On Mon, 2 Jan 2006, Russell McMahon wrote:

>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmdebate/Story/0,,1535428,00.html
>> 
>> Russell is going to feel vindicated ?
>
> A better subject ljune may have been "GM rape", which is what the article is 
> about 9and which term is mentioned therein). The pun is originally unintended 
> but highly apposite.
>
> But, vindicated? - Not really. It's so obvious that GM "contamination" can 
> and will happen that any given instance is of no great significance to me, 
> accept as a milestone along the way to greater disasters. Which will come. 
> The key issue is, WHEN will we experience the GM disaster which harms 
> millions of people and/or irrevocably damages us all in a way that can't be 
> denied.

GM contamination within variants of one species is one thing, GM 
contamination *across* species as described above is scary. And it's a 
fact already ?! We will all become dead supermen eventually ?!

>   The cross-fertilisation between GM oilseed rape, a brassica, and a 
> distantly related plant, charlock, had been discounted as virtually 
> impossible by scientists with the environment department. It was found 
> during a follow up to the government's three-year trials of GM crops 
> which ended two years ago. The new form of charlock was growing among 
> many others in a field which had been used to grow GM rape. When 
> scientists treated it with lethal herbicide it showed no ill-effects.

I love the wording of 'virtually impossible'. Did they, like CHECK that 
the new genes really weren't in the supercharlock or are they waiting 
for a message from the charlock that says 'take me to your leader' ?

> To give the report some perspective. best comment in the article is:
>
>       Brian Johnson, an ecological geneticist and member of the government's 
> specialist scientific group which assessed the farm trials, has no doubt of 
> the significance. "You only need one event in several million. As soon as it 
> has taken place the new plant has a huge selective advantage. That plant will 
> multiply rapidly."
> Dr Johnson, who is head of the biotechnology advisory unit and head of the 
> land management technologies group at English Nature, the government nature 
> advisers, said: "Unlike the researchers I am not surprised by this. If you 
> apply herbicide to plants which is lethal, eventually a resistant survivor 
> will turn up."

That is true, but can't they, like *analyze* the new shrubs to make sure 
they really don't have the new modifications instead of fighting it out 
on paper ? I think that this issue is *rather* important ? No ? Also 
this piece of news was picked off Slashdot or such so it is not exactly 
'unknown' or 'obscure'. Some kind of reaction should become visible soon 
imho.

Peter
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist