Top of list?. What if this is mostly correct?

[oneoff]

TOM4CWB posted Feb 4, 2010 21:06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
oneoff, CP, Checking....

This whole thing is a gut wrencher.

If one 60 gram sample is tested... (about 10,000 seeds) the accuracy is only .03% according to the experts.

So my test was negative... but really means nothing. We have been deceived.

This is why the 'new' protocol requires 4 different samples of 60 grams each... bringing the statistical accuracy to .01% 95% of the time. The sample needs to be .01% of the lot being tested... then cut using proper reducing protocol to end with 2.5kg for export... and 2.0kg for seed.

These DNA tests were originally for .1%... and only by close calibration can they meet the accuracy claimed. EU protocol requires 4 different 60 gram samples... ground to a preset consistency... then tested against known calibration samples. One sample is calibrated at .05%, one sample at .01% and the third at a known sample of ZERO Flax GM event.

I understand the EU often does not use the higher GM event .05 &.01% calibration samples... just the known ZERO sample. The EU in general does not care much about the .01% standard I am told... any amplification reading from the zero known sample is a positive for the GM event... there is no such thing as a 'trace' level of contamination in their minds.

A seed either contained the GM event... and tests negative... or is positive.



So Our Canadian GM testing system is screwed up and backwards.

Seed needs to have the 4-60 gram test first before conditioning. NOT after! $3/bu for conditioning is not far off cost last year for the flax I cleaned... using gravity etc. and assuring high quality for pedigreed stock seed. Plus $2.50/bu levy and royalty is not unusual. How many lots can seed growers afford to loose... to a 'false' positive or GM trace event...

If one of my 10t flax lots... tests positive... will anyone buy the lots that are from the same field that are negative? What about a trace result?

What about outcrossing?

If a GM flax plant outcrossed in a field 12 years ago... being a diploid and crossing with normal flax...

25% are normal; 50% have 50% of the GM event; 25% have 100% of the GM event normally this GM Flax.

Normal outcrossing is about 1.85% @ .1m it has been found. Outcrossing can happen as far as 35m at low frequencies (ie. Bees).

[Environmental biosafety of genetically engineered crops: Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) as a model system by Amitkumar Jayendrasinh Jhala]

So trace events now being tested at 30-40% of samples submitted... are by some people considered positive results even though we can not test accurately below .01%.

I am told in cargos now being delivered... have a very similar result being reported for their EU testing... our trace is a EU positive...

IF the cargo is being used in the EU for industrial... it can then be handled.

This is a 'gentleman's agreement' the .01% tolerance... NOT the LAW.

Zero is still Zero!

According to CFIA if a negative at .01 is tested and certified; a grower of seed can use this. BUT is a negative zero? It is a fact many growers who now THINK they are negative.... are instead half pregnant!

In the US... the LLRice event taught many things to those in LA. I spoke for a very long time to a wise operator at Eurofins GeneScan, Inc. today.

Farm saved seed that was properly cleaned and sampled and had a zero GM event... was just as effective at removal of the problem... as was certified seed.

Is rice different that flax?

Good question... but one would logically expect the US to be as expert and best experienced anywhere; because they have being dealing with this problem for over a decade!

I know there will be those who will want to hang me... being honest is more important than anything else... on judgement day before my creator.

In Louisiana they are 2 years into having clear rice seed GM zero reports... and virtually all commercial grain is at zero as well.

He said we are headed for a disaster up here... politics is trumping common sense and logic.

They will do the same tests as Quantum... are ISO certified (Quantum is not)... if you can wait a couple of weeks for the result.

Check the CGC web site for links... only 3 in North America are properly certified for the EU.

http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/gmflax-lingm/ltf-lal-eng.htm



List of ISO 17025-accredited laboratories

Eurofins/GeneScan USA
Eurofins GeneScan, Inc.
2315 N Causeway Boulevard, Suite 200
Metairie LA 70001
Telephone: 504-297-4330
Web site: http://www.gmotesting.com/

Genetic ID
504 N 4th Street, Suite 102
Fairfield IA 52556
Telephone: 641-472-9979 or 877-366-0790
Web site: http://www.genetic-id.com

OMIC USA, Inc.
3344 NW Industrial Street
Portland OR 97210-1619
Telephone: 503-223-1497
Web site: http://www.omicnet.com/omicusa/index.htm
IP: Logged
Edit?

oneoff posted Feb 5, 2010 1:25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know t4; I have the deepest respect for anyone who tells the whole truth. Such people (and I now include you as one of them) have always been my first choice with whom I would prefer to have business dealings.
Registered seed growers deserve fair returns for the extra work and costs of producing your saleable product. When a catastropy happens; and the seed industry is an integral part of the story; it should have come clean and accepted even more than their fair share of the financial damages that have and will fall mainly outside the seed grower community.
When I first brought up the concept of the relationships of test sensitivity as it relates to tolerance levels as then related to the science of statistics and probabilities; levels of significance; maybe even standard deviations and confidence levels; not to mention sampling methadologies and inherent errors and mistakes possible in each of the above factors; it could be just as confusing to ordinary farmers as the Chief Justices summary of the determining liability. Myself included. I didn't have the facts that t4 has so bravely provided; and will be totally suprised if he is far from the mark. When there is no credable rebuttal to t4; as there has not been to my previous posts; then it can almost safely be said that our statements are pretty accurate.
Whether you can pull together various pieces of information to see the bigger picture is not determined by your level of education. That comes from a separate set of skills that involve common sense; fairness and the ability to put truth and honesty above the short term gains in protecting your own interest.
Up to now; there has been way too many industry plans dictated by at least perceived self interest of those parties. There is every likelihood that their plan of certified seed is deleloped around limiting their own liabilities and offloading costs onto farmers. We've aquiesed too many times before; and someday should come together enough to gain a seat at the table. Again its time for those organizations and companies to come clean. They surely knew all about the points that t4 has reported; and have deliberately witheld and continue to withold that information which is essential to choosing the best options going forward.
Speak up if we are wrong; and certainly listen and respond if valid points are being made. You will gain respect no other way.

[dave4441]

DO their mustard contracts actually say that???

[parsley]

Simply put, this is about decency. It has been the trademark of the farm community, entrusted to us from homesteaders.

[oneoff]

The four page fact sheet passed out by Viterra at the Minot Farm show last week actually says that. It is in dark bold print and says there is a zero tolerance for GM canola in mustard.

[charliep]

Off topic but is it interesting to note that EU has resumed importing Canadian canola (page 7 Feb. 4 Western Producer). This is the first time since 96/97. Bio diesel industry in the south. Genetic events for canola have been register for the most part. 95,000 tonne to date (Portugal) with opportunity for more.

Should Canada be attempting to get the genetic event around triffid registered in the European Union?

[checking]

No comments from "the industry" or "the trade"; yet . Are you spokespersons just waiting for the post to get buried and diasappear on its own. That may not happen.
If its a case of not understanding the issue; then maybe someone can explain the problem in words you can understand.
If you're going to lead; then you need to be accountable. You don't want to follow; so consider getting out of the way.
You "leaders" in the "industry" might consider responding. There are actually people waiting for a response.

[oneoff]

I'll try reword what is wrong with the certified seed solution

A sample with less than 0.01% Triffid contamination (at current test sensitivity of 0.01% contamination) is not usually detectable and thus tests negative. Those negative test results do not mean the sample is Triffid free; and as such do not meet anyone's strict zero tolerance.
Farmers are being led down the path of satisfying the trade that only needs production to not have detectable levels. As soon as a more sensitive test is developed (and the researchers and testers will develop and market those tests); and their services will be in demand forever again and again); then we are in trouble again and again when positive tests come from those samples previously considered negative.

There's a whole lot of room between 0.01% and zero per cent.

Certified seed is irrepairably contaminated. To eradicate Triffid(which I think is not technically or practically even feasible) requires "sterilizing" the environment and digging out those tiny stored seed samples grown before someone starting tinkering with the Triffid experiment.
It will be years before there is a commercial supply for your muffins.
Don't worry; that will never happen. What will happen is that over time GM varieties will contaminate every crop and every species and every animal known to man. It probably already beyond the point of no return. That was not meant to be.
The scary part; to me; is not the foreign genes that were inserted for the specific trait; but the additional genes that accompany the insertion that no one even pays any attention to. There's a little bit of everything in anything you know; and they all aren't tested for; let alone down to zero percent tolerance.

[parsley]

On topic, charliep

If farmers are looking to buy flax seed, and go surfing on the web, and come across a website advertising seed, do farmer buyers want know who and where the seedgrowers are located as listed on the website?

How does a person avoid "hot" Triffid areas, is what I keep being asked.
Here's flax listed for sale, but<p></p>
<p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong><a href="http://fpgenetics.ca/">(I can't seem to find the names of the seed growers and their locations, can you?)</a></strong></p>

[charliep]

Why would this be important?

From what I know, there is a presence of mute amounts of triffid
contamination everywhere. A person can't say for sure but the
best guess is the source has been at the breeder seed source at
some point.

I perhaps agree with oneoff's comment.

NO THERE WILL NEVER EVER BE A TRIFFID FREE WORLD

If this is the case, and we both agree this is market access issue,
not a food safety one, what should be done next?

[parsley]

Reason #1, charliep.

1. There are people called organic farmers. They buy seed and plant crops, charliep. Many of them have bought pedigreed seed, because they believed seedgrowers were a credible supplier.

As the Seedgrowers webpage presently states:

quote "Organic Pedigreed Seed Listing

New regulations for organic production in Canada were implemented in 2009 by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

The preferred source of seed in organic production regulations is certified organically grown seed. Due to the limited supply of organic seed of new varieties and some crop kinds, the traditional exception has been included in these regulations to allow the use of untreated, non GMO seed from conventional agriculture."

Yes, well, it's a bit dicey, isn't it? I'm sure most seed buyers didn't expect Triffid in their seed.

But if farmers can actually identify the seedgrower' farms who bought the Triffid seed, and then multiplied it, then isn't it prudent business for organic farmers to actually avoid buying from those contaminated /fields/cleaning plants/sites?

But they must be first identified.

Since the site I posted is a company gazetted as FP Genetics Inc., but were previously named FarmPure Genetics Inc. and before that Farmpure Seeds Inc. and on and on and on with name changes, until we go right back to Quality assured Seeds Inc, who INITIALLY purchased the Triffid Seed from the CDC in the U of S, it becomes imposrtant to identify the Triffid growers. Some shareholders will not have grown Triffid at all. Or even flax, for that matter.

And organics does not only buy flax. Indeed organics purchase other seed, too.

Some farms will be Triffid free. Organics needs to source from them. pars.

You sound so keen to get on with even yet more Triffid, charliep. Pars