VZCZCXRO1176
RR RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
DE RUEHFR #1448/01 1011129
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 111129Z APR 07
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6410
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES
RUEHMRE/AMCONSUL MARSEILLE 1649
RUEHSR/AMCONSUL STRASBOURG 0387
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 2640
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 PARIS 001448 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
BRUSSELS PASS USEU FOR AGMINCOUNSELOR 
STATE FOR EB; EUR/ERA, EUR/WE, EUR/PPD, IIP AND 
ECA EEB/TPP/ABT(SPIRNAK); 
STATE PASS USTR FOR MURPHY; 
USDA/OS/JOHANNS/TERPSTRA; 
USDA/FAS FOR OA/YOST; 
OCRA/CURTIS 
STA/SIMMONS/JONES/HENNEY 
FAA/YOUNG; 
EU POSTS PASS TO AGRICULTURE AND ECON 
GENEVA FOR USTR, ALSO AGRICULTURE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ETRD EU FR
SUBJECT: NEW BIOTECH DEVELOPMENTS - FRANCE 
 
REF: (A) 2006 PARIS 7639; (B) 2006 PARIS 7802; 
(C) PARIS 515 
 
PARIS 00001448  001.2 OF 003 
 
 
¶1.  Summary:  Biotech issues continue to make 
headlines in France.   An anti-biotech lobby 
reported on health risks associated with MON863 
biotech corn, while the President and Director of 
Greenpeace France were charged with an ?incentive 
or direct provocation of GMO destruction? in a 
lawsuit.  For 2007, the Ministry of Agriculture 
(MinAg) authorized 13 biotech products for open 
field testing; published new regulations 
transposing the EU Directive 2001/18 (relative to 
biotech authorization), adopted biotech and non- 
biotech coexistence measures and created a 
requirement that biotech farmers register crop 
locations to provide transparency in biotech 
production.  French farmers are expected to 
increase biotech corn planting from 5,200 
hectares in 2006 to 30,000 to 50,000 hectares 
this year, despite activists? threats.  End 
summary. 
 
Anti-Biotech Lobby Allege MON863 Health Risks 
 
¶2.  On March 13, the anti-biotech lobby CRII-GEN 
held a press conference to present the findings 
of a Greenpeace funded study which concluded that 
MON863 was not safe for consumption due to 
toxicity on kidneys and liver.  CRIIGEN asked for 
additional research from the European Food Safety 
Agency (EFSA) on MON863, and an immediate ban of 
GM corn MON863.  According to ?EU Food Law 
Weekly,? (March 23, 2007), EFSA was to have 
discussed the study during its March 22-23 
meeting, but did not invite its author to present 
his results to the GMO panel. 
 
¶3.  The CRII-GEN study reinterpreted the 
toxicological survey conducted by Monsanto on 
MON863.  The French authority for biotech 
approval (Biomolecular Engineering Committee, or 
?Commission du Genie Biomoleculaire? in French, 
or CGB) reviewed the Monsanto data and approved 
the product. 
 
¶4.  The CRII-GEN allegations received wide press 
coverage in France.  Le Figaro, a well-known 
French daily newspaper, published an article on 
CRII-GEN?s assertions on March 15, translated as 
follows: 
 
Begin informal translation:  New Controversy 
Over the Toxicity of a Transgenic Corn. 
 
Gerard Pascal is 'exasperated' with the new 
attack launched on Tuesday by two anti-biotech 
organizations, Greenpeace and the CRII-GEN, 
against Monsanto?s transgenic corn MON863, 
suspected damaging liver and kidneys in rats. 
 
Contacted by Le Figaro, this highly regarded 
toxicologist, a member of the Biomolecular 
Engineering Committee (note: in French 
'Commission du Genie Biomoleculaire,' or CGB, is 
the French competent authority for approving 
biotech products) regrets finding himself 
involuntarily at the origin of the concern. ' If I 
had not said anything, in other words, if I had 
not scrupulously done my job of expert, no-one 
would have ever known and especially not those 
who aim to manipulate this issue launching 
another press campaign,' he bitterly divulged. 
 
Thus, Gerard Pascal is the one who, as early as 
 
PARIS 00001448  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
October 2003, discovered some 'anomalies' in the 
weight of the kidneys, the level of white blood 
cells and the glycaemia of rats fed on the corn 
in question.  However, the counter-research 
conducted by the CGB indicated one year later 
that these differences are considered within the 
natural variability range and are not related to 
the consumption of this biotech product 
authorized since then for human consumption in 
Europe. 
 
In an article published in a little-known 
scientific journal, the biologist Gilles-Eric 
Seralini, scientific director of CRII-GEN, 
strikes again stating that 'MON863 is not a safe 
product.'  After obtaining the raw data of the 
research, and implementing a new statistical 
appraisal of this data, he suggests that the 
liver-kidney anomalies are of a hormonal origin. 
But he is careful not to prove anything? 
 
'This is simply a way to hide the absence of 
correlation between the ingested dose and the 
biological effects induced.  These results are 
therefore not significant, says Gerard Pascal. 
Gilles-Eric Seralini probably wants to reinvent 
toxicology by himself while he is not a 
toxicologist!?'  End informal translation. 
 
Greenpeace Demonstrates and is Charged by a Court 
 
¶5.  On March 14, the President and the Director 
of Greenpeace France were charged for 'incentive 
or direct provocation for committing a crime or 
an offence, here the destruction of a biotech 
field.' The complaints were filed last July by 
two biotech corn producers whose biotech field 
locations were published on the Greenpeace 
website.  Their crops were subsequently destroyed 
by activists.  The public prosecutor now has 
three months to decide to prosecute the cases. 
 
¶6.  On March 15, Greenpeace unloaded several tons 
of so-called biotech corn in front of the 
headquarters of the conservative presidential 
candidate Nicolas Sarkozy to highlight the fact 
that he is the only one of three leading 
presidential contenders who does not support a 
moratorium on all biotech activities beyond 
confined environments. 
 
New French Biotech Regulation 
 
¶7.  On March 19, the MinAg authorized 13 biotech 
open field trials (12 corn products and 1 
tobacco) for 2007 and rejected one request for a 
potato trial.  There were fewer products 
authorized this year but the authorizations came 
earlier than in 2006, when 17 products were 
approved in May.  For more information on the 
dossiers approved, see: 
http://www.ogm.gouv.fr/experimentations/decis ions 
/decisions.htm. 
 
¶8.  On March 20, the French Official Journal 
(Federal Register equivalent) published the 
decrees (2007-358 and 2007-359) transposing EU 
Directive 2001/18 (EU framework on the release of 
biotech products for both experimentation and 
commercialization) into French law.  France thus 
avoids paying heavy penalties for failure to 
transpose in a timely manner.  The decrees are 
supplemented by two 'arretes' (complementary 
documents) relative to environmental 
dissemination and commercialization of biotech 
 
PARIS 00001448  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
products as well as information gathering on 
biotech crop cultivation. 
 
¶9.  Also on March 20, the MinAg created a public 
register to identify the number of farms and 
acreage of biotech plots present in each canton 
(administrative group of cities and villages). 
This list will be available at the GOF?s inter- 
ministerial website on biotech at: 
http://www.ogm.gouv.fr.  Farmers were pleased 
that the government retreated from a position 
requiring more specific biotech crop location 
information, which would have made them more 
vulnerable to anti-GMO attacks. 
 
¶10.  The MinAg further published coexistence 
recommendations for biotech crops, including 50- 
meter buffer zones and obligatory notice to 
neighboring farmers of biotech cultivation.  The 
Government will monitor farmer compliance, but 
the recommendation on buffer zones cannot be 
enforced without legislative approval. 
 
EU Action Impacts French Biotech Bans 
 
¶11. (SBU) Despite the WTO ruling that France's 
national bans on biotech rapeseed were 
inconsistent with the WTO, France subsequently 
voted to renew its ban on these products through 
April 18, 2007 (ref A).  Interestingly, the EU 
Commission and Member States recently voted to 
withdraw approval for five biotech products, 
including the two rapeseed products banned in 
France.  Consequently, France will be in 
conformity with the WTO when its ban expires on 
April 18.  In addition, EU authorities decided to 
authorize 0.9 percent adventitious presence of 
these products for the next five years.  This 
decision means an increased tolerance in France 
from zero to 0.9 percent of the two banned 
rapeseed products, starting on April 18. 
 
¶12.  Comment:  Despite interruptions orchestrated 
by anti-biotech lobbies, the GOF continues its 
actions regulating biotech research and 
commercial production.  The recent French decrees 
published in the Official Journal bring France 
into conformity with the EU legislation (ref B). 
In addition, France's biotech rapeseed bans will 
be irrelevant once these same products are no 
longer approved at the EU level.  While the 
government's biotech crop registry provides 
additional transparency for consumers, it does 
not contain details about farmer's fields that 
would make them vulnerable to attacks by anti-GMO 
activists (ref C).  Farmers now benefit by 
coexistence measures in place before the planting 
season and can hopefully use these new measures 
to maximize potential this year for planting 
30,000 to 50,000 hectares of biotech corn, up 
from 5,200 hectares in 2006.  End comment. 
 
Stapleton