"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
Mooshie peas wrote:
On 20 Aug 2003 06:11:20 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

In sci.agriculture Mooshie peas wrote:
On 17 Aug 2003 12:53:23 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

Why do you think the NZ
Royal Commission recommended education about refuges before releasing
GM
crops?

The NZ RC has a bad taste in it's mouth after that lady professor lied
to them with phony evidence.

No she didn't.

Yes she did.

She worked in the subject, and understands it. As you showed on
sci.med.nutrition you even thought fish oil capsules are mainly
peanut oil.

And the refuges are mandatory in the US. But the seed companies may not
be
insistant that they are applied since it means they only sell half the
GM
seed.

Aren't the refuges for pest predators? Why would you want refuges for
the pests?

So there is a refuge of non-resistant pests to breed with resistant ones
to reduce overall resistance.

With organic Bt spray it is applied in years when the pests are a
problem.
In the intervening time when Bt is not being applied having Bt resistant
genes is not an advantage, so the non-resistant ones increase and the
next
application of Bt when needed will cut them well back again.

So what if intervening years have heavy pest predation too? You
continue with the up and down levels of pesticide?
The organic folk spray it all the time,

It is an important spray for them when significant pests are
present, it is not used all the time.

they haven't anything else.

Organic farming is going big commercial so some very good practices
such as companion planting and using other plants to discourage
pests are not getting propoer attention.

Don't tell them that it is GM

That is a bit of a worry. Quite a few microbiological productive
processes are using GM bacteria. Note what happened with the
tryptophan produced by GM. I think such purifiaction as it was
getting has always been sufficient with the non-GM approach.

However in New Zealand the public were assured the moth spray does
not have GM. I presume that is the Btk as well as the soy and corn
medium it grows in when sprayed.

She claimed association with Oregon State University. She actually had guest
privileges to use one professors lab and a library card. I called and asked
the department she was claiming association with. She had failed to make
tenure in two departments at OSU.

She referenced a paper that didn't exist. When it was later published it
claimed 1 in 100 certainty with 90 trials and data that didn't agree with
the findings was discarded with out being included an marked in the paper.
The paper would get an undergrad a D or F were I come from.

The lady takes a great deal of liberty with the truth.

Gordon