Of course, it because of legal challenges like this that GM R&D is solely the reseve of big companies like Monsanto as smaller biotech companies without powerful legal devisions find that their work is stopped before it begins.
With the ever decressing cost of biotechnological processes there would be numerious GM crop start ups in this country if not for these anti-GM legal challenges.
Monsanto must love the anti-GM lobby, they’d have to compete with other companies if not for them.

Hi Starburst. That Indian farmers committing suicide actually appears to have been completely false: http://www.collide-a-scape.com/2012/05/09/how-seeds-of-a-false-story-took-root-and-spread/

Sorry Malboury, I stopped reading that blog post in the first paragraph: ”global warming hoax cooked up by thousands of scientists.”!

Yeah, Starburst pointed that out as well. Rather weird, and my apologies for linking to it. Here’s the link to the IFPRI article on the same topic instead – a little less casual science denial thrown in!
http://www.ifpri.org/publication/bt-cotton-and-farmer-suicides-india

Apologies accepted! Perhaps in atonement you might have a look at a link of mine regarding some serious oversights where the Dept of Ag were found to be using GM maiz seed in field trials that were NOT approved for GM maize seed trials. You will also note from this press release that because of false certification by Pioneer HiBred Northern Europe, a subsidiary of DuPont, GM seed has likely to have already contaminated the maize crop in Ireland generally. With such flagrant disregard for the laws governing the cultivation GM crops by the Dept of Ag and the multinational seed corporations the court action to be taken by Mr Noonan may do no more than consider a swinging stable door.
Anyway, here’s the link: http://www.gmfreeireland.org/press/GMFI50.pdf

Had a look at the IFPRI research article… The rise in farmer suicides in India is a complex matter in which other societal factors may very well have played a part. While I have myself refrained from introducing this subject into my arguments against GM crops I am also aware that the IFPRI has it’s critics too.

Well, that shouldn’t have happened, no argument there. I’m trying to find some follow up, as the links in the pdf seem to be mostly broken – were the company fined or otherwise punished? While I feel that the science supports the notion that GMO is an extremely promising advance for industry in general, I’m also a big believer in following the law of land, and have no issue with condemning the mislabeling of product to avoid legislation. I think this example is more of an argument for legislation enforcement and better oversight than it is an argument against GM though?

Yeah, absolutely. Even if everything claimed in the articles re. suicide rates in India were true, it would be an argument against business practices and the politics of small farmer loans in India rather than an argument against GM. The companies and groups involved are far from spotless (in fact, I don’t think there are any spotless big companies out there, really!) but I don’t see how it naturally follows that the tool of GM should be demonized for actions companies may have taken that could have been committed just as easily with regular hybrid seeds as well. When we feel outraged at GM as a technology instead of at particular companies for their actions we risk throwing the baby out with the bath water.

You won’t find much more information Malboury. The press release from GM Free Ireland was largely ignored by the mainstream media and this serious matter in relation to the breach of existing laws went ignored and unpunished!
I agree that the jury MAY still be out on the benefits or otherwise of GM, but if multinational seed corporations, Gov agencies and the media in general are seen to be acting in such a careless and underhand manner what does it say to those that take more than a passing interest in such things?

Just reading the EPA report on that issue – according to them 0.3% of the seeds were contaminated with a genetic marker from a GM organism. Definitely a screw up, but I don’t know if I’d call it underhanded on the part of the company that supplied them – surely they just screwed up, or they would have shipped 100% GM crops?
I think that the media, gov. etc screw up in lots of areas, and most often for entirely human reasons, but I think GM has been given a very harsh rap in Ireland. Even the very idea of a government body testing a single crop is anathema; and if some GM crops are dangerous then trials like this are the very thing to do.
Re. benefit, I think it’s safe to say that crossing genes form one organism to another can be massively beneficial, as we’ve been doing it for centuries with traditional agriculture to great effect. To my mind, the only thing that separates direct genetic modification from traditional hybridization and selective breeding is it’s accuracy and scope.

Pioneer Hybred NE has presented falsified GM free maize seed certificates to Irish authorities on three(!) occasions now – an unfortunate screw-up or wilful neglect?
GM trials are controversial and it behoves the government to ensure that they are carried out openly, honestly and with diligence. This is not happening… Ireland’s reputation as a food producer is at stake and the kind of negligence that came to light regarding the maize field trials in several secret locations in Kildare, Kilkenny and Cork is disgraceful and can hardly be excused as an instance of human frailty.
Hybridization has been a plant breeding method that has resulted in most of the food crops around today and is an example of the ingenuity of man for the betterment of mankind. I sadly suspect that the selective synthetic genetic modification of plant genes by corporate interests that have a closer eye on their balance sheets than their certificates of authenticity will serve a much more sinister purpose.

I agree that we need to shepherd our appearance re. food production carefully, but balancing corporate interests vs. public interests is something that occurs in all industries, including the realm of non-GM agriculture too. I think if we treat this like any other emergent technology, legislate appropriately and enforce that legislation then GM products could become an important part of world agriculture. I think we agree that this hasn’t always happened, and is deplorable when it doesn’t. But it still seems like GM is getting more that it’s fair share of the public accountability stick. It seems to be that, far from being spurned forward by concerns over corporate abuse, the average anti-GMO member of the public is motivated by fear from a lack of understanding of what exactly GM is, more than anything else. I think GM could be just as useful a tool for humanity as earlier forms of bio technology (eg. as you mention, hybridization), and you may be right to say that corporate interest threaten that. But if so, I think trials like the publicly funded Teagasc efforts are exactly what we need to explore the potential benefits of GM without that risk, right?

Like in most things when people of opposing views share their opinions a common concern emerges. I’m not afraid of the continuing development of biotechnology and in some respects it can be seen as the natural progression of hybridization or ‘manual’ plant breeding.
What scares me is the corporate element in the advancement of the science. Where our politics and regulatory systems are open to corporate influence ( just like with the foul-up in relation to regulation of banks) the necessary safeguards will be ignored in the interest of the corrupt political/corporate agenda which is an undeniable feature of most countries.
Our monkey brains have made us good climbers but we have trouble figuring how far out onto the branch we can go!

So we already import 1 million tons of animal feed every year, and ran the first field trial of GM sugar beet 13 years ago. Plus the gene added to these potatoes already exists in the wild, in other potatoes. Would you ban those potatoes?

Ahem, that should have been 1 million tons of GM animal feed every year.

Hi Smiley. F1 Hybrids use selective breeding to randomly mix the genes of two plants in the hopes of getting desirable traits from both. This is genetic modification, but has been around for a long time and so is not controversial. Modern genetic modification takes the specific traits desired from one plant and adds them directly to another.

Cheers. Now I get it.

Huh, that line is a bit weird alright. I’m trying to figure out what the writer intends there…
In any case, I think I’d rescind that link based on that paragraph alone and link you directly to the IFPRI paper on the same issue instead, just to be safe :-P
http://www.ifpri.org/publication/bt-cotton-and-farmer-suicides-india

Mark potatoes produce flowers which means cross pollination can occur. Cross pollination occurs during the transfer of pollen from one of the flower(s) of one plant to a stigma of the flower of another plant. In the case of potatoes for instance seed potatoes are gather from the crop planted if that ‘organic’ crop is next to a field of GM potatoes those ‘organic’ potatoes can be contaminated.

BTW who does the testing?

Facepalm. Cross pollination does occur, as potatoes are flowering vegetables, ergo pollen and seed can be dispersed by birds, bees, wind etc. It’s called “Nature” and doesn’t much care for fences and borders.

sorry hippies cross pollination does happen what i was trying to say without going into the details was that it shouldn’t survive more then a single generation because of current farming processes. Kerry to answer your q your average seed merchant this is where crops are brought after their harvested tests your seeds or has them sent to a lab before you reseed you don’ want to be planting a strain of potatoes that are prone to blight

Problem is Sean if GM crops are introduced into Ireland people will not have the choice due to cross pollination. If you want to eat GM foods you are welcome to there is no ban on buying the actual product as far as I know. In fact I do believe the shops have to mark the product as a GM.

The issue is, Sean, that gm pollen doesnt respect fences. Pollinators , whether bees, flies or wind can take pollen to another plant miles away. see this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeiser

Sean, I think there’s a number of problems here. Firstly, introduction of GM crops that are disease or pest resistant might encourage the dominance of diseases or pests that are themselves resistant to the new strains. This scenario could make it more difficult to cultivate the non-GM strains. Secondly, engineering food to contain pesticides throughout the crop could possible be bad for the health of the population in general. And then there’s a lot of trouble in the US, with the owners of the patents of GM crops suing independant farmers when the crops happened to spring up on their land. I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want, but not when it has a negative impact on others.

It might be worth pointing out that Teagasc did preform 3 years of pollen dispersal trials on potatoes to find the minimum safe distance before planning to begin this trial.
http://www.teagasc.ie/news/2012/201202-27.asp

“We’ll make a killing out of food crisis, Glencore trading boss Chris Mahoney boasts”

The United Nations, aid agencies and the British Government have lined up to attack the world’s largest commodities trading company, Glencore, after it d
escribed the current global food crisis and soaring world prices as a “good” business opportunity.

With the US experiencing a rerun of the drought “Dust Bowl” days of the 1930s and Russia suffering a similar food crisis that could see Vladimir Putin’s government banning grain exports, the senior economist of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, Concepcion Calpe, told The Independent: “Private companies like Glencore are playing a game that will make them enormous profits.”

Ms Calpe said leading international politicians and banks expecting Glencore to back away from trading in potential starvation and hunger in developing nations for “ethical reasons” would be disappointed.

“This won’t happen,” she said. “So now is the time to change the rules and regulations about how Glencore and other multinationals such as ADM and Monsanto operate. They know this and have been lobbying heavily around the world to water down and halt any reform.”

Glencore’s director of agriculture trading, Chris Mahoney, sparked the controversy when he said: “The environment is a good one. High prices, lots of volatility, a lot of dislocation, tightness, a lot of arbitrage opportunities.

“We will be able to provide the world with solutions… and that should also be good for Glencore.”

Glencore announced pre-tax global profits of £1.4bn. The G20 is considering holding an emergency summit on the world food crisis.

Oxfam was scathing about Glencore’s exploitation of volatile world food prices. Jodie Thorpe, from the aid agency’s Grow Campaign, said: “Glencore’s comment that ‘high prices and lots of volatility and dislocation’ was ‘good’ gives us a rare glimpse into the little-known world of companies that dominate the global food system.”

Oxfam said companies like Glencore were “profiting from the misery and suffering of poor people who are worst hit by high and volatile food prices”, adding: “If we are going to fix the ailing food system then traders must be part of the cure.”

Stephen O’Brien, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Development, said: “We know that food-price spikes hit the poorest hardest. Ensuring the poor can still access enough food is vital in times of food-price rises, which is why the UK is investing in safety nets that deliver food and cash to the poorest.”

A Glencore spokesperson said: “Regardless of the business environment, Glencore is helping fulfil global demand by getting the commodities that are needed to the places that need them most.”

By JAMES CUSICK
Published here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/well-make-a-killing-out-of-food-crisis-glencore-trading-boss-chris-mahoney-boasts-8073806.html

Thank you for proving my earlier point.
Really, thanks. ;)

nope i have no benefit from this except food, when your organic stuff fails to disease and weather conditions. Oh and i grew up round farmers so i know how this stuff works on the ground. California has banned everything there a silly nanny state. So what are your qualifications on this matter cause you look like someone who has never been out of the city.

Hi Sinead, just a couple of corrections you may not have been aware of. First of all, undoubtedly the companies selling the seeds of GM crops will benefit, but so will farmers and the environment due to reduced pesticide use (Ordinary potatoes are sprayed 15 times per growing season before harvest) and increased yields. (This is a somewhat controversial statement, but many studies seem to hold this out)

Secondly, Europe has not banned GM foods – they had put a moratorium on new varieties back in 98, but lifted this is 2004 when they approved a type of GM maize. They also import millions of tons of GM animal field every year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_trade_of_genetically_modified_foods#European_de_facto_moratorium

Thirdly, the US state of California has not, to my knowledge, banned GM crops. One small county, Mendocino County has, and there is currently a bill in progress to label foods containing GM products as such, but they are certainly not banned. In fact around 70% of all US food products contain GM ingredients, possibly more if you include non GM animals that were fed GM animal feed during their life.

All companies interests are in making profit thats why there companies not NPO’s. So your Anti-work? Also the IMF and ECB are not corporations and if you read above there are more pro GM arguments then anti ones. Also “foist this filth” thats rich coming from someone who’s profile picture is them with a pint in there hands why aren’t you out there giving out bout the problems drink causes instead of the made up ones that you think (without scientific backing) that GM food will cause.

I think you’re right on that one to some degree Starburst, but it’s worth remembering that hybrid plants have been patentable since the 1930’s, and there have been controls on replanting seeds too – those are uniquely GM issues. Plus patents expire – the first of Monsanto’s patented crops will be expiring in 2014 (Round up ready Soy Beans) which is pretty ironic, since the patent on Roundup has expired as well.
Personally, I’m not that happy with the current patent system in any case, but if we’re going to allow businesses to patent hybrid plants, then I think the same should apply to modern GM techniques as well.
As for terminator genes, it’s certainly something to consider, but do any commercial GM crops actually use them? I think the UN has a recommend moratorium on them, and some countries have banned it.

GM foods are banned in the EU. Ireland trades on its reputation as a producer of pure and wholesome foods grown and produced naturally(not quite true perhaps). Introducing a GM strain into potatoes wouldnt do the farmers any good at all and they know it.

Sean, there’s a job waiting for you with monsanto!

Sean your comment makes no sense. I mean seriously….not one bit of sense. If you were involved in anyway with the industry you’d know that potatoes need to be sprayed with chemicals every 7 to 10 days. These chemicals are expensive getting dearer, cost of diesel is rising, weather is deteriorating and spraying is time consuming. If we can cut out blight for good imaging the savings for us and for the consumer!

Safer, cleaner? Are you listening to yourself?!?!?
Do a little research. The general plan with GM spuds etc is to have them create their own pesticides, as opposed to being sprayed with them. I’ll rather give my veg a good wash than be forced to ingest the pesticide as it’s now a part of the vegetables genetic makeup. Thanks, but no thanks. I think you give biotech way too much credit. It’s all about profit, simple. Anyone that tells you it’s because they care and want to improve your life is lying or a bit dense, imho.

Hi Warran. The potatoes in this trial are not producing their own pesticide – they are simply adding a blight resistant trait from other, wild potatoes. They could have bred this gene in through regular hybridization, but it would have taken about 20 years to do so. Also, the ‘pesticide production’ of GM plants (I assume you mean the various Bt. varities?) uses a gene from the peanut plants – it’s not exactly unnatural.

I dont think people understand whats actually happening in theses trials. They see the word “GM” and and then reach for their pitchforks.

Pharming, a choice for the wealth first worlders, a god sent for those in the third world.

The World According to Monsanto..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XwXG2rV4co