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: Anthony Wong who wrote (1798)	3/23/1999 6:04:00 PM
From: Dan Spillane	Respond to of 2539

Wow! European "terminator"...how ironic; not from Monsanto but Europe. Actually, this isn't much different than common hybrid corn (which can't produced normal offspring)...or a farm mule. BUT, this is what they have been talking about. (from the story below) "The MS6 was genetically engineered for male sterility and glufosinate herbicide tolerance." (full story) AgrEvo corn GMO line no longer regulated by USDA WASHINGTON, March 23 (Reuters) - The U.S. Agriculture Department said Tuesday it will no longer regulate a genetically engineered corn variety developed by AgrEvo USA Co to tolerate the herbicide glufosinate. The decision, which is effective April 22, was issued after AgrEvo presented the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service with studies showing corn designated as MS6 was similar to another type of genetically-modified corn already approved by the USDA. The MS6 was genetically engineered for male sterility and glufosinate herbicide tolerance. USDA said an evaluation of field tests of MS6 showed there were no adverse impacts on plants or other organisms. AgrEvo is a joint venture of Germany's Hoechst AG (quote from Yahoo! UK & Ireland: HOEG.F) and Schering AG (quote from Yahoo! UK & Ireland: SCHG.F).

To: Anthony Wong who wrote (1798)	3/24/1999 1:08:00 AM
From: Dan Spillane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2539

Beef hormone label unacceptable, US cattle group says By Doug Palmer Tuesday March 23, 8:13 pm Eastern Time (Great idea for labeling. "Made in the USA" would work for beef or food crops.) (highlight) "To accept a label that sets U.S. beef apart because of how it is produced would be inconsistent with that ruling and set a bad precedent for other controversial but safe production practices, such as genetically-modified crops, he said." (full story) WASHINGTON, March 23 (Reuters) - U.S. cattle producers would accept a ''Made in the USA'' label on their beef shipments to the European Union, but not one that says ''made with artificial growth hormones,'' a U.S. cattle industry aide said on Tuesday. Labeling has emerged as a potential way out of the bitter trade dispute between the two agricultural powerhouses. The United States is now threatening to impose at least several hundred million dollars of punitive duties on the EU. But ''the issue of labeling production practices I think is a very slippery slope,'' Chuck Lambert, chief economist of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, told reporters, after a House hearing on international trade issues. The whole point of the two World Trade Organization rulings against the EU is that ''there is no scientific difference'' between beef from cattle injected with artificial growth hormones and beef from other cattle, Lambert said. To accept a label that sets U.S. beef apart because of how it is produced would be inconsistent with that ruling and set a bad precedent for other controversial but safe production practices, such as genetically-modified crops, he said. On Monday, the United States targeted more than $900 million of EU goods for possible retaliation if the EU does not open its market to U.S. hormone-treated beef by a May 13 WTO deadline. The EU has acknowledged that it won't be able to meet that deadline, but has said it is willing to discuss both labeling and compensation for U.S. cattle producers. U.S. cattle producers ''conservatively'' estimate their annual lost sales because of the EU's import ban at about $500 million, Lambert said. At the time the ban was imposed in 1989, U.S. sales of hormone-treated beef to the EU totaled about $100 million annually and sales to other markets have grown sharply since then, he said. In a banana dispute that is still pending, the United States initially targeted about $1.5 billion worth of EU goods for punitive duties in retaliation. Later, it trimmed the list to $520 million, or roughly by two-thirds. The Clinton administration will hold a hearing late next month on its beef sanctions list. Lambert said he expected the final beef list to be trimmed, but maybe by less than in the banana case. It could just be cut by half, instead of two-thirds, he said. A large portion of the EU goods on the list are agricultural products, particularly beef, poultry and pork. Nick Giordano, international counsel for the National Pork Producers Council, told the House panel his group would make a strong push to make sure that pork stays on the final list. ''The EU pork market has basically been closed to the U.S. pork industry for over ten years'' because of protectionist rules disguised as food safety measures, he said.