Getting a bit desperate here?

What has the University of Nebraska got to do with it? They are one of 100 odd land grant Universities and Colleges in the US whose mandate is to conduct research in agriculture. They are funded from State taxes.

As for your specific allegation, the addresses of the authors are:

J. Brake – Department of Poultry Science, North Carolina State University
M.A. Faust – Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University
J. Stein – Syngenta Seeds

Not a single person from Monsanto here.

No I am pointing out the facts that scientists can be manipulated at a cost. I am also pointing out that companies like Zeneca have vested interest in GM as in 1996 Zeneca (which was sold to Syngenta) offered the first GM tomato puree to customers. They are a seed company that sells GM therefore they are less likely to show if there are problems with GM are they?

"In January 2006, Syngenta announced an agreement with International Seed Holdings L.P. to acquire Emergent Genetics Vegetable A/S (EGV) based in Odense, Denmark. EGV is an established vegetable seed company specialized in breeding and marketing of selected vegetables crops.

EGV focuses primarily on spinach, cucumber, cabbage and cauliflower. Its products are sold internationally under three well-known brands - “Daehnfeldt™”, “Ohlsens Enke™” and “Hurst™”. For the fiscal year ended in September 2005, EGV reported sales of DKK 100m ($17m). The financial terms of the transaction were not disclosed."

Universities will allow donations to research and I have found that the results are most likely funded by GM Companies and the universities are manipulated for the research grants. Look at the amount of scientists that have been sacked if they find something wrong with GM.

There are large amounts of money involved with these Companies with GM and I do not trust any research that comes from any seed company that sells GM or any research done with money from GM Companies as it can be manipulated and would definately be biased.

“Universities will allow donations to research and I have found that the results are most likely funded by GM Companies and the universities are manipulated for the research grants.”

Have you found this indeed?

Perhaps you might give examples?

How exactly were the results changed?

Which results and who was responsible?

“Look at the amount of scientists that have been sacked if they find something wrong with GM.” Give us a list.

Given that your claim that Brake, Faust and Stein are within the Monsanto Scientific Affairs has now been shown to be ridiculously wrong, why should we believe anything else you say?

www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=1728 you will see information about CSIRO relying on corporate investment and this corporate investment appears to be directly linked to approval over G crops. CSIRO announced a lucrative deal with Bayer Cropscience at the same time that Bayer Cropscience was granted Federal approval.

List examples of scientists, well lets start with Dr. Arpad Pusztai. He did a study on GM potatoes and found they alone damaged young rats' organs and immune systems in Oxctober 1999. He went public with his findings before publication in a peer-reviewed journal and was fired and his computer and research data confiscated.

I said that science is manipulated to suit you as I have noted on this forum on this site and 3864 as well and you can look at that again if you are so insistant. When I have studied the full versions of the scientific reports, 90% of the time I see the words "More tests need to be done to fully understand the implications" or something to that affect.

Pat Howard, associate professor of communication, Simon Fraser University quotes "In 2004, people living near a field of Bt corn in Phillippines developed respiratory and gastric illness when the corn flowered. Tests of their blood revealed antibodies to the Bt toxin in the corn pollen, which suggested that it might have caused the illnesses".

Where did these tests go? The public were never allowed to know the full implications of these tests as the results were quickly hidden.

"In Germany, between 2001/2, 12 cows illegally fed a steady diet of Bt corn, mysteriously died. Milk from the herd was tested and found to contain the genes for the bacterial Bt toxin. Neither Canada nor the US conducts tests on milk from cows fed GM feed for the presence of bacterial toxin or viral promoter DNA. How can we know if GM plants are producing dangerous allergens or toxic metaolites as a result of disruptions of plant genomes caused by the insertion of foreign DNA? We are part of one enormous feeding experiment in which none of us have given informed consent".

I thought you list might start and end with Arpad Pusztai. Pusztai did make comments about GE and did get the sack, but it was not cause and effect. He got the sack because he spoke publicly without permission and embarrassed his employer. Here is what one of his colleagues said about it. http://silver-server.dur.ac.uk/GM_Plants_Pages/Lancet.html. And one of the UK’s top nutrition scientists http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Arpad-Pusztai-Potato.htm.

What about the CSIRO? Any evidence to back you claims? T.J. Higgins published an article on GM peas pointing out they had modified a bean protein differently that what beans do. Did he get the sack? No.

Pat Howard’s classic misuse of science. There was indeed a cover up involved here, but no GM companies involved. This quote refers to a report made by well-known anti-GM activist Terje Traavik in 2004 at an activist conference. Subsequently, a group of scientists called on Traavik to share the data so it could be reviewed. http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/pr/traavik.html. Traavik has refused to release or publish the data. He has covered up the data himself.

Source of the German cover up – ISIS and Greenpeace. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMDNAinMilk.php http://www.genet-info.org/genet/2003/Dec/msg00152.html. Notice the ISIS article refers to work that occurred in 2000 and 2001 and was leaked in a report obtained by Greenpeace dated October 2000. Perhaps you are going to suggest that somebody had a time machine and can read the future out of a 2000 report? In Greenpeace’s version they talk about deaths in 2001 and 2002. And the Bt in milk – totally different sudy. This is Mae-Wan Ho’s fantasy about an unpublished report where even the authors stated the Bt DNA fragments did not come from the cow.

As I am only a consumer concerned about my rights to eat what I want, I serfed the net and found things out about scientists being harrassed when they told the world that GM was possibly dangerous. Unfortunately I did not keep this information and I will get back to you with more names. I did not lie about the Monsanto scientists either so I will have to go back into the site I found. I will get back to you but it may take time. Other non-GM'ers feel free to give us your thoughts.