Home Page Link AgBioWorld Home Page
About AgBioWorld Donations Ag-Biotech News Declaration Supporting Agricultural Biotechnology Ag-biotech Info Experts on Agricultural Biotechnology Contact Links Subscribe to AgBioView Home Page

AgBioView Archives

A daily collection of news and commentaries on

Subscribe AgBioView Subscribe

Search AgBioWorld Search

AgBioView Archives





November 27, 2000


Soil Ass. Response, "Contamination",


Dear Mr Avery,

In response to your email received this morning I would like to clear up
your query in the matter of the synthetic pesticides that work in a
similar way to Rotenone.

The Soil Association fact sheet that you refer to states that some
synthetic chemicals could be linked to the onset of Parkinson's Disease.
The basis for this assertion comes from the research published in Nature
Neuroscience which concludes that; "our results highlight the possibility
that environmental toxins, including pesticides that inhibit mitochondrial
function, may contribute
to the pathogenesis of PD. Many other naturally occurring compounds and
synthetic pesticides are potent inhibitors of complex I. Individuals are
likely to be variably exposed to numerous natural or synthetic complex I
inhibitors through diet, drinking water or other environmental factors"
(Nature Neuroscience, p 1305, vol 3, no. 12 Dec 2000).

If you still unsure about what Nature Neuroscience have concluded, I
suggest that you take it up with the authors of the report at Nature

There are a number of acaricides that function like Rotenone, these are
fenpyroximate, fenazaquin, tebufenpyrad and pyridaben (Hollingworth and
Ahammadsahib, Rev. Pestic. Toxicol. 3:277-302 (1995)). The UK
Government's Pesticide Usage Survey Group has informed us that the first
three are licensed for use in the UK, of these tebufenpyrad was the most
widely used with 1707 kilos used over 5915 hectares in 1999. Alternatively
you could contact Mr Roush as he has stated that there are 6 fungicides
which could have a similar mitochondrial function to Rotenone, he has not
specified what these are but I am sure he would be willing to help you.

I hope that this has helped to clear things up. Again I must stress that
if you have any further problems with the facts and findings you should
contact the research authors at Nature Neurosceince.

Your sincerely
Michele Burton
Campaigns Officer

Date: Nov 27 2000 18:39:11 EST
From: Roger Morton
Subject: (No Subject)

By what mechanism will the level of GMOs in their crops expand as they
keep seed and replant it?

Surely the levels of GMO contamination will reach equilbrium levels equal
to to the rate of cross pollination between his and neighbouring crops. I
am sure a population genetics expert could model this but my feeling is,
that in the absence of selection (the organic farmer whos neighbour is
growing a roundup resistant crop will not be spraying roundup presumably),
the levels of GM contamination will not increase through cycles of planting
and resowing. In the absence of selection the frequencies of transgenes
will enter Hardy-Wienberg equlibrium and remain constant.

This is based on my vague recollection of population genetics - any one
more expert care to comment?

Opinons expressed in this posting are personal and do not reflect the
position of my employer

>Subj: Re: AGBIOVIEW: Non-Thanksgiving Turkey; Dangers in Nature; Shiva
>and Sad Rice; Let's Ban Cooking!!
>Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 10:34:20 AM Eastern Standard Time
>From: Craig Sams
>It's not worth getting in too deep on the reasons why "the levels of
>pesticide in organic crops that were banned from using them was nearly the
>same as for crops that are allowed to use them" as there is no evidence
>for this.

Subj: Re: A matter of life or starvation
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 1:55:32 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: "Gordon Couger"

> A matter of life or starvation
> To ignore modern biotechnology as a possible solution to pressing food
> security challenges would be most unwise

We will need every means we can find to feed the world in the next
century. Fools that use GM issues as trade barriers should be the ones
that get fed last when food is short.
> Per Pinstrup-Andersen
> Bangkok Post
> November 26, 2000

> Although there is tissue culture and other agricultural biotechnology
research underway in many developing countries, most transgenic crops are
> planted in the developed world and for developed country markets. In
> North America accounted for 82 percent of genetically modified (GM)
> plantings, with the United States alone accounting for 72 percent.

Only because the technology is developed here. The knowledge and tools to
actually do the work are wiht in the reach of any small company or
possibly a determined individual.
> In Asia, only China has a significant area planted to GM crops. The
> country in the world to approve commercialization of GM crops, China has
> authorized the environmental release of over 100 GM crops, including
> insect resistant-cotton; virus-resistant tobacco, papayas, green
> and potatoes; and slow ripening tomatoes. India has a major research
> programme, but has not approved commercialisation of GM varieties. There
> are modest research efforts in Thailand and the Philippines.
Without much respect for intellectual property of the developers of the
seed. China has fully embraced GM food as the way of the future. If I were
in Chinese agriculture I would be recruiting biotech professionals in the
EU with a check book that makes Silicone Valley wages look low. They have
a chance to take the lead in agriculture in the twenty first century while
the rest of the world helps them in every way we can.
> Strong opposition to GM food in the European Union has resulted in
> restrictions on modern agricultural biotechnology, including a
> moratorium on approval of commercial use of new GM agricultural
> The opposition is driven in part by perceived lack of consumer benefits,
> uncertainty about possible negative health and environmental effects,
> widespread perception that a few large corporations will be the primary
> beneficiaries.

Fools that in 20 years will by buying their seeds from others.
> Failure to remove antibiotic-resistant marker genes used in research
> before a GM food is commercialised presents a potential although
> health risk. China does not subject GM food to scrutiny beyond that
> required for conventional food. Having gone the farthest in developing
> agricultural biotechnology, among Asian countries, China should enhance
> its biosafety and food safety regulations, ensuring that field testing
> even commercialisation gives systematic attention to potential
> environmental risks.

Food is food. There is not one bit of evidence that GM makes one bit more
danger than a new variety. The antibiotic is one of the biggest red
herrings that sounds like a Georing quote. The antibiotic resistance gene
that is used is every where in nature. If it did get loose it would only
get to bugs that already have it.
> India, in contrast, has enacted regulations requiring special testing of
> all GM seeds, plants, and plant parts for both toxicity and
> A vigorous civil society and strong anti-GMO organisations are helping
> ensure that biosafety is based much more on precaution. So far, India
> not approved the commercial release of any GM crops, although
> field trials of Bt cotton are underway. This research is the object of
> some protest from anti-GM organisations.

In 20 years they will be buying food from China.
>- Dr Per Pinstrup-Andersen is Director-General of the International Food
>Policy Research Institute based in Washington DC. This article is adapted
>from his lecture at the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) last week, in
>honour of the late AIT faculty, Dr Gunner Kjer Hansen.

I did not pick Georing's name lightly. What the greens are doing to
biotech is the same as what Georing and Hitler did to the world only the
greens have the potential to kill more people if they win.

Gordon Couger gcouger@couger.com
Retired Farmer www.couger.com/gcouger

Subj: Re: AGBIOVIEW: Starlink, Thanksgiving, FAO Inventory
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 2:25:53 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: fogher

Dear Mertze
I have developed, for a private lab, a very sensitive chemiluminescente
test for the cry toxin. I will ask them if I can send you 20-20 microl of
the policonal antiboby. In this case you
need to buy the secondary antibody.


Corrado Fogher

> I would like to know if anyone can direct me to the kit to detect
> StarLink insecticidal protein in corn flour, so that we can purchase =
> The purpose is to do some lab exercises with students in our class
> "Recombinant DNA technology in foods".
> Thank you very much.
> Mertxe de Renobales
> Bioqu=DDmica y Biolog=DDa Molecular
> Facultad de Farmacia
> Univ. Pa=DDs Vasco
> E-01006 Vitoria-Gasteiz
> Spain


Survey: U.S. Food Consumption Unaffected by StarLink Fiasco
by Julianne Johnston

A new survey conducted by a North Carolina State University sociologist
concludes the StarLink corn fiasco – including numerous food recalls – has
done little to change the way Americans choose their food. In fact, the
author of the study says the more the public becomes aware of ag
biotechnology, the fewer concerns they have.

Seventy-five percent of those surveyed said they are more aware
Fifty-three percent of those surveyed say they were aware of the of ag

Sociologist Dr. Tom Hoban says people who had heard or read more about
biotechnology were more positive about its use in agriculture and food
production. recall of food products containing StarLink corn, but no one
interviewed said they had avoided any foods that contained genetically
modified ingredients. Only 5% had taken any action as a result of concerns
over genetically modified foods.
“Biotechnology is simply not an issue of concern for the vast majority of
U.S. consumers,” said Hoban. “In fact, most U.S. consumers are looking
forward to the benefits that biotechnology will provide in the future.”

Of the 500 participants surveyed, 67% said they would buy produce such as
potatoes or tomatoes that have been genetically modified to require fewer
pesticides. The same number said they would buy GM produce with
nutritional benefits. In addition, 66% said they have little or no concern
about the safety of the food supply, while only 10% reported that they
worry a great deal about food safety. Consumers' major concerns related to
food spoilage or bacterial contamination, said Hoban.