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 (1667)	3/17/1999 6:52:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Respond to of 2539

Food law proposals under scrutiny Australian Broadcasting Corp. News Wednesday 17 March, 1999 (7:09am CST) What has been described as the biggest change in the regulation of food since the Food Act of 1985 will be under scrutiny at a conference in Adelaide today. A planned move to a national system of self-regulation would see food manufacturers audited on the basis of the quality control mechanisms, including the training of employees in food hygiene regulations. Chris Cavanagh from the Australian Institute of Enviromental Health says it would be a move away from the inspection process. "Premises will be required to develop what is best known as a food safety manual," he said. "They will be required to look at their own processes, look at them from the minute they come in the door...to the point that it leaves the premises and to put in place, at set points, controls which will be able to be monitored." abc.net.au

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1667)	3/17/1999 6:53:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2539

In denial over mobile phones This is London March 17, 1999 by Quentin Letts We all raged about mad cow disease, and most of us agree that GM foods look dodgy. But the mobile phones cancer story is the health scare that London is too frightened to discuss. It is heads-in-the-sand, taboo time. Mobiles? Those natty little indispensables used by everyone from plumbers' mates to City traders? Brain cancer? Mention it in the pub or at a party and suddenly the chattiest people fall silent. Mobiles are such a huge part of late Nineties life that the West, to use an American psychiatrist term, is "in denial". After all, "You can get me on my mobile" is one of the expressions of our age. We cannot face up to the possibility we might soon be saying: "My mobile got me." Every week brings fresh evidence that mobiles could be as bad for you as a trip to a Pacific atoll at nuclear bomb testing time. Every time you take that throbbing little gizmo from your handbag and say "Hello" you could be frying your mind. We give them to our children for safety reasons. Is this really so wise? The children might be better off chain-smoking untipped Camels. The latest development came at the weekend when a former BT engineer claimed he had been left mentally punch-drunk by heavy use of mobiles. The implications for telecommunications shares are dire. Martin Dawes, the mobile phone entrepreneur who sold his business for £70 million to Cellnet last week, may have got out just in time. If there was anything like doubt about a drug or foodstuff, the agencies of the state and the consumer rights cadres would be in full swing. There would be questions in the House. Television specials would be fronted by sombre presenters, pressing manufacturers for answers and demanding an inquiry. The word scandal would be flung around. Senior executives would be expected to resign. None of this is happening in the mobile phones scare because the ramifications are too immense. If you ask people what they think, they mumble that yeah, there's probably something in this brain cancer theory. But should mobiles be banned? We all raged about mad cow disease, and most of us agree that GM foods look dodgy. But the mobile phones cancer story is the health scare that London is too frightened to discuss. It is heads-in-the-sand, taboo time. Mobiles? Those natty little indispensables used by everyone from plumbers' mates to City traders? Brain cancer? Mention it in the pub or at a party and suddenly the chattiest people fall silent. Mobiles are such a huge Beef on the bone has been. Asda and others are ruling out GM foods. So should there be a mobiles moratorium? We dare not say so. It is not as though the theories are new. Three summers ago an acquaintance of mine, the international financier Michael von Clemm, 61, developed a brain tumour near his telephone ear. Von Clemm, a billionaire so careful of his health that he had a high-altitude anti-radiation blanket made for his frequent Concorde trips, had long been a mobile phone addict. In 1996 I got an article into the papers which reported: "Von Clemm's friends wonder whether the tumour has anything to do with his long-term use of mobile phones." When von Clemm died last autumn, his friend Richard Branson disclosed that the doctors - and Michael could afford the very best - were "convinced" mobiles were to blame for his death. There are signs that a few people may at last be taking notice. In offices there are the beginnings of a rumble as employees seek assurances and ask for remote headset devices (though if the phones are clipped on to your belt, you may be giving yourself cancer of the kidneys). But the questions are too few, and may be too late. thisislondon.co.uk

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1667)	3/17/1999 6:57:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2539

Sainsbury's ban GM foods from own-brand range March 17, 1999 Sainsbury's supermarket chain will exclude all genetically-modified ingredients from products in its own-brand range by June this year. The retail giant has joined with other major players in the food industry across Europe, including rival Marks & Spencer, in an unprecedented move to buy non-GM products, meeting consumer demand for a "GM-free" guarantee. The huge collective buying power of the group will be used to end the domination of the market by US producers. It includes French hypermarket retailer Carrefour, Delhaiz in Belgium, Migros in Switzerland, Effelunga in Italy and Irish group Superquinn - Sainsbury's currently have around 50 own-label products - mostly processed foods including ready-cook meals, tomato puree and biscuits. Non-GM soya from Canada will be substituted for the US variety and the products will be independently verified as GM-free by scientists at British firm, Law Laboratories. Sainsbury's said: "Our customers have indicated to us very clearly that they do not want genetically-modified ingredients in their food and we are taking steps to offer that guarantee. "The consortium will be working with farmers and producers to find a supply of ingredients that can be scientifically assessed to prove that they are GM-free. It will introduced into our own-brand ranges as soon as possible." The move will come as a blow to giant American soya producers who had made it impossible to guarantee products were GM-free by mixing genetically-modified and non-GM soya at source. itn.co.uk

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1667)	3/17/1999 11:22:00 PM
From: Edscharp	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2539

Dan, Concerning your point about genetic engineering by ancient farmers. This month's issue of Scientific American (April, 99) has a very interesting article which expands on this issue. I found the below summary on their website: sciam.com The Revival of Colored Cotton James M. Vreeland, Jr. Today's fashion craze for cotton fabrics made without artificial dyes owes a debt to the indigenous people of the Americas. For thousands of years, pre-Columbian Indians have been cultivating cotton plant stocks with fibers that are naturally green, red and other colors. Unfortunately, this article does not appear in their website. You'll have to buy a copy of the magazine.