I spotted this BBCArticle the other day while on my lunch time potter.

It piqued my interest for a couple of reasons. First I'm a bit


When it comes to GM, bayer pays my wages, not Monsanto (joke!!!!!!!) and I'm a bit wary of the idea of it for reasons I'm not sure I can clearly explain.

Perhaps this is because my perception of GM is that it's mostly about Monsanto flogging roundup and being nasty buggers.

What caught my interest, perhaps not co-incidentally given the shenanigans on here over the past few weeks was what these particular varieties were attempting to do:

Quote Originally Posted by BBC
The lab's director Prof Maurice Moloney said the act was an attempt to "deny us all the opportunity to gather knowledge and evidence" on a possible new approach for reducing the use of pesticides.

...

The crop being trialled at Rothamsted contains genes synthesised in the laboratory. It will produce a pheromone called E-beta-farnesene that is normally emitted by aphids when they are threatened by something.

When aphids smell it, they fly away.
On the one hand this sounds pretty good, less pesticide use (sorry Bayer), on the other, given how little we appear to understand about pheromones, is sticking a field of the stuff out in the open that good an idea?

The concerns over pollen distribution on something that is supposedly still being tested do seem warranted to me though.