DOCSLIB.ORG

Messages from the FAO E-Mail Conference on 'Gmos in the Pipeline'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Messages from the FAO E-Mail Conference on 'Gmos in the Pipeline' All messages from the FAO 2012 e-mail conference on "GMOs in the pipeline: Looking to the next five years in the crop, forestry, livestock, aquaculture and agro-industry sectors in developing countries" [This document contains all of the 109 messages that were posted during the FAO moderated e-mail conference on "GMOs in the pipeline: Looking to the next five years in the crop, forestry, livestock, aquaculture and agro-industry sectors in developing countries" that took place from 5 November to 2 December 2012. The goal of the conference was to look into the near future in order to inform the debate about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the pipeline. Specifically, people were asked to address two main topics in the conference. First, what new GMOs are likely to be commercialized in developing countries within the next five years (i.e. before the end of 2017) in the crop, forestry, livestock, aquaculture and agro-industry sectors? Second, what are the likely implications of these new GMOs for developing countries? A total of 770 people subscribed themselves to the conference and, of these, 59 (i.e. 8%) submitted at least one message. Of the 109 messages that were posted, 36% came from people living in Asia; 26% from Europe; 24% from North America; 10% from Latin America and the Caribbean; and 5% from Africa. The messages came from people living in 24 different countries, the greatest number coming from India (31 messages) followed by the United States (25 messages). A total of 55 messages (i.e. 50%) were posted by people living in developing countries. A total of 30% of messages came from people working in universities; 18% from participants from non-governmental organisations; 17% from people working in research centres; 12% from people working in the private sector; 11% from people working as independent consultants and 8% from people in Governments. NB: People posting messages are assumed to be speaking on their own behalf and not on behalf of their employers (unless they indicate otherwise). The conference was hosted by the FAO Biotechnology Forum and was the 18th e-mail conference hosted by the Forum since it was launched in the year 2000. The Background Document to the conference is available from the website of the Forum (http://www.fao.org/biotech/biotech-forum/). A Summary Document will also be prepared and made available from the Forum website. For further information on agricultural biotechnology, see http://www.fao.org/biotech/ (in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish).] The Messages Messages are numbered in order of their posting during the conference. The few messages without a number are from the Moderator. Subject of Messages: : Background document to the FAO e-conference on GMOs in the pipeline : Welcome to the FAO e-mail conference on GMOs in the pipeline 1: Potential GE livestock and fish 2: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 3: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 4: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 5: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 6: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 7: Re: Potential GE livestock and fish 8: Tanzania's 'pipeline GMOs' 9: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 10: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMO 11: Golden Rice 12: Re: Potential GE livestock and fish : Message from the Moderator about the focus of this conference 13: GE animals for human health applications internationally 1 14: What GM crops are in the pipeline in India? 15: Re: GE animals for human health applications internationally 16: Bt brinjal in India 17: Re: GE animals for human health applications internationally 18: Re: GE animals for human health applications internationally 19: Re: Bt brinjal in India 20: Re: Potential GE livestock and fish (& ornamental fluorescent fish) 21: Quality improved GM crops in the pipeline 22: Research on subsistence crops for marginal farmers? 23: Re: Bt brinjal in India 24: Private sector, WEMA and PPPs 25: Re: Bt Brinjal 26: Re: Bt Brinjal 27: Re: Bt Brinjal 28: Re: Bt Brinjal 29: Re: Bt Brinjal 30: Re: Bt brinjal 31: Re: Bt Brinjal 32: Re: Potential GE livestock and fish 33: Re: Bt Brinjal 34: GM crop pipeline in India 35: Re: Bt Brinjal 36: GMO pipeline in India - crops, pharma 37: Re: Bt Brinjal 38: GMOs in pipeline - Iran 39: GM livestock pipeline in China 40: Re: Bt Brinjal 41: GM fish in China 42: Re: Bt brinjal 43: AquAdvantage Salmon 44: Re: Bt brinjal 45: Re: Bt Brinjal 46: Re: Bt brinjal 47: Re: Quality improved GM crops in the pipeline 48: Genetic modification of insects for pest control 49: Regulatory pipeline for Africa - crops 50: Re: Bt Brinjal 51: Re: Bt Brinjal 52: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 53: Re: Bt Brinjal 54: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 55: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon : More than halfway through this FAO e-conference on 'GMOs in the Pipeline' 56: New GM crops for developing markets 57: Re: Bt brinjal 58: Re: Bt Brinjal 59: Re: Bt brinjal 60: Re: Bt brinjal 61: Re: Potential GE livestock and fish 62: GM crop pipeline in Pakistan 2 63: Indigenous GM crop technology for developing world 64: Re: Bt brinjal 65: Re: Bt brinjal 66: What we mean by 'GMOs in the pipeline' 67: Re: Bt brinjal 68: GM crops in India: Products in the pipeline as of 2012 69: Re: Potential GE livestock and fish 70: Bt rice in China 71: Transgenic subsistence crops in the near pipeline from the commercial sector? 72: Argentina´s GMO pipeline 73: GMO pipeline in Bangladesh 74: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 75: Re: Transgenic subsistence crops in the near pipeline from the commercial sector? 76: Little contribution about GM crop pipeline in Brazil 77: Re: Bt brinjal 78: Re: Bt brinjal : Reminder that are in last days of this FAO e-mail conference on 'GMOs in the pipeline' 79: GMOs from Iran in the next 5 years 80: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 81: Re: Transgenic subsistence crops in the near pipeline from the commercial sector? 82: GMO events in the pipeline in Brazil 83: GM trees in Brazil 84: Re: Bt brinjal 85: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 86: Re: Selection strategies used to develop new GMOs 87: Re: Bt brinjal 88: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 89: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 90: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 91: GM rubber in India 92: Economic and environmental benefits of new traits 93: Biotechnologies and new GM crops - French Ministry report 94: Significant investments and potential GM crops in developing countries 95: Re: Bt brinjal 96: Re: Bt brinjal 97: Re: Little contribution about GM crop pipeline in Brazil 98: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 99: Re: Bt brinjal 100: Re: Bt brinjal 101: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 102: Re: Bt brinjal 103: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon 104: Nutritional enhancement of cassava and grass pea 105: Re: Bt brinjal 106: GM plants being developed by Embrapa, Brazil 107: Re: Regulatory pipeline for Africa - crops 108: Likely impact of GM technologies in the pipeline 109: Re: AquAdvantage Salmon : End of FAO e-mail conference on GMOs in the pipeline 3 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 15:55:18 +0100 From: Biotech-Mod2 <[email protected]> Subject: Background document to the FAO e-conference on GMOs in the pipeline Dear Colleagues, Thank you for subscribing to this FAO e-mail conference on "GMOs in the pipeline: Looking to the next five years in the crop, forestry, livestock, aquaculture and agro-industry sectors in developing countries". I am now sending you the Background Document to the conference. It aims to provide information that you, as participants, will find useful for the e-mail conference. The first Section of this 9-page document provides some background to the hosting of this conference. Section 2 of the document provides an overview of GM crops, trees, livestock, fish and micro-organisms that are currently commercialized. Section 3, on the GMO pipeline, briefly discusses the research-to-commercialization pathway; the choice of a 5-year time horizon for the e-mail conference; and some GMOs that are in the pipeline in the different sectors. Section 4 presents some specific guidance about the topics that are to be discussed in the conference. Section 5 provides references of articles mentioned in the document, abbreviations and acknowledgements. The document is provided below, and is also available on the FAO website at http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/ap109e/ap109e00.pdf (60 KB). I particularly encourage people to read Section 4 of the document before they begin preparing a message. The conference begins on Monday 5 November. If any of your colleagues wish to subscribe, they should send an e- mail to [email protected] with the following one line in the body of the message (leave the subject line blank): subscribe biotech-room2-L firstname lastname Where firstname and lastname refer to the person's first and last name. For example, if the subscriber's name is John Smith, then the line should be: subscribe biotech-room2-L John Smith Finally, in case you do not know about it, I want to inform you that FAO also produces a free e-mail newsletter called FAO-BiotechNews. It is prepared in all six official UN languages and its main focus is on the activities of FAO (such as this e-mail conference), of other UN agencies/bodies and of the 15 CGIAR research centres. News items about new documents are included in the newsletter if the documents are freely available on the web, and for each item an e-mail contact is also provided.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U.S. V. Bayer AG and Monsanto Company Comment: the Sierra Club
    ATTN: Kathleen S. O'Neill Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture Section Antitrust Division United States Department of Justice 450 5th Street, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20530 Petition in opposition to proposed U.S. v. Bayer AG and Monsanto Company settlement and merger: A merger of agrochemical giants Bayer and Monsanto would create the world's largest seed and pesticide maker. I am afraid this move will reduce competition, raise prices for consumers and farmers, and result in an unacceptable degree of control over the agricultural industry and our food supply. I am very concerned about pollinators and the increased risks to bees, butterflies and birds with the increase of Bayer's neonicotinoids. Both companies produce corn products engineered to imply the use of harmful pesticides they manufacture. The production of corn uses high amounts of nitrogen- based fertilizers and the excess sediment is contaminating our waterways, therefore I am deeply worried about increased corn production from this merger. The heavy nutrient runoff from corn is widely attributed to exacerbating the marine "Dead Zone" in the Gulf of Mexico, in which algal blooms create hypoxic conditions wherein oxygen concentration is in such low levels that marine life suffocates and dies. I urge the Department of Justice to do more prevent the Bayer-Monsanto seed and pesticide platform from growing too strong by stopping this merger. If this merger is allowed, it should require more pesticide and seed divestments in order to protect our agriculture and food supply. This merger is anti-competition, if it is approved it will fail to protect farmers, consumers and the environment by allowing further consolidation of the industrial agriculture sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Pregnancy: Fred Lyman Adair and the Influence of Eugenics on the Development of Prenatal Care
    Yale University EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale Yale Medicine Thesis Digital Library School of Medicine January 2019 Controlling Pregnancy: Fred Lyman Adair And The nflueI nce Of Eugenics On The evelopmeD nt Of Prenatal Care Florence Hsiao Follow this and additional works at: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/ymtdl Recommended Citation Hsiao, Florence, "Controlling Pregnancy: Fred Lyman Adair And The nflueI nce Of Eugenics On The eD velopment Of Prenatal Care" (2019). Yale Medicine Thesis Digital Library. 3504. https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/ymtdl/3504 This Open Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Medicine at EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale. It has been accepted for inclusion in Yale Medicine Thesis Digital Library by an authorized administrator of EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Controlling Pregnancy: Fred Lyman Adair and the Influence of Eugenics on the Development of Prenatal Care A Thesis Submitted to the Yale University School of Medicine In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Medicine By Florence Hsiao Class of 2019 Abstract This thesis examines the development of prenatal care in the United States in the early 1900s by focusing on the life and career of Fred Lyman Adair who, as an obstetrician and eugenicist, played a significant role in shaping prenatal care into what it is today. Although prenatal care was a product of infant welfare activists and public health officials, obstetricians like Adair who struggled to establish obstetrics as a legitimate specialty, saw an opportunity in prenatal care to pathologize pregnancy and elevate their specialty.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CASE for FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION of BIOART in 2000
    FREEDOM TO EXPRESS A BIOLOGICAL CONSTRUCT: THE CASE FOR FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION OF BIOART KEITH SYVERSON INTRODUCTION In 2000, contemporary artist Eduardo Kac made international headlines by partnering with scientists at the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), France where together they genetically engineered an albino rabbit to express an enhanced green fluorescent protein (GFP)1 so that the rabbit would glow green when exposed to blue light.2 The entire project from its conception to the final display was intended as an artistic experiment to challenge society’s views on animal experimentation and the selective breeding of pets.3 This type of work that merges art and biology is called “BioArt.” According to Eduardo Kac, BioArt “employs one or more of the following approaches: (1) the coaching of biomaterials into specific inert shapes or behaviors; (2) the unusual or subversive use of biotech tools and processes; (3) the invention or transformation of living organisms with or without social environmental integration."4 BioArt has arguably existed for centuries.5 For example, some commentators have described the primitive methods of brewing beer in the Old Kingdom as form of BioArt.6 Similarly, the artificial selection involved in agriculture has been viewed by some as a form of 1 Frances Stracey, Bio-art: The Ethics Behind the Aesthetics, 10 NATURE REVIEWS: MOLECULAR CELL BIOLOGY 496, 499 (2009). 2 Id. 3 Id. 4 Eduardo Kac, Art That Looks You in the Eye: Hybrids, Clones, Mutants, Synthetics, and Transgenics, in SIGNS OF LIFE 1, 18 (Eduardo Kac ed., MIT Press, 2007). 5 See Edgar DaSilva, Art, Biotechnology and the Culture of Peace, 7 ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF BIOTECHNOLOGY 130, 131-32 (2004) (arguing that the brewing reliefs in Egypt during the Old Kingdom from 2650 BC are an example of BioArt).
    [Show full text]
  • SUMMARY Sign Offv7
    Syngenta Event GA21 Page 1 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY Application for import and use of genetically modified herbicide tolerant maize Event GA21 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 PART II: SUMMARY Syngenta Event GA21 Page 2 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY A . GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Details of application a) Member State of application UK b) Application number Not available at the time of submission c) Name of the product (commercial and other names) Maize Event GA21 In the USA, GA21 is marketed under the product name Agrisure GT Advantage (http://www.nk-us.com/infosilo/seedguide/agrisure.asp) d) Date of acknowledgement of valid application Not available at the time of submission Syngenta Event GA21 Page 3 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY 2. Applicant a) Name of applicant Syngenta Seeds S.A.S on behalf of Syngenta Crop Protection AG, Basel b) Address of applicant Syngenta Seeds S.A.S. 12, chemin de l'Hobit BP 27 F-31790 Saint-Sauveur On behalf of Syngenta Crop Protection AG, Basel Switzerland and all affiliated companies Schwarzwaldallee 215 CH 4058 Basle Switzerland c) Name and address of the person established in the Community who is responsible for the placing in the market, whether it be the manufacturer, the importer or the distributor, if different from the applicant (Commission Decision 2004/204/EC Art 3(a)(ii)) Event GA21 maize will be imported and used as any other maize in the EU by operators currently involved in these processes. 3. Scope of the application x GM plants for food use x Food containing or consisting of GM plants xFood produced from GM plants or containing ingredients produced from GM plants xGM plants for feed use x Feed containing or consisting of GM plants x Feed produced from GM plants x Import and processing (Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC) o Seeds and plant propagating material for cultivation in Europe (Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC) Syngenta Event GA21 Page 4 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY 4.
    [Show full text]
  • The Era of Corporate Consolidation and the End of Competition Bayer-Monsanto, Dow-Dupont, and Chemchina-Syngenta
    Research Brief October 2018 The Era of Corporate Consolidation and the End of Competition Bayer-Monsanto, Dow-DuPont, and ChemChina-Syngenta DISRUPT ECOSYSTEM ACCLERATE MONOPOLY THE EFFECTS OF CORPORATE CONSOLIDATION UNDERMINE FOOD SECURITY HARM SMALL PRODUCERS HAASINSTITUTE.BERKELEY.EDU This publication is published by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at UC Berkeley This research brief is part of the Haas Institute's Shahidi Project from the Global Justice Program. The Shahidi Project (Shahidi is a Swahili word meaning “witness”) intends to demystify the power structures and capacities of transnational food and agricultural corporations within our food system. To that end, researchers have developed a robust database focusing on ten of the largest food and agricultural corporations in the world. See more at haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/shahidi. About the Authors Copyeditor Support Elsadig Elsheikh is the director Marc Abizeid Special thanks to the Food of the Global Justice program and Farm Communications at the Haas Institute for a Infographics Fund, which provided the seed Fair and Inclusive Society at Samir Gambhir funding for the Shahidi project. the University of California- Berkeley, where he oversees Report Citation Contact the program’s projects and Elsadig Elsheikh and Hossein 460 Stephens Hall research on corporate power, Ayazi. “The Era of Corporate Berkeley, CA 94720-2330 food system, forced migration, Consolidation and The End of Tel 510-642-3326 human rights, Islamophobia, Competition: Bayer-Monsanto, haasinstitute.berkeley.edu structural marginality and Dow-DuPont, and ChemChina- inclusion, and trade and Syngenta.” Haas Institute for development. a Fair and Inclusive Society at the University of California, Hossein Ayazi, PhD, is a Berkeley, CA.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Release Syngenta Group: Growth of Sustainability- Enabling
    Media Release Syngenta Group: Growth of sustainability- enabling products and services drives record H1 2021 Syngenta Group’s focus on helping farmers adapt to climate change and be part of the solution is creating growth opportunities • H1 Group sales at $14.4 billion (+$2.8 billion), +24 percent year-on-year • Q2 Group sales of $7.4 billion (+$1.6 billion), +28 percent year-on-year • H1 EBITDA at $2.7 billion, +22 percent year-on-year • Q2 EBITDA at $1.2 billion, +25 percent year-on-year • First half performance shows strong demand from farmers for sustainable products and services • Growth driven by Group’s innovation in seeds and crop protection products that enable regenerative agricultural practices • The Modern Agriculture Platform (MAP), which provides farmers with access to market-leading products and services, more than tripled sales year-on-year • Syngenta biologicals sales, including Valagro, grew 27 percent in H1, strengthening the Group’s leading position in this high growth segment 26 August 2021, Basel / Switzerland Syngenta Group today reported strong financial results for the second quarter and first half ended June 30, 2021. Group sales in second quarter were $7.4 billion, up 28 percent versus Q2 2020 (+25 percent at CER). EBITDA increased in the second quarter 25 percent (+38 percent at CER) to $1.2 billion. Group sales for the first half of 2021 were $14.4 billion, up 24 percent year-on-year (+18 percent at CER). EBITDA for the first half of the year was $2.7 billion, 22 percent higher year-on-year (+25 percent at CER).
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview: Innovation in Plant Breeding
    An Overview: Innovation in Plant Breeding Modern plant breeding blends traditional ways of developing crops with the latest in science and technology to achieve improved crops – enabling more choices for both farmers and consumers, and producing crops that can better cope with evolving pests, diseases and a changing climate. The Basics What: The simplest definition of plant breeding is crossing two plants Most of the fruits, vegetables, and to produce offspring that share the best characteristics of the two grains that we eat today are the parent plants. Breeders make crosses then select which offspring to advance in the pipeline based on their desired characteristics. result of generations of plant breeding. About 5,000 years ago, Why: Even the earliest farmers understood that, in order to survive, watermelons were only they needed plant varieties specifically adapted to their environmental conditions and cultivated to produce the best foods to nourish their 2 inches in diameter livestock and communities. and had a bitter taste, vastly How: Through generations of research and discovery, plant breeding has advanced beyond selecting a parent plant simply based on its different from appearance. It now includes an in-depth understanding of plants’ the large, genetic makeup, enabling breeders to better predict which plants will sweet-tasting have the highest probability of success in the field and the grocery fruit we enjoy store before making a cross. today. The Background The earliest farmers were plant breeders who understood the value of identifying crops that showed beneficial characteristics to plant in future seasons. Later, they learned they could cross two plants to develop an even better plant.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Monitoring Report on the Cultivation of MON 810 in 2008
    Annual Monitoring Report on the Cultivation of MON 810 in 2008 Czech Republic, Germany, Portugal, Slovakia, Poland, Romania and Spain Submitted by MONSANTO EUROPE S.A. Dept. Regulatory Affairs Avenue de Tervuren 270-272 Tervurenlaan 270-272 B-1150 Brussels BELGIUM VOLUME 1 OF 1 July 2009 Data protection. This application contains scientific data and other information which are protected in accordance with Art. 31 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. © 2009 Monsanto Company. All Rights Reserved. This document is protected under copyright law. This document is for use only by the regulatory authority to which this has been submitted by Monsanto Company, and only in support of actions requested by Monsanto Company. Any other use of this material, without prior written consent of Monsanto Company, is strictly prohibited. By submitting this document, Monsanto Company does not grant any party or entity any right to license, or to use the information of intellectual property described in this document. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2008, Bt maize was planted in the EU on 107,719 hectares across seven countries (James, 2008). As part of stewardship of the technology, industry has implemented an Insect Resistance Management (IRM) plan to proactively avoid and/or delay the potential development of pest resistance to the Cry protein, as well as a voluntary general surveillance monitoring program. The adherence to these stewardship measures in the context of the cultivation of MON 810 maize in Europe is detailed in the Annual Monitoring Report on the Cultivation of MON 810 in 2008. The planting of MON 810 in the 2008 season was accompanied by a rigorous IRM plan involving three main elements: refuge implementation, monitoring and farmer education.
    [Show full text]
  • The Debate on the Golden Rice and Its Background
    The Debate on the Golden Rice and its Background A Literature Review Klaus Ammann, [email protected] Dedicated to the inventor and relentless promoter of Golden Rice, Ingo Potrykus Judge GM crops on their properties, not the technique used to make them – and we can start saving lives Editorial help: Vivian Moses, Patrick and Michael Moore 20140615 references numbered with full text links Millions of children die worldwide every year, an untenable situation that is still worsening which needs immediate correction. According to the World Health Organization (1), an estimated 250 million preschool children are vitamin A deficient (= VAD) and it is likely that in VAD areas a substantial proportion of pregnant women are also affected in 2013. Earlier reports (2) make evident that the problems are still growing: (in 2004: 140 million preschool children and more than 7 million pregnant women were suffering from VAD) 2 Preface It is not the intention of the author for this literature compilation on Golden Rice to replace the two websites www.goldenrice.org and www.allowgoldenricenow.org, they contain major information pieces, are well organized and specific information is easy to access. Rather it is the aim here to pull together a set of publications related to the background of the Golden Rice debate. We often are confronted with all kinds of determined opinions about the Golden Rice, Bio-Fortification, Transgenic Plants, Traditional and Organic Agriculture etc. and it is the purpose of this summary to shed light to the background of opinions pro and contra the Golden Rice – on how and why those opinions grow and how they are unfortunately melting down into simplistic slogans.
    [Show full text]
  • View Presentation
    Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva1 Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda Sanofi Novartis AstraZeneca Roche Otsuka Johnson & Johnson Otsuka Abbott Teva Amgen Daiichi Sankyo Bayer Boehringer Ingelheim Merck & Co Eli Lilly Bristol-Myers Squibb Novo Nordisk Pfizer GlaxoSmithKline Takeda
    [Show full text]
  • List of Active Bayer Companies with at Least a Share of 50% Last Update: 17.8.2020 Country Company
    List of active Bayer companies with at least a share of 50% last update: 17.8.2020 Country Company Algeria Bayer Algerie S.P.A. Argentina Bayer S.A. Argentina Biagro S.A. Argentina Monsanto Argentina SRL Australia Bayer Australia Limited Australia Bayer CropScience Holdings Pty Ltd Australia Bayer CropScience Pty Limited Australia Cotton Growers Services Pty. Limited Australia Imaxeon Pty. Ltd. Australia Monsanto Australia Pty Ltd Bangladesh Bayer CropScience Ltd. Belgium Bayer Agriculture BVBA Belgium Bayer CropScience NV Belgium Bayer NV Bermuda MonSure Limited Bolivia Bayer Boliviana Ltda Bolivia Monsanto Bolivia S.A. Bosnia & Herzeg. Bayer d.o.o. Sarajevo Brazil Alkagro do Brasil Ltda Brazil Bayer S.A. Brazil D&PL Brasil Ltda Brazil Monsanto do Brasil Ltda. Brazil Rede Agro Fidelidade e Intermediacao S.A. Brazil Schering do Brasil Química e Farmacêutica Ltda. Brazil Stoneville Brasil Ltda. Bulgaria Bayer Bulgaria EOOD Burkina Faso Monsanto Burkina Faso SARL Chile Bayer Finance & Portfolio Management S.A. Chile Bayer Finance Ltda. Chile Bayer S.A. Chile Monsanto Chile, S.A. Costa Rica Bayer Business Services Costa Rica, SRL Costa Rica Bayer Medical S.R.L. Costa Rica Bayer S.A. Curacao Pianosa B.V. Germany Adverio Pharma GmbH - 1 - List of active Bayer companies with at least a share of 50% last update: 17.8.2020 Country Company Germany AgrEvo Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH Germany Alcafleu Management GmbH & Co. KG Germany BGI Deutschland GmbH Germany Bayer 04 Immobilien GmbH Germany Bayer 04 Leverkusen Fußball GmbH Germany Bayer 04 Leverkusen
    [Show full text]
  • Whither Plant Genetic Engineering? Allow Crops to Tolerate Environmental Stress Such As Drought, Cold, Salt, Heat, Or flood
    PLANT TREK TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO PLANT HAS GONE BEFORE On the Past, Present & Future of Plant Genetic Engineering by Richard G. Stout A HowPlantsWork.com eBook Copyright © 2013 by Richard G. Stout Version 1.0.1 PDF August, 2013 Table of Contents Preface Chapter 1: Where Do New Plants Come From? Chapter 2: How To Make A Transgenic Plant Chapter 3: Gene Guns, Terminators & Traitors Chapter 4: Farmaceuticals, Plantibodies & Edible Vaccines Chapter 5: Into The Wild Chapter 6: Are GM Plants Self-Replicating Inventions? Chapter 7: Plant Trek - The Next Generation Chapter 8: DIY Plant Genetic Engineering? Attributions About The Author Glossary about where plant biotechnology may be headed in the future, Preface including how plant biotechnology “hobbyists” may be getting into the act. Who is this book for? Please Note: This book is NOT a comprehensive textbook on plant genetic engineering and biotechnology. (If you’re looking This book is intended for people who may be curious about for such books, I’m sure you can find them at your local college plant genetic engineering, but who don’t want to read a long, bookstore or at an online bookseller.) Nor is this book meant to technical textbook on the subject. (There are provided, be a defense of genetically-engineered organisms (GMOs), however, ample links to books and articles - and also to online though I’m sure some readers will think so. Maybe here’s why. resources - for further reading.) If you’re looking for small “tastes” of information regarding various aspects of plant Since I was a graduate student in the 1970s at the University of genetic engineering, then this little book maybe just the Washington where some of the original work on transgenic informational “snack” that you’re looking for.
    [Show full text]