• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Protesters threaten to destroy GMO crop 5/27/12

Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
799
http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/animal-genes-rothamstead-wheat-trial/

Rothamsted Research is conducting a trial of a new genetically engineered wheat that repels aphids and will drastically reduce wheat farmers’ need for pesticides. Unfortunately, a group calling themselves Take The Flour Back have been spreading misinformation and fear about this trial and have even threatened to destroy it on May 27th 2012 in a public “decontamination”.

I'm still not understanding their point but maybe it's because they don't have one? They are claiming the wheat's synthesized gene is similar to one found in cows therefore the wheat is an animal?

http://taketheflourback.org/open-letter-to-rothamsted/

So it appears they are threatening to pull up the wheat later this month.:eye-poppi

Am I missing something?
 
http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/animal-genes-rothamstead-wheat-trial/



I'm still not understanding their point but maybe it's because they don't have one? They are claiming the wheat's synthesized gene is similar to one found in cows therefore the wheat is an animal?

http://taketheflourback.org/open-letter-to-rothamsted/

So it appears they are threatening to pull up the wheat later this month.:eye-poppi

Am I missing something?

Nop you got that right - had a similar argument in the 90s with a consumer group back home that modified wheat shared similar DNA with peanuts and therefore the wheat was a danger to those in society with nut allergies.

The old saying a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing never rang truer
 
Nop you got that right - had a similar argument in the 90s with a consumer group back home that modified wheat shared similar DNA with peanuts and therefore the wheat was a danger to those in society with nut allergies.

The old saying a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing never rang truer

indeed.

The amusing thing is since the announced this to the public, won't those running the trial respond with armed guards or similar protection? I know I would.

I don't abide drastic methods to advocate one's own personal political propaganda, but those who are most effective at it, tend to act first and claim responsibility later.

They don't seem to be very good at this.
 
indeed.

The amusing thing is since the announced this to the public, won't those running the trial respond with armed guards or similar protection? I know I would.

I don't abide drastic methods to advocate one's own personal political propaganda, but those who are most effective at it, tend to act first and claim responsibility later.

They don't seem to be very good at this.

Now if they managed to create pig wheat that would raise bacon to a whole new level
 
had a similar argument in the 90s with a consumer group back home that modified wheat shared similar DNA with peanuts and therefore the wheat was a danger to those in society with nut allergies
The first linked article in my OP quotes a book on the subject. It mentions Brazil nut DNA in GMO tomatoes being rejected because of allergy issues. I wasn't sure to make of that--is it true?
 
The first linked article in my OP quotes a book on the subject. It mentions Brazil nut DNA in GMO tomatoes being rejected because of allergy issues. I wasn't sure to make of that--is it true?

I honestly could not answer that - I know peanut allergy is caused by specific proteins, whereas I have no idea about Brazil nuts
 
The first linked article in my OP quotes a book on the subject. It mentions Brazil nut DNA in GMO tomatoes being rejected because of allergy issues. I wasn't sure to make of that--is it true?

They mention it as a hypothetical situation, not something that has actually happened. In it, they decide to use protein coding genes from a Brazil nut in order to infuse a higher methionine/cystein content to a pea. Without knowing exactly which protein is being produced by this gene and whether it can serve as an antigen in an allergic response, one cannot speculate. I'm honestly not even sure they know which proteins in nuts induce the allergic response.
 
indeed.

The amusing thing is since the announced this to the public, won't those running the trial respond with armed guards or similar protection? I know I would.

They don't seem to be very good at this.

Better, I fear, than you. Arming guards only helps if they have authorization to shoot. Which no sane rent-a-cop is going to do in front of cameras.

So armed guards provide a win-win for the anti-GMO movement. If somebody gets killed, they have a martyr. If the guards, despite being armed, are unable to prevent destruction of the crops, that's a win, too. Great video, at the very least.
 
http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/animal-genes-rothamstead-wheat-trial/



I'm still not understanding their point but maybe it's because they don't have one? They are claiming the wheat's synthesized gene is similar to one found in cows therefore the wheat is an animal?

http://taketheflourback.org/open-letter-to-rothamsted/

So it appears they are threatening to pull up the wheat later this month.:eye-poppi

Am I missing something?

No, they are feces devouring incompetant fools who need to be put on an island somewhere with primitive tools and primitive crop seeds and left to fend.
 
No, they are feces devouring incompetant fools who need to be put on an island somewhere with primitive tools and primitive crop seeds and left to fend.


GM crops, so far, have shown themselves to very primitive.
 
http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/animal-genes-rothamstead-wheat-trial/



I'm still not understanding their point but maybe it's because they don't have one? They are claiming the wheat's synthesized gene is similar to one found in cows therefore the wheat is an animal?

http://taketheflourback.org/open-letter-to-rothamsted/

So it appears they are threatening to pull up the wheat later this month.:eye-poppi

Am I missing something?



What they need now is a GMO crop that repels, well, protesters.

I remember a documentary of something they were working on in the 60’s


 
GM crops, so far, have shown themselves to very primitive.

What does that even mean?

This particular GM wheat produces an aphid pheromone that signals danger to the aphids, thus the aphids will hopefully be repelled. Apparently many other plants also produce this pheromone. How is this primitive? How is any GM crop primitive? Do you know what primitive means?
 
Last edited:
I'm still not understanding their point but maybe it's because they don't have one? They are claiming the wheat's synthesized gene is similar to one found in cows therefore the wheat is an animal?
Where do you find that in their letter?

No offense, but you seem to have made up your mind on their position rather than actually reading what they have to say.
 
Where do you find that in their letter?

No offense, but you seem to have made up your mind on their position rather than actually reading what they have to say.
I posted a direct link to it already, followed by a few questions since the statement appears nonsensical and I wondered what I was missing. But yeah, I totally made up my mind w/o reading it.:rolleyes:

You say that to “suggest that we have used a ‘cow gene’ and that our wheat is somehow part-cow betrays a misunderstanding which…has no basis in scientific reality.” Yet the description of the gene you have synthetised as being “not found naturally” and having “most similarity to that from cow” is taken directly from own your application

They do not deny claiming the wheat is part cow. When this claim was refuted by the scientists they respond with saying their claim was correct, not by saying they never made the claim.
 
Not sure whether to start a new thread, so I'll put this here:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6735584/Hundreds-of-GM-trees-destroyed

Intruders have dug under electrified security fencing to destroy genetically modified pine trees in a field trial being carried out by Crown Research Institute Scion in Rotorua.

[...]

Set inside Scion's perimeter fence, the 1-hectare field trial site was secured by a double fence, one of which was electrified and monitored.

The offenders cut through the perimeter fence elsewhere on the campus, then dug under the security fencing and attacked the trees by cutting them at root level and pulling them out of the ground.

Most of the trees were less than a metre high, and were part of two experiments due to run for two to three years.

One was testing herbicide resistance and the other was looking at reproductive development.

Not all the trees were genetically modified as the experiments included some control trees. The direct value of the destroyed material was around $400,000. [...]
 
Better, I fear, than you. Arming guards only helps if they have authorization to shoot. Which no sane rent-a-cop is going to do in front of cameras.

So armed guards provide a win-win for the anti-GMO movement. If somebody gets killed, they have a martyr. If the guards, despite being armed, are unable to prevent destruction of the crops, that's a win, too. Great video, at the very least.

So you think that if there were armed guards and cameras that they would still attempt to destroy the crops?

I would think you would have to be nuts to take that chance. Not to mention the cops would surely be on their way.....
 

Back
Top Bottom