"It is the very same politics, economics and logic that are behind the global biotechnology industry that have created so much marginalization, poverty and environmental degradation all over the planet." Marit Stinus-Remonde writing in the Manila Times 09/05/2001
---
PANTS ON FIRE
A. Winner of January/February's PANTS
B. March/April NOMINATIONS:
1. The Institute of Public Affairs
2. Scottish Enterprise
3. The John Innes Centre
---
AN ADDRESS FROM THE PANTS ON FIRE CHIEF: JdB
'Allo my fellow anti-genetic ngineers. Welcome again to ze lingerie conflagration!
First of all ze winner of ze January/February pants frites (nominations: Lord Haskins, ze Royal Society, Prof Philip Stott):
Ze winner of ze prestigious pants - le grand Stott!
[Ed: for more on Stotty see: http://members.tripod.com/~ngin/319.htm for a peep at his pants: http://members.tripod.com/~ngin/pants.htm]
Do not despair about ze RS and ze Haskins losing ze pants - one thing you can be sure, zey will return!
Below ze nominations for March/April. Your votes s'il vous plait: un, deux, or trois?
Merci!
Jean de Bris
President for life
Trouzer Smoke International
---
March/April NOMINATIONS:
1. The Institute of Public Affairs
2. Scottish Enterprise
3. The John Innes Centre
1. The Institute of Public Affairs... Aussie front organisation
The Australian based IPA issued a press release implying Malaysian NGOs opposing GM crops were little more than "local front organisations" "doing the bidding of their wealthy American paymasters". They based this smear on the fact that the NGOs concerned received some funding support from a US environmental group. So, by these standards, just how independent is the pro-corporate IPA?
Almost one third of the IPA's $1.5 million annual budget comes from mining and manufacturing companies. Representatives of transnational corporations sitting on the IPA's board include Shell, Rio Tinto and Philip Morris.
What was that about "wealthy paymasters"?
2. Scottish Enterprise... an enigma wrapped in a mystery
On April 15 a Sunday Herald article, "Fury at pro-GM school magazines", exposed how a US-based biotech industry science series, 'Your World', was going wholesale into Scottish schools, courtesy of the folk at Scottish Enterprise, in a trial run for UK-wide distribution.
According to the article, 'Up to 20,000 copies of seven editions of Your World are this month being sent to 600 schools and colleges throughout Scotland as a "teacher's resource for biotechnology education." '
The edition of Your World on GM crops had as it 'Science Advisor' hardline pro-GM scientist C S Prakash. The series is credited to the 'The Biotechnology Institute' whose financial backers include Monsanto, Novartis, Rhone-Poulenc, and the 900-member Biotechnology Industry Organisation.
Scottish Enterprise's biotechnology director, Peter Lennox, dismissed concern as nonsense. "I'm flabbergasted that anyone should raise this.", he said. "It didn't even cross our minds.... Biotechnology is an enigma wrapped in a mystery and there is a lack of knowledge about it."
3. The John Innes Centre... keeping crap busters in business
Towards the end of April the John Innes Centre organised a conference on the future of global agriculture. According to the JIC's Director, the conference was all about "fostering balanced scientific discussion" and avoiding the polarised rhetoric of campaigners (The Guardian, May 2, 2001).
Unfortunately, the JIC somehow forgot to invite a single speaker from the developing world who was a known critic of GM, and they even rejected proposals to have such speakers at a conference fringe event.
In 1998 the JIC was represented on a panel of experts overseeing a citizens'jury that, having been given balanced and accurate information on biotechnology, decisively rejected GMOs. The conference was also addressed by an academic whose research has shown that public opposition to GMOs does not stem from ignorance. That, however, didn't stop the JIC from reaching the conclusion: "One of the main constraints on the uptake of biotechnological solutions is lack of understanding and resulting non acceptance of products by the general public."
The JIC has, of course, its own remarkable record of encouraging understanding and balance through its many science communication and education activities (some, like its schools' project, Lord-Sainsbury assisted).
For instance, Prof Jonathan Jones, who works in the Sainsbury Laboratory (massively assisted by Lord-Sainsbury), told the Independent on Sunday (April 29, 2001) of how he wrote an article to order for the Blair Government (Lord-Sainsbury assisted ) during the Pusztai crisis: "Jonathan Powell (Tony Blair's chief of staff) suggested that it might be a good time to write another article" and also told Jones which papers to send it to.
Prof Jones, as an independent scientist, is still continuing this effort to educate the public. At a public meeting on GM crops on 7th March, organised by South Norfolk District Council, he attacked GM critics as self-serving and as "quite literally leading everyone up the garden path."
Jones repeated (several times!) one of his favourite claims at the meeting: the growing of GM crops has made aerial spraying of pesticides unnecessary in the United Sates, resulting in "crop dusters" going "out of business because plants are so [pest] resistant, there’s no business for applying insecticides indiscriminately from aeroplanes". According to Prof Jones, this effect of GM crops is "a benefit not just to the workers who don’t have to apply the insecticides but to all the wildlife in the area and beyond."
However, according to the leading US agronomist Dr Charles Benbrook, former Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture for the US National Academy of Sciences and author of "Pest Management at the Crossroads", overall insecticide use in the US has been on the increase, "Pesticide pounds applied are up, sales are up."
And while "crop dusters" are indeed going out of business, Dr Benbrook points out that this is due to the fact that "fewer and fewer pesticides may be applied aerial, because of drift" because "the new chemistry is incompatible with aerial application", being either too expensive for indiscriminate application or too "devastating to all sorts of other vegetation".
None of this, of couse, has anything to do with GMOs!
Dr Benbrook’s conclusion on Prof Jones’ much repeated claim that crop dusters are going out of business because of GM crops: "This fellow does not know what he is talking about."
That conclusion, however, may be overly charitable! Prof Jones'claims fit into a pattern of science communication and education activities by the JIC involving multiple instances of baseless claims, bogus research and other misinformation. http://members.tripod.com/~ngin/biospin.htm