From Bavaria

> In his Opinion ... Advocate General Yves Bot recalls, first of all, that GMOs, like any other living organism, are biological entities capable of replication or of transferring genetic material. As regards maize pollen, he states that, as a result of desiccation, it quickly loses its fertility and becomes inanimate material. Although that material may still contain genetic information, the simple presence in it of DNA and the possible incorporation of that DNA by other organisms does not thereby mean that the dead organism is still capable of actively transferring genetic material. 

> In those circumstances, the Advocate General concludes that pollen from MON 810 maize that is no longer viable and is thus infertile, is not a living organism and, therefore, cannot be regarded as a GMO.

> Next, the Advocate General makes clear that food containing material from a genetically modified plant, whether that material is included intentionally or not, must always be regarded as food produced from a GMO. The risk that a genetically modified food can pose to human health is not dependent on whether the incorporation of that material from a genetically modified plant was intentional or unintentional.

[This is a very clear ruling. Pollen cannot be regarded as a "GMO" because it is non-living. However, pollen coming from GMO corn falls under the classification of "food produced from a GMO" - PLB]

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm