Pamela Ronald

From Powerbase
Revision as of 19:27, 2 June 2010 by Claire Robinson (talk | contribs) (GM promoter shows why Monsanto's data untrustworthy)
Jump to: navigation, search

Pamela Ronald is Professor of Plant Pathology at the University of California, Davis. She wrote a book with her organic farmer husband, Raoul Adamchak, suggesting that organic and GM farming could co-exist and that GM is the way forward for sustainable agriculture. The book is called Tomorrow's Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food. Ronald runs a blog called Tomorrow's Table.[1]

GM promoter shows why Monsanto's data untrustworthy

The Australian women's NGO, MADGE (Mothers Are Demystifying Genetic Engineering), says it was told by Western Australia’s agriculture minister, Terry Redman, that Ronald’s book “contains guidance to help the public distinguish rumours from high quality science." MADGE decided to rate the GM canola Monsanto material that FSANZ (Food Standards Australia New Zealand) used for their food approval, against the checklist in the book. This is their commentary, with Ronald's checklist in the numbered points and MADGE's responses underneath, indented:

1. Examine the primary source of information.
Yes, we've got the Monsanto GM RR canola data and we've examined it.
2. Ask if the work was published in a peer-reviewed journal.
No, after approval the trout production study was written up for publication.
3. Check if the journal has a good reputation.
No, the Monsanto material wasn't published.
4. Determine if there is an independent confirmation by another published study.
No, the GM RR canola is a patented product and there was no independent confirmation. FSANZ relied solely on material provided by Monsanto.
5. Assess whether a potential conflict of interest exists.
Yes, Monsanto is presenting its own work to advocate for the safety of its own product.
Astoundingly the authors also say: "If governmental regulators were to rely solely on data supplied by parties whose primary concern is not the public good but private interest, then the public would have reason to question the integrity of the research."
This is exactly why MADGE has been questioning the integrity of the research.
6. Assess the quality of institution or panel.
No journal, no panel, no university - just Monsanto.
7. Examine the reputation of the author.
Here is a list of some of Monsanto's achievements:
  • 2002: found guilty of conduct "so outrageous in character and extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency so as to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized society".[2] Monsanto had released tons of PCBs into the city of Anniston and covered up its actions for decades.[3]
  • 2005: fined $1.5million for bribing an Indonesian official <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4153635.stm> , in a bid to avoid environmental impact studies
  • 2007: fined by a French court for misleading the public about the safety of Roundup <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup#False_advertising_and_scientific_fraud>. The verdict was confirmed in 2009.
  • Oct 2009 investigated by the US Department of Justice on antitrust issues related to possible monopolistic practices.

9th February 2010 a former Managing Director of Monsanto India admitted that in his time Monsanto falsified scientific evidence for regulatory approval <http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/83093/India/Monsanto+%27faked%27+data+for+approvals+claims+its+ex-chief.html> .

So under the author's own criteria it seems that the scientific evidence in support of GM is not credible.[4]

GM rice

Ronald has her own laboratory at UC Davis, called the Ronald Laboratory. According to her biography on the UC Davis website:

Her laboratory has genetically engineered rice for resistance to diseases and flooding, both of which are serious problems of rice crops in Asia and Africa.[5]

Ronald cloned the disease- and flood-resistant gene from a wild rice variety found in Mali and UC Davis patented it. According to an article in the Sacramento Bee, Ronald "encouraged the university to create a benefit-sharing fund" to give something back to the people of Mali:

first, scholarships for Mali students and later, disease-resistant rice to help feed the impoverished country. There was talk of future health clinics and conservation programs, even using the gene to battle hunger and poverty in other corners of the world.[6]

However, reported the Sacramento Bee:

Eight years later, no help whatsoever has arrived. The Genetic Resources Recognition Fund that UC Davis officials hoped would turn university patents and corporate profit into a model of social responsibility has a balance of zero.[7]

The article noted that the Malians from whom the rice gene was taken were unimpressed by UC Davis's patenting:

When informed that university officials half a world away in California owned a part of their culture, a gene from their rice - and were licensing it to biotechnology corporations - the Bela were puzzled, even angry.
As she sat inside a grass hut weaving reeds into brooms and fans in the Bela backwater of Musawere, Fadimata Walet Alkhassane - a 40-year-old mother of two - expressed the view of many:
“For the man who took something from our rice, I only want to ask him for help so we can leave these bad conditions where we live without adequate water, garments and shoes.”[8]

Affiliations

  • Monsanto: The University of California, Davis College of Biological Sciences runs a Monsanto Fellowship Program. It says, "These fellowships are made possible through an endowed student fellowship fund created by a gift from the Monsanto Corporation."[9]
  • Genetic Resources Recognition Fund: The University of California, Davis has set up the Genetic Resources Recognition Fund (GRRF). According to the Ronald Laboratory website: "Part of the royalties derived from the licensing of academic discoveries using developing countries' materials can be used to fund fellowships, land conservation efforts, or other projects that will benefit the developing nation partner." Pamela Ronald is the contact name given.[10]

Notes

  1. home page, Tomorrow's Table blog, accessed 23 May 2010
  2. Michael Grunwald, Monsanto Held Liable For PCB Dumping, Washington Post, 23 Feb 2002, acc 2 Jun 2010
  3. Michael Grunwald, Monsanto Hid Decades Of Pollution, Washington Post, 1 Jan 2002, acc 2 June 2010
  4. Tomorrow's table - GM promoters show why Monsanto's data untrustworthy, MADGE Digest No #107, May 22nd 2010, acc 27 May 2010
  5. Ronald Biography, Ronald Laboratory website, accessed 23 May 2010
  6. Tom Knudson, Seeds of Doubt: Mali's people reap no reward from cloned wild-rice gene, Sacramento Bee, 6 Jun 2004, acc 23 May 2010
  7. Tom Knudson, Seeds of Doubt: Mali's people reap no reward from cloned wild-rice gene, Sacramento Bee, 6 Jun 2004, acc 23 May 2010
  8. Tom Knudson, Seeds of Doubt: Mali's people reap no reward from cloned wild-rice gene, Sacramento Bee, 6 Jun 2004, acc 23 May 2010
  9. Monsanto Fellowship Program, UC Davis College of Biological Sciences website, acc 23 May 2010
  10. Genetic Resources Recognition Fund (GRRF), Ronald Laboratory website, acc 23 May 2010