This last statement from the
Court of Justice of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No 5/11
Luxembourg, 9 February 2011
Advocate General’s Opinion in Case C-442/09
Karl Heinz Bablok and Others v Freistaat Bayer
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2011-02/cp110005en.pdf
is worrysome
"Finally the Advocate General concludes that the unintentional presence in
honey, even of a minute
quantity of pollen from MON 810 maize, means that *such honey must be the
subject of an*
*authorisation to be placed on the market*. In that regard, the fact that
the pollen in question
comes from a GMO authorised for deliberate release into the environment and
the fact that certain
other products from that GMO may lawfully be marketed as food are not
decisive because the
honey containing that pollen is not covered by an authorisation issued under
Regulation
1829/2003."
--
Juanse Barros J.
APIZUR S.A.
Carrera 695
Gorbea - CHILE
+56-45-271693
08-3613310
http://apiaraucania.blogspot.com/[log in to unmask]
***********************************************
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
