> Dale, you say it is expensive to segregate "commodities".
> Your choice of words detail the problem. People do not eat
> commodities, they eat food.
If you had 1000 tons of wheat in your backyard, you too would probably think
of it differently than the granola in your breakfast bowl. The seed
industry would be quite happy if grains were de-commodified. We would like
to see the identity of our genetic products preserved, because the users of
the grain would be willing to pay for the quality and health attributes we
are developing. Probably, identity preservation will become common, but the
transition is difficult.
> It has an emotional and cultural connection for them, something
> the conventional food business has forgot. Agri-culture.
Not really. The processors and repackagers haven't forgot. The big grain
handlers sell to the food companies, who try to connect with consumers.
> Perhaps the food business should listen to their customers.
> They are always right, no matter how you think they are wrong.
I agree completely. But right now, it isn't clear what the customers want
regarding transgenic foods. This controversy will facilitate
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: