Pamela Ronald

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.

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 of RR canola by FSANZ, 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 [Ronald and Adamchak] 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". Monsanto had released tons of PCBs into the city of Anniston and covered up its actions for decades.
• 2005: fined $1.5million for bribing an Indonesian official, in a bid to avoid environmental impact studies on its Bt cotton
• 2007: fined by a French court for misleading the public about the safety of Roundup. 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.
• Swiss research firm Covalence's Ethical Quote system once again ranked Monsanto last on their ethical listing of multinationals; Monsanto was 581st behind companies such as Halliburton and Philip Morris

So under Pamela Ronald's own criteria it seems that the scientific evidence in support of GM is not credible.

GM rice and the Genetic Resources Recognition Fund

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.

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 [UC Davis] to create a benefit-sharing fund" (the Genetic Resources Recognition Fund or GRRF).

This is how the Ronald Laboratory website describes the University of California, Davis's GRRF: "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.

According to the Sacramento Bee article, the GRRF was intended to give something back to the people of Mali in return for their rice germplasm:

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.

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.

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.”

Affiliations

• Raoul Adamchak - Pamela Ronald's husband and the co-author of her book, Tomorrow's Table. Adamchak manages the student-run organic farm on the campus of the University of California, Davis.

• 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." UC Davis names Monsanto in a list of companies, "most" of which have "donated at least $20,000 per year for a fellowship".

• Monsanto also funds UC Davis's Designated Emphasis in Biotechnology (DEB) graduate internship program, which UC Davis describes as "An inter-graduate program that credits PhD students for training in Biotechnology".

• According to an article in The Sacramento News and Review, "UC Davis faculty currently receive nearly $10 million in research contracts from the private sector - more than a few of them, according to UCD officials, with Monsanto." The deal prompted the reporter to ask, "The future of a major research deal between UC Davis and the Monsanto corporation brings the role of the university into bold relief. How far can a university go in collaborating with private industry before its mission of contributing to basic knowledge becomes distorted? How will we know when it's gone too far?" The article noted the dangers of reliance on funding from a single source of funds: "Last April when Davis City Councilwoman Julie Partansky dared suggest reduction of municipal use of Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, she was met with a public rebuke from a Monsanto senior researcher: 'As Monsanto searches for a permanent site for its West Coast operations... how would it look for a company to build a base of operations in a city that has banned, or even thought about banning its major product?'"