Re: aconomic arguemtns

[Rick Roush <rroush@waite.adelaide.edu.au>]

>Why a director of research at USDA has been refused some seeds, while he was
>said they had no more seeds ? (NYT 19 nov. 1997 ; the quantity he asked
>for was 50 square meters).

Herve: This was two years ago, and we don't know any of the circumstances
from your brief description.

>
>Why Monsanto refuses to sell its RR soy to Marc Lappe who did a study that
>seems  to cintradict the conclusions of Monsanto ?

Given his public positions, Marc Lappe was clearly not going to look at
Monsanto's seeds objectivelty, and he still hasn't looked at his results
objectively.  Every one I have talked too feels that his results are within
the normal range of variation in soybeans.

If someone who didn't like you asked for your financial and telephone
records, would you give them to him freely?


>that it does not seem to be open to critics of GMO. What do you think of
>the article of News Scientist ?

If you mean the one I think, that they misinterpreted the USDA press release.

>And if you think only
>by the way of consensus, you should acknowledge that there must be at least
>one critic right with GMOs.

There are lots of creationists out there who don't believe in evolution,
some even with PhDs and MDs, many with very scientific sounding arguments.
I am not prepared to accept that any of them is right.


>Last, I quote a sentence from the report sent by Roush (I thank him) :
>
>>There is no question in the scientific community that transgenic plants
>>should be managed taking a proactive approach to the issue of resistance.
>

Still right. That isn't a call for banning them.