[转载]塞拉利尼发文爆料转Bt基因玉米导致奶牛出现肾衰竭等多种疾病！
&&&吕永岩按语：法国卡昂大学塞拉利尼团队是真正有良心的科学家团队。塞拉利尼用长达2年的试验证明了转基因致癌，如今他又在国际农业科学学术杂志上发表文章，揭露转BT基因玉米导致德国一位农民的奶牛出现肾衰竭等多种疾病，农民将转基因生物公司告上法庭，转基因生物公司在铁的事实面前不得不认账转基因的危害，但是过后却采用挑唆农民妻子所谓“家暴”的卑鄙手段，将起诉的农民投入监狱。转基因生物集团的不择手段、卑鄙无耻真是令人发指！
陈一文按语：德国Gottfried
Gl&ckner是一位德国农民，听信转基因作物能够提高农作物产量与牛奶产量，他1997年带头支持与促进农业生物技术。他的农场80公顷（1200亩）农田种植玉米，为60头奶牛的奶牛场提供饲料。先正达公司开发的转基因杀虫Bt176玉米获批准商业化种植作为食物与饲料后，他开始种植，尽管不知道先正达未进行过哺乳动物长期喂养安全性试验。1997年至2002年用转基因Bt玉米喂养奶牛群，转基因玉米比例逐步增加，奶牛群2001年出现重大健康问题：高产健康奶牛比例降至40%，奶牛出现长期的麻痹性痴呆综合症、肾衰竭的生化迹象，死亡率上升到10%！先正达拒绝赔偿他的经济损失后，他愤起控告先正达。先正达采用卑鄙手段遭致他入狱一年，而且丧失了农场。《农业科学学术杂志》2016年1月发表论文《喂养Bt176玉米头一批奶牛的病理报告（）》披露独立实验室检测结果：“在牛奶中发现特定转基因Bt176的DNA”！&
The experienceof one of the first GM crop farmers in Europe
欧洲种植转基因作物头一个农民之一的经验
Gilles-Eric S&ralini
G-E 塞拉利尼
Network on
Risks, Qualityand Sustainable Environment MRSH,
风险、质量与可持续环境网络
University of Caen,
法国卡昂大学
Accepted 22 January, 2016
接受日期：2016年1月22日&
Scholarly Journal of
Agricultural Science Vol.6(1),
pp. 9-10 Jan
农业科学学术杂志，Vol.6(1),
pp. 9-10，2016年1月
Available online at
Thepurpose of this commentaryis not to detail the results of feedinga GMO to a dairy cow herd & which are presentedelsewhere in a scientific article & but rather to document the particular historical and sociological context. After the court case pertaining to this affair ended, the author had access to the archives of the courts, to the lawyer’s summary, to the farm archives and to the farmer’s testimony.
该项评论的目的不是详细描述喂养转基因饲料给奶奶群的结果 -- 另外一篇科学性文章对此进行介绍
-- 而是记录相关的具体历史与社会背景。涉及此事件的法庭诉讼结束后，作者得以访问法庭的档案、律师的概述、农场的档案以及农民的证词。
Key words: GMO; dairy
Bt176; court case.
关键词：转基因；奶牛场；Bt176；法庭诉讼案。
INTRODUCTION
Gottfried Gl&ckner was one
of the first
farmers to defend and promoteagricultural biotechnology, believing that it would improvehis crop yields and milk production. He was an experienced manager of a conventional &dairy
farm (80 &
the maximum cultivatedarea for GM Bt maize reached 10 ha in 2001) in &Weidenhof,
W&lfersheim,
Hessen, Germany. He also produced conventional crops. He grew the first GM crop as soon as it was commercialized in Europe for food and feed. This was the GM maize Bt176, which produced an insecticidal Bt toxin that had never been tested on mammals& an omissionthat was not known at the time. He used the engineered plant for the first and longest-term feeding of dairy cows with an agricultural GMO in history, from 1997 to 2002.
德国格特弗莱德·哥罗克那是欧洲带头捍卫与促进农业生物技术的农民之一，他当初相信转基因作物能够改进他的农作物产量与牛奶产量。他是德国德国黑森州Weidenhof地方一个传统奶牛场有经验的经理(农场农田面积为80公顷，2001年转基因Bt玉米种植已经达到10公顷）。他同时种植传统作物。欧洲头一个转基因作物，先正达公司开发的转基因杀虫Bt176玉米在欧洲批准商业化种植作为食物与饲料后，他就开始种植，尽管当时不知道，先正达当时并没有进行过哺乳动物喂养安全性试验。1997年至2002年他一直用这种转基因Bt玉米喂养农场的奶牛群，成为历史上有记录的转基因作物喂养奶牛群首次与最长的实践。
detailed farm-level observation was performed because unusual and important health problems arose in the cows in 2001, when the GM maize was reachingits maximum level of 40% in the diet (Gl&ckner and S&ralini, 2016). These problems were not at first believed to be associated with the GMO. Only after investigation by the farmer during the following year was a link suspected.
进行了详尽的农场水平观察，因为奶牛群2001年出现了重要的健康问题，当时奶牛群饲料中的转基因Bt176玉米比例已经达到其最高比例40%（见论文：Gl&ckner
and S&ralini, 2016）。这些问题一开始并未认为与转基因作物相关。通过这位农民2002年期间进行调查开始怀疑存在这样的相关性。&
Detailed data were
kept regarding the feed,
blood, and urine andmilk analyses, and regular veterinary inspections
were carriedout. The proportion of healthy cows in the herd decreased to only 40% in 2002, coinciding with the progressive increase in the percentage ofthe GMO in the diet. At that time up to 10% of deaths were preceded by a long-lasting paresis syndrome, without hypocalcemia or fever, but with biochemical signs of kidney failure,as well as mucosal and epithelial problems.
保留了对于饲料、血样、尿样与牛奶分析的详尽记录，常规的兽医检查一直进行。2002年期间，奶牛群众健康奶牛的比例降至40%，与饲料中转基因Bt176玉米比例逐步增加同步。此时奶牛死亡率上升到10%，之前出现长期的麻痹性痴呆综合症，没有低钙血症或发烧，但是有肾衰竭的生化迹象，还出现粘膜与上皮问题。&
microbial origins for the diseases were found, but the specific Bt DNA was detected in milk (Gl&cknerand S&ralini, 2016). The presence of the GMO in the diet was duringthe described period the only intended management change on thefarm.
没有发现疾病微生物起源，但是在牛奶中发现特定转基因Bt176的DNA（见论文：Gl&ckner and S&ralini, 2016）
The dairy farm closed
in December 2004. All
the remaining cows were
sold at thistime
because of the health problems following the introduction of the GMO in the diet, causing an important economic loss for the farm from 2001. At this time, the GM maize had been very limitedto 12 tons (around 500 ha) of seeds per year on the German market. Bt176 maize was officially withdrawn by the European Union in 2007.
& 2004年，这个养牛场不得不关闭。此时，所有剩余的牛都卖掉了，由于饲料中引进转基因作物造成的健康问题，造成养牛场从2001年起陷入重大经济损失。此时，转基因玉米每年在德国市场上销售的种子量已经非常有限，每年仅12吨（大约500公顷）。2007年，欧盟官方决定撤除转基因Bt176玉米。&
First court case
第一场诉讼&
On 2 February2002, the farmer wrote to Syngenta, the developer of Bt176 maize, stating that the diseases were linkedto the GMO in the diet.
2002年2月2日，德国农民写信给转基因Bt176玉米的开发企业先正达，声称奶牛群的疾病与饲料中的转基因玉米关联。&
On 21 February his lawyer advised him to stop feedingthe cows with this diet.
2002年2月21日，这位农民的律师建议他停止用这样的思路喂养牛群。&
After a round table at the German Ministryof Health in Berlin on 13 March 2002, official test materials were sampled and the lack of microbialorigin for the diseases was confirmed by various universities. &&&
2002年3月13日在柏林德国健康部一次圆桌会议后，官方采样测试材料，不同的大学确认没有致疾病的微生物病源。&
Syngenta phoned and
visited the farm,
concluding that they
did not believe
the problems were due
to their GMO, though they offered no other explanations.
先正达公司打了电话并访问了这个奶牛场，他们结论他们并不认为问题由于它们的转基因，虽然他们未能提供其他的解释。&
Afternumerous oral and written requests by the farmerfrom 2001, in April 2002 Syngentapaid &43,224.62 out of the &97,374 lost by the farmerduring 2001, which represented the costs of the deaths and veterinary analyses, as well as the losses in milk production and feed.
德国农民向先正达公司提出无数口头与文字要求后，先正达2002年4月对于农民&97,374欧元经济损失（奶牛死亡、兽医的检测分析，以及牛奶生产与饲料损失）支付了&43,224.62欧元。&
However, the company did
not detect the presence of the Bt toxin in the feed, althoughthe GMO was genetically modified to produce high levelsof this toxin, and althoughit tested positive in an analysis by an official laboratory in 2002 (Gl&ckner and S&ralini, 2016, Annex).
&&&&然而，先正达公司声称在饲料没有检测到Bt毒素的存在，尽管转基因Bt176玉米转基因来产生很高水平这种毒素，而且尽管一家官方的实验室2002年做的分析中检测的结果为阳性（见论文：Gl&ckner
and S&ralini, 2016）。&
In order to avoid a court case, in January 2003 the representative of the company finally proposedto the farmer a compensation payment amounting to 50% of his losses. For 2002 alone, these were already estimated at &143,213.60. The farmer refused the informal proposal (see below) and sued Syngenta.
为了避免法庭诉讼，2003年1月，先正达公司的代表向德国农民提出赔偿其损伤的50%。仅对2002年而言，这些损失已经估计达到&143,213.60欧元。德国农民拒绝了这个非正式的提案（参看下便）并且在法院对先正达公司提出控告。&
The case went tocourt
in December 2005 and was completedin the same month (DistrictCourt Giessen, judgement of March 7, 2007, Az. 3 O 564/05; and the appeal in Higher Regional Court Frankfurt, judgement of February 6, 2009, Az. 2 U 128/07).
2005年12月对这场诉讼开庭审理，同月结束（地区法院Giessen，2007年3月7日裁决，案号Az.
3 O 564/05；向法兰克福高级地区法院提出上诉，2009年2月6日裁决，案号Az.
2 U 128/07）。&
After the court case, the company proposed a settlement whereby they would pay at first &70,000 andthen &100,000. The farmer finally lost the case in 2009 over a technicality: the lack of the signatureof the farmer’s wife on a document. They had been divorcedin 2005, after she left the family (including three children aged 17, 15 and 13) and the farm in 2000, forminganother couple.
法庭审理后，先正达公司提出解决方案：先支付&70,000美元，而后再支付&100,000欧元。德国农民最终因为技术性原因失掉了官司：一份文件上缺乏农民妻子的签字。他的妻子2000年离开了他们的家庭（他们家庭包括17岁、15岁与13岁三个孩子）与农场与其他人同居。&
A second personal court case overlapping the first
与第一个诉讼时间重叠的第二项个人诉讼&
The second court case
overlapped with the
firstand ended with the farmer being jailedfrom 2006 to 2007.
第二场与第一场诉讼时间重叠，结果是德国农民2006年到2007年监禁一年。&
His wife complained for the first time in May 2003 (DistrictCourt Friedberg, Hessen, Az. 605 Js 673/03 and appealin Giessen Regional Court in March 2005 8 Ns 605 Js 673/03) of violence by her husband “in October 1999 or the new year of 2000”, she said in court, without medical or other testimony.
他的妻子2003年5月对他第一次提出控告（地区法院Friedberg,
Hessen，案号Az. 605
Js 673/03，2005年3月在Giessen地区法院上诉，案号8
Ns 605 Js 673/03），庭审时她声称丈夫“1999年10月或者2000年新年”对她施暴，但未能提出任何医学或其他证据。&
Just before this complaintwas filed, Syngenta had pressured the farmerin January 2003 to accept compensation of 50%. After the farmerrefused and said that hewould sue Syngenta, thecompany’s representative told him that something was going wrong with his wife.
他的妻子该项投诉记录在案前，先正达2003年1月施压要求德国农民接受50%的赔偿。德国农民对此拒绝并表示要控告先正达后，先正达公司的代表告诉他：他与妻子之间将有麻烦。&
Up to this time, the farmer’swife had made no complaintof violence. The ex-wife also appointed a new lawyer at that time. GottfriedGl&ckner was unfortunately absent from the Higher Court in Frankfurt in November 2005 (General Prosecutor, ref. 2 Ss 209/05)because his lawyer told him it was not necessaryto attend, adding that he, the lawyer, would represent him. But the lawyer did not attend court this could have led the judge to pronounce an unusually severe sentence.
以上网友发言只代表其个人观点，不代表新浪网的观点或立场。丁香园App是丁香园社区的官方应用，聚合了丁香园论坛和丁香客的精彩内容。医生可通过丁香园App浏览论坛，也可以在这个医生群集的关系网络中分享和互动，建立更广泛的学术圈子。
扫描二维码下载
今日：0 | 主题：130303
每发1个新帖可以获得0.5个丁当奖励
【求助】明年报转基因是不是要慎重？！
楼层直达：
这个帖子发布于7年零35天前，其中的信息可能已发生改变或有所发展。
(转)最新科研证实转基因玉米影响生育能力 网易探索11月12日报道 奥地利政府于当地时间11月11日发布最新科学研究，首次证实转基因玉米会导致小白鼠繁殖能力下降。国际环保组织绿色和平警示：包括中国在内的各国政府需加强对转基因食品安全性的研究，同时呼吁立即停止任何转基因粮食作物的商业化审批和种植。此项研究由奥地利健康部和农业与环境部共同发起并资助，维也纳大学兽医学教授Juergen Zentek主持完成。研究结果显示，在长达20周以上的持续喂养评估实验中，被喂养饲料中含33％转基因玉米的小白鼠从第三代开始，后代的体重、体长和数量都明显减少。“这一研究结果明确证实了转基因作物对健康的威胁。我国对于转基因粮食作物的安全性研究和商业化审核需要更为谨慎，避免伤害到我国十三亿人的健康与未来。”绿色和平食品与农业项目主任方立锋说。该研究所用材料为孟山都公司研发的转基因玉米NK603(抗除草剂)和MON810(Bt抗虫)的杂交品种，在阿根廷、日本、菲律宾和南非等国家已通过生物安全审批。早在2004年和2005年，中国已经批准进口这两种孟山都公司的转基因玉米。今年7月9日，国务院总理***在国务院常务会议上审议并原则通过了转基因生物新品种培育科技重大专项，其中包括在2020年前共200亿元的转基因研究专项资金。同时，据悉目前在中国已经有转基因水稻和转基因玉米在等待农业部商业化种植资格审批。方立锋说：“水稻是中国最重要的粮食作物，关系着十三亿人的吃饭问题。此次奥地利转基因玉米的研究证实转基因作物对健康的隐患。在这种情况下，我国在对待转基因作物——尤其是转基因水稻——的商业化审批时，必须慎之又慎。”值得注意的是，孟山都公司在2003年对该杂交品种曾进行了42天的雏鸡喂养实验，虽然实验发现了在鸡的翅膀重量等方面有显著不同，但当时却被孟山都公司判定为“生物学上不显著”。方立锋说：“对转基因技术的安全性研究时，这些生物公司有着自己的意见。我们鼓励中国政府充分考虑到转基因技术的长期安全性以及该技术涉及的知识产权隐患，将更多的资源投入到长期安全性的更彻底研究中，而不是仓促推动转基因技术的商业化。”
分享到哪里？
怎么没有人关心一下哦？：（
分享到哪里？
关于丁香园欧洲种植先正达公司Bt176转基因Bt玉米德国农民的遭遇
&&德国Gottfried
Gl&ckner是一位德国农民，听信转基因作物能够提高农作物产量与牛奶产量，他1997年带头支持与促进农业生物技术。他的农场80公顷（1200亩）农田种植玉米，为60头奶牛的奶牛场提供饲料。先正达公司开发的转基因杀虫Bt176玉米获批准商业化种植作为食物与饲料后，他开始种植，尽管不知道先正达未进行过哺乳动物长期喂养安全性试验。1997年至2002年用转基因Bt玉米喂养奶牛群，转基因玉米比例逐步增加，奶牛群2001年出现重大健康问题：高产健康奶牛比例降至40%，奶牛出现长期的麻痹性痴呆综合症、肾衰竭的生化迹象，死亡率上升到10%！先正达拒绝赔偿他的经济损失后，他愤起控告先正达。先正达采用卑鄙手段遭致他入狱一年，而且丧失了农场。《农业科学学术杂志》2016年1月发表论文《喂养Bt176玉米头一批奶牛的病理报告（）》披露独立实验室检测结果：“在牛奶中发现特定转基因Bt176的DNA”！&
The experienceof one of the first GM crop farmers in Europe
欧洲种植转基因作物头一个农民之一的经验
Gilles-Eric S&ralini
G-E 塞拉利尼
Network on
Risks, Qualityand Sustainable Environment MRSH,
风险、质量与可持续环境网络
University of Caen,
法国卡昂大学
Accepted 22 January, 2016
接受日期：2016年1月22日
Scholarly Journal of
Agricultural Science Vol.6(1),
pp. 9-10 Jan
农业科学学术杂志，Vol.6(1),
pp. 9-10，2016年1月
Available online at
Thepurpose of this commentaryis not to detail the results of feedinga GMO to a dairy cow herd & which are presentedelsewhere in a scientific article & but rather to document the particular historical and sociological context. After the court case pertaining to this affair ended, the author had access to the archives of the courts, to the lawyer’s summary, to the farm archives and to the farmer’s testimony.
该项评论的目的不是详细描述喂养转基因饲料给奶奶群的结果
-- 另外一篇科学性文章对此进行介绍
-- 而是记录相关的具体历史与社会背景。涉及此事件的法庭诉讼结束后，作者得以访问法庭的档案、律师的概述、农场的档案以及农民的证词。
Key words: GMO; dairy
Bt176; court case.
关键词：转基因；奶牛场；Bt176；法庭诉讼案。
INTRODUCTION
Gottfried Gl&ckner was one
of the first
farmers to defend and promoteagricultural biotechnology, believing that it would improvehis crop yields and milk production. He was an experienced manager of a conventional &dairy farm (80 & the maximum cultivatedarea for GM Bt maize reached 10 ha in 2001) in &Weidenhof, W&lfersheim, Hessen, Germany. He also produced conventional crops. He grew the first GM crop as soon as it was commercialized in Europe for food and feed. This was the GM maize Bt176, which produced an insecticidal Bt toxin that had never been tested on mammals& an omissionthat was not known at the time. He used the engineered plant for the first and longest-term feeding of dairy cows with an agricultural GMO in history, from 1997 to 2002.
德国格特弗莱德·哥罗克那是欧洲带头捍卫与促进农业生物技术的农民之一，他当初相信转基因作物能够改进他的农作物产量与牛奶产量。他是德国德国黑森州Weidenhof地方一个传统奶牛场有经验的经理(农场农田面积为80公顷，2001年转基因Bt玉米种植已经达到10公顷）。他同时种植传统作物。欧洲头一个转基因作物，先正达公司开发的转基因杀虫Bt176玉米在欧洲批准商业化种植作为食物与饲料后，他就开始种植，尽管当时不知道，先正达当时并没有进行过哺乳动物喂养安全性试验。1997年至2002年他一直用这种转基因Bt玉米喂养农场的奶牛群，成为历史上有记录的转基因作物喂养奶牛群首次与最长的实践。
A detailed farm-level observation was performed because unusual and important health problems arose in the cows in 2001, when the GM maize was reachingits maximum level of 40% in the diet (Gl&ckner and S&ralini, 2016). These problems were not at first believed to be associated with the GMO. Only after investigation by the farmer during the following year was a link suspected.
进行了详尽的农场水平观察，因为奶牛群2001年出现了重要的健康问题，当时奶牛群饲料中的转基因Bt176玉米比例已经达到其最高比例40%（见论文：Gl&ckner
and S&ralini, 2016）。这些问题一开始并未认为与转基因作物相关。通过这位农民2002年期间进行调查开始怀疑存在这样的相关性。
Detailed data were
kept regarding the feed,
blood, and urine andmilk analyses, and regular veterinary inspections
were carriedout. The proportion of healthy cows in the herd decreased to only 40% in 2002, coinciding with the progressive increase in the percentage ofthe GMO in the diet. At that time up to 10% of deaths were preceded by a long-lasting paresis syndrome, without hypocalcemia or fever, but with biochemical signs of kidney failure,as well as mucosal and epithelial problems.
保留了对于饲料、血样、尿样与牛奶分析的详尽记录，常规的兽医检查一直进行。2002年期间，奶牛群众健康奶牛的比例降至40%，与饲料中转基因Bt176玉米比例逐步增加同步。此时奶牛死亡率上升到10%，之前出现长期的麻痹性痴呆综合症，没有低钙血症或发烧，但是有肾衰竭的生化迹象，还出现粘膜与上皮问题。
No microbial origins
for the diseases were found, but the specific Bt DNA was detected in milk (Gl&cknerand S&ralini, 2016). The presence of the GMO in the diet was duringthe described period the only intended management change on thefarm.
没有发现疾病微生物起源，但是在牛奶中发现特定转基因Bt176的DNA（见论文：Gl&ckner
and S&ralini, 2016）
The dairy farm closed
in December 2004. All
the remaining cows were
sold at thistime
because of the health problems following the introduction of the GMO in the diet, causing an important economic loss for the farm from 2001. At this time, the GM maize had been very limitedto 12 tons (around 500 ha) of seeds per year on the German market. Bt176 maize was officially withdrawn by the European Union in 2007.
2004年，这个养牛场不得不关闭。此时，所有剩余的牛都卖掉了，由于饲料中引进转基因作物造成的健康问题，造成养牛场从2001年起陷入重大经济损失。此时，转基因玉米每年在德国市场上销售的种子量已经非常有限，每年仅12吨（大约500公顷）。2007年，欧盟官方决定撤除转基因Bt176玉米。
第一场诉讼
On 2 February2002, the farmer wrote to Syngenta, the developer of Bt176 maize, stating that the diseases were linkedto the GMO in the diet.
2002年2月2日，德国农民写信给转基因Bt176玉米的开发企业先正达，声称奶牛群的疾病与饲料中的转基因玉米关联。
On 21 February his lawyer advised him to stop feedingthe cows with this diet.
2002年2月21日，这位农民的律师建议他停止用这样的思路喂养牛群。
After a round table at the German Ministryof Health in Berlin on 13 March 2002, official test materials were sampled and the lack of microbialorigin for the diseases was confirmed by various universities. &&&
2002年3月13日在柏林德国健康部一次圆桌会议后，官方采样测试材料，不同的大学确认没有致疾病的微生物病源。
Syngenta phoned and
visited the farm,
concluding that they
did not believe
the problems were due
to their GMO, though they offered no other explanations.
先正达公司打了电话并访问了这个奶牛场，他们结论他们并不认为问题由于它们的转基因，虽然他们未能提供其他的解释。
Afternumerous oral and written requests by the farmerfrom 2001, in April 2002 Syngentapaid &43,224.62 out of the &97,374 lost by the farmerduring 2001, which represented the costs of the deaths and veterinary analyses, as well as the losses in milk production and feed.
德国农民向先正达公司提出无数口头与文字要求后，先正达2002年4月对于农民&97,374欧元经济损失（奶牛死亡、兽医的检测分析，以及牛奶生产与饲料损失）支付了&43,224.62欧元。
However, the company did
not detect the presence of the Bt toxin in the feed, althoughthe GMO was genetically modified to produce high levelsof this toxin, and althoughit tested positive in an analysis by an official laboratory in 2002 (Gl&ckner and S&ralini, 2016, Annex).
然而，先正达公司声称在饲料没有检测到Bt毒素的存在，尽管转基因Bt176玉米转基因来产生很高水平这种毒素，而且尽管一家官方的实验室2002年做的分析中检测的结果为阳性（见论文：Gl&ckner
and S&ralini, 2016）。
In order to avoid a court case, in January 2003 the representative of the company finally proposedto the farmer a compensation payment amounting to 50% of his losses. For 2002 alone, these were already estimated at &143,213.60. The farmer refused the informal proposal (see below) and sued Syngenta.
为了避免法庭诉讼，2003年1月，先正达公司的代表向德国农民提出赔偿其损伤的50%。仅对2002年而言，这些损失已经估计达到&143,213.60欧元。德国农民拒绝了这个非正式的提案（参看下便）并且在法院对先正达公司提出控告。
The case went tocourt
in December 2005 and was completedin the same month (DistrictCourt Giessen, judgement of March 7, 2007, Az. 3 O 564/05; and the appeal in Higher Regional Court Frankfurt, judgement of February 6, 2009, Az. 2 U 128/07).
2005年12月对这场诉讼开庭审理，同月结束（地区法院Giessen，2007年3月7日裁决，案号Az.
3 O 564/05；向法兰克福高级地区法院提出上诉，2009年2月6日裁决，案号Az.
2 U 128/07）。
After the court case, the company proposed a settlement whereby they would pay at first &70,000 andthen &100,000. The farmer finally lost the case in 2009 over a technicality: the lack of the signatureof the farmer’s wife on a document. They had been divorcedin 2005, after she left the family (including three children aged 17, 15 and 13) and the farm in 2000, forminganother couple.
法庭审理后，先正达公司提出解决方案：先支付&70,000美元，而后再支付&100,000欧元。德国农民最终因为技术性原因失掉了官司：一份文件上缺乏农民妻子的签字。他的妻子2000年离开了他们的家庭（他们家庭包括17岁、15岁与13岁三个孩子）与农场与其他人同居。
A second personal court case overlapping the first
与第一个诉讼时间重叠的第二项个人诉讼
The second court case
overlapped with the
firstand ended with the farmer being jailedfrom 2006 to 2007.
第二场与第一场诉讼时间重叠，结果是德国农民2006年到2007年监禁一年。
His wife complained for the first time in May 2003 (DistrictCourt Friedberg, Hessen, Az. 605 Js 673/03 and appealin Giessen Regional Court in March 2005 8 Ns 605 Js 673/03) of violence by her husband “in October 1999 or the new year of 2000”, she said in court, without medical or other testimony.
他的妻子2003年5月对他第一次提出控告（地区法院Friedberg,
Hessen，案号Az. 605
Js 673/03，2005年3月在Giessen地区法院上诉，案号8
Ns 605 Js 673/03），庭审时她声称丈夫“1999年10月或者2000年新年”对她施暴，但未能提出任何医学或其他证据。
Just before this complaintwas filed, Syngenta had pressured the farmerin January 2003 to accept compensation of 50%. After the farmerrefused and said that hewould sue Syngenta, thecompany’s representative told him that something was going wrong with his wife.
他的妻子该项投诉记录在案前，先正达2003年1月施压要求德国农民接受50%的赔偿。德国农民对此拒绝并表示要控告先正达后，先正达公司的代表告诉他：他与妻子之间将有麻烦。
Up to this time, the farmer’swife had made no complaintof violence. The ex-wife also appointed a new lawyer at that time. GottfriedGl&ckner was unfortunately absent from the Higher Court in Frankfurt in November 2005 (General Prosecutor, ref. 2 Ss 209/05)because his lawyer told him it was not necessaryto attend, adding that he, the lawyer, would represent him. But the lawyer did not attend court this could have led the judge to pronounce an unusually severe sentence.
已投稿到：
以上网友发言只代表其个人观点，不代表新浪网的观点或立场。