US Commodity Prices
The market closed a little higher than last week. The freight rates have stagnated at last week’s levels. At week close the indicative prices were as under:
Corn: USD 105.50 / MT (Sept) – USD 107.00 / ton (Oct)
Sorghum: USD 109.00 / MT (Sept) – USD 110.50 / MT (Oct)
Barley: USD 115 / MT (Sept – Oct)
The soy meal prices have shown a down trend, which has also brought down prices of other plant proteins. Corn co-products specially corn gluten meal is being quoted at USD 324.00 / MT (Oct delivery) with 60 percent protein. It has slid down from high of USD 400.00 / MT.
India Monsoon – Hi and low – the game is on
Until last week (ending July 31, 2004), the deficiency in monsoon was over 40 percent. Now it is a problem of plenty. Areas of Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra reported above normal monsoon, which may / may not cover the deficiency, but is surely going to effect agriculture production.
As regards maize (Corn) production, based on the assessment done, the expected production will range from 11.2 – 12.2 MMT. Based on seed sales and the planting the production is estimated at 11.4 MMT. The major losers are Gujarat & Rajasthan Other states anticipated to loose are Chattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh. While production will be higher in Karnataka (up from 1.0 MMT to 1.5 MMT), Andhra Pradesh, it will not be enough to cover the losses. It is also anticipated that the rabi crop will be higher, but not enough to cover the shortfall. The total consumption is expected to be 13.2 MMT with Poultry leading the way at 6.64 MMT, followed by Livestock and Starch at 1.5 MMT and 1.3 MMT respectively. The home use is expected to be stable at about 3.7 MMT (depending on the maize availability).
The maize prices are ranging from Rs.6700 / MT (USD 146) to Rs.7000 / MT (USD 152) depending on the transport cost and availability of the material. The feed costs have also shown an increase from Rs.12000 / MT (USD 261) to Rs.13200 / MT (USD 287) due to perceived shortages.
There will be a need to bridge the gap between the supply and demand and save the Indian end users from the clutches of the traders, who are creating a hike in the price.
Study says GM food just as safe as food from traditional crops (from world grain.com)
WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S. — A new study on the safety of bioengineered foods by the U.S. National Academies of Science concludes that bioengineered crops pose no greater risk to the food supply than traditional crops.
As a result, the study advises federal agencies to review the safety of bioengineered foods on a case-by-case basis by focusing on changes in composition of end products rather than the technology used to produce them.
Conducted by the National Academies' National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine, the study stresses that such reviews should focus primarily on whether changes in composition could produce allergens or toxins. The committee overseeing the study determined that genetic engineering of food is not inherently dangerous, adding that adverse effects of such food on the human population never have been documented.
"All evidence to date indicates that any breeding technique that alters a plant or animal — whether by genetic engineering or other methods — has the potential to create unintended changes in the quality or amounts of food components that could harm health," said Bettie Sue Masters, the committee’s chairperson and a chemistry professor at the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio.
The committee called attempts to assess food safety based solely on the method of breeding "scientifically unjustified" because any method — including traditional cross-breeding, other conventional breeding techniques and even chemical radiation — potentially can cause unintended changes in food.
Supporters of bioengineered foods praised the study’s findings, which quell concerns about potential hazards of food containing genetically altered ingredients.
Dr. Michael Phillips, vice-president of agricultural science and regulatory policy with the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), called the report "another milestone in consumer acceptance of agricultural biotechnology."
"Coming from the Institute of Medicine, this report should lay to rest the few naysayers who continue to question the safety of these crops," Dr. Phillips said. The study resulted from requests by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The USDA and the two agencies asked the National Academies to assess the potential for adverse health effects from bioengineered foods compared with foods altered in other ways and to provide guidance on how to identify and evaluate the likelihood of such effects.
The study noted that current safety assessments on genetically altered food focus on comparing bioengineered products with conventional counterparts to identify unique components.
Instead, the report proposes a new framework to examine unintended compositional changes in food, one that first determines whether compositional changes actually have taken place rather than first considering whether a product contains bioengineered ingredients
Should you need more information, please feel free to contact
Kind Regards
Amit Sachdev