GM Free Cymru

HOW THE GM MULTINATIONALS STIFLE "UNCOMFORTABLE" RESEARCH

"Just a few months ago, I wrote to Bayer CropScience here in Australia, asking for only about 100g of their InVigor GM canola seeds when I was trying to determine the sensitivity and specificity of some field "strip tests" that are on sale that are supposed to be able to determine GM contamination in otherwise non-GM canola seed. I recieved no reply. They simply ignored me. So even 100g was too much for them it seems."

Dr Judy Carman BSc(Hons), PhD, MPH, Epidemiologist and Biochemist Affiliate Senior Lecturer, Department of Public Health, University of Adelaide Director, Institute of Health and Environmental Research Inc. PO Box 155, Kensington Park, SA, 5068 Email: judycarman@ozemail.com.au

================================

"After three years of research (2001-2003) Monsanto refused in 2004 to allow us further MON 810 seeds for our experiments, although we are absolutely neutral on seed-politics. We also won a Hungarian grant from the Education Ministry here to work with maize containing the Cry3-toxin (MON 863 or MON 88017 or DAS-59122-7), but Monsanto, Pioneer/DuPont, and Mycogene/Dow have all refused to supply seeds for our independent experiments. Probably we will loose this project in this year if we do not obtain seeds by May."

Prof Bela Darvas, Plant Protection Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences drdarvas.bela@chello.hu

============================

"As far as I know, there is nobody who would do precautionary research who has managed to obtain seed directly from the producers without selling their soul. In our case, we obtained seed from farmers whose identity has to be kept secret, since these farmers' act of giving us bought seed could be used to drag them to court."

Dr Ignacio Chapela

======================

"We have always believed in the transparency of our work and were disappointed Monsanto scientists did not share their results with us. We believe the work we have conducted is an "initial" study and we would like to do more testing. Unfortunately, we are no longer privy to obtaining Monsantoˆås seeds. We were directly told by a Hartz seed company (a wholly owned subsidiary of Monsanto) representative who graciously supplied us with seed for our initial study, that he was told he could no longer provide us with seed samples. Even if we were to obtain seeds the chances of finding isogenically matched varieties is becoming increasingly more difficult. When we contacted Hartz a few months ago, we were told there were 23 varieties of Roundup Ready’Ñ¢ soybeans and only 8 varieties of conventional. Even if we wanted to move beyond our 2 variety- triplicate testing, we would not be able to expand our research beyond the levels of seed available." Marc Lappe

=====================

"The Birchip Cropping Group proposed trials of Bayer's canola in Australia. The rural newspaper "Stock and Land" reported on March 10 2005 that Bayer had rejected Birchip's request for GM seed for trials, saying there would be additional costs to the research that they could not afford to meet." Bob Phelps, GeneEthics info@geneethics.org

=============================

With reference to the By10 contamination incident: "While regulators in Japan and the EU attempted to establish a reliable test for Bt10 so that incoming cargoes of maize products from the US could be monitored, Syngenta refused absolutely to provide information about the genetic makeup of the variety which could have enabled GM testing labs to start work. It also refused to supply reference materials to independent or government-owned testing laboratories. After a considerable delay, Syngenta worked out a testing method with a company called GeneScan in May 2005 which was suspected to have been carefully designed to provide "false negatives" -- in other words, to ensure that shipments with low or moderate contamination would not be identified no matter how much sampling was done." GM Free Cymru web site http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BT10DMA.php Bt10 Detection Method Unacceptable Dr Mae-Wan Ho and Prof. Joe Cummins

========================

Sierra Club has asked Pioneer Hi-Bred (a Dupont company) and Dow Agrosciences (a division of Dow Chemical) to reverse their recent decision to withhold seeds and genetic material from an Ohio State researcher whose findings indicated that their products could be harmful to the environment. "It's outrageous that these companies claim that their products are thoroughly tested and good for the environment but throttle research when the results go counter to their PR message," said Laurel Hopwood, Chair of Sierra Club's Genetic Engineering Committee. Dr. Allison Snow's research was originally funded by the two companies and the USDA. The Ohio State researcher showed that the genes which had been genetically engineered into sunflowers could persist in the wild and give rise to "superweeds." She wanted to continue her research without company funding but the companies -- which control the patented seed -- will not allow her. Details were released to the broader scientific community earlier this month by an article in the prestigious journal Nature. http://www.saynotogmos.org/news_updates2d.htm October 30th 2002

=====================================

In a similar vein, I also know of a researcher who found soil microbe differences for a GM crop and was told, when he wanted to repeat this experiment, that the plot was 'unavailable'. This was a report at the 2004 ISBGMO meeting in Montpellier. from Jonathan Latham

================================

Quotes on Fascist science:

During the Nazi era in Germany "....... far from being subjected to force, many scientists voluntarily oriented their work to fit government policies - as a way of getting money and of exploiting the new resources that Nazi policies made available ......... Most researchers, it turns out, seem to have regarded the regime not as a threat, but as an opportunity for their research ambitions." (Nature, 7 April 2005)

Encouraging the people of Britain to stand up to Hitler, Winston Churchill said this: "....... if we fail, the whole world, including the Unites States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science." (June 18th, 1940)

"In the 1950s and 1960s, chemical companies persuaded governments to fund research into the use of chemicals in agriculture. In the 1980s and 1990s, many of the same companies used their influence to get public monies to do research on genetically engineered (GM) crops. Corporate influence over government has always been present, but ,,,,,, that influence is stronger than ever. For example, much of the public research carried out in areas like agriculture only meets the needs of large corporations. Although it would serve the public good, neither the Canadian nor the U.S. governments have spent adequate research dollars on the environmental impacts of GM organisms. Outright attempts by governments to muzzle scientists doing public research is not that common, but here are much more subtle ways to direct research. Decisions about what projects are funded, for how long, the methodology used, and the assumptions made all influence the eventual outcome. Research results tends to reflect who's paying for it." Stephen Bocking, Associate Professor of Environmental Studies at Canada's Trent University. See this: POLITICS-US: "They Blinded Us With Science" by Stephen Leahy Inter Press Service News Agency, February 18, 2006 http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32201