Pro-GMO propaganda at Cornell University - a student fights back. You didn't think I was just going to complain about a pro-GMO, industry-sponsored Cornell all day, did you?
Good, because I have come up with a plan to create actual, lasting change on campus. Deconstructing Indian cotton: weather, yields, and suicides. Golden rice GMO paper retracted after judge rules for journal. The authors are unable to substantiate through documentary evidence that all parents or children involved in the study were provided with the full consent form for the study.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition is retracting a scientific paper that claimed to show that genetically engineered rice serves as an effective vitamin A supplement after a Massachusetts judge denied the first author's motion for an injunction against the publisher. The journal announced plans to retract the paper last year following allegations that the paper contained ethical mis-steps, such as not getting informed consent from the parents of children eating the rice, and faking ethics approval documents.
Last July, first author Guangwen Tang at Tufts University filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction against the journal's publisher, the American Society for Nutrition, to stop the retraction. 'Gene drive': Scientists sound alarm over supercharged GM organisms which could spread in the wild and cause environmental disasters. The development of so-called “gene drive” technology promises to revolutionise medicine and agriculture because it can in theory stop the spread of mosquito-borne illnesses, such as malaria and yellow fever, as well as eliminate crop pests and invasive species such as rats and cane toads.
However, scientists at the forefront of the development believe that in the wrong hands gene-drive technology poses a serious threat to the environment and human health if accidentally or deliberately released from a laboratory without adequate safeguards. Some believe it could even be used as a terrorist bio-weapon directed against people or livestock because gene drives – which enable GM genes to spread rapidly like a viral infection within a population – will eventually be easy and cheap to generate. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that genetically modified crops are any more harmful than conventionally grown food (Getty) Loading gallery Science News in Pictures.
OGM : les parlementaires américains refusent l’étiquetage obligatoire des aliments. Living with GMOs - a letter from America. Today in the US, from seed to plate, the production, distribution, marketing, safety testing, and consumption of food is controlled by a handful of companies, many of which have commercial interests in genetic engineering technology.
We are writing as concerned American citizens to share with you our experience of genetically modified (GM) crops and the resulting damage to our agricultural system and adulteration of our food supply. In our country, GM crops account for about half of harvested cropland. Around 94% of the soy, 93% of corn (maize) and 96% of cotton grown is GM. i The UK and the rest of the EU have yet to adopt GM crops in the way that we have, but you are currently under tremendous pressure from governments, biotech lobbyists, and large corporations to adopt what we now regard as a failing agricultural technology.
Les OGM et la panne de la biodiversité agricole. Le soja GM, très chargé en glyphosate. Le soja GM, le plus imprégné de RoundUpDR Le soja GM résistant au glyphosate, plus connu sous le nom de RoundUp, présente des niveaux très élevés de cet herbicide, selon une étude publiée dans la revue Food Chemistry.
Extrait : Si les OGM ont souvent été présentés par leurs fabricants comme une opportunité de réduire l’usage de pesticides, c’est tout l’inverse qui s’est produit. Pour l’herbicide RoundUp, cela a conduit à la sélection... OGM/Etats-Unis : prolifération de « supermauvaises herbes » résistantes au glyphosate. Les agriculteurs américains font face à une prolifération de « supermauvaises herbes » devenues résistantes aux herbicides et les OGM sont accusés par certains activistes et chercheurs d'être à l'origine du phénomène.
Ce que contestent les semenciers. Science, « les Etats-Unis se dirigent vers une crise » car, « dans certaines régions du pays, les mauvaises herbes résistantes à l'herbicide le plus populaire au monde, le glyphosate, poussent maintenant dans la grande majorité des champs de soja, coton et maïs ». Récit : Quand les pro-OGM tiennent salon. GMOs and RoundUp - junking down our food supply.
Farmer of genetically modified canola ‘recklessly tainted neighbour’s crop' A West Australian farmer being sued for allowing his genetically modified canola to allegedly contaminate his neighbour’s organic land was “reckless” in how he planted and harvested his crop, a court has been told.
In a landmark case being globally monitored, farmer Steve Marsh is suing his former friend Michael Baxter over the contamination in 2010, which cost Marsh his organic certification and an estimated $85,000 in earnings. GMO Manifesto - Comment. As environment secretary Owen Paterson made his speech at Rothamstead, the location of the current GM wheat trials, the twittersphere exploded with outrage but also shame and bewilderment that our government should lend its backing to some of the boldest lies ever uttered on the subject.
Paterson's speech read like something that would have been written at the beginning of our GM learning curve rather than here at the end, when we know so much better. Given the fact that most of the rest of the world is trying to get rid of GMOs this controversial UK commitment to growing more of them seems almost inexplicable. Two days after his speech, and perhaps not to anyone's surprise, the Daily Mail revealed the extent to which our government ministers and regulators have crawled into bed with the biotech lobby. Now, at least, we can fully understand their enthusiasm.
OGM : l'étude polémique du professeur Séralini désavouée. Séralini et OGM : une étude qui dérange vraiment. La revue Food and chemical toxicology pourrait retirer l'article de Gilles Eric Séralini sur le maïs NK603 et sur le Round up, publié en septembre 2012.
Ce qui relance le débat sur l'évaluation des risques à long terme des OGM et des phyto. C'est lors d'une conférence de presse organisée dans l'urgence au Parlement européen ce jeudi 27 novembre que Gilles Eric Séralini, l'auteur de l'étude controversée sur les risques à long terme du maïs NK 603 et de son herbicide associé, a dénoncé le retrait par la revue de son article révélant les résultats de cette étude. Initialement publié en septembre 2012, cet article pointait du doigt la toxicité sur les rats du maïs transgénique NK 603 et de son herbicide associé, le Roundup, produits tous les deux par la société Monsanto.
Mais mardi 26 novembre, le scientifique a reçu un courrier, signé par l'éditeur en chef de la revue, le priant de retirer son article. La raison ? Biosafety and the 'Seralini affair' - scientific and regulatory reform are essential. Censorship on research into the risks of a technology so critically entwined with global food safety undermines the value and the credibility of science.
There is an ongoing debate on the potential health risks of the consumption of genetically modified (GM) plants containing high levels of pesticide residues. Currently, no regulatory authority requests mandatory chronic animal feeding studies to be performed for edible GMOs and formulated pesticides. This fact is at the origin of most of the controversies. Seralini republished: Roundup-ready GMO maize causes serious health damage. This study has arguably prevailed through the most comprehensive and independent review process to which any scientific study on GMOs has ever been subjected. UK Environment Secretary suffering from GM Delusion - News. Paterson focuses on what might someday be achieved rather than the scientific barriers to that achievement In his recent speech at Rothamsted Research, Defra Secretary of State Owen Paterson called on Europe to speed up the approval of GM crops to give UK farmers access to the technology and begin a new agricultural revolution.
Paterson's thesis is that GM crops can reduce pesticide and fertiliser use, bring higher yields and lower costs. According to Mr Paterson they bring "a wealth of benefits" to people, the environment and the economy. He blames the EU's precautionary approach to GM for delaying the march of GM herbicide tolerant (GMHT) and insect resistant crops across EU farmland, and says he is keen that decisions on approvals should be science based. This is where his argument starts to look shaky. These GM crops were designed to use Roundup as the primary, or only, means of weed control, and in the early stages this enabled farmers to achieve a very high level of weed control.