SUPPORTERS of the biotech industry have accused an American scientist of
misconduct after she testified to the New Zealand government that a genetically
modified bacterium could wreak havoc if released.
The New Zealand Life Sciences Network, an association of pro-GM scientists
and organisations, says the view expressed by Elaine Ingham, a soil biologist at
Oregon State University in Corvallis, was exaggerated and irresponsible. It has
asked her university to discipline her.
But Ingham stands by her comments and says the complaints are an attempt to
silence her. “They’re trying to cause trouble with my university and get me
fired,” Ingham told 91av.
Advertisement
The controversy began on 1 February, when Ingham testified before New
Zealand’s Royal Commission on Genetic Modification, which will determine how to
regulate GM organisms. Ingham claimed that a GM version of a common soil
bacterium called Klebsiella planticola could spread and devastate
plants if released into the wild. Other researchers had previously modified the
bacterium to produce alcohol from organic waste. But Ingham says that when she
put it in soil with wheat plants, all of the plants died within a week.
“We would lose terrestrial plants . . . this is an organism that is
potentially lethal to the continued survival of human beings,” she told the
commission. She added that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revoked
its approval for field tests using the organism once she had told them about her
research in 1999.
But last week the New Zealand Life Sciences Network accused Ingham of
“presenting inaccurate, careless and exaggerated information” and “generating
speculative doomsday scenarios that are not scientifically supportable”. They
say that her study doesn’t even show that the bacteria would survive in the
wild, much less kill massive numbers of plants. What’s more, the network says
that contrary to Ingham’s claims, the EPA was never asked to consider the
organism for field trials.
The EPA has not commented on the dispute. But an e-mail to the network from
Janet Anderson, director of the EPA’s biopesticides division, says “there is no
record of a review and/or clearance to field test” the organism.
Ingham says EPA officials had told her that the organism was approved for
field tests, but says she has few details. It’s also not clear whether the
organism, first engineered by the Institute for Biotechnology in Jülich,
Germany, is still in use.
Whether Ingham is right or wrong, her supporters say opponents are trying
unfairly to silence her.
“I think her concerns should be taken seriously. She shouldn’t be harassed in
this way,” says Ann Clarke, a plant biologist at the University of Guelph in
Canada who also testified before the commission. “It’s an attempt to silence the
DZDzپDz.”
The Provost of Oregon State University, Timothy P. White, says the school is
investigating the complaint.