INGHAM REBUTTAL PDF

The distancing of critical analysis from autobiographical sleuthing reaches its furthest extent in Patricia Ingham’s rebuttal of Michael Slater’s Dickens and Women. Genetically Engineered Klebsiella plan- ticola: A Threat to Terrestrial Plant Life? (accessed November Under the direction of his academic advisor, Elaine Ingham, Holmes Because Ingham’s assertions were scientifically rebutted before the.

Author: Vot Nabar
Country: Cape Verde
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Spiritual
Published (Last): 28 August 2017
Pages: 327
PDF File Size: 12.43 Mb
ePub File Size: 17.15 Mb
ISBN: 845-2-76566-421-6
Downloads: 99148
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tomi

Often, however, they find themselves up the proverbial creek without a paddle. In different types of testing the first tier of tests are those three tests that I’ve already described. Dr Ingham cites a paper: Make your own decision about whether this engineered bacterium is something that could cause significant impacts on terrestrial systems. This point is discussed authoritatively in D.

Other bacteria would happily consume that alcohol, and so on. Now have two rotating bins. They often begin their tests with “sterile soil.

Ingam fermentation, the residue could have been available as a fertiliser. We are therefore of the opinion that Dr Ingham’s assertions have no scientific validity. We need scientists who are willing to admit the limits of our current scientific methods in addressing issues of such great complexity, and who will search for better ways of knowing, rather than sell their “scientific souls” for fame and fortune.

Evidence in Rebuttal – Life Sciences Network | Scoop News

I love the style of bantering. President, Soil Foodweb Institute Pty. That being said, I stand behind the need to pay some attention to compost intended for a vegetable garden. Because he no longer has the engineered organism rebuttwl his possession. People who use Scoop for work need to be licensed through a ScoopPro subscription under this model, they also get access to exclusive news tools.

Say No To GMOs! – Klebsiella Planticola

Would it contain live Klebsiella-planticola engineered to produce alcohol? Effects of Klebsiella planticola SDF20 on soil biota and wheat growth in sandy soil. The reason is simple: Relevant extracts from transcript But, Klebsiella would produce alcohol, which it normally does not do.

A clarification was submitted to the Royal Commission basically to point out the incorrect reference for the scientific paper. In her defense, it is impossible to check everything we hear or read we have to take some things of faith.

  LUCK IN THE SHADOWS LYNN FLEWELLING PDF

This is a great learning tool for jngham of us. Klebsiella planticola In the early s a European genetic engineering company was preparing to field test and then commercialize on a major scale a genetically engineered soil bacteria called Klebsiella planticola.

The EPA has specifically rejected all her assertions. I believe most people are familiar with the concept. The alcohol production would be performed in a bucket in the barn.

It is all so confusing to me. A literature search conducted by the authors and other scientists has established the paper mentioned in par. Why not have two piles- Erik can have his and then try a worm compost pile to use during down times.

Falkow also states p78 that genes are promiscuously transferred among the members of the Enterobactericeae by mating factors.

I found out via a blog post last week that Kelly had secretly constructed a compost pile to deal with a surplus of kitchen scraps.

I have to, respectfully, disagree with commentators on the use of black containers to create heat. This bacterium was being considered for release, and my understanding was that release was mere weeks away when the results of Dr. So, we’re running such risks, by pretending that we might know what would happen in a field test, that we could unleash some really unpleasant effects on the ecology of the world.

2001 articles

I believe most people are familiar with the concept. That was a fabrication by a newspaper reporter. Until such time as adequate testing procedures are instigated and carried out, engineered organisms should not be considered ingahm have acceptable risks. Alcohol producing genes are present in many bacterial species and other microorganisms, and horizontal gene transfer can theoretically transfer such gene into non-engineered Klebsiella strains under natural conditions.

Perna et al Nature Vol phas revealed this bacterium has inherited over genes from other species. What is wrong with someone doing such a small thing in inghwm own fashion? Because he no longer has the engineered organism in his possession.

Scientists at virtually every scientific institution in the country have made statements, something to the effect of: After Klebsiella-planticola has decomposed plant material, reburtal sludge left at the bottom would intham high in nitrogen and phosphorus and sulfur and magnesium and calcium-all of those materials that make a perfectly wonderful fertilizer. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thanks everyone for the reassurance.

  ATLAS RADIOLOGICZNY PDF

Ingham explained, “Clearly the current regulatory methods are totally inappropriate. To make a broad generalisation, such as that made by Dr Ingham, appropriate experimental controls ijgham more than one set of conditions should be investigated. What they discovered was not only startling, but terrifying–the biotech industry had created a biological monster–a genetically engineered microorganism that would kill all terrestrial plants.

Evidence in Rebuttal – Life Sciences Network

She had the excellent idea, after reading my post that I should have translated it into LOL cat-speak for proper comic effect. Ingham believes that the EPA was trying to hide the results because they were under pressure from chemical, seed, and biotech companies.

The paper inghan by Dr Ingham could not be found. But, whatever works for you. I was very careful to say that if you extrapolate the results of the laboratory work to the field, based on the facts that most terrestrial plants cannot tolerate alcohol production in the root system, that this bacterium was engineered to produce alcohol, that this bacterium typically grows in the roots systems of all plants, then there is a clear risk if this bacterium were to be released into the natural environment.

Such statements are clearly false — no more true that were similar statements made in the s and s regarding pesticides that have since been banned by the same agencies that initially approved them.

This organism would have been released to the real world by placing the residue left at the bottom of ingha fermentation container following grass straw alcohol production on fields as fertilizer.