Letters to the Editor

Daily story wrong about Bt Corn

I am writing in response to the May 24 article, "Corn hybrid produces its own natural pesticide." The article contains several inaccuracies about Bt corn and our research at the University. I was misquoted throughout the piece.

Bt corn has been modified to produce an insecticidal protein that occurs naturally in the soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis. Bt corn was developed by Ciba Seeds (now Novartis Seeds) and Monsanto Corp., not by me. I have never attempted genetic manipulation of plants. To my knowledge, no one at the University has been involved with creating Bt corn.

Bt corn was produced to control lepidopteran pests of corn, especially the European corn borer (not corn border). Corn borers reduce yield by disrupting the flow of water and nutrients in the plant, creating wounds for pathogens, weakening the corn stalk and directly feeding on corn ears.

Our research at the University relates to the effectiveness of the crop, insect resistance to Bt and possible nontarget effects of the toxin. I have been fortunate to work with Drs. David Andow, Bill Hutchison and Ken Ostlie (Department of Entomology) who initiated and continue to support much of this research. Our goal is to identify and mitigate possible risks from Bt corn and preserve the long-term utility of this technology.

To reduce the risk of insects developing resistance to Bt, we encourage growers to plant a refuge of non-Bt corn where susceptible insects can multiply. Effectively "raising" insects means accepting a reduction in yield on non-Bt acres. Many corn growers face an economic crisis. Any reluctance to plant non-Bt corn is completely understandable. We are actively working with growers to develop programs that satisfy short-term economic realities and long-term resistance management goals.

I also question the accuracy of statements made by and about Jim Rowe. To my knowledge, Rowe's personal Bt corn does not provide revenue to the University. Please set the record straight.

Robert C. Venette,Department of Entomology

Sometimes lawsuits are only remedy

It is too early to say if the recent Supreme Court decision regarding harassment in schools will be counterproductive. While the Daily raises a few interesting issues, I think the fear of multimillion dollar awards to victims of any kind of harassment (sexual or prosecutorial) would encourage the utmost care, diligence and respect in the pursuit of a resolution.

By now, however, news sources ought to have learned that the McDonald's coffee lawsuit was a bit more complex than the way it has been popularized. My memory of the source is sketchy -- I believe I read this in Newsweek -- but as one often hears, the devil is in the details. The senior citizen had bought a cup of coffee at McDonald's. Her son, the driver of the sports car, gave her the carelessly covered paper cup. As they drove out of the drive-thru, the scalding hot coffee spilled in her lap. The burnt customer suffered third-degree burns on her lap and genitals and spent considerable time and money at the hospital.

Instead of pursuing a legal solution immediately, this older lady approached McDonald's, asking for reimbursement for the medical bills. McDonald's offered $800 dollars. Needless to say, this was an insignificant fraction of the medical bills incurred. After being slapped in the face, she pursued legal recourse.

While it is true the jury awarded an astronomical figure as an award, what is not reported nearly as often, and is just as true and significantly more important is the fact that the award was later reduced to around $640,000, not unlike so many other decisions that are appealed by the losing corporation.

As you can see, the true events surrounding the case make for an entirely different frame of reference. It is for each reader to decide if being harassed can be equated with having suffered third-degree burns in your privates. It is the Daily's responsibility to present accurate information to its readership.

Alfredo Lorente,Law School admissions

U needs late-night study space

I wholeheartedly agree with the Daily's editorial regarding the ideal study space on campus. In my five years at the University, I've struggled to find the "perfect" spot (besides Perkins) to study all night. I can't ignore the Internet or e-mail while studying in my room, the library Nazis scold you if you need a soda to stay awake, and nothing really stays open past midnight.

Luckily, Coffman Union's renovation plans include a study space that espouses many qualities of the ideal study space. Thanks to the students of the University, the renovated Coffman will have a state-of-the-art computer lab, quiet study areas, vending machines and 24-hour access to these areas, seven days a week.

This campus absolutely needs an identifiable place that all students know they can go to at any time of the day on any day of the week to study or work on a paper. I hope other facilities on campus will take notice that the typical student's daily schedule does not end at midnight or 1 a.m. The new Coffman Union is a great step in the right direction, but we should have more places and opportunities to study through the night if we need.

Andrew Kahn,senior,Carlson School of Management,Coffman Union Board of Governors