Cornell Report - Industry Response

[Neil Jones]

In article <374A939E.62C6 at concentric.net>
           paulcher at CONCENTRIC.NET "Paul Cherubini" writes:

<snip
> Doug, I think it's reasonable to assume the industry companies have
> known about the Bt in the Bt corn pollen for years and have also known,
> via their own private testing,  it has no significant "toxic pollen
> effect" in a real world situation on non-target leps.  I base this
> assumption on the billions of dollars the companies would have at risk
> if they overlooked this fundamental possibility. 

The question isn't just whether there is a toxic effect, it is aslo whether
there is an ecological effect. Ecology has a substantial mathematical
part of it and mathematics is subject to a system of total logical
proof. 2 and 2 will always equal 4 never mind what any corporation OR
scientist says.
It is clear that distributing Bacillus thurigiensis "toxin" into the 
environment will have effects on the predator prey system.
We know for certain that resistance to the toxin will arise. Putting it
into the wider environment increases the risk that resistance will arise
and remember this is not the natural "variable" Bt toxin, but just a 
specific form.

> Yesturday  Robert Fraley, co-president of Monsanto's agricultural
> division said in a press release: "For all practical purposes all the
> [Cornell] experiment on the monarch butterfly shows is that if you put
> enough Bt protein on a leaf, you'll kill the caterpillar". "But that's
> been known for 150 years".
> Paul Cherubini, Placerville, California

Now that is a very interesting statement. Note.-There is no doubt that
Monsanto are saying this. It is one of _their_ press releases and one
of _their_ executives saying that it has been known for 150 years that
Bt protein will kill caterpillars.

I cannot see how this can possibly be true and it seems to me that it does not
do credit to Mr Paul Cherubini's knowledge of biology and history that he
repeats it. 150 years ago is 1849.

Bacillus thurigiensis was NOT discovered until 1911 !!!!

At around 1849 Louis Pasteur was still in the early years of his work on
bacteria which led to the development of the first synthetic vaccines.

If this is true then it seems that there are several possible
conclusions:

1. Monsanto don't know much about the creature they are manipulating.

(This would be rather worrying. Would it not?)

2. Monsanto's press office are not very clued up.

(This would also be worrying since if that were the case we would not
be able to trust what they were saying to be accurate.)

3. Monsanto are issuing press releases with misleading information in order
to further their aims.

(This, of course would also be worrying.)

I do not know which is correct or even if I have missed something, but the
whole thing seems distinctly odd to me.

-- 
Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
National Nature Reserve