President Clinton and Plant Stress

Ulrich Ulrich
Wed Feb 8 11:08:11 EST 1995

In article <1995Feb6.085841.1089 at> MARDER at
(Jonathan B. Marder) writes:
>brambl at (Robert Brambl) wrote:
>As an outsider, it seems to me that you are going about this the wrong
>trying to show how plant research is important.  I doubt that your
>even realized that he was attacking the research you describe in your
letter to
>the press.  More likely, some researcher/speech writer failed to check
>his facts, and concluded that "PLANT STRESS" concerns plant psychology
>than main line agricultural and environmental research.
>Whoever was responsible for this incredible screw up should be ridiculed,
>and the President asked to publicly correct the error.  Who knows, maybe
>can grab some extra publicity and funding from this!
Perhaps we should come up with a different catchy phrase to replace "plant
stress', one that would be less susceptible to misinterpretation.
Remember the "pro-choice" advocates in the US used to rail against the 
"anti-abortionists", which, in the press, made them "pro-abortionists".
A change of label made it clearer what the groups stood for (perhaps).
Unfortunately, I have no good clear phrase to suggest.
Perhaps others do?

More information about the Arab-gen mailing list