In July, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) appointed new experts for the ‘GMO Panel’, which is responsible for the assessment of genetically engineered organisms. Research conducted by Testbiotech found that the panel now includes a large number of researchers involved in the development of genetically engineered (GE) plants, some of whom have links to industry, and are actively lobbying for the deregulation of new genetic engineering (NGT).
The panel is responsible for the risk assessment of genetically engineered plants and for developing risk assessment guidelines. Testbiotech has previously uncovered a number of cases of conflicts of interest in the panel. It has now taken a closer look at the official declarations of interest submitted by the newly appointed experts.
The research shows that, amongst other things, almost half of the 16 panel members are involved in the development of transgenic or NGT plants. In a number of cases, there were or are collaborations with industry, such as Syngenta and Corteva (formerly Pioneer/DowDuPont). Five experts on the panel have also applied for patents on transgenic or NGT plants, often together with companies. The chair of the GMO Panel even advises industry on EFSA risk assessment.
Although specialist knowledge about the development of genetically engineered plants is certainly relevant to their risk assessment, the GMO panel at the EFSA, in the past, has never been so one-sidedly staffed by developers of GE plants. This inevitably reduces the number of experts on the panel whose competence lies in crucial areas, such as ecology, and who are not looking at risk assessment from the development perspective.
In addition, close cooperation with industry creates obvious conflicts of interest that EFSA has not adequately assessed as part of the selection process. Panel chairs are subject to particularly strict rules regarding conflicts of interest, so the careless handling of the chair’s advisory activities seems particularly incomprehensible.
Testbiotech is also concerned that many panel members are active in organisations such as EPSO, EU-SAGE and ARRIGE, which are currently lobbying for the deregulation of NGT plants. Further research also revealed that some panel members support lobby organisations, even though this is not mentioned in their declarations of interest.
Overall, the analysis shows that pro-GE activists and developers of genetically engineered plants have gained considerable influence in the risk assessment of GMOs in the EU. From Testbiotech’s point of view, it will be hardly possible to conduct independent risk assessment – or to further develop adequate risk assessment guidelines.
The findings raise questions regarding the selection process and the independence policy of the authority, including its management, which is responsible for the appointment of the experts. According to Testbiotech, the composition of the panel shows the signature of the outgoing Executive Director, Bernhard Url.
Already during the discussions on the regulation of NGTs, Testbiotech warned that Url has allowed EFSA to be turned into a kind of service institution for the EU Commission and the interests of industry.
Therefore, when filling the new Executive Director position, strict attention must be paid to competence and independence. In addition, the composition of the GMO Panel urgently needs correction.
Contact:
Christoph Then, info@testbiotech.org, Tel + 49 151 54638040
Further information: