by Guest Posts on 29 May 2012 Editor’s note: Republished with permission from The Birds, the Bees, and Feeding the World. By Rebecca Nesbit My excitement of today was to attend the anti-GM protest organised by Take the Flour Back, joining the group of bystanders wearing ‘Don’t Destroy Research’ badges. Take the Flour Back (I don’t get the name – apparently it’s something to do with Rage Against the Machine) objects to a trial of GM wheat, and they organised a day to do some ‘decontamination’. That’s vandalism to you and me. The trial at Rothamsted Research is of genetically-modified wheat which contains an aphid-repelling gene normally found in
Yesterday, Newsnight on BBC2 hosted a discussion about the genetically engineered possibly-aphid-repelling wheat underway at the Rothamsted Station in the UK. It featured John Pickett from Rothamsted, Tracey Brown from Sense About Science, Lawrence Woodward who is a former head of the Soil Association, and Jyoti Fernandes representing the protest group, Take the Flour Back. Have a watch while it is still up on YouTube:
In England, there is an important experiment underway. A research group at the Rothamsted Research station in Harpenden, is testing a variety of wheat that has been genetically engineered to scare away aphid pests. If successful, the experiment could demonstrate the effectiveness of a novel, environmentally-friendly way to manage pests. However, a protest group is threatening the ability of the researchers to continue their project, and there have been a lot of claims made about the research. To help shed some light on this experiment, I interviewed Dr. Gia Aradottir, a biologist who is involved in the project. KJHvM: Can
  Interview  aphids, bioethics, biotechnology, Crop pests and disease, Entomology, Genetic Engineering, GMO, insects, pest control, UK, Vandalism, Wheat
by Karl Haro von Mogel on 23 April 2012 This year and next, an important and interesting trial of genetically engineered wheat is underway. At the Rothamsted research station in the UK, they are testing the ability of this wheat to ward off aphids by emitting an odorless pheromone. If successful, it could mean that wheat farmers will have a non-insecticide option for prevent losses to this harmful herbivore. This field trial has gotten a lot of press and attention, and the UK’s chief scientific adviser called it amazing. However, a group calling themselves Take The Flour Back, is protesting the trial, and through their website are threatening to
by Guest Posts on 17 April 2012 Republished with permission from Quantum Forest. Minor editing from the original source. By Luis Apiolaza The media in New Zealand briefly covered the destruction of a trial with genetically modified pines (Pinus radiata D. Don, vulgar name Radiata pine, Monterey pine) near Rotorua. This is not the first time that anti-GM groups destroyed a trial, ignoring that they have been established following regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency. Most people have discussed this vandalism either from the wasting resources (money, more importantly time, delays on publication for scientists, etc) or from the criminal activity points of view. I will discuss
|
|
GM debate: scientists and protesters aren’t polar opposites
Editor’s note: Republished with permission from The Birds, the Bees, and Feeding the World. By Rebecca Nesbit My excitement of today was to attend the anti-GM protest organised by Take the Flour Back, joining the group of bystanders wearing ‘Don’t Destroy Research’ badges. Take the Flour Back (I don’t get the name – apparently it’s something to do with Rage Against the Machine) objects to a trial of GM wheat, and they organised a day to do some ‘decontamination’. That’s vandalism to you and me. The trial at Rothamsted Research is of genetically-modified wheat which contains an aphid-repelling gene normally found in
Newsnight on the Rothamsted Wheat
Yesterday, Newsnight on BBC2 hosted a discussion about the genetically engineered possibly-aphid-repelling wheat underway at the Rothamsted Station in the UK. It featured John Pickett from Rothamsted, Tracey Brown from Sense About Science, Lawrence Woodward who is a former head of the Soil Association, and Jyoti Fernandes representing the protest group, Take the Flour Back. Have a watch while it is still up on YouTube:
Interview with Dr. Gia Aradottir
In England, there is an important experiment underway. A research group at the Rothamsted Research station in Harpenden, is testing a variety of wheat that has been genetically engineered to scare away aphid pests. If successful, the experiment could demonstrate the effectiveness of a novel, environmentally-friendly way to manage pests. However, a protest group is threatening the ability of the researchers to continue their project, and there have been a lot of claims made about the research. To help shed some light on this experiment, I interviewed Dr. Gia Aradottir, a biologist who is involved in the project. KJHvM: Can
What do you want to know about GE wheat?
This year and next, an important and interesting trial of genetically engineered wheat is underway. At the Rothamsted research station in the UK, they are testing the ability of this wheat to ward off aphids by emitting an odorless pheromone. If successful, it could mean that wheat farmers will have a non-insecticide option for prevent losses to this harmful herbivore. This field trial has gotten a lot of press and attention, and the UK’s chief scientific adviser called it amazing. However, a group calling themselves Take The Flour Back, is protesting the trial, and through their website are threatening to
On the destruction of a trial of genetically modified pines
Republished with permission from Quantum Forest. Minor editing from the original source. By Luis Apiolaza The media in New Zealand briefly covered the destruction of a trial with genetically modified pines (Pinus radiata D. Don, vulgar name Radiata pine, Monterey pine) near Rotorua. This is not the first time that anti-GM groups destroyed a trial, ignoring that they have been established following regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency. Most people have discussed this vandalism either from the wasting resources (money, more importantly time, delays on publication for scientists, etc) or from the criminal activity points of view. I will discuss