Some thoughts on the nuclear industry and GE food by Ute Mueller

The nuclear industry was driven by the US and British military industrial complexes that were eager to use the waste from reactors for the production of nuclear weapons. At some stage the nuclear weapon density on earth was enough to kill every man, woman and child 80 times over. We have seen a reduction in the number of those weapons while the number of the countries in the nuclear club has increased. The problem of save waste disposal has not been solved in more than 50 years.

In the early days of nuclear energy the technique was hailed by its proponents as being safe and too cheap too meter. We are now aware that the planet is dotted with potential time bombs. None of the promises have eventuated. The technology is outdated and we are unable to master the disposal in a responsible manner.

We should follow the NZ example and refuse to be a part of the hazardous cycle anymore. The long term risks for communities are not compensated for by the short-term profits of a few.

The same could be said for Genetic Engineering (GE). The industry is driven by transnational companies that alter existing crops in order to claim ownership on the 'new' product, so they can sell the seeds at huge profit margins.

To splice foreign into existing crops non-specific viruses are used as vectors. They have the potential to recombine with other pathogens in the environment to form new and potentially vary hazardous pathogens which could damage any existing form of life, including humans.

The question on WTO in the paper (Discussion Starter 5) is misleading. It is only an empty threat from the industry. The WTO does not oppose labeling of GE food and it will be introduced in Australia at the end of this year. Secondly, the WTO can not apply trade barriers or any other punishments on states or countries that reject the import of GE food. I received this information from the Tasmanian Health Minister Mrs Judy Jackson.

There are many other important consequences of the technology, which are too complicated to discuss in the format of this rough reply.

Ute Mueller