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.

Biotech / Medical : Monsanto Co. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1208)	2/17/1999 12:14:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Respond to of 2539

Unbiased opinion for a change. There is no room left in the debate for people such as me who think genetic engineering can be used for both good and bad, and that if we choose carefully it offers possible benefits for the environment, for human health and for Third World prosperity, but that if we choose the wrong applications it could damage all of these things. What exactly is so terrible about taking a gene that kills insects from a bacterium and putting it into a potato, so that you no longer need to spray potatoes with insecticide? The gene is harmless to people, it already exists and it is a threat only to Colorado beetles and not to passing butterflies (because they do not eat potatoes).

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1208)	2/17/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Paul Kelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2539

The saddest fact for the people in these countries is that they will find themselves more poor because they will be unable to compete in world markets and more hungry because shortsightedness and ignorance, as always, will leave them without enough food.It really is sad.

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1208)	2/17/1999 12:36:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2539

02/17 11:37 FOCUS-UK govt may delay commercial gene crops (Recasts with hint of delay; adds Meacher, Monsanto case) By John Morrison LONDON, Feb 17 (Reuters) - Britain's Labour government, struggling to calm a public row about genetically modified (GM) crops, hinted on Wednesday it might insist on a further delay before giving farmers freedom to grow them commercially. The government has up to now said no to demands from environmentalists and political opponents for a moratorium of three to five years on commercial planting of GM crops, expected to commence in 2000. But Environment Minister Michael Meacher told BBC radio on Wednesday the green light for commercial sowing depended on assessing research on how GM crops affected the environment. "If that is not sufficient time we will consider what further time period may be needed," he said. "It may well be true that a longer period is required." The government has vigorously defended the safety of the GM food products now on sale in British shops -- tagged "Frankenstein foods" by some newspapers -- and says it is leading European efforts to ensure they are properly labelled. On Tuesday, it defused opposition attacks in parliament by pointing out that all such foods now in supermarkets had been authorised by the previous Conservative government. But it faced fresh questions on Wednesday over a more tricky subject -- whether growing GM crops will harm Britain's environment by threatening rare species. Environmental pressure Group Friends of the Earth (FOE) said GM crops could threaten the brown hare, the horseshoe bat, the skylark, the song thrush and the great crested newt. Meacher denied accusations by FOE that his department had delayed release of a study by government scientists highlighting such long-term dangers. Meacher said it was nonsense to say the report, written last June, had been suppressed and promised it would be published this week. "We are getting it out as fast as we can," he said. English Nature, a government advisory body, has urged a three-year delay before the planting of GM crops is allowed. Monsanto, one of the leading GM crop companies, pleaded guilty in court on Wednesday and paid a 17,000 pound ($28,000) fine for a breach of environmental rules during a trial of GM winter oilseed rape at a farm in Lincolnshire, eastern England. The case was brought because the company carrying out the trial on behalf of Monsanto failed to ensure a six-metre (yard) pollen barrier around the crop. Monsanto spokesman Tom McDermott accepted the court decision but stressed there was no danger involved and predicted British public opinion would eventually accept GM crops. "Often a new technology experiences a period of public debate, even with a tinge of hysteria," he said. A trade group which represents British supermarkets said government assertions that it is possible for food makers to avoid GM soya do not stand up. Food standards minister Jeff Rooker has published a list of 59 companies he says could supply non-GM material, but British Retail Consortium spokesman David Southwell said there were not enough controls to guarantee their soya would be GM-free. "They are not able to to offer the volume required and they can only supply soybeans, not the food ingredients the manufacturers need," Southwell said. (Additional reporting by Christopher Lyddon) ($1=.6107 Pound)