"..because farmers are always genetically modifiying seeds and livestock to improve them without Monsanto's help.. whats the difference".

The difference is that selectively breeding tomatoes with tomatoes to enhance existing traits is possible naturally.

There is no way however, that a tomato could cross-breed with a salmon and there is no place in nature for such a hybrid to exist.

GM technology is based entirely on greed. There are at least 65 health risks and thousands of allergic reactions associated with the consumption of GM foods already documented in research.

It's probably too late to stop the widespread introduction of GM products into the food chain (I know of a few everyday products that have GM ingredients already) but it's presence in any product should be clearly labelled so consumers can make a choice.

Aren't Monsanto the same crowd who sold us on the harmless benefits of DDT and manufactured Agent Orange for military use?

Aside from the issues with GM, which are basically fallible humans "playing god", there is the fact that such crops increase the hold of multinational corporations over our farmers. Should they really be allowed to have more control over our food supply?

To top that off, most of the positive claims for GM, especially canola, are pure spin:

http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=1064

Agreed.

Being an ex-commercial farmer myself, I can't see any reason to introduce GM ANYTHING in Australia. Or anywhere else for that matter. Farmers don't need higher yielding crops. They need climatic confidence in order to have income. We could plant the "best-est" wheat or barley (or whatever) strain in the world, but if if doesn't rain, its not bl**dy good sitting in the ground as ungerminated seed, is it?

As for Monsanto, don't get me started. Truly an evil organisation, which is planning to control the world's stomach and take away our right to choose what we eat (for those fortunate to have a choice). Selling cheap Terminator seed to poor farmers in Africa, (seed which is genetically modified to be unable to reproduce), will cause mass starvation and global misery. Pretty much genocide - and the way they are going, they are well on the track to getting away with it through sheer scientific ignorance and arrogance. Adolf Hitler, eat your heart out.

The one thing the scientists haven't yet worked out is that Mother Nature always wins. And she doesn't have shares in companies, or any interest in politics.

Caveat emptor, Homo Sapiens.

This is probably worse news for Canadian canola growers than anyone else. The adoption of GM canola by Australian farmers rather than using the old atrazine-resistant canola will certainly improve yields and oil content. At the moment the Japanese buy both Australian and Canadian canola and blend them together. They like the low chlorophyll content of Australian canola, but prefer the high oil content of Canadian canola.

Geoffc, interesting to see you quoting Julie Newman. She makes her appearance regularly in these pages and tells me often that Australian canola yields more than Canadian canola, that Canada is unable to sell its canola, and other fairy tales. Perhaps you might explain how the Canadian canola crop is at record levels of production with record yields if GM has reduced the yield of Canadian canola.

Farmers do need to have higher-yielding crops - its been the only way to sustain income levels for at least the last 20 years. Add to that the fact that we are facing a world food shortage and we need to find a way to increase production from the available land that we have. Yes, rainfall is required obviously, but avoiding GM doesnt mean we'll get more rain!

Insect resistance GM crops have been grown in Aust for a number of years - think cotton, with their ingard and bollgard technologies. No downsides from that, and plenty of upsides, with a huge reduction in pesticide sprays required.

Mostly plant gene tampering is done with genes from other plants, not salmon genes into canola. generally it may have been possible to achieve the cross conventionally, but much more time would need to be put into it to identify plants of the same species that display the resistance sought, rather than using the resistant gene from another plant variety.

My main conern with canola is that it has a number of weed relatives, and if cross-pollination were to occur, we could potentially end up with a weed that is resistant to cheap chemicals, thereby creating a larger problem in the long run. Not such an issue with cotton (which is also round-up ready), as it doesnt easily grow wild enmasse.

VICTORIAN and NSW Governments:....SHAME!SHAME!SHAME!

Aime:
I support you to the fullest!

I wonder how many of the supporters of GM of Crops etc that enter our food chain have young children?

Don`t we have enough problems affecting the children of today`s society with the plethora of injections, vaccinations, drugs (illegal and prescribed) as well as excessive alcohol ingestion?

How blind are we if we cannot see what is happening to our society. Look at the rapidly increasing incidence of brute violence being utilized by mere children who are running the streets out of control?

Do we need another possible source of "brain-warp" resulting from the consumption of GM foods, and of course the use of this technology involves Patent Rights and profits organizations such as the despicable and morally questionable companies such as Monsanto. Once again we see the interests and principles of big business being applied, regardless of the long term costs upon the human race!

I wait for the invetiable response from the ratbags out there, who no doubt will advocate that this is "God`s will" or similar sort of crap, in their pathetic efforts to paper over a problem that mankind should have condemned when it first hit the streets!