natural protections + misleading
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: natural protections + misleading
- From: Herve LE MEUR <Herve.LEMEUR@math.u-psud.fr>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 11:02:18 +0200 (MET DST)
- Content-MD5: zH1pTh2dko7TYgKyV2qJ1A==
- Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Reply-To: Herve LE MEUR <Herve.LEMEUR@math.u-psud.fr>
- Resent-From: firstname.lastname@example.org
My source was a non-scientific article from the magazine of CNRS (public
organism for scientific research).
I would advise you to ask the authors for the scientific researchs.
About me saying that you "mislead" people, I quote precisely :
>>>I've learnt recently that the coding sequence inserted is not
>>>exactly the very same as the one in the natural Bt (i've not
>>>put quotes around natural !).
Rick answered :
>>Herve: The protein produced is exactly the same as by the bacteria ; that
>>is, the amino acid sequence is exactly the same.
Then I replied that there is no contradiction : the coding sequence may
be different while the final result may be the very same.
So, saying that the final product was the same, you did not answer the point
which dealt with the coding sequence. And the most important for
allerginicity of food is (if I've well understood) the coding sequence
because we eat it, and it seems different for Bt corn of Novartis, not
for Monsanto, nor for the cotton.
Am I right ?
P S: I recall the e-mail of the researchers (whom I do not know) :
> and Kloareg@sb-roscoff.fr