Dr. Thierry Vrain, a former soil biologist and genetic scientist, worked for Agriculture Canada for 30 years. He was the designated spokesperson to assure the public of the safety of GMO crops. Since retiring 10 years ago, after taking into account scientific evidence ignored by most of the bio-tech industry promoters and government regulators, Dr. Vrain has reversed that position and now warns of the dangers from GMOs.
Full story
http://commonground.ca/2013/10/dr-th...whistleblower/
"Tsiporah Grignon: Was there a pivotal event when you reversed your position on GMOs?
Dr. Thierry Vrain: As a scientist working for the government, I didn?t question the status quo or dogma. I just did my work and was the person designated from the institute to reassure the public, so I was very busy. When I retired, my wife and I began an organic farm where I started to discover new things about soil biology never taught in graduate school. Not being on the payroll anymore, I had the freedom to read different sources and look at genetic engineering from new perspectives. That is how I first became aware of the possibility that GMOs were not all rosy and perfect.
Q: It is astounding that people don?t question the very idea of altering DNA. When Monsanto or others claim a genetically modified organism is ?substantially equivalent? to the conventional plant, it?s illogical to me because when DNA is altered, the plant is altered. It?s not the same and it?s certainly not natural.
A: That depends on your view of the world. As a scientist, when you add a bacteria gene to a plant, or a plant gene to a fish, or a human gene to corn, or 10,000 acres of corn growing insulin ? they consider it progress. So if a tomato plant has a bacterial gene, it still looks very much like a tomato plant. You couldn?t tell very much from the taste of the tomato so there is something easy about believing in ?substantial equivalence.?
Q: What do you think of Big Biotech claims that they have the answer to feeding the world, increasing crop yields, decreasing use of pesticides and herbicides, and lowering costs?
A: Charles Benbrook, head of the Union of Concerned Scientists from California, who put together the statistics from the USDA to see if there was an increase in yield, discovered that there is no increase in yield, and, in fact, there is a slight decrease, that some of the engineered crops are not as good as the conventional crops. Herbicide use is actually increasing. People are really concerned because there are now Super Weeds resistant to this technology. The GE herbicide is basically useless when the weeds become resistant. This was predicted 25 years ago. Same thing happened with insect resistance. It builds up, so if there is a saving of insecticide today, it will disappear in the next few years. Farmers are now encouraged to spray insecticide on the Bt crops so the insects don?t become resistant to the particular genetically engineered technology? it?s madness!"
Continued
http://commonground.ca/2013/10/dr-th...whistleblower/