Jonathan Jones

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search

Prof Jonathan Jones is a Fellow of the Royal Society and senior scientist at the Sainsbury Laboratory of the John Innes Centre (JIC) (1988-present as at June 2010).[1]

He has also undertaken research at UC Berkeley. He is on the advisory board of Mendel Biotechnology[2], in which Monsanto is an investor and collaborator.[3]

Since the late 1980s he has headed a lab within the Sainsbury Laboratory, using molecular biology and genetics to better understand plant disease resistance with a view to engineering disease resistance genes into crop plants. In 1998 Jones wrote, 'I've worked with transgenic plants for 15 years, in the US and the UK. The more I do it, the less I worry about it.'

It was environmental concerns which, according to Prof Jones, led him into a career in plant biology as a source of high-tech solutions. He has written, 'It simply is appalling how rainforests are cut down, fisheries fished out and water resources are overutilized and polluted. But the solutions require more science, not less.'

Unusually for a biotechnologist, Jones has at times been willing to criticise the biotech industry, outside of the area of GM crops. He wrote to The Guardian to support George Monbiot's concern about Monsanto's genetically engineered cattle drug BST, 'George Monbiot and the Guardian have got wrong much of their coverage on GM foods and GM crops. But he is certainly right to highlight concern... about milk from cows treated with bovine somatotropin (BST). It appears suspect both on animal welfare and human health grounds'.

However, his keenness to communicate the benefits of GM crops has led him to adopt a less tolerant attitude towards environmental critics of GM crops like George Monbiot. In fact, while the JIC's Director, Prof. Chris Lamb, has publicly expressed his concern at the 'polarisation of discussion about agriculture', and declared it part of the JIC's vision to seek to foster balanced debate, Jones has adopted an often highly aggressive tone in public meetings and in some of the material he has written for publication.

He attacks critics of GM crops at public meetings as 'self-serving' fundamentalists, calling them 'the green mujihadeen'. On the JIC website he has posted material complaining of 'George Monbiot's periodic eruptions of green bile on the subject of GM crops' and of 'George Monbiot and his bigoted, myopic, mystical, anti-scientific, organic farming business interest friends'.

During the Pusztai crisis in February 1999 Jones penned an article at the request of Number 10 on the benefits of GM crops. The government's spin doctors then tried to place the article in a national newspaper. The material turned up 'partially summarized' in a Sunday Times editorial on 14 February 1999.[4] The following day the Daily Telegraph reported how the piece had been hawked around the press by Number 10. The fact that Jones worked for a laboratory founded and funded by Labour's Science Minister, Lord Sainsbury, who is a leading advocate of GM crops, attracted critical comment.

In the article, Jones wrote, 'Grandstanding does not resolve scientific questions', and he concluded, without any apparent sense of self-contradiction, 'The future benefits (for consumers and the environment) will be enormous [from GM] and the best is yet to come. In the meantime, let's have more information and less rhetoric.'[5]

Jones has also attacked GM critics for 'quite literally leading everyone up the garden path.' But he has himself faced criticism for making baseless claims in support of GM crops.

At public talks, Jones has repeatedly claimed that GM crops have made aerial spraying of pesticides unnecessary in the US, resulting in 'crop dusters' going 'out of business because plants are so [pest] resistant, there's no business for applying insecticides indiscriminately from aeroplanes'.[6] However, according to a leading US agronomist, Dr Charles Benbrook, in an email to GMWatch, insecticide use in the US has actually been on the increase.[7] While crop dusters are indeed going out of business, says Benbrook, this is because 'fewer and fewer pesticides may be applied aerial, because of drift. Virtually all the new chemistry is incompatible with aerial application.' Dr Benbrook's conclusion on Jones' much repeated claim that crop dusters are going out of business because of GM crops: 'This fellow does not know what he is talking about.' So where did Jones get his data? He told GMWatch he read it in a newspaper[8] - The Christian Science Monitor.

Ironically, in his article about the media storm over Pusztai's research, Jones wrote, 'As a scientist myself I can only say "show me the data". Grandstanding does not resolve scientific questions.'[9]

Notes

  1. Jonathan Jones, The Sainsbury Laboratory website, acc 9 Jun 2010
  2. "Scientific Advisory Board", Mendel Biotechnology, accessed February 2009.
  3. "Monsanto, Mendel Biotechnology sign deal", St. Louis Business Journal, April 28 2008, accessed September 2009.
  4. Jonathan Jones, [http://web.archive.org/web/20030112031102/http://www.jic.bbsrc.ac.uk/Sainsbury-Lab/jonathan-jones/GMO-pieces/SJJGMO3.HTM untitled article, 12 Feb 1999, version placed in web archive 12 Jul 2000, accessed in web archive 26 Jun 2010
  5. Jonathan Jones, [http://web.archive.org/web/20030112031102/http://www.jic.bbsrc.ac.uk/Sainsbury-Lab/jonathan-jones/GMO-pieces/SJJGMO3.HTM untitled article, 12 Feb 1999, version placed in web archive 12 Jul 2000, accessed in web archive 26 Jun 2010
  6. Jonathan Jones, speaking at public talks, which were recorded.
  7. Benbrook made this specific point in an email to GMWatch. Some years later, in 2009, regarding the general use of pesticides as a whole on GM crops (pesticides being in this context a technical term that includes herbicides), Benbrook published an updated report based on official USDA data that concluded that while GM Bt maize was associated with a decrease in applied pesticides, this apparent benefit was wiped out by the increase in herbicide use on GM crops. The report concluded, "The basic finding is that compared to pesticide use in the absence of GE crops, farmers applied 318 million more pounds of pesticides over the last 13 years as a result of planting GE seeds. This difference represents an average increase of about 0.25 pound for each acre planted to a GE trait." (Benbrook, C. "Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years". The Organic Center, Nov 2009. Accessed 26 Jun 2010.) In addition, there is also the fact that GM Bt maize and cotton have built-in pesticides in every cell of the plant. If this means it is in some cases unnecessary to apply pesticides through spraying, it also means that the entire plant is a pesticide. Jones does not address these questions.
  8. Email from Jonathan Jones to GMWatch
  9. Jonathan Jones, [http://web.archive.org/web/20030112031102/http://www.jic.bbsrc.ac.uk/Sainsbury-Lab/jonathan-jones/GMO-pieces/SJJGMO3.HTM untitled article, 12 Feb 1999, version placed in web archive 12 Jul 2000, accessed in web archive 26 Jun 2010