Proposed Addition of Chardon LL Maize
to the National Seed List

Witness statement

A CALL FOR AN IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASE OF GM ORGANISMS BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIALLY UNLIMITED, UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES OF GM TECHNOLOGY

A review of the quantum mechanical properties of DNA and a discussion of the need for a Unified Field based - consciousness based - approach to agriculture.

By Dr Geoffrey Clements, physicist and Leader of the Natural Law Party, UK

A major factor in the creation of unexpected and hazardous results arising from genetic modification is that the scientific model that is used is confused with the actual structure and functioning of the unmodified and modified DNA and its interaction with its environment. Confusion between model and reality is, in fact, at the root of many of the unpredicted outcomes of new technologies.

The lay person is not generally aware that the description given by a scientist of a particular structure or activity is only a model of that phenomenon. The model is used either in the development of a satisfactory theory, or in the sharing and dissemination of information to those who are not specialists in the relevant scientific field, or who are non-scientists, for example, members of the general public or government ministers and civil servants.

In general, the more simplistic and approximate the model, the less adequate it will be in predicting the behaviour of the entity under consideration in novel conditions. This is the underlying reason behind the need for experiments to test actual behaviour. If a scientific model were complete and precise in every detail, there would be complete accord between prediction and measured outcome. In virtually every real case, the outcome of experiments demonstrates shortcomings in the model, the experimental results being used to refine the model.

This distinction between scientific model and actual behaviour is crucial in the case of genetic modification, for two important reasons:

• firstly, the entity under consideration -- the DNA of a plant species and the DNA of any other species used in the modification process -- is highly complex and sophisticated, and the models used (especially in descriptions to the public, the media, and government departments) are very elementary, neglecting many crucial features of structure and function,

• secondly, the consequences of any mistakes are potentially grave, since we are creating changes in the gene pool of the world in which we live in a manner that has never occurred before, to our knowledge.

A general idea of the difference between the model generally used and the actual structure and function of DNA can be illustrated by using three examples: a hydrogen atom, a water molecule, and the DNA. Essentially, the modes of description used in the models used generally in the field of genetic modification leave out of consideration the quantum-mechanical nature that is vital in the structure and function of all atoms and molecules. It is not generally known that the only entity that can be described completely and fully by quantum mechanics is the hydrogen atom. All other atoms, molecules, and other structures can only be described approximately. The more complex the molecule, the more approximate is the description and the more necessary is the need for experiment to test actual behaviour under a range of circumstances.

There are no precise solutions to the Schroedinger equation (the fundamental equation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics) for anything more complex than the single hydrogen atom; for a structure as complex as DNA, the approximations are very inexact.

The illustrations of the non-quantum-mechanical and quantum-mechanical descriptions for the hydrogen atom show just how inadequate is the non-quantum-mechanical description even for this simplest of atomic species. When we come to the simplistic "building block" model that is used for the DNA and genetic modification, it is clear that it is sadly lacking. It fails to account for the helical structure and for many crucial aspects of the dynamic functioning of DNA. In particular, any model that fails to incorporate quantum mechanics cannot describe or predict any phenomenon that is "long-range", ie that refers to any correlation phenomenon between elements of the DNA that are separated by any distance along its length.

There are further approximations, such as neglecting the position effect and the concerted collective action of groups of genes, that also result in serious restrictions in the capacity to predict successfully the behaviour of modified DNA.

This being the case, any artificial modifications to the DNA, and any behaviour arising from a particular form of DNA functioning in a novel environment, clearly have the potential to create a wide spectrum of novel and unpredictable effects when the model does not incorporate quantum mechanics. The gap between model and reality is such that the predictive power of the current model is very weak. This is demonstrated, for example, in the fact that often hundreds or perhaps thousands of attempts are made to modify a species in a particular way before one successful outcome. It is also evidenced for example, in the failure of the crop of genetically-modified species, as has been observed, or in other unpredicted qualities so far seen in genetically-modified strains. The range of tests currently used for any new seed species, based on the flawed principle of substantial equivalence, are not competent to predict such outcomes.

The limitations of scientific models is one of the main driving forces behind the advancement of science. It has led to the development of progressively deeper and more unified descriptions of nature. Recently, it has led to identification of a "unified field" in nature, which is the integrated substrate underlying diverse forms and phenomena. It has also led to an understanding of the connection between the unified field of physics and human consciousness. It is argued that a "unified field" based approach must be employed in the case of genetic modification, the conclusion of which is that genetic modification is intrinsically uncertain. The number of potential unexpected outcomes is virtually unlimited. Given the potential hazards and risks, and given satisfactory alternatives for creating a healthy and abundant food supply without using genetic modification, it is concluded that field trials of Chardon LL are not necessary, and will generate the risk of effects in our environment that we cannot afford to create.