GM Crops Experiment At Rothamsted Is An 'Act Of Terrorism' Protest Group Say

The Huffington Post UK  |  By Posted: 2/05/2012 12:43 Updated: 2/05/2012 17:57

Wheat
The anti-GM activists who are threatening to destroy experiment on genetically modified crops said they feel they have "no choice" and allowing the crop to continue would be an "act of terrorism."

The anti-GM activists who are threatening to destroy experiment on genetically modified crops have said they feel they have "no choice" and allowing the crop to continue would be "completely irresponsible."

In response to a plea from John Pickett, a chemical ecologist leading pioneering research at Rothamsted in Hertfordshire, Matt Thomson, a spokesperson for the group Take the Flour back said the scientists were being "rather melodramatic."

Pickett, in an open letter published on Wednesday, said the activists risked destroying their lives' work and ruining a project that could protect the environment.

But the protesters argue that similar experiments in Canada have leaked into the food-chain, costing farmers millions in lost exports.

"I am completely opposed to the crops being given open-air release. We've asked Rothamsted to remove it, we took a challenge to Defra last month, if you don't then we will. We don't want to be criminalised, but we don't feel we've got any choice," he told The Huffington Post UK.

"If we were to allow it [the crop] to flower we would be risking much more than any of the work that's been done on GM we would be risking generations of research.

"I think it's a case of there needs to be a full and frank debate on the science. GM is something which has been rejected time and time again by consumers. time and time again by farmers. There's no market for this stuff. Why is it being pushed on us again?

"Why is it risking the most important crop we have in the UK. That to me is an act of terrorism. It's completely irresponsible. I would hesitate to use the word terrorist because I think it's overused but I think they are acting irresponsibility."

The scientists at Rothamsted Research are conducting an experiment to create wheat that can more easily repel aphid attacks. But protesters, who are worried GM crops could carry viruses and be antibiotic resistant, say they are risking contaminating wheat and "robbing UK farmers of their livelihoods."

But Pickett, in an open letter to the group, claimed: “We can only appeal to your consciences, and ask you to reconsider before it is too late, and before years of work to which we have devoted our lives are destroyed forever,” he said.

On Wednesday morning organic farmer Gerald Miles, who plans to join the protests, said the experiment would "ruin the market for wheat exports in the UK."

He denied it was an exaggerated claim, telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "They can't give us a written guarantee that this won't happen because there's proof of it happening all over the world."

Thomson said the group were not seeking to "cause terror."

"We are being very public and accountable in everything that we do," he said. "This is a publicly funded experiment and the scientists will still be paid at the end of this, you can't say the same with UK farmers. People have lost thousands of pounds, what you are talking about is potentially robbing UK farmers of their livelihoods which I think is absolutely deplorable."

Quick Poll

Are GM crops the only way to secure future food supplies?

VOTE

FOLLOW UK

The anti-GM activists who are threatening to destroy experiment on genetically modified crops have said they feel they have "no choice" and allowing the crop to continue would be "completely irrespons...
The anti-GM activists who are threatening to destroy experiment on genetically modified crops have said they feel they have "no choice" and allowing the crop to continue would be "completely irrespons...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 37
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:39 on 08/05/2012
Gathuru Mburu, Coordinator of the African Biodiversity Network, has made the following statement:

"It gives us strength to see the British people standing up to the irresponsible release of genetically modified foods into the ecosystem. We have seen the negative effects that crops like this have had in India, where GM cotton crops failed in their claims of pest resistance, and sent farmers into spiraling debt. Experimenting with staple crops is a serious threat to food security...Seed saving is the basis of African farmers' security and livelihood, but patented GM crops forbid farmers from saving their own seed. This is a violation of Farmers' Rights. Furthermore, there is always a strong likelihood that GM will cross-pollinate with our crops, and that we will lose our indigenous diversity forever. ...

Beneath the rhetoric that GM is the key to feeding a hungry world, there is a very different story, a story of control and profit. This story is about controlling seed, and thereby the farmer, his land, and the food system. GM...creates dependence on corporations and increased vulnerability to hunger and poverty. Actions against GM, by movements like the African Biodiversity Network, Via Campesina, and the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa, are happening across Africa and beyond. The fact is that we need a diversity of genetic traits in food crops in order to survive worsening climates. Above all, people need to have control over their seeds".
07:51 on 03/05/2012
Perhaps rent a mob should look at what has happenned to wheat over the last 100 years. It has been modifiedto protect itself against disease, give larger yields per acre therefore feeding more people for less land use. Therefore it has already been modified. Anyway, who gives these people the right to destroy other peoples property?
21:21 on 02/05/2012
the antis wont like this but ordinary cross bred plants are the same as genetically modified except they are bred much quicker
it takes years and years to get a new seed but genetically modifieng will take a couple of years it will also cut down on chemicals so help the enviroment
i have eaten and used to grown tomatoes from seed produced this way since 1954
10:09 on 03/05/2012
thats not accurate. GM modification can use genetic sequences from completely unrelated organisms. cross breeding is limited to similar strains from related organisms.
18:35 on 25/05/2012
Wrong. Study after study has shown that be is more precise and safer than selective breeding.

Try reading an actual scientific paper.
21:10 on 02/05/2012
Of course they say that, but they know they are lying when they do.
20:08 on 02/05/2012
But if you burn the fields, won't the seeds spread even more?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mad Hatter 1
19:20 on 02/05/2012
Creating food with very little nutritious value, to keep you sick so you have to buy pills from big Pharma, this is the new world we live in. David Ike has written extensively on this, as well as many others. Knowledge is power and power is knowledge, the more you know, can only help when it comes time to cast your vote.

"Monsanto" is leading the charge in America, with GM seeds...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ppenguinator
Life's too imprtant to be taken seriously.
22:54 on 02/05/2012
And we better get our tinfoil hats ready, too.
05:53 on 03/05/2012
The food we're eating now is toxifying our bodies and slowly killing us. Even with basic foods - Grains, fruit, vegetables and animal protein - our bodies are having a harder time recognising it as food to get any good out of it and add to that any modifications and chemicals they use to make it grow, we have become nutrient deficient - disease ridden beings. Certified organic is the way to go but for the average person with an average or below average income, it's still way too expensive. We need to find a way to make this the norm before food companies like Monsanto and the lot make us even sicker.
19:11 on 02/05/2012
Millions of years of Evolution being put at risk for corporate profit,
every time man has gone against nature man has lost.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ppenguinator
Life's too imprtant to be taken seriously.
22:56 on 02/05/2012
If that were true, what would be the problem?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Altern8
19:01 on 02/05/2012
I suspect that what this boils down to is the old argument between the Enlightenment and Romanticism.
Romanticism is about feelings basically says that the problems of the modern world if we abandoned, or at least constrained, scientific and economic growth, whereas the Enlightenment is all about proof, evidence and the scientific method.

All my life there has been a parade of people telling me that we are all doomed unless we give up economic growth.
Enough already, they have no incontrovertible proof just strong emotions on the subject. Why should I trust them on subjects where all they bring to the table is a sense of outrage?

Romanticism is dangerous.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Altern8
19:05 on 02/05/2012
Whoops typos galore. Sorry.
15:36 on 02/05/2012
These are the type of 'people' who released Mink, Wild Boar and other animals into the countryside, causing environmental damage. These 'people' only care about causing damage, if they had 1 brain cell between them, they would be dangerous. ECO TERRORISTS who should be thrown into 6 foot square cell, forever
This comment has been removed.
15:32 on 02/05/2012
History has shown us so many times that when Man decides to interfere with Nature, things go terribly wrong.
Importing rabbits to Australia seemed a good idea at the time, but now they are a massive problem. You will very rarely see a red squirrel here now, since American Greys have almost eliminated them.
I feel very uneasy about genetically engineered food, the big companies tell us its what we need etc, but they are money driven. Another company is happily selling pesticides that are now known to be wiping out the worlds population of bees. Will they stop ? I very much doubt it, money doesnt only talk, it bellows, and the worlds population may well pay for their greed with famine
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Altern8
15:40 on 02/05/2012
Mankind has been interfering with nature since history began, it's not a modern invention.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tony Booth
16:11 on 02/05/2012
yes they have but not by introducing alien genetics, they did it by cross breeding and selecting the offspring they wanted for further breeding. it's a natural process unlike GM.
15:00 on 02/05/2012
To call a field trial of genetically engineered wheat "an act of terrorism" is to grossly exaggerate the situation and indeed devalues REAL terrorism. Tell this to the victims of car bombs, planes flying into buildings, and of suicide bombers. Terrorism is the use of fear to coerce people into doing what you want. This wheat trial is not an effort to coerce so there is no possibility that it can apply. However, what Take The Flour Back is proposing to do, by threatening destruction of research - if the researchers don't destroy it themselves - is in fact coercion. In the U.S. This is often called eco-terrorism - a name I'm not sure I agree with, but it is something that Matt Thompson and other would-be vandals should keep in mind before they throw around such a heavy term such as that.
20:16 on 02/05/2012
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!!!! Seriously?! You're saying GM is not coercing? Really, threatening famine if we don't produce this crap is not coercing?! Wow, the play on words is so ridiculous. You have lied to yourself so long that you belief your own foolishness... Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism. The same people that started spreading "terrorism" are the same who are growing that genetic wheat.
20:31 on 02/05/2012
No one is threatening famine - that would indeed be coercing. No one wants people to be food insecure, least of all the people who are working on ways to enhance the food security of the world. Next time please try to understand what someone is saying before commenting with such anger and calling people liars. You should really get a hold of yourself.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
13:53 on 02/05/2012
Concerns must be met rationally - destroying experiments is not the way to solve this.

Vandalism is hurtful and will not help support your case. It makes me think less of you.

I am reminded of the animal rights protestors who released Mink in to the New Forest... these people reacted in an agressive, thoughtless and nonsensical way and thier 'just action' nearly destroyed that protected habitat.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tony Booth
16:17 on 02/05/2012
they have tried rational argument and have been roundly ignored. direct action is all the capitalists understand. once the pollen is released it will be too late, other crops for miles around will be polluted, any organic farms in the area will become non organic overnight. you may also be interested in the american tendency to sue any neighbouring farms whose wheat is contaminated by GM and drive them out of business. (for theft)
20:19 on 02/05/2012
The people own the fields. Did they ask the people prior to growing the wheat? Did the people respond, "Oh yes, we want it, we need it, oh yes...."? I doubt it seriously. Wake up!!! This is not about helping "The People." While I am totally against violence and vandalism, most governments only respond with violence against the people... Do you not see it as violence against a generation who will eat that crap, who will lose the opportunity to grow naturally, because this crap has spread? Are you kidding me? This is biological warfare!