GENTECH archive


Re: GE Debate v0.2 archive 2274


 >risk in the field. The Losey paper was about event 176 corn, the one with
 >the most toxic pollen to Monarchs, and yet this accounts for only 3% of the
 >Bt corn in the field. The latest data still shows no effects on Monarchs at

Nonetheless, if monarchs ingest the Bt corn pollen, they are still at
risk, but not with conventional corn pollen. So the two are still not
substantially equivalent, as far as monarchs (and other lepidopterans
are concerned).

 >With respect to lacewings, lacewing larvae in the field prefer aphids or
 >caterpillar eggs, so the lab experiments on which claims of harm are based,
 >which gave the lacewings no choice but to feed on Bt treated larvae or
 >other impregnated food, are very artificial.  Indeed, even Hilbeck and the
 >other authors of the key paper note that "No conclusions can be drawn as to

But since the lacewing are harmed after eating Bt treated larvae,
Bt corn and conventional corn are still not substantially equivalent
as far as lacewings are concerned.

The questions therefore remains: shouldn't substantial equivalence be
established on a species by species basis?

Roberto Verzola