Posted 6/12/2019 12:48 (#7555046 - in reply to #7555011) Subject: RE: streamlining does not negate compliance safeguards
Streamlining a process does not negate the regulatory compliance safeguards that companies are to adhere to when "experimenting" with GE/GM/non-approved traits or technologies.
Most experimental traits are "trialed" out in fields in later stages of their development after greenhouse tests, etc. The companies put together a plan for "containing" these events - most areas where these "events" are conducted become crop destruct and fallowed for 1 to many years with company folks incharge of their monitoring. There are isolation distances and time of crop growth/testing to ensure that pollen flow doesn't make it out into neighboring fields. crop grain & residue is destroyed. soil plowed/chiseled deep so that no residue remains. area of plat is fallowed for a year / multiyear so that NOTHING grows / emerges from the area.
Someone didn't do their job...…. and oversight failed in the process
YES! and this isn't the first time. Last time this happened a group of farmers brought a lawsuit against the chem companies for market damages. The final agreement was the company responsible would pay a fine via "donating" money to several land grant universities, I forget now which all universities, but my cynical brain thinks it was probably the same ones that do "unbiased research" for them.