taking due account of the company’s size, location and product mix, a snapshot which is more relevant than companies – you know who you are – that file their annual reports at the very last minute and sometimes later, thus incurring the ignominy of a fine. That said, Dugdale Nutrition would appear to have a lot to talk about as regards their 2012-13 financial year. In their 2012 report, Dugdale’s Directors said that their strategy


for the upcoming year would be to ‘build customer numbers, increase market share and strive for further efficiency improvements’. In their 2013 report, the Directors said that ‘the company has been successful in all of the aforementioned aims with the 2012/13 trading year setting new records for sales, volumes and profitability’. Dugdale did graciously acknowledge the part played by ‘the extremely wet conditions of 2012 and the long winter that followed leading onto a very wet spring’ which led, amongst other factors, to deficient quantities of good quality forage and thus to increased demand for Dugdale’s range of ruminant-based products. They are, according to their website, currently producing around 100,000 tonnes of feed a year. Demand increased to the extent that sales rose by almost £10.9


million or 41 per cent to £37.4 million in the twelve months ending 30 April 2013 while pre-tax profits more than doubled to £1.56 million. Dugdale reports that the 2012-13 trading year, reflecting the combined efforts of the entire team ‘resulted in 2012/13 being the best financial trading year in the company’s 163 year history’. Judging from the 2013 results, they certainly seem to have been


doing something right; I can’t help wondering at whose expense in this major area of feed production in Great Britain!


GM FRACAS An important report that linked early death from cancer in rats with the fact that they were fed on a Monsanto GM maize variety is the subject of new controversy. The editor of internationally recognised journal Food and Chemical


Toxicology, Dr A Wallace Hayes, has decided to ‘retract’ the French study, ‘Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize’ carried out by a team led by Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini and published in November 2012. The study found that that rats fed on a lifetime diet of Monsanto’s genetically modified maize NK603 and tiny amounts of the Roundup glyphosate herbicide used in its cultivation suffered severe toxic effects, including kidney and liver damage and increased incidences of tumours and mortality. According to a recent report, in November 2013 Dr Hayes sent Prof.


Séralini a letter saying that the paper will be ‘retracted’ if Séralini does not agree to its withdrawal. This is, to say the least of it, curious in that, in the letter, Dr Hayes concedes that an examination of Prof. Séralini’s raw data showed ‘no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data”. It appears, therefore, that Dr Hayes has stated that the retraction was solely based on the ‘inconclusive’ nature of the findings on tumours and mortality, taking into account the relatively low number of rats used in the Séralini trial and the choice of the strain of rat used which, Hayes said, is subject to a naturally ‘high incidence of tumours’.


PAGE 14 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2014 FEED COMPOUNDER


On 28 November 2012, the European Food Safety Authority issued


a statement saying that ‘serious defects in the design and methodology’ meant that the paper did not meet acceptable scientific standards and that, consequently, there was no need to re-examine previous safety evaluations of genetically modified maize NK603. The statement added that these were the conclusions of separate and independent assessments carried out by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and six EU Member States; Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands, which followed the publication of the paper on 19 September 2012. I understand that, following the publication of the Séralini paper,


more than seven hundred scientists and academics signed a statement calling on Prof Séralini to release all data from his research. Following the announcement that Food and Chemical Toxicology would ‘retract’ the paper if Séralini did not agree to withdraw it, the proverbial hit the fan. One publication, noting that ‘Rigid criteria exist for a serious scientific journal to accept a peer-reviewed paper and to publish it’ added that there were also ‘strict criteria by which such an article can be withdrawn after publication’. The publication in question proclaimed that ‘The Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology has apparently decided to violate those procedures’, going on to allege that the publisher of The Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology, Elsevier, had created a new position of Associate Editor for Biotechnology and filled it, and I quote, ‘with a former Monsanto employee who worked for the giant Monsanto front- organization, the International Life Sciences Institute, which develops industry-friendly risk assessment methods for GM foods and chemical food contaminants’. I understand that the row is now escalating with Séralini said to


be contemplating suing the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology if it goes through with its retraction. For further news on developments, watch this space.


AVIAN FLU As a reminder that the world is still on guard against a new and malignant flu variant with the ability to travel between human beings, Hong Kong has reported its first case of the H7N9 avian influenza strain, signalling that the virus is spreading beyond mainland China since it first emerged in April 2013. The victim is identified as a female domestic worker from Indonesia,


who has a history of travelling across the Hong Kong / Chinese border to purchase and slaughter chicken. The 36-year-old patient is reported to be in critical condition in a Hong Kong hospital. Since its discovery in mainland China in 2013, H7N9 avian influenza has caused 139 people in China and Taiwan to become ill and has been fatal to 45 people, almost a third of the total. Local governments in China have become more restrictive as


regards live markets in an effort to curb the spread of avian influenza. In early December, the Shanghai local authorities announced they would halt live poultry trading from the beginning of the lunar year – that’s 31 January 2014 – until late April. The authorities in Hong Kong have reported a second case of


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68