Recall that Nigeria is still under ban by the EU for unacceptable levels of a pesticide–dichlorvos on her beans
Now, the African Centre for Biodiversity (formerly African Centre for Biosafety) has come out to frown at the continued use of what it called ‘questionable’ data on pesticides by African countries. The South Africa based centre published a report titled ‘No Safe Limits for Toxic Pesticides in our foods’ in July 2017. The Maximum Residue Limits now seems suspect
No established safe levels
for toxic pesticides
The safe levels for pesticides that are
determined by regulators have been widely
scrutinised for being outdated, inadequate
and heavily influenced by industry, which has
even participated in the regulatory approvals
of glyphosate for the EU, making the integrity
of the entire process questionable. Some
of the concerns surrounding the approval
process and the acceptable daily intake (ADI)
doses include:
1.
Tests rely on industry studies alone,
which remain unpublished and kept as
confidential commercial secrets. This
means that data cannot be independently
scrutinised and comes with clear conflict
of interest.
2.
Only the active ingredient is tested,
despite the fact that certain adjuvants
added to commercial formulations are
toxic and has also been shown to increase
toxicity of the active ingredient itself
(Mesnage et al., 2014).
3.
Most regulatory tests are more than
20 years old for glyphosate, 2,4-D and
glufosinate and therefore have not taken
into account recent independent data
showing toxicity.
4.
No tests are done on low doses that are
below the ADI.
5.
Combinatorial effects of multiple
pesticides are not tested.
6.
The ADI differs in various regions, from the
EU to China, the United States and South
Africa, questioning a scientific consensus on safety
For full report please visit==https://acbio.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/No-Safe-Limits-for-Toxic-Pesticides-in-Our-Food.pdf
FURTHER NOTES ON NEW AFLATOXIN- PRODUCING SPECIES
The report of the new aflatoxin producing species Aspergillus korhogoensis, was confirmed to belong to distinct clade and heterothallic. The isolates were able to produce B and G aflatoxin, aspergillic acid, cyclopiazonic acid aflavarins, asparazones and other metabolites.
This finding has further increased the need to be extravigilant in food safety across West African sub region and the world in general
The publication by Carvagal-Campos et al 2017 was published in TOXINS. For more please visit
http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/9/11/353/htm
Nov 12 2017
NEW AFLATOXIN -PRODUCING SPECIES INCREASES FOOD SAFETY SCARE !!!
The discovery of a new species == Aspergillus korhogoensis has been reported in the West African nation Cote D’Ivoire. In the report by many researchers comprising nationals of USA, France, Cote D Ivoire and Nigeria, The new species also confirmed to produce aflatoxin , a mycotoxin common on grains and other crops particularly in store on has further raised the scare on food safety in Sub saharan African.
The paper was published today in the current edition of the scientific journal——-TOXINS 2017, 9, 353; doi:10.3390/toxins9110353
For further readings , please go to
WORLD FOOD DAY AT BABCOCK UNIVERSITY
On October 16, 2017 the world Food day was observed at Babcock University, Ilishan remo Ogun state. It was in partnership with Mushroom Development Foundation Highlights were presentation of awards to outstanding stakeholders ion the Agriculture and Food industry . Awardees included Chief Kessington Adebutu, Chief Oba Otudeko, the chairman of All Farmers Association of Nigeria AFAN, Lagos state Otunba Femi Oke, and Chief Kuteyi . The Vice Chancellor Prof Ademola S Tayo commended the organizers and expressed the readiness of BU to go into productive partnership with corporate bodies in the current spirit of entrepreneurship and alternative revenue sources for the institution
Other dignitaries present were Chief Oyewole form Ishara remo , Chief Jimi Abiodun , Mr Ariyibi who represented the state commissioner for Trade
Presentations were made by Dr Agbato (Junior) of Animal Care , Ogere and Chief Kuteyi of Spectra. The President, Mushroom Development Foundation Mrs Tolani Roberts and Dr Tony Wemton Owatemi spoke about their experiences and the urgent need to convert wastes to wealth in Nigeria. Dr Owatemi expressed the willingness of MDF to go into collaboration with Babcock University in this regard with the hope of making the project a signature endeavour for the University.
Reported by DF
ANY GMO CRISIS IN SWAZILAND ?
The GMO crisis in Swaziland…
Author: Teboho S Oct 18, 2017
By Tsakasile Dlamini
Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (Pelum) Swaziland Country Coordinator
October 2017
Swaziland is under enormous pressure to introduce genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the country’s farming system. This pressure is coming not only from Monsanto but also from farmers and some sections of the public who have been fed a great deal of misinformation and hype by the pro-biotech machinery. The farmers, acting on incomplete and often unsubstantiated information, are pushing for the adoption of genetically modified (GM) cotton, in the hope that it will give them greater yields, while reducing the costs of production.
Currently, according to Swaziland’s legislation, to import GM products or live GMOs (seeds) one needs to apply for a permit; a lengthy process that requires evidence that the GMO in question is safe. However, it is an open secret that farmers are bringing GM cotton and maize seed into the country illegally from South Africa because they have been informed that GM-based farming is more cost effective. It is unfortunate that a majority of our cotton farmers are told disingenuously about the “great yields and benefits” of GM cotton and not about the dangers associated with this technology. There is a serious lack of accurate information that would enable them to make informed decisions.
The biggest problem with introducing Bt cotton into Swaziland is that it only controls one pest – the bollworm – and doesn’t solve the other problems cotton farmers face in this country. For example, there is a serious shortage of water in the Lubombo region, where a majority of cotton farming takes place. Even with Bt cotton, farmers will still face water shortages, low cotton prices, secondary pests and – worse yet – resistant bollworms that will now require even more expensive and toxic sprays. In fact, Bt cotton will prove to be a more expensive and unsustainable option for cotton growing farmers.
The Swaziland Cotton Board has made no effort to explore effective organic pest control measures, which could be sustainable economically and ecologically in the long term. Organic cotton also fetches a premium price at the market, a factor that is not being adequately shared with cotton farmers in Swaziland.
Furthermore, the Swaziland Environment Authority (SEA) has allowed the Swaziland Cotton Board to conduct confined field trials at several sites in the country, where they are growing BT cotton to test whether it is suitable for release into the environment. PELUM was once invited to view these “amazing” Bt cotton fields, and what we saw was a crop heavily infested with mealy bugs. So, the bollworm may have been temporarily controlled but what came next was a wave of secondary pests that threatened the performance of the GM cotton. The farmers were not told that in almost every country that has adopted Bt cotton, secondary pests have become a major problem.
In fact, incomplete data in a report on the confined field trials has been used as the basis for an application for permission to commercially grow Bt cotton in the country, which the Swaziland Cotton Board submitted to the SEA. The report doesn’t include any information about secondary pests (such as jassid infestation) that became a problem in some of the fields). It also carries no data on the effects of Bt cotton on soil quality. Were any changes brought about? The trials seem to have focused only on yield potential and adaptability of the two Indian varieties (JKAL 1947 and JKCH 1050).
PELUM Swaziland and its partners have made quite a lot of noise about this application, publishing articles in the media, submitting objection letters to the SEA and coming together to march to the SEA offices and deliver petitions to the SEA signed by farmers against the introduction of GM cotton in the country. Thirty people joined the march and delivered a petition with over 80 signatures on 15 September 2017, followed by another petition signed by 101 farmers, which was delivered on 30 September 2017.
What is worse is that industry and the Swaziland Cotton Board have lobbied legislators to support amendments to our Biosafety Act, in order to weaken the law. The legislators were taken on a “LEARNING” visit to South Africa (11 May 2016) and India (13–19 November 2016) where they were shown the “success” of Bt cotton and just how much Swaziland would also benefit if the crops were commercially released in the country. They were then informed that the Biosafety Act of 2012 is too strict and not conducive for the GMO companies to conduct business with farmers in Swaziland. An amendment of the strict liability and redress clause was proposed as the only way to ensure that farmers would have access to GM seeds. However, farmers did not realise that the amendment would also make it easier for GM companies to conduct business in the country, while stripping them of any protection from damage and loss as a result of this technology, as has already occurred in Burkina Faso.
To the best of my knowledge, the proposed amendments to the Biosafety Act of 2012 have not yet been adopted, as Parliament has not conducted a public consultation or validation workshop. As part of civil society, PELUM and its partners, Africa Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) and Third World Network (TWN), are eagerly awaiting such a workshop, where we will submit our objections to the proposed amendments.
The applications by the Swaziland Cotton Board and Nisela Farm for commercial release of Bt cotton, currently under review by the National Biosafety Advisory Committee, propose to roll out the GM cottonseed to all interested cotton farmers across the country, without even a proper assessment or database of the location of these farmers’ fields. This goes against the “precautionary approach” of the Biosafety Act and the Cartagena Protocol to which Swaziland is a Party.
There is an urgent need to create awareness on the dangers of this technology, as well as the possible alternatives that farmers should rather be exploring; in particular, agroecology.
NEW EU ORGANIC REGULATIONS ATTRACT EXPERT SCRUTINY
The new Organic Regulation – status quo and outlook
by Karin Heinze
Part of panel discussing pro and contra of the new EU Organic Regulation. From the left side: Toomas Kevvai, Deputy Secretary-General for Food Security and Development of the Rural Ministry of Estonia, Elena Panichi, Deputy Head of the Organic Unit DG AGRI, European Commission and Professor Nic Lampkin, Organic Research Centre, UK.© Karin Heinze
At the IFOAM EU Organic Congress in Tallinn representatives of the EU and of the organic sector discussed pro and contra of the new European Organic Regulation. After a record time of more than three years and 18 trilogues Regulatino probably will be launched in June 2020, although neither the Council and Commission nor the Parliament and the stakeholders of the organic sector are completely satisfied with the compromise.
At the panel discussion moderated by Markus Arbenz Managing Director of IFOAM Organics International, Elena Panichi, Deputy Head of the Organic Unit DG AGRI, European Commission, looked back to the very long negotiations about the proposal of the Commission. She explained that the negotiated compromise that was found under the EU-presidency of Malta in June will be the base of the further working out of the Regulation.
She expects the final meetings of the Commission and the Council for the Regulation in October/ November and after that the vote of the Parliament. Ms. Panichi was confident that the Regulation will be a harmonization of the organic law for all EU members. Toomas Kevvai, Deputy Secretary-General for Food Security and Development of the Rural Ministry of Estonia, which has the EU Presidency till the end of the year, said “certainly it is a compromise but that from the view of the member states it is acceptable.
Markus Arbenz, IFOAM Organics International, moderated the panel. From the left side: Prof. Nic Lampkin, Markus Arbenz, Martin Häusling (MEP), translator, Thomas Fertl (IFOAM EU Board) © Karin Heinze
Martin Häusling, Member of the European Parliament and chief negotiator for the Organic Regulation emphasised: “Nobody is really and completely satisfied with the compromise paper. But after three years of negotiations I can say that we reached a draft that has an added value for the organic sector.” He added: There are 600 pages of the text and you must not only look at some problematic issues, because there is a true potential to make a the Regulation a senseful tool for the sector. As Professor Nic Lampkin from the Organic Research Centre in UK said, organic is much more than commodities free from pesticides. He explained that he can understand the unsecurity about this new regulation but he also reassures that there will be ways to handle the new regulation.
Associations call for further improvements
Thomas Fertl Board Member of IFOAM EU and BioAustria explained that he, IFOAM and other organic associations could not see the added value for the organic sector. He said: “It is no secret that the organic sector was not asking for a new regulation and that associations are sure that the work on the current regulation would have been more fruitful than a new draft.” Among others he quoted the regulations for residues in the draft and the import issues.
Professor Nic Lampkin outlined that there is the need of a regulation, but it should be a baseline and not a prison for organic producers. If rules are too restrictive and block the producers in their activities and innovation the regulation is on a wrong way. „In fact the Regulation should encourage organic farmers“, he said.
The participants from all over Europe listened the interesting discussions. © Karin Heinze
Private activities are welcome
Elena Panichi explained that every party in the process has its own role. She reminded the panel and the auditorium also that there are many other tools in the EU and that private activities are very welcome. An example is the European Innovation Partnership that brings new ideas also to the organic sector. Ms. Panichi also mentioned new tool that should strengthen farmers and there private along the food chain were more than welcome. On a global level there is a new initiative called ´plurilateral meets` that is involving the biggest players in the organic sector like the US, Canada, Europe, Switzerland, Chile, Japan and South Korea. In these talks the harmonisation of the international rules is discussed. This should make international trade easier and lower the burden for farmers and traders, Panichi said. Martin Häusling reqired fair rules for international competition.
Source=http://organic-market.info/news-in-brief-and-reports-article/the-new-organic-regulation-status-quo-and-outlook.html
AFRICAN CENTRE REPORTS ON FISP IN MOZAMBIQUE
African Centre for Biodiversity <webmaster@acbio.org.za>
www.acbio.org.za
PO Box 29170, Melville 2109 South Africa
Tel: +27 (0)11 486 1156
Dear Friends and colleagues
The African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB), shares with you the position of civil society organisations on Farm Input Subsidy Programme in Mozambique.
The CSO statement criticizes the farm input subsidy programme (FISP of the government of Mozambique, which promotes the use of hybrid seed, toxic agrochemicals, ecologically harmful synthetic fertilisers and expensive agricultural implements and machinery.
During the period 2007-2013, the Mozambican government spent a staggering $1.1-billion on synthetic fertiliser programmes, creating enormous profits for fertiliser companies. Despite this expenditure, the agricultural sector is far from securing sufficient nutritious food for 25 million Mozambicans.
For CSOs in Mozambique, the way in which the FISP is structured, it is creating high levels of farmer dependency on expensive agricultural inputs, reducing seed and crop diversity, while threatening to make farmers’ seeds obsolete. The program is also bolstering the monopoly of companies that produce and supply farm inputs and creating enormous ecological problems such as damage to the soils through the use of synthetic fertilisers. FISP is also deepening inequalities between small-scale and commercial farmers. According to the groups, this kind of programme does not build a sustainable agricultural system able to cope with economic pressures and the effects of climate change.
As an alternative to the current FISP, the CSOs are encouraging their government to support an agricultural system that promotes agro-ecological practices for food, feed and fibre production. This includes the promotion and use of indigenous seed and respect for and maintenance of traditional knowledge and cultural traditions and practices.
Kind regards ACB team
22 Oct 2017
Source=www.acbio.org.za
MOIN-MOIN IN NYLON CAUSES CANCER—EXPERT
Food
Cooking ‘Moi-moi’ in nylons dangerous, expert warns
admin 0 Comments
A dietician, Mr John Tehinse, has warned people against cooking moi-moi and other foods in nylons or cellophane bags as it produced dioxins, a toxic substance that causes cancer.
Tehinse gave the warning on Tuesday in Ilorin at an awareness campaign on food safety organised by the Food Safety Awareness Campaign Initiatives, funded by the European Union.
Moin-moin is a Nigerian steamed bean pudding made from a mixture of washed and peeled black-eyed peas, onions and fresh ground peppers.
It is a protein-rich, staple food in Nigeria and has its origin in West Africa.
In his lecture entitled: “Food Safety Control System in Nigeria”, he explained that cooking Moin-moin, a local delicacy of bean pudding, in nylon had become widespread while people were unaware of the dangers.
The food safety expert said nylons or cellophane bags produced dioxins when heated, adding “they are a group of chemically-related compounds that are persistent environmental pollutants (POPs)’’.
Tehinse further warned that dioxins were highly toxic and could cause reproductive and developmental problems, damage the immune system, interfere with hormones and also cause cancer.
He advised people to use the traditional leaves to cook the food.
The dietician also called for good food practices in Nigeria and urged restaurant owners to look at the business as public service.
Food business is not only to make money but a calling to protect public health and ensure what they offer to consumers is safe,” he said.
Source: NAN
http://www.diasporatv.com.ng/category/life/food/
Mycotoxins and Adsorbing Agent on antibiotic bioavailability in Pigs
by Goossens et al
For more
visit www.engormix.com
AFRICA WARNS !!!—–NO SAFE LIMITS FOR TOXIC PESTICIDES
Recall that Nigeria is still under ban by the EU for unacceptable levels of a pesticide–dichlorvos on her beans
Now, the African Centre for Biodiversity (formerly African Centre for Biosafety) has come out to frown at the continued use of what it called ‘questionable’ data on pesticides by African countries. The South Africa based centre published a report titled ‘No Safe Limits for Toxic Pesticides in our foods’ in July 2017. The Maximum Residue Limits now seems suspect
IN TANZANIA, SUNFLOWER SEEDS ALSO CONTAIN AFLATOXIN !!!!
Aflatoxins, toxins produced by Aspergillus moulds commonly infect corn, peanuts, pistachios and almonds. The US study (done in Tanzania) is one of the first studies to associate aflatoxin contamination with sunflower seeds. Samples of sunflower seeds (n = 90) and cakes (n = 92) were collected across 2 years, and analysed for total aflatoxin concentrations using a direct competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
For seed samples collected June-August 2014, the highest aflatoxin concentrations were from Dodoma (1.7–280.6 ng/g), Singida (1.4–261.8 ng/g), and Babati-Manyara (1.8–162.0 ng/g). The highest concentrations for cakes were from Mbeya (2.8–97.7 ng/g), Dodoma (1.9–88.2 ng/g), and Singida (2.0–34.3 ng/g). For seed samples collected August-October 2015, the highest concentrations were from Morogoro (2.8–662.7 ng/g), Singida (1.6–217.6 ng/g) and Mbeya (1.4–174.2 ng/g). The highest concentrations for cakes were from Morogoro (2.7–536.0 ng/g), Dodoma (1.4–598.4 ng/g) and Singida (3.2–52.8 ng/g).
Juma Mmongoyo, a former MSU food science doctoral student and lead author of the study, analysed aflatoxin levels of seeds and cakes in 7 regions of Tanzania in 2014 and 2015. Nearly 60% of seed samples and 80% of cake samples were contaminated with aflatoxins. “These high aflatoxin levels, in a commodity frequently consumed by the Tanzanian population, indicate that local authorities must implement interventions to prevent and control aflatoxin contamination along the sunflower commodity value chain, to enhance food and feed safety in Tanzania,” said Gale Strasburg, MSU food science and human nutrition professor and one of the study’s co-authors.
Smallholder farmers in Tanzania grow sunflowers for the seeds, which are then sold to local millers who press the seeds for oil and sell it to local consumers for cooking. The remaining cakes are used as animal feed.
The study has been published in PLOS ONE.
Source: ScienceDaily
http://www.allaboutfeed.net/Raw-Materials/Articles/2017/5/Sunflower-seeds-often-contain-aflatoxins-138093E/?intcmp=related-content
Sept 2017