jeanc-claude:
>It is also stated that they will grow those lettuces specifically for that
>purpose and not as a food.

Thank you SO MUCH for the original. It makes perfect sense to me now--your
original mention of it makes all the sense in the world now.

>Maybe those scientists are just crazy ones and the world scientific
>commmunauty will reason  with them ! Yet they got financed to do the
>researchs.

If you believe in vax it makes all the sense in the world. I still don't
know what to make of the vax issue. Our daughter has not been vaxed, though
her parents were, yet livestock of all sorts do appear to respond
live-ingly to various vaccinations. I just don't know what to think. It
would be easy to trash the whole idea, especially with the statistical
evidence on autism, but, like most everything else, it probably isn't as
simple as black and white, evil and good. So I buy Marek's vax on our day
old chicks and don't bother with our sheep. Perhaps I should try the
opposite and see if it makes any difference. ;)

>I remember the trauma of being forced by the doctor to have the needle stuck
>in my bum as a very young kid . Eating lettuce instead will had made me less
>resistant and more cooperative and will had  saved me from overreacting to
>the idea now.

Actually, they'll probably have as much trouble getting kids today to eat
lettuce as they do giving shots--unless the put the lettuce in some cereal.
;) But your point is well taken.

>If it is true,  as paleo eaters concerned by "foreign proteins" .we are
>faced with an open door to "nobody knows what".

This has been true since the beginnings of genetic engineering, and is not
specific to the article you forward. While I think GM foods may very well
prove to be another frankenstein scenerio, who knows?, I must admit I am
glad that artificial selection has been in place for thousands of years. I
plant very few seedlings since grafts (clones) are readily available. I am
happy that domesticated breeds of poultry and ruminants are available and
take advantage of them. There are pros and cons to domestication in
general, and I suspect there will be pros and cons to domestication on
steriods, as GM foods seem to be.

(FWIW, I certainly welcome cloned livestock when and if they are ever
available. I'd love to have a herd of ewe's who are great mothers instead
of a variety. I'd love to have a a flock of the few layers who put out on
foraging alone, instead of a variety. And I'd love to be able to get some
sure-broody hens instead of hoping a couple hens will go broody. And it
would be nice to have a single rooster service several dozen pullets,
instead of several.)

Perhaps what the "health-conscious" community needs to do with GM is to
actually use the technology make a more nutritious/more tasty tomato (or
for instinctos, more "original" tomato ;)) instead of one that has a better
shelf life. Leaving it all to the "industry" and fearing it like aliens
from outer space is probably part of the problem. As far as I can see,
there is no way that most any technology isn't going to be used, sometime
somewhere, sooner or later, no matter how many people march in the streets.

And it may be that everyone has their price. jean-claude, if I could secure
you twenty durian plants which were adapted to the BC climate, beared the
third year, twice a year, and had the flavor and nutrition of wild Sumatran
varieties--wouldn't you bite? ;)

Cheers,
Kirt