Sense about Science ? equipping people to make sense of science and evidence
Petition and comments
6060 people have signed the petition
The Don't Destroy Research petition is now closed, many thanks to everyone who signed it. Below is the list of signatories and their comments. You can also see a collection of public support for the Rothamsted researchers' appeal here.
The planned direct action against the GM wheat experiment at Rothamsted did not happen on Sunday 27th May. The GM wheat trial is ongoing.
rob yorke, rural chartered surveyor
This is a 'national conversation' that needs to be opened up by government and not just a polarised debate between inarticulate scientists and vocal antis. Ownership of scientific research should not be with corporates (Monsanto's Roundup Ready patent expires 2014) but should be public funded looking to potentially benefit conservation (less pesticides) and perhaps be just ONE of the tools in the tool box of our future global food production needs.
Alison Foster, senior curator
Scientific research is vitally important to help us solve the major challenges facing humanity today such as food security and climate change.
Rachel Allen, Research Animal Technician
Science is the most important tool we have for insuring our survival and prosperity.
WFU, President Womens food and farming union
Scientific research is paramount for the aim of achieving sustainable food crops whilst maintaining a healthy environment.
Joe Hemsted, PhD Student
Ideology should have no place in public policy. We should make decisions based on the evidence we have. How can these decisions be made if the research is destroyed.
daniel jamieson, phd student
Because it's what keeps us from falling back into a draconian existence. It progresses society and enlightens us to comprehension and wonder of all the amazing things the universe has to offer.
Susan Morey, Housewife
Where would we be if we had fought scientific research in the past? It really shouldn't need saying - but please don't destroy this research.
Mark Henderson, Science writer / communicator
Of course we need to assess GM crops on a case-by-case basis -- but we can't possibly do those assessments if campaigners threaten to destroy trials. Those who make such threats betray their lack of interest in the outcome of research.
Dave Ingram, Software Engineer
Chris Burton, PhD student
Destroying experimental results before they can be analysed is senseless and in the long run detrimental to the advancement of the human race.
Gary Foster, sales
Because it's the only effective way of finding out what works, what is sensible, what is dangerous and what isn't. Destroying public research here only makes it impossible for people who actually care about the possible consequences to do this research. Do you think Unilever cares about the ecological impact of its crops? This is why scientists who know what they are doing need to be allowed to work in controlled conditions (as they are).
Jim Woods, Director
In my opinion, we are going to need technology in food to feed 9bn people.
Eleanor, Molecular Biologist
Working with several countries in Africa, I know that we're fighting a losing battle to get enough crops growing to feed everyone. It makes no sense to destroy the work that will answer your questions about the safety of GM. Especially as, crops sprayed with pesticides etc. have been absolutely proved to be harmful to health and the environment. These scientists are trying to answer the questions & concerns you have about GM. There's no big conspiracy here, why destroy research that is working to make the world a better place?
Laura Holland, Outrecah manager
GM food may well prove to be vital to living sustainably in the future, especially given environmental pressures added to population growth. Please don't let fear and ignorance triumph!
Andrew Higgins, PhD Student
There is clearly a common misconception about what genetic modification of crops actually entails. This can only be rectified by a more informative school syllabus. One interesting point to bring up with anyone who considers GM to be dangerous would be the widespread use of randomly mutated strains. This is completely ignored by campaigners due its lack of attachment to any sort of apocalyptic terminology.
Melanie Landamore, University Research
Chris Poole, Auditor
This technology has the potential to save many lives - it needs to be researched.
Dr David Evans, physicist
Destruction of knowledge is a mindless act of violence. No better than burning libraries. Decisions about the use of such technologies should only come with evidence. This evidence can only be accumulated with research. Destroying the research means making decisions without evidence, which is essentially religious. This has no place in decision making for science policy.
Alexandra Allen, research scientist
At a critical time for global food security scientific research must be allowed to continue. There are strict guidelines in place for researchers to adhere to, particularly when growing GM crops. It is dangerous to let ill-informed members of the public decide what research should be conducted.