Check Radio here.

4. NO Labelling / NO Traceability

National says consumers will know if they are eating genetically modified food as National supports labelling. But their claim is misleading.

As significant categories of GE technologies will be exempt from regulation, many GE foods will not be labelled. Therefore, we won't know! Such foods will likely go under the radar if they are causing any problems.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) are also in the process of deregulating categories of GE foods. See previous post: https://flagnfix.substack.com/p/FSANZ-friend-or-foe.

Guy Hatchard brings attention to this in his article Urgent: Government Plans To Remove Gene Food Labelling:

This is a key part of the government’s programme for biotechnology deregulation. They are well aware that if GM foods are labelled, the public will not buy them in any quantity. So their simple solution, take away labelling thus forcing the public to buy into the biotech paradigm…

It is interesting to see how they are going about enacting these huge changes to the food chain. Firstly, it is being achieved through regulation rather than parliamentary legislation. This has a lower profile and occurs over a short time period. It avoids any meaningful opportunity for the public to lobby their MP. In any case, a regulator will now decide the menu for us.

National claims genetic science has advanced considerably in recent decades, notably the invention of the CRISPR process, which allows precise changes to be made to genes.

Once again, National’s claim is misleading. There is precision in gene manipulation, but NO precision in the resulting intended or unintended outcomes, which could be harmful, and extremely so. The word precision is used as a marketing ploy to imply safety. The term precision is used to gain government and public confidence in the technology. But in effect, the outcomes of GE are anything but precise.

Also, it is not the size or the number of genetic modifications that is important, but the consequences. New GE techniques can create mutations that are different from those arising naturally or from conventional breeding. In case studies, new GE techniques have resulted in unexpected changes in the composition of the plant, which could give rise to nutritional, allergenic or toxicity problems or pose long-term risks to wild or cultivated compatible plants. See here, here and here.

New Genetic Techniques are often referred to as New Breeding Techniques. As most people do not want GMOs, I believe the government/industry use the misnomer to fool the public. What other reason could there be?

From the same interview mentioned above, this clip’s about Prof. Michael Antoniou talking on how this technology is nowhere near as precise, predictable and safe as Government and Industry claim.

All GE foods need to be labelled. They have the potential to cause damage to the gut, the bowel and the immune system. This has been observed in research on animals that were fed GE foods.

It will be extremely hard to prove a GE/GM product is unsafe when those pushing it are in the driving seat.

For instance, it would be relatively easy to compare the Covid 19 vaccinated outcomes to the unvaccinated per 100,000 but, to my knowledge, our leaders/health officials REFUSE to do that, or if they have, they haven’t released the information—why? They want the significant extent of vaccine harm to remain buried? They don’t want to face the consequences? This is an indication of what they might find, obtained via an OIA request, see here.

The genetic mRNA 'vaccines' were considered safe and effective but now a huge and growing body of evidence questions/refutes such claims. See this article by Guy Hatchard: No One Need Allow Themselves to Be Fooled for a Second Time and this is a must-watch video on the Forest of the Fallen, deaths from mRNA genetic vaccines.

In this clip, listen to Guy Hatchard talk about the dangers of mRNA technology and their link to cancer. You can listen to the full RCR interview here on the dangers of deregulatiing biotechnology and gmos…

I believe it will be NO different with other gene technology. Harms or inconvenient truths will likely be buried and will be blamed on anything but the gene technology itself since powerful, international players with loads of money are involved and reputations will be at stake.

If gene technologies are relaxed, New Zealand's beautiful, natural organic products will be permitted to be adulterated with up to 1% GE contamination, which will likely increase with time.

Also, as some GE seeds/plants will be exempt from regulation and labelling, conventional and organic growers will NOT know if the seeds or plants they use are in reality GMOs.

Classifying certain GE products as non-GE, not labelling certain GE products, and in effect allowing organic produce/products to be contaminated with GE is irrational, reckless and harmful.

Summary

The National Party is using propaganda and NOT reality to fool us into accepting gene-technology. National's unrealistic claims about the benefits are based on industry spin.

National says it will end NZ's effective ban on gene-editing/gene-modification. That is also deceptive. If industry proves safety, they can do field trials.

National says it will enable the safe use of gene technology, and then in the same breath says it will exempt new breeding techniques from regulation etc. Their proposed policy will result in a flood of gene-modified organisms into our clean, green environment. New gene-modification techniques = NO track-record of safety.

National says they support labelling—they say we have a right to know if we are eating GM foods. But they did not add broad categories of GE products will be reclassified as non-GM. That's deceptive.

It will be almost impossible to prove GE harm. Those in the driving seat will ignore inconvenient truths, as they have done with vaccine harms.

I believe, the proposed regulations are NOT for our benefit but for the benefit of the GE industry complex.

The next article will cover more of National’s GE policy and more associated red flags.