"David Hare-Scott" > wrote in message
...
>
> > Its more that plant breeding is pretty safe. Unfortunately we don't
> > actually know if our plant species are safe because most have never been
> > tested.
>
> Hang on, we eat them all the time, isn't that a pretty large scale test?

but further down you refute that argument when discussing GM crops, there is
a contradiction in your stance

>
> In fact feeding to animals is probably the only real test and
> > the species fed is very limited. Even so most feeds are restricted in
> > the amounts that should be fed due to animals showing negative
> > reactions. Often the precise reasons are not known but the safe feeding
> > amounts are.
> >
> > Some have been known in farming for A VeryLongTime. Not putting tupping
> > ewes on a clovery/leguminous sward is one very nice example but there
> > are others.
> >
> > >What about the risks of GE? To me it is an open question, one that we
> > >should put many resources into answering so we can determine the real
> risks.
> > >This needs to be done over a long period of time with plenty of
redundant
> > >cross checking by different parties.
> >
> > 's OK. Massive worldwide experiment feeding to humans and livestock
> > worldwide now in its 15th year without problems.
> >
> >
> I must be ultra conservative on such issues.
>
but you just said
Hang on, we eat them all the time, isn't that a pretty large scale test?

--

Jim Webster.
Pat Gardiner, Five years raving about bent vets and still no result