"I said wheat belt farmer, not canola farmer." I understand that Monsanto is only interested in bringing Roundup Ready canola to Australia. The Roundup Ready wheat program has been shelved. Therefore, at present there is no possibility of Roundup Ready wheat. Wheat acreages are irrelevent, unless you are trying to scare farmers.

"Why wouldn't Monsanto treat Australia the same as America? Show me where this document no longer applies in America.

http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=310 gives you the user agreement that shows that you have to use Monsanto products. "Only Roundup Transorb and Roundup Original are registered for use on Roundup Ready canola"."

Here is the current document http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/us_ag/content/stewardship/tug/springCanola.pdf. If you read it it will say: "You may use another glyphosate herbicide". The 2006 agreement can be found at: http://www.dahlcoseeds.com/images/forms/2006techagreement.pdf

Do you know how end point royalties work? If so, you might explain to me why investigators would be needed on farms to police end point royalties.

Let's get a few things straight here. Number 1 is that I have definately not given up on the safety aspects of GM. The reason why I don't bother at the moment is because I am waiting for the true and reliable data of GM tests being done when I know the scientist or the results are not manipulated. With every question or comment I have given you so far in your GM tests you don't answer me or try and change the subject onto something that I am not familiar with like the farming aspects. I am not a farmer, greenie or whatever you think I am. I am a concerned consumer. That's it, no more.

Every safety document that you have given me I have found flaws with and they don't show qualitive and quantitive results. It has been a generalization of all results. There is no triangulation and validity of the research methods. The reports are so biased that it becomes ethnocentric to the non scientist.

The updated version of your Monsanto document is for the American farmer. There is no report on any Australian farmer agreement. If there is, show it to me and stop hiding the real figures that Australian farmers will have to pay. If you want to fight to say how little the farmer is going to have to pay then give the full figures not some rehashed American agreement.

This sort of thing in scientific reports concerns me: - "The last years have also witnessed the appearance of the first reports linking genetically altered polyamine metabolism to human diseases".

This is why I continue to say that GM is a potential biohazard.

http://www.jcmm.org/en/pdf/9/4/jcmm009.004.09.pdf

If you have not read the full report, mices and people are different but I still see no frankenstein food.

Change of subject again. This research is done on genetically modified mice not mice fed genetically modified grain. Is this correct? How does that make a difference in this debate? I don't want to know what they are doing with stem cell research, I want to know what you GM'ers are trying to put in our food and what effect it has on us.

"The experimental approaches include an activation of polyamine biosynthesis and catabolism, transgenic expression of ODC antizyme and gene-disruption technology applied to the biosynthetic and catabolic enzymes of the polyamines. Studies with genetically modified rodents have revealed a plethora of diverse phenotypic changes, many of them relevant to human disease conditions. The latter include, among others, tumorigenesis, skin pathophysiology, lipid metabolism, male and female reproduction, integrity of pancreas, liver, heart and central nervous system as well as embryogenesis."

Just this statement alone is ethnocentric to the non scientist. Give us a well written, able to be looked at critically by a non-scientist so they understand easily, in plain speak for the everyday person, report and research done on pigs or humans that have been fed GM that is quantifiable and qualifiable. This is what I ask. Show us without predjudice that GM is safe with the full report not hacked and slashed by the GM companies. Every last word from a non-judgemental, totally uncommitted to GM, scientist that has not got blinkers on or blindfolded by the GM industry has to be given with his non-judgemental views. So far every scientist that has shown that GM is unsafe has been sacked and told that if they say anything it comes under "privacy agreement" under Monsanto rules. I don't need to give you all the names as you know them.

Until then GM is a biohazard in my eyes.

Your request: "Why wouldn't Monsanto treat Australia the same as America? Show me where this document no longer applies in America."

I simply answered this request by showing you the 2006 agreement.

Your quote: This sort of thing in scientific reports concerns me: - "The last years have also witnessed the appearance of the first reports linking genetically altered polyamine metabolism to human diseases".

I have read the paper this comes from. It has nothing at all to do with GM food. The genetically altered polyamine metabolism referred to in relation to human disease is that which occurs naturally in some genetically inherited medical conditions. Look for this quote at the end of the paper: "The last few years have witnessed the appearance of the first reports of human disease conditions caused by mutations or rearrangements of genes involved in polyamine metabolism." Janne et al. (2005) Animal disease models generated by genetic engineering of polyamine metabolism. J. Cell Mol. Med. 9 865-882.

If you insist on picking this stuff of the anti-GM industry websites without checking its background, don't be surprised if we do the checks for you and demonstrate the nonsense you are talking.

By the way you are the one who brought up farming information on your post of 13th September, by again copying material from anti-GM industry websites without checking it.

"Change of subject again. This research is done on genetically modified mice not mice fed genetically modified grain. Is this correct? How does that make a difference in this debate? I don't want to know what they are doing with stem cell research, I want to know what you GM'ers are trying to put in our food and what effect it has on us."

Careful what you post may come back and bite you on the bum. You raised this "quote" I showed where it originated. I am sure you are an intelligent person, admit this "quote" was embelished by anti-GM forces. :)