flax conference call

[oneoff]

Now that everyon's confidence in a "Triffid-free" test should have been shaken to the core; we could discuss the inadequacies and errors that are inherent in sampling methods. After that please consider; the futileness of testing for traces of everything that could be found in absoluely anything; if only we looked harder and more widely. We might find most of the worlds resources could be consumed by testing materials. Only then are we even close to getting legal opinions; which could be submitted to the courts for determination down the road.
No one should argue that everyone of these topics are unrelated.
Anyone ready to talk about sampling methods?
Do we even yet argree that there is no such thing as a "Triffid-free" test result?

[oneoff]

Bucket ...
or will they simply say that 0.005% still isn't zero percent?

[oneoff]

A view by the trade is quoted below


Effective Date: 2/2/2010
Canadian Farmers Frustrated over Flax Issue

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Plenty of concern was expressed in a conference call yesterday over the handling of trace amounts of genetically modified material that have severely restricted exports to Canada’s largest flax market.



The call - organized by the Saskatchewan Flax Development Commission - was an opportunity to update farmers on the current situation and provide a forum for questions.



Many of the farmers on the conference call questioned an industry plan that will require any flax earmarked for export to be planted with certified seed in 2010, a move designed to demonstrate to the EU that Canada is doing all it can to rid itself of Triffid, the GM variety that turned up in a EU shipment last year.



Farmers complained about the certified seed plan, contending it will drive up input costs, especially if their own farm-saved seed tests negative for Triffid. Additionally, farmers expressed concern that certified seed supplies might be limited.



Some also wondered aloud whether the use of certified seed would even solve the problem, as GM contamination has shown up in samples of flaxseed that was grown from certified seed in 2009. Another concern was the certified seed requirement would become permanent, with some producers indicating that the need for certified seed would dissuade them from planting the crop.



The EU, which typically accounts for about 70% of all Canadian flax exports, stopped importing the commodity in September, 2009 following the discovery of GM material in some shipments.



A protocol for the testing, sampling and documenting Canadian flaxseed - developed in conjunction with the EU - was implemented in October 2009. All flaxseed destined for the European market must now undergo rigorous testing. Other smaller markets, including Japan and Brazil, are also requiring testing protocols on Canadian flax.



Viterra flax merchant Quentin Stewart, who participated on the call, said the use of certified flax seed will not be an indefinite requirement.



“This is being done solely to try and rid the marketplace of Triffid, and more specifically to ensure that nothing going into the ground does in fact contain Triffid, so we can begin to weed this out as we go forward.”



“The cleaner we can get the seed, with the least likelihood of further Triffid contamination, the quicker we’ll get the doors reopened in a more sustainable commercial fashion,” added David Sefton, a director with the Saskatchewan Flax Development Commission.



For those producers holding flaxseed supplies that have tested positive for Triffid, Stewart said Prairie grain companies are making every effort possible to find a market for it.



“If a producer does in fact have stock that contains Triffid, please do not panic in any capacity,” he said on the call. “We will take it. We will find a home for it.”



He added that industry is working to keep the price spread between GM-free flaxseed and supplies that have tested positive for Triffid as narrow as possible.


Source : DePutter Publishing Ltd.



Information contained herein is believed to be accurate but is not guaranteed by the parties providing it. Syngenta, DePutter Publishing Ltd. and their information sources assume no responsibility or liability for any action taken as a result of any information or advice contained in these reports, and any action taken is solely at the liability and responsibility of the user.

[wmoebis]

I wouldn't have any problem growing triffid free flax from certified seed and testing it to zero for sale to who ever wants to buy it. But, it should be worth 2x as much as bin run untested product.

But watch these marketers will down load the cost on producers then sell it for regular price or cheaper to buy back a market. See they don't give a rat's "A" about price as long as they get their cut.

Come on, guarantee $20.00 per bushell and I will grow it. If you can't sell it I won't grow it. I say it becomes a specialty crop not unlike organic.

[charliep]

Was there any talk on the conference call about developing 2 streams of flaxseed shipments. One stream would be a high specification/zero tolerance flaxseed destined for the human food market (would include organic). The other stream would be flaxseed for the industrial oil/livestock feed markets.

Perhaps one of the problems is there are too many bureaucrats involved and not enough common sense. Parsley will tell me the customer is always right/European rules have been broken but it seems strange that flaxseed has been pulled aside as a genetically engineered crop (don't like the term genetically modified as even Europe has genetically modified crops using mutagenic technology) when genetically engineered soybeans that have been registered are fed to their livestock every day.

That would go against the statement of keeping the spread between triffid free and infected seed as small as possible. A market solution would let signals flow about the value of triffid free flax including the risk of getting caught off side when a boat/container hits Europe.

[bduke]

Charlie.... my understanding of the current
"protocol" is the flax is first tested at the farm
level...1kg per bin.., then at the elevator level.... at
5 carloads or less... and then if the 2kg samples
from the rail car lots are under .01 % Triffid the
flaxseed may be loaded for export to Europe.

Samples testing above .01 % will be segregated and
sold into markets not excluding "GM's".

It seems to me these procedures are based upon
mathematical algorithms which should result in a
95% probability that shipments into Europe will be
testing below .01 % when tested in Europe.

The request for certified seed is to ensure the
flaxseed seeded in 2010 is Triffid free... thereby
greatly increasing the probability that most of the
2010 crop will blend out below .01 % triffid, after
volunteers and other contamination.

The flaxseed testing above .01 % at car lot level and
the rejected... guessed at 5 %... European
shipments are being price protected by the extreme
discount at our elevators..... probably over $3 per
bushel.

The current protocols basically have a "pool" of
extra basis to protect the discounting of
contaminated samples.... thereby off loading the
discounts on to all flaxseed farmers.

My conclusion is that the extreme price
discounting, the cost of farm sampling, the cost of
everyone seeding certified or higher standard seed
has all been unfairly off loaded onto farmers.

The CDC must be sacred!..... Bill

[checking]

Why do people continue to miss the point that you shouldn't be thinking there is such a thing as growing Triffid free flax when there is no test that has that sensitivity to test that there is no Triffid present in a sample. And that is on a sample basis; let alone the problems of it not being a perfect sample from a much larger lot.
To even contemplate advertising growing Triffid free flax and then guaranteeing its purity at 100% is absurd; or at least extremely risky. Twenty dollars a bushel might not cover an insurance premium required to protect yoursef from the risk; if adequate insurance is even available. Apparently limited companies are used for their personal limited liability features; (perhaps as in the Farmpure family of companies associated with Triifid); but shirking debts owed to more honoroable customers just doesn't seem really fair to me.
WHERE IS THIS ABSOLUTELY TRIFFID FREE SOURCE OF SEED?

[bduke]

Checking.... I agree they can not guarantee "Triffid
Free".

However, my understanding is that Europe has
agreed to accept shipments of which they test to
have levels below .01 %.

The protocols are based upon probabilities that
most shipments will be accepted in Europe.

To have our farms and handling systems "Triffid
Free" may take 10 or more years.

If my math is correct, .01 is the equivalent of 1
seed out of 10,000.......... Bill

[oneoff]

Thank you bduke My interpretation is that your logic is accurate; and other than oneoff; very few are willing to concede that statistical principle upon which all test results are interpreted.

[oneoff]

I agree again bduke. And that will be why the more expensive test will probably be relicated 4 time from the same sample. That would increase the "confidence" level maybe a per cent or two. You are still only testing at 0.01 % level (NOT ZERO PER CENT) and you are still not absolutely sure if you had extemely bad luck that your 0.1% isn't totally out to lunch. That is it is possible that you picked out every last Triffid seed just by accident; and it tested 100% Triffid. Its just like winning the lottery. If you have a 1 in a million chance of winning; figure out what your percent chance is. Hint: It is orders of magnitude less than 0.01% Triffid.

[oneoff]

I made a mistake in the post above and once said 0.1% It should have been 0.01% Sorry.