Sample Letters

10,Downing Street,
London.
SW1A 2AA

Dear Prime Minister,

------Having waded through masses of information about genetically engineered food, including independent scientific findings, I can only conclude that it poses serious dangers for human health and 'genetic pollution' of the ecology.
------The giant biotech companies like Monsanto and Novartis want to develop and sell the products of genetic engineering because of the $billions to be made. The USA is shamelessly using the WTO to force acceptance on us and Europe. That the unelected WTO can actually do this has staggering repercussions for the future of democracy and citizens rights. By what right do WTO 'Free Trade Rules' insist that unwanted products can be forced on hundreds of millions people?
------Every survey and poll shows that the great majority of the people of Britain and Europe do not want to eat genetically engineered food. Arrogantly dismissing these consumer demands, the biotech companies race ahead with research and development, while the regulators routinely approve their products, equating 'no evidence' with 'no risk'. The giant biotech companies intend to force on us a virtually 100% genetically engineered diet within about 10 years. TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!
------I greatly admire the position taken by Austria, despite the undemocratic corporate forces ranged against it. Will the government also support its citizens, refuse to submit to US and corporate demands, and take a strong stand against genetically engineered food? If the government does not intend to do so, will you please explain why not?

Yours sincerely,

John Rose

________________________________________________________________________________

Monsanto plc,
Corporation Road,
Newport,
Gwent.
NP9 0XF

Dear Sir,

Re: Genetically Engineered Food ------I could argue that genetically engineered food involves risks to human health and will cause irreversible 'genetic pollution' of the environment, which is backed up by independent experts and research.
------I could also argue that regulation only uses data supplied by the company seeking approval, with no independent testing. The onus is on the regulators to prove a product unsafe, rather than the company prove it is safe. In other words , 'no evidence' equates to 'no risk'.
------I know that discussion on those subjects would be pointless, as you will never accept the 'precautionary principle'. But what about the fact that 80% of Europeans do not want GE food? Are they just a nuisance, interfering with your commercial ambitions? Will you continue trying to force your unwanted products on hundreds of millions of unwilling consumers in Europe?

Yours faithfully,

John Rose

________________________________________________________________________________

BBC Viewer and Listener Correspondence,
Villiers House,
The Broadway,
London.
W5 2PA

Dear Sir,

------I'm surprised to hear so little about Genetic Engineering on your news. It is the most significant technology since nuclear and is likely to have an even greater impact on the planet and our lives.
------There are serious risks to health and there will be massive 'genetic pollution' of the environment. Biotech companies like Monsanto state that all commodity crops will be genetically engineered within 10 years, as well as thousands of other products that are already lined up for approval. If the development continues at such rapid pace, our diet will consist of virtually 100% genetically engineered food within 10 years. Even organic food, which excludes genetic food, is under threat in the US by their Department of Agriculture, and could be under threat across the world as standards are made uniform in the interest of 'Free Trade' by the World Trade Organisation.
------Opponents of genetic engineering include consumers, consumer organisations, independent scientists, European farmers, public health organisations, etc.. 97% of Europeans want labelling and 80% do not want genetic food at all. The USA and the biotech companies that are pushing ahead as if consumers were irrelevant, are doing so because they see $billions in profits.
------In view of such an extraordinary scenario, does this subject not deserve more TV coverage in the way of news and also a major documentary?

Yours faithfully,

John Rose

back to main page