Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (9592)	4/4/2000 12:19:00 PM
From: Ron Bower	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

I live in an agricultural area (corn, soybeans, wheat). It is my understanding that the genetically engineered seeds were primarily developed to resist diseases and that neutered seeds have been developed to prevent cross pollination from field to field. It seems to me, a layman, that a grain resistant to disease would be beneficial to the consumer versus a grain that might carry a latent disease through processing. I would also think these altered seeds would be most beneficial to farmers in the third world countries where crops are more susceptible to diseases. Farmers no longer save back seed as mentioned in the article as the seeds available from Monsanto and other seed companies consistently provide much higher yields. I am much more concerned about the increased use of chemicals (insecticides and herbicides). Not only are these chemicals being carried into our water supplies, but there is no guarantee that residual amounts aren't carried through to the products produced from the grains. JMHO, Ron