Soil Association Logo - Click for Home
Search
Google
Join the Soil Association
Donate E-newsShop
  • What we do
  • Take action
  • Why organic?
  • Certification
  • About us
  • Farmers & growers
  • |
  • Businesses
  • |
  • Schools
Home – News – News Item

Organic ‘fraud’: GMO lab clarifies position

01 February 2010

Last week the German Financial Times published and article suggesting that consumers were being badly mislead and that a number of EU retailers' organic garments were contaminated with GM.

The journalist responsible for the article reported that one Germany testing house had found that 30% of the fabric samples routinely screened were positive for GM. The suggestion was that the industry had failed to preserve the identity and integrity of organic cotton and that this may also affect independently certified products.

Following the publication of the article, a number of key players in the organic textile industry were quick to accuse the FT-G journalist of misrepresenting the facts. Anne Gillespie, Director of Industrial Integrity at Organic Exchange was particularly unimpressed, claiming to have been "completely misquoted." Gillespie also denied the existence of a fabled 'internal' OE report which the article suggests indicated 25%-30% GMO contamination of Indian organic cotton. The GM test results outlined in the article were also questioned by Technical Director at IWG-GOTS , Marcus Bruegel. Bruegel explains that “current testing facilities can detect the presence of GMO in organic batches, but are not yet able to quantify the level of contamination." Without knowing the level of contamination it is impossible to gauge whether any contamination detected is accidental (e.g from pollen drift) or as the result of deliberate fraud.

It's now becoming clear that the scale of GM contamination reported is likely to be an exaggeration. In the absence of any suggestion that organic certification systems lack rigour, it looks equally unlikely that any contamination detected was the result of complacency or dishonesty on the part of organic farmers, processors or certification bodies. This situation does however highlight the difficult issue of organic status, namely what to do with farmers and processors, who despite their best efforts to stay non-GM, have been contaminated through no fault of their own.

  • Read the full Eco-Textile News article.




Return
Newspaper

Related 
links 

Find out more

  • Better Nursery Food Now campaign
  • Why organic?
  • Media contacts
  • Events 


Get involved

  • Join us
  • Buy organic
  • Take action

 

 

What we do

Campaigns and policies
Organic standards
Certification
Food for Life Partnership
Land Trust
Support farmers and growers
Organic farm network
Community supported agriculture
Education
International work
Conferences

Take action

Support us
Buy organic
Holiday organic
Grow organic
Get involved locally
Visit an organic farm
Consultations
School food
Learning
Organic Fortnight
Events

Why organic?

What is organic?
Climate friendly food and farming
Welfare and wildlife
Health
GM
Organic heroes
FAQs

About us

Who we are
Our history
Funding
Work with us
News and media
Contact us
 

Certification

Guide to certification
What we do
Services for licensees
Standards

Contact us

Farmers & growers

Producer membership
Advice and support
News
Training and events
Market
Get connected
Organic Farming magazine

Businesses

Marketing support
Market information
Get involved
Find organic
Working for you
News

Schools

Food for Life Partnership
Visit an organic farm
Primary resources
Secondary resources
Scotland resources
Log In - Register
Help - Legal information - Accessibility