Why did the chicken cross the road?

Falling foul of the law?

Falling foul of the law?

Falling foul of the law?

Falling foul of the law?

Falling foul of the law?

Falling foul of the law?

The people involved in this sort of activity should be arrested for criminal damage and prosecuted.

Personally, I choose to avoid all the organic foods and favour genetically engineered foods. Its only those blind or ignorant to science that are anti GM.

Why eat something natural when we can take something inferior and create something superior through manipoulation of the genetics. We have the ability to evolve ourselves and our environment now through genetic engineering and so we should.

A rounded society will allow me the opportunity to decide and choose for myself what I eat. A civilised society will then ensure that as many interest groups as possible will have the opportunity to realise the choices they've made.

The problem with GM foods and technology is that the essential scientific research and tests, to determine what effect the GM organism will or may have upon the environment that grows the food I want to eat, is not being carried out in hermetically sealed labs, but in the open environment!!

This is crap science. Crap scientists and crap 'environmentalists' that espouse this method of research are the new eco-dictators... along with Criminal Damage Mike.

Dear All,

There is really no need to damage these crops, they are safe. I would be very interested to hear of the paper or publication quoted in the earlier article, which alledges that chickens fed the produce had a higher mortailty rate...higher than what though, how high, and was it statistically significant...such as 499 chickens died in on group, and 498 in the other?!!! Give us the numbers...and source of info. The green lobby is derided among scientists and public alike for plucking figures and statements which are unsupportable and unsupported out of the air.

There is NO evidence of a GM crop being grown anywhere having done any harm to any human or animal. If safety is the issue, please concentrate on the withdrawl of dangerous pesticides and herbicides being planned by the EU. Reducing certain petrochemcial input in agriculture and elsewhere (around cities, railways, near waterways) might actually reduce the risk of harm - whereas GM crops do no harm and glyphosate is relatively harmless.

Remember Silent Spring, and read it if you haven't - jump off the bandwagon, fuckers, the reality is that it is harder to stop REAL damage such as petrochemical pollution -

A concerned environmental scientist

You can state they are safe. There is no evidence that that is true.

If the read the text above you would see that it quite clearly states that TWICE as many birds died - not an extra one in 400 as you suggest might be the case.

The Chicken Action at Littlemoor aimed to demonstrate that no resonable tests have been done on the safety of GM crops. While clearly the results of the chicken test don't prove anything, the fact that no repeat of the trials was undertaken when an otherwise disturbing result seem to be reached shows how dangerous it is to trust the industry to monitor its own products.

In a climate where there is simply no funding or political will to carry out indepentent investigations into this totally new technology why should we expect to find evidence of damage. If you don't look you don't find.

It's funny you should have mentioned Silent Spring - perhaps you should read it again (evidence of you reading ability doesn't seem to impresive so far). Silent Spring esposes a deeper understanding of ecology and our place within it. GM certainly would not fit into her vision.

Evidence from north american farmers shows that single applications of glyphosate to GM crops is virtually unheard of. The vast majority of farmers are finding they must use multiple applications and often mixing in other chemicals. The GM promise of reduced pesticide and herbicide use is a sham and a lie.

(BTW - Dr Jon, is the biotech lobby paying you to monitor these websites and make your snide comments?)

Anyway, heres some stuff about the chicken study....

Ten male broiler birds out of 140 (7.14%) who were fed the GM maize in a small trial died compared to five (3.57%) who died after eating conventional maize.

This, they said, suggested "either a fault in the study or a real direct effect of diet and should act
as a spur for further investigation".

The Aventis study stated that the level of deaths was "normal for this fast growing strain of bird"
and gave a normal mortality rate in broiler chickens of this age at "between 5 and 8%".

But a source in the British poultry industry said yesterday this range of deaths was abnormal - "4% is the average. Anything over 5% and you have got a problem".

[See  http://members.tripod.com/~ngin/JM060.htm for original article]

And from elsewhere...

Proponents argue that GM technology could produce cheaper, more nutritious food that requires less weedkiller and pesticide. It could also grow food in colder or drier climates. Consumers, environmentalists and some scientists worry about risks to human health and the environment. They fear that GM crops could cause toxic or allergenic effects to humans. They are also concerned about large scale elimination of indigenous agricultural and natural species.

In the case of Chardon LL, Orskov is one such skeptic. He has been awarded the Order of the British Empire and is an expert on nutrition in the group of animals known as ruminants which includes cows. Orskov has published four books and is the author or co-author of more than 500 scientific publications.

"The scientific case put forward for this GM maize is not adequate," said Orskov, yesterday. "If the GM maize was approved for commercial growing in the UK then people would be justified in turning their back on consuming milk derived from it. As a scientist I wouldn't drink milk from cows fed GM maize with the present state of knowledge."

Orskov's criticism was shared by Dr. Vyvyan Howard, head of the Foetal and Infant Toxico-Pathology Group at the University of Liverpool. "My interpretation is that this GM maize has not been tested thoroughly," said Dr. Howard.

Howard and Orskov's main criticism of safety data presented by Aventis is that the firm has not tested Chardon LL on cattle, even though it is intended for their use. Instead, rats and chickens were fed a protein from oilseed rape - the same protein found in Chardon LL, according to Aventis.

Orskov was quick to point out that chickens and rats have one stomach, whereas ruminants such as cows have four. "The scientific case put forward for this GM maize is not adequate," said Orskov. "Chemical analyses of the kind reported cannot identity potential problems. We need to carry out proper, long term tests both on the effect of the maize silage for the microbes in the stomach of the ruminants which digest the feed and on the host animals. This has not been done."

Orskov warned Aventis and the government that the UK public could turn their backs on milk and switch to other foods. "This would have a disastrous effect on our dairy industry," he said. "Aventis needs to pay attention to this."

[original articles  http://members.tripod.com/~ngin/2b.htm]

This isn't scientific or anything, but it was something I read in "Psychic News" (!) from 25 March 2000. It's not a publication I often read but I think they have a regular little column where they put questions to a "spirit panel" of deceased people. I make no claims at all for the validity of this as a source... but I did value the angle these few little paragraphs gave on the whole matter of GM foods:

****************
A communication from the spirit realms in answer to particular questions

"Are genetically modified foods safe for humans?"

They are as safe as any other comestibles. They are to be compared with the difference between bread which is white in colour and the bread which appears brown made from unadulterated flours generally named wholemeal.

Genetically modified food is interfered with by scientific process from seed to fruition, and thereafter, as is quite usual now. This process however denies the spirit of the force of creation and could therefore by definition be deemed lifeless, as we know we literally are what we eat, so if we were to ingest only such processed substances so our energies would dwindle accordingly.

This does not just apply to the human race. Where animals and birds have been fed with inappropriately processed feed stuffs, the consequences are only now becoming apparent to those who hvae had the responsibility of so feeding them. There is sufficient land in the world to grow plenteous crops in a natural way that pays due regard to that creative life force and good spirit. The motive as usual is greed and not a desire to forward the development of the world and its inhabitants. The debate will continue to rage on the earth plane and argument will rage until the awful consequences are generally known. There is a danger of rendering life sterile in every department and this we can only counsel against. It is the responsibility of every thinking being to work this one out for themselves, and to examine all scientific data appertaining thereto, and to bring their findings and knowledge to notice and attention of their fellows. Meanwhile, those who are aware must be sure to feed and water themselves and their animals and birds and fish only naturally produced goods. We must all pray for enlightenment to dawn before it is too late to redress the balance of life. God bless and keep you safe from all harm."
--p.3, Psychic News, 25 March 2000.
******************

I can only praise the chickens :) The secrecy and furtive nature of the introduction of GM crops leaves the general public vulnerable and uninformed. At least through stunts like this people can be reminded of the menace they are facing, the deviousness of the multinationals and goverments and a couple of those abominations to nature wiped out in the bargain.

Perhaps indeed there is nothing wrong with these crops, and that my paranoia is backward. But what these trials in essence are doing is removing my right to chose. Dr john I do find meddling with nature unsettling especially when the aim is so obviously for profit. However it is the nature of the technology being forced unseen upon us that i object to most strongly.