FYI - Bt Risk Negligible?

[1_iron]

Leroy:

My points, both of which seem to have been missed,  are two in number:

1. Paul is entitled to express his opinion - indeed, he should be encouraged
to do so. In this case, I think he is right. Witness the recent post to this
list:

CHICAGO (AP) - A new study found that pollen from genetically
altered corn poses little risk to monarch butterfly larvae, contradicting
previous findings that led to calls to curb the spread of bio-engineered
crops . . .

 But the latest study  . found that the larvae usually do not eat enough
pollen for it to harm them . . .  ``It's a negligible risk at best. They
must consume considerable amounts of pollen to show an effect, and that
amount of pollen rarely exists in nature,'' said Mark K. Sears, chairman of
the Department of Environmental Biology at the University of Guelph in
Canada . . .

2. LEPS-L posters seem to be losing their manners. Our postings more and
more are becoming personal attacks rather than reasoned argument.

Jim Taylor
----- Original Message -----
From: <Leptraps at aol.com>
To: <1_iron at msn.com>; <monarch at saber.net>
Cc: <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:51 AM
Subject: Re: FYI - Bt Risk Negligible?


> Jim:
>
> Your point is well taken. However, when enough of a chemical that is
intended to kill something is applied in small doses over a period of time,
it will eventually cause harm. One only need look at result of twenty five
years of mosquito control spraying in the Florida Keys and the loss of the
majority of the insects. Even though a bugs life is short, the long term
applications of insecticides which were intended to kill adult mosquitoes
eventually killed off many populations of insects, the lone exception was
the intended target, mosquitoes.
>
> BT and Roundup were designed to kill. Regardless of what the manufactures
may claim, long term exposure to a chemical that kills cannot be good.
Whether it is to the intended target or not. Read the labels, the warning is
very clear. The contents are Poison!
>
> Paul's purpose for defending BT corn pollen, roundup and any number of
chemicals is a mystery to many of us. Every time I read a post by Paul, I
cannot believe that anyone can be that stupid and believe there is no harm
from long term exposure to these chemicals.
>
> Another good example, Ethyl Acetate, supposedly long term exposure to this
chemical will cause one to collect moths, lots of them. Trust me, I believe
that!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Leroy C. Koehn
> Georgetown, KY
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>
>
>


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl