Protestors threaten to destroy GM wheat plot

decrease font size  Resize text   increase font size       Printer-friendly version of this article Printer-friendly version of this article

The activist group “Take the Flour Back” has called for members of the public to join them in the destruction of a genetically modified wheat trial in Rothamsted, England on May 27. Scientists have spoken out after the announcement, which called for a mass “decontamination” of the trial.

The test plot was planted in April to test GM wheat that has been engineered to be the first crop in the world that would repel aphids instead of kill them. This particular wheat emits a pheromone called E-beta-farnesene that is normally emitted by aphids when they are threatened. When aphids smell it, they fly away. However, natural enemies of aphids, including ladybirds, lacewings and a parasitic wasp, are attracted to the wheat.

After the activist group announced its intentions, scientists involved in the research released a statement in response.

“We appeal to you as environmentalists,” they write in an open letter. “”Our GM wheat could, for future generations, substantially reduce the use of agricultural chemicals.”

The scientists explained that if approved, this wheat would have an advantage in western countries.

“You have described genetically modified crops as ‘not properly tested,’” they wrote. “Yet when tests are carried out, you are planning to destroy them before any useful information can be obtained.

“We do not see how preventing the acquisition of knowledge is a defensible position in an age of reason.”

“What you are planning to do is reminiscent of clearing books from a library because you wish to stop other people finding out what they contain. We remind you that such actions do not have a proud tradition.”

The activists claim there is no evidence that the GM fields require less pesticide and they argue against the scientists using an antibiotic resistance gene as a marker. In addition, they have published materials suggesting the crop contains a cow gene. The questionable gene is a promoter gene, which switches on other genes, is a synthetic variant of one found in many organisms, including wheat. But the activists claim the researchers chose a variant closer to the cow version than the wheat one.

This is not the first time that scientists have chosen to publicly address activist groups. However, it is a relatively new tactic. It was used by the Sainsbury Laboratory in Norwich in 2011. Protests against a GM potato trial never actualized and the crop was not destroyed.

In this case, “Take the Flour Back” have written back to the scientists inviting them to meet on “neutral ground” for a public debate.

In its reply, “Take the Flour Back” wrote, “We would welcome the opportunity to engage with you in a public debate over the forth-coming weeks, so that both sides of the debate have an equal chance to hear and understand each other’s perspectives.

“To this end we invite you to join us on neutral ground, with a neutral chairperson, for an open exchange of opinions and concerns.”

It remains to be seen if the debate will happen and if it will prevent any destruction of the GM wheat trial on May 27.


Buyers Guide

Doyle Equipment Manufacturing Co.
Doyle Equipment Manufacturing prides themselves as being “The King of the Rotary’s” with their Direct Drive Rotary Blend Systems. With numerous setup possibilities and sizes, ranging from a  more...
A.J. Sackett Sons & Company
Sackett Blend Towers feature the H.I.M, High Intensity Mixer, the next generation of blending and coating technology which supports Precision Fertilizer Blending®. Its unique design allows  more...
R&R Manufacturing Inc.
The R&R Minuteman Blend System is the original proven performer. Fast, precise blending with a compact foot print. Significantly lower horsepower requirement. Low inload height with large  more...
Junge Control Inc.
Junge Control Inc. creates state-of-the-art product blending and measuring solutions that allow you to totally maximize operating efficiency with amazing accuracy and repeatability, superior  more...
Yargus Manufacturing
The flagship blending system for the Layco product line is the fully automated Layco DW System™. The advanced technology of the Layco DW (Declining Weight) system results in a blending  more...
Yargus Manufacturing
The LAYCOTE™ Automated Coating System provides a new level of coating accuracy for a stand-alone coating system or for coating (impregnating) in an automated blending system. The unique  more...
John Deere
The DN345 Drawn Dry Spreader can carry more than 12 tons of fertilizer and 17.5 tons of lime. Designed to operate at field speeds up to 20 MPH with full loads and the G4 spreader uniformly  more...
Force Unlimited
The Pro-Force is a multi-purpose spreader with a wider apron and steeper sides. Our Pro-Force has the most aggressive 30” spinner on the market, and is capable of spreading higher rates of  more...
BBI Spreaders
MagnaSpread 2 & MagnaSpread 3 — With BBI’s patented multi-bin technology, these spreaders operate multiple hoppers guided by independent, variable-rate technology. These models are built on  more...


Comments (2) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Paul W    
London  |  May, 05, 2012 at 09:08 AM

The above article (and much of the current coverage on this issue) seems to imply scientists are universally pro-GM. This is totally untrue, for example scientists who compiled the IAASTD report, involving the UN and dozens of scientists across the world, argued strongly that GM has no place in feeding the global population. Professor Bob Watson, the director of IAASTD and now chief scientist for UK’s Department for Environment Farming and Rural Affairs, when asked if GM could solve world hunger, said: “The simple answer is no.” Also, Despite Rothamsted’s reassurance, it seems contamination could be a risk, and an irreversable one at that: http://www.farminguk.com/news/GM-outcrosses-six-times-more-than-non-GM-wheat_23445.html

Paul W    
London  |  May, 05, 2012 at 09:09 AM

The above article (and much of the current coverage on this issue) seems to imply scientists are universally pro-GM. This is totally untrue, for example scientists who compiled the IAASTD report, involving the UN and dozens of scientists across the world, argued strongly that GM has no place in feeding the global population. Professor Bob Watson, the director of IAASTD and now chief scientist for UK’s Department for Environment Farming and Rural Affairs, when asked if GM could solve world hunger, said: “The simple answer is no.” Also, Despite Rothamsted’s reassurance, it seems contamination could be a risk, and an irreversable one at that: http://www.farminguk.com/news/GM-outcrosses-six-times-more-than-non-GM-wheat_23445.html


Truck and Trailer Mounted Tenders

Doyle’s Tenders are available in 8’, 10’, 16’, and 24’ lengths and include truck or trailer mounted with side or ... Read More

View all Products in this segment

View All Buyers Guides

Feedback Form
Feedback Form