Ok, what's so evil about Monsanto?

[Zundfolge]

I'm always hearing folk ragging on Monsanto as though they're a blend of Enron, Hannibal Lector and the Illuminati (most of these folk are leftists but also Alex Jones types).

So can someone posit a cogent, logical, fact based explanation as to why exactly I'm supposed to buy the whole "Monsanto is teh evil" thing?

Arguments I won't buy are:

They're a big multinational corporation only interested in making profits, ergo; evil!
Frankenfoods man! GMOs are a conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids!
They ARE part of the Illuminati/Reptilian/Zionist/Bilderberg/whatever conspiracy.

So if one of those is your argument, just go away.

[Sawin]

I posted my thoughts about GMO's and Monsanto in another thread a few weeks ago. I don't remember where... but in short, my two-part grief with them is their manipulation of the seeds and having a government/court backed stranglehold on the agricultural industry, not the supposed effects of GMO's on health. Are you not aware that the seeds they manufacture grow produce that bare infertile seeds? They are a single-generation seed that cannot grow produce in to perpetuity. See the problem yet?

IMHO, if someone wants to buy a cucumber seed, grow the plant, harvest the produce, and process the seeds in order to continue to grow more produce in years to come, they should be able to do that.... Monsanto says no. They MUST buy THEIR seeds, every single year until the end of time.

[Rooskibar03]

I'm no expert (but I did stay in a holiday in express last night) but from what I gather from farming relatives is they have become the monopoly in the growing business.

They developed seed that will only grow when treated with their own special blend of fertilizer and bug spray. They drove all the other seed makers into the ground and now if you want to grow all your products have to come from them, and they continue to raise prices.

The last hold out crop was wheat (I think) which up until a few months ago they had not be able to modify. Now that they have cracked that code they basically own everything that is planted that becomes our food.

I saw a list of the products and brands that come from them and its a lot of household names on there. There is an awful lot of control of the nations food supply behind handled by one major corporation. .

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/5b3aee4a639f8561c483f0a406122d6d_zps93b224a8.jpg

[Dave_L]

I heard that without them, the price and availability of most of our foods would be outrageous. I can't confirm or deny that though. Just hearsay...

[Sawin]

I heard that without them, the price and availability of most of our foods would be outrageous. I can't confirm or deny that though. Just hearsay...

I'm sure that's probably true to some degree. They've decimated their competition, so without them the supply could not possibly measure up to the demand quickly enough to keep prices stable.

[roberth]

I posted my thoughts about GMO's and Monsanto in another thread a few weeks ago. I don't remember where... but in short, my two-part grief with them is their manipulation of the seeds and having a government/court backed stranglehold on the agricultural industry, not the supposed effects of GMO's on health. Are you not aware that the seeds they manufacture grow produce that bare infertile seeds? They are a single-generation seed that cannot grow produce in to perpetuity. See the problem yet?

IMHO, if someone wants to buy a cucumber seed, grow the plant, harvest the produce, and process the seeds in order to continue to grow more produce in years to come, they should be able to do that.... Monsanto says no. They MUST buy THEIR seeds, every single year until the end of time.

We can buy seed elsewhere but we're just little guys, are you saying the big farms are being coerced into buying Monsanto seed products?

[Scogin]

We can buy seed elsewhere but we're just little guys, are you saying the big farms are being coerced into buying Monsanto seed products?

Monsanto and a few other major companies like them are the main money contributors to almost all agriculture programs in colleges throughout the U.S. Because of this they have been able to "educate" the current and future major farmers that their way is the best way. There is a slow movement trying to turn this around because the Monsanto way of farming is destroying our number one resource, our soil.
I had the same question as the OP a few years ago and spent quite a bit of time researching and reading what the big deal was with the hate of Monsanto. Everything I have been able to find has made me a firm hater of everything Monsanto.

[Rooskibar03]

It's also my understanding you cannot save and reuse their seeds. You must purchase new seed every season. They have Successfully argued they own the rights to the seen much like an artist owns the rights to the content of a CD.

Theh sue, and win, against farmers who attempt to do so.


For as long as humans have been growing food, farmers have saved seeds from their harvest to sow the following year. But Monsanto and other big seed companies have changed the rules of the game. They have successfully argued that they spend millions of dollars developing new crop varieties and that these products should be treated as proprietary inventions with full patent protection. Just as one can't legally reproduce a CD or DVD, farmers are now prohibited from copying the GM seeds that they purchase from companies like Monsanto, Bayer, Dow and Syngenta.

Taken from here. http://www.alternet.org/food/monsantos-rural-police-state

[Scogin]

While I do buy into the idea that many of their products including GMO foods cause cancer that is not my main reason for hating them.
Monsanto creates patented breeds of plants, let's say corn in this example. Farmer A plants this corn. Farmer B next door to farmer A wants nothing to do with this corn and plants his own corn. During that season the pollen from Farmer A's corn blows onto Farmer B's corn and pollinates it. The next year when Farmer B plants, his corn comes up as having the patented gene from Monsanto. Monsanto then sues Farmer B for illegal use of their product, puts him out of business, and now owns his farm.

[Dave_L]

I've also "heard" that if Monsanto's seeds blow over into your fields, that portion of the field now belongs to Monsanto. Can anyone confirm that?

*edit* Person above me answered.

[rondog]

I'm no expert (but I did stay in a holiday in express last night) but from what I gather from farming relatives is they have bass socially become the monopoly in the growing business.

They developed seed that will only grow when treated with their own special blend of fertilizer and big spray. They drove all the other seed makers into the ground and now if you want to grow all your products have to come from them, and they continue to raise prices.

The last hold out crop was wheat (I think) which up until a few months ago they had not be able to modify. Now that they have cracked that code they basically own everything that is planted that becomes our food.

I saw a list of the products and brands that come from them and its a lot of household names on there. There is an awful lot of control of the nations food supply behind handled by one major corporation. .

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/5b3aee4a639f8561c483f0a406122d6d_zps93b224a8.jpg

Jesus! Who ISN'T on that list? And that's probably just the food related companies. Talk about having Americans by the short hairs.....

[asmo]

I love me some GMOs but Monsanto is evil. Evil in the sense that they spend Billions of dollars on bullshit legal cases and drive anyone that doesn't bow down to them into bankruptcy. They just lost a fairly important SCOTUS case but even then it was only by the skin of their teeth and it only applies to just a small collective of folks actually named in the suit.

When you read their legal briefs you will want to tear your eyes out and scream.

[Scogin]

Back in the late '70s Monsanto was trying to find a way for farmers to be able to grow more wheat per square foot. Their issues was that wheat would grow, let's say, 10 stalks per square foot. They wanted many more, let's say 50. They contracted with one of the ag colleges to try and make this happen. This was before genetic modification was possible, but the college was able to do it through selective breeding. The issue they found with this new type of wheat was that the gluten in it was increased by the power of eight (not G x 8, but G x G x G x G x G x G x G x G). Monsanto decided to put out this new type of wheat anyways. Anyone wonder why Celiac disease never seemed to be a problem in the past.

[Ronin13]

I don't buy into the GMOs are terrible hype- considering we've been selectively breeding and planting for hundreds of years (as a species). Modified foods can be grown longer, in harsher environments, and have higher yields (in terms of volume of food they produce). But from what I hear, Monsanto's business practices and monopoly-dealings are the real reason to dislike them. Already been stated with how they handle their seeds. But there is not enough conclusive evidence to prove GMO foods are bad or good, from what I've found.

[rondog]

And I wonder just how many politicians in this country are in Monsanto's pocket......probably more like how many are NOT in their pocket. Bet that's a small club.

[Scogin]

Here is a website that has some of the information on the horrors of Monsanto. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto

[ThunderSquirrel]

The cost is so high because they are watered with Brawndo. It's got what plants crave.

[Scogin]

The cost is so high because they are watered with Brawndo. It's got what plants crave.

Go away, I'm baitin.

[Zundfolge]

Here is a website that has some of the information on the horrors of Monsanto. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsanto

You were actually making a good case until you sourced Center for Media and Democracy. Do you have some sources that aren't owned by George Soros?


See, this is my problem with the whole Monsanto and GMO issue ... there's a lot of things that sound like they make sense when you say them fast, but then I find out they're all coming from sources that see as their life's work the destruction of capitalism and western civilization ... then I have to take it all with a grain of salt.

[Scogin]

You were actually making a good case until you sourced Center for Media and Democracy. Do you have some sources that aren't owned by George Soros?


See, this is my problem with the whole Monsanto and GMO issue ... there's a lot of things that sound like they make sense when you say them fast, but then I find out they're all coming from sources that see as their life's work the destruction of capitalism and western civilization ... then I have to take it all with a grain of salt.

I completely agree with the you on disliking anything having to do with Soros. I will go back and try and find the studies and reports when I first started digging into this. I was just trying to find a quick website with the condensed information and this is the first one that popped up. My apologies.

[ThunderSquirrel]

Other than my dislike for brawndo, My real concerned is cross-pollination, as has already been stated above.

This is the case especially with their single generation, self terminating strains. What happens if these cross pollinate into a neighboring farm? If they are not sued to bankruptcy, they will slowly start losing the ability to do selective seeding on their crops, since they will become more sterile every generation. Or, (doomsday tin-foil hat theory ahead) what if the genetic mutation makes its way out to other plant species? Far fetched, I know.

[sellersm]

Here's one view: http://www.naturalnews.com/037289_monsanto_corporations_ethics.html

[Ronin13]

You were actually making a good case until you sourced Center for Media and Democracy. Do you have some sources that aren't owned by George Soros?


See, this is my problem with the whole Monsanto and GMO issue ... there's a lot of things that sound like they make sense when you say them fast, but then I find out they're all coming from sources that see as their life's work the destruction of capitalism and western civilization ... then I have to take it all with a grain of salt.
You mean like the whole anti-CO2 deal (which is false) and the anti-Fracking movement (which is also false)? [Coffee]

[SA Friday]

I don't buy into the GMOs are terrible hype- considering we've been selectively breeding and planting for hundreds of years (as a species). Modified foods can be grown longer, in harsher environments, and have higher yields (in terms of volume of food they produce). But from what I hear, Monsanto's business practices and monopoly-dealings are the real reason to dislike them. Already been stated with how they handle their seeds. But there is not enough conclusive evidence to prove GMO foods are bad or good, from what I've found.
Well then you haven't researched the current methodologies used to genetically modify seed plants. Make no mistake, selective breeding and cross pollination are VERY different.

In a nut shell, the genetics of antibiotic resistant bacteria (ARBG) is introduced along with the target gene sequence (the two most common are Beta protein or round-up resistance protein sequences). Then once introduced, the sample is washed in antibiotics to kill any part of the sample that didn't take the insertion. The result is a gene sequence with traits of antibiotic resistance for bacteria in it. If this isn't enough to scream "danger Will Robinson," then look up the very newly discovered "Shadow protein" dilemma currently being tested and researched at only the highest levels of human genetics. Apparently they've figured out that certain sequences once thought to be "junk DNA" and in sequences ignored like the carrier ARBG sequence are not so much junk and show up in all kinds of places. Basically, certain protein sequences may work like letters of words of sentences that make things happen. An A is an A until it's Cyrillic and then everything get's confused and crashes. Ya, I want the world's corn and soy bean crops to systemically fail and... Oops, we didn't see that coming.

Lastly, there is evidence that gene sequences are incorporated by bacteria based on their environment. Basically, GMO plan pollen is ingested by bees, the bacteria in the bees stomach incorporates part of the ARBG, then propagates this sequence into other bacteria and the honey it makes. The honey is eaten by bee larva and propagated further. Scary stuff when you think about the 50% or more food that relies on bees to pollenate them.

It's a complicated issue that stems from the basic scientific question asking that just because we can do something, should we. In this case, we shouldn't (I caveat this with 'yet'). We simply don't understand the biological ramifications, the potential for catastrophic failure, nor the long term effects. The potential for financial destruction is pretty obvious with Monsanto running around testing fields for their gene sequences and suing anyone it's found on. This is udder BS by the way. cross-pollenization is impossible to stop and they know it, but they get away with it because it's cheaper for the farmer to pay their fucking blood money than fight them in court.

Ugh.... I'm getting wound up... I did a pretty extensive report on these issues in college. It's scary stuff and Monsanto crushes anyone that publishes scientifically against them.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-world-according-to-monsanto/

Here.

[SA Friday]

Other than my dislike for brawndo, My real concerned is cross-pollination, as has already been stated above.

This is the case especially with their single generation, self terminating strains. What happens if these cross pollinate into a neighboring farm? If they are not sued to bankruptcy, they will slowly start losing the ability to do selective seeding on their crops, since they will become more sterile every generation. Or, (doomsday tin-foil hat theory ahead) what if the genetic mutation makes its way out to other plant species? Far fetched, I know.
No not far fetched. It has a name: vertical transfer.

[PSS]

Monsanto sueing farmers for cross pollination is a myth. In fact they will pay to remove any gmo crops where they don't belong. I'm not sure about all the politics of gmo (pro or con) but I come from SE Kansas which has a heavy ag based economy and there are very few farmers if any that don't like Monsanto products. From a conventional farmers standpoint, Monsanto has revolutionized the farming industry for the better.

There was one case where a Canadian conola farm (Percy Schmeiser) was found to have a heavy percentage (over 50%) of roundup resistant gene. Percy admitted to spraying some canola that was next to a field of roundup ready canola as an experiment. Many plants survived the the herbicide. The farmer harvested the plants and replanted the seed the next year. The judge ruled that the farmer planted the seed knowing it contained the gene and ruled for Monsanto. The Canadian supreme court ruled that Percy had violated patent laws but gained nothing by it so they owed Monsanto nothing. This is the only case that I'm aware of that had Monsanto suing farmers for cross pollination. edit(they didn't sue because they thought it was cross pollinated but rather because of the presence of the patented gene)I'd like to know if there are others.

There has been a lot of cases of farmers and seed cleaners that were knowingly reusing seeds from gmo crops. I have no sympathy for those farmers. They sign agreements specifically stating that they are not allowed to do that. They reap the benefit of gmo crops and don't want to honor their own word. Monsanto is big ag business and it's easy to be bitter at the "man" but not sure that's how I want to live my life. As far as the ramification of gmo seeds causing the ills of the world and mutating into some monster strains I don't know. I do know the vast majority of farmers I know would be pissed if they lost access to Roudup Ready crops.

[PSS]

BTW roundup ready patent runs out in 2014. At which date farmers should be able to replant roundup ready crops. The heavy handed way they aggressively pursue suspected patent infringement makes me dislike the company. But not sure what they should do. I do know farmers and my belief is that there would be very few of them bother to pay for the technology if they could get away with it.

[SideShow Bob]

I'm no expert (but I did stay in a holiday in express last night) but from what I gather from farming relatives is they have become the monopoly in the growing business.

They developed seed that will only grow when treated with their own special blend of fertilizer and bug spray. They drove all the other seed makers into the ground and now if you want to grow all your products have to come from them, and they continue to raise prices.

The last hold out crop was wheat (I think) which up until a few months ago they had not be able to modify. Now that they have cracked that code they basically own everything that is planted that becomes our food.

I saw a list of the products and brands that come from them and its a lot of household names on there. There is an awful lot of control of the nations food supply behind handled by one major corporation. .

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/5b3aee4a639f8561c483f0a406122d6d_zps93b224a8.jpg
Damn ! I would starve to death if I avoided buying from all their companies.....

[spyder]

If you didn't read my big longish explanation on how most GMO's are made in the other thread, well, oh well I guess.

The other reason I really, really dislike Monsanto, is the way that they have grown so big, is partly because of getting rid of the competition illegally. There are tons of video's on exactly what they've done, and if you feel the need, you can watch them. Even if you don't care about the GMO thing (which isn't cross pollination, it's literally genetically modified by scientists, I explained this in my last thing in the GMO thread), Monsanto has pushed out the competition in evil ways. In a lot of cases, the wind has blown pollen from their crops, into the other crops of near by farmers, now making their produce, part of the Monsanto plantation (half of the fruit/vegetable plant). They then sue the farmers for not paying for the rights of these crops (even though it was by complete accident), and win. Monsanto uses their billions of dollars to keep the litigation going, and bankrupting the little guys in court, this has happened again, and again. If you save Monsanto seed, they will sue you, and do the same thing in court, making you bankrupt. So, basically, if you're the little guy, and Monsanto moves in next to you, you're fucked. I also posted most of the people who have either worked for, or still work for Monsanto that are a part of the FDA, you know, the people who are supposed to regulate the food that Monsanto makes... That's just for the FDA, and doesn't include the legal system. The rabbit hole is deep with Monsanto........

[KestrelBike]

...having a government/court backed stranglehold on the agricultural industry, not the supposed effects of GMO's on health...

Can't give a source at this moment (ok I looked real quick and this is the most legitimate that isn't a direct AJones type website I could quickly find: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine-escobar/hes-back-former-vp-at-mon_b_228792.html ) but I used to read a lot about the Revolving Doors between Monsanto and the FDA, the only 'organization' capable of regulating the giant company. So basically, Top Monsanto execs go work for the FDA and vice versa back and forth. IE zero legitimate oversight of what Monsanto's doing.

The danger of a big company like Monsanto having it's way is that when they gain so much power, they start to feel above the law, and their practices and R&D get more aggressive and reckless. Here's something that was not Monsanto's doing but easily could have been: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929139398001292 and here's the laymen's version : http://web.mst.edu/~microbio/BIO221_2004/K_planticola.htm Basically, they engineered this bacteria that would help create awesome fertilizer. Then some joe-schmoe *ASSISTANT* grad student went above and beyond his homework, tested it on soil that actually contained living plants, and voila noticed that *bam* all the plants got killed. This stuff was going to go out into the wild (~1999) and had the theoretical potential for absolutely devastating effects on agriculture.

It's going to sound absurd but I think there's some real validity to it, think of Resident Evil's Umbrella Corporation. Monsanto is like them, but for Agriculture. And while the world was circle-jerking over george zimmerman, Monsanto got the cover-our-ass-no-liability law passed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmer_Assurance_Provision

Of all of the companies not to trust, Monsanto's gotta be Numero Uno.

[spyder]

Also, for those that don't know... Monsanto, is the major funding source for almost all of the past GMO tests that were done by "private" companies... and the companies that did it without Monsanto, all had drastic health effects on the animals they tested, go figure.

[rondog]

Kinda like some evil mega-corp from a superhero movie, only real?

[spyder]

Kinda like some evil mega-corp from a superhero movie, only real?

It would be the perfect back drop for Lex Luther....

[rondog]

That's who I was trying to think of.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I am somewhat suspicious of the increase in various allergies in the general population but the evidence on that is sketchy and could just as easily be a reaction to our modern hyper-sterilized society. I'm not weighing in for or against anything or anyone because of videos on the Internet. There are also videos saying fracking is evil, we blew up the Twin Towers ourselves and other tin-foil hat fantasies.

At the end of the day, as much as I dislike some of their legal theories, the only thing I need to know is that the same people pushing anthropogenic global warming, Bush is Evil but Obama is Good, fracking causes cancer/makes water catch fire, and gun control is a rationale reasonable way to protect the children are the same idiots protesting Monsanto and GMOs. Some capitalists have certainly done bad things but I have to worry that the people who favor state control of the economy/health services/education/etc. are the same ones who've chosen to direct their fire against a particular conglomerate.

[Bailey Guns]

OK...I'll admit it. I don't hate Monsanto. I haven't looked into this at all. Right or wrong, I don't really care at this point. I have other, more pressing issues to worry about over whether or not Monsanto is evil.

[jhood001]

At the end of the day, as much as I dislike some of their legal theories, the only thing I need to know is that the same people pushing anthropogenic global warming, Bush is Evil but Obama is Good, fracking causes cancer/makes water catch fire, and gun control is a rationale reasonable way to protect the children are the same idiots protesting Monsanto and GMOs. Some capitalists have certainly done bad things but I have to worry that the people who favor state control of the economy/health services/education/etc. are the same ones who've chosen to direct their fire against a particular conglomerate.

I hear ya. It is hard to trust our 'enemy' when they warn of us of much of anything... Even if they may be right.

Anyway, don't worry yourself with attacks on Monsanto being a motive of people who are for the state. Monsanto is as much ingrained in our state as Blackwater, Xe, or whatever else they want to be called these days. They run a business and our government supports them 100%. So much so that they have the State Department acting on their behalf for their overseas interests.

Whether that is good or bad is up to you to decide.

[Zundfolge]

At the end of the day, as much as I dislike some of their legal theories, the only thing I need to know is that the same people pushing anthropogenic global warming, Bush is Evil but Obama is Good, fracking causes cancer/makes water catch fire, and gun control is a rationale reasonable way to protect the children are the same idiots protesting Monsanto and GMOs. Some capitalists have certainly done bad things but I have to worry that the people who favor state control of the economy/health services/education/etc. are the same ones who've chosen to direct their fire against a particular conglomerate.

This is why I started this thread. I hear all these evil things that Monsanto is responsible for, but I don't hear these from reputable sources and that makes me suspicious ... I was hoping someone could provide me with something more definitive.

Thing is the institutional left has done some pretty evil things in the name of "protecting the people" and "protecting the environment" (the millions of malaria deaths after the ban on DDT which was based on a lie called "Silent Spring" is a perfect example) and on the one hand Monsanto may be evil, or they may be benign but self interested (which is still evil in the eyes of the left) or maybe they are the key to saving millions in the third world from famine ... thing is I don't know and in this day and age of hyper-leftist-politicized science and journalism I just want to know the truth.

[10mm-man]

Other than my dislike for brawndo, My real concerned is cross-pollination, as has already been stated above.

This is the case especially with their single generation, self terminating strains. What happens if these cross pollinate into a neighboring farm? If they are not sued to bankruptcy, they will slowly start losing the ability to do selective seeding on their crops, since they will become more sterile every generation. Or, (doomsday tin-foil hat theory ahead) what if the genetic mutation makes its way out to other plant species? Far fetched, I know.


Not to far fetched; I watched a special on corn (GMO) and how the corn industry leaders manipulate it to grow in different climates. They have vaults of seeds, for just in case! I think it is on Netflix or on Amazon; it's a documentary or short film like "Food inc" or "the one were the guy juices". Anyway they had a special corn strain down 10 stories underground, they had to keep it isolated or they said if it got out it would kill all the corn plants around and be the dominate strain.

[asmo]

Monsanto sueing farmers for cross pollination is a myth. In fact they will pay to remove any gmo crops where they don't belong.

A quick Lexis-Nexis search proves you very very wrong.

What they do is file a TRO on you, then get an injunction forcing you not to sell your crops until they can be tested (and only THEY are allowed to test - lest thier secrets get out) - so your crops rot. The injunction also says you can't replant until the testing is done - so your screwed for the next year as well. Effectivly bankrupting anyone who wants to challenge them.

They do lots heavy handed tactics and they have a whole metric fuck ton of case law that let's 'em do it.

[Kraven251]

I always have been a fairly strong supporter of GMO crops, but have also been pretty negative on Monsanto. They do ramrod farmers pretty hard on the cross pollination issue. They also pose a serious risk to the seed banks and the reason behind having them due to their seeds being largely infertile from year 1 crops.

I have recently started looking at GMO crops like many modern medicines. The individual components are mostly harmless, until you put them all together in high concentrations, or you introduce an allergen into a food as part of a gene splice that was never there before. For instance you have an allergy to shellfish and company X has spliced in a sequence that makes the plant more hearty and in the sample set for consumption no ill effects. The Susy Shellfish-Allergy eats some corn has a reaction and drops dead.

I see nothing inherently wrong with the concept of the GMO, just the implementation.

[RblDiver]

IMHO, if someone wants to buy a cucumber seed, grow the plant, harvest the produce, and process the seeds in order to continue to grow more produce in years to come, they should be able to do that.... Monsanto says no. They MUST buy THEIR seeds, every single year until the end of time.

I don't actually see a problem with this.

My company is in the marketing business. We analyze people's purchase habits and sell names to companies of people most likely to buy their products. We have stipulations that such names are one-time-use only. Our product aren't the names, but rather the process which we use to find the names. If we said "Sure, go ahead and use these people forever," we'd be run out of business pretty darn quickly.

To a certain extent, yes while Monsanto is selling seeds (a more physical product than names I'll admit), another large part of what they are selling IS the process which they used to create the seeds in the first place. If they only sold once and then no more, pretty soon all farmers'd have their seeds and wouldn't need them anymore. It's not like selling a car, which once it's dead it's dead. It'd be like selling a car that could produce even more cars in perpetuity. A company which would sell the first and only the first would either have to have rights to all the future cars, or sell the first car at an amazingly high price to compensate for the future ones.

So (to throw out numbers pulled from the air), say that now a bushel of seeds costs $10. Let's assume that their product cycle is 20 years (time until they think they can make a new type of seed you'll use). They would probably have to change the price to more than $200 (20*10, plus whatever interest that they would think would account for inflation and the like. I don't feel like calculating this too). So sure, then you can own the seeds, but they receive a fair price for what their product is worth.

[Ronin13]

I am somewhat suspicious of the increase in various allergies in the general population but the evidence on that is sketchy and could just as easily be a reaction to our modern hyper-sterilized society. I'm not weighing in for or against anything or anyone because of videos on the Internet. There are also videos saying fracking is evil, we blew up the Twin Towers ourselves and other tin-foil hat fantasies.

At the end of the day, as much as I dislike some of their legal theories, the only thing I need to know is that the same people pushing anthropogenic global warming, Bush is Evil but Obama is Good, fracking causes cancer/makes water catch fire, and gun control is a rationale reasonable way to protect the children are the same idiots protesting Monsanto and GMOs. Some capitalists have certainly done bad things but I have to worry that the people who favor state control of the economy/health services/education/etc. are the same ones who've chosen to direct their fire against a particular conglomerate.
This is the exact reason I'm skeptical.
SA- I understand your background in science and all that, but from the little looking around I've done on this, I just can't find much. It seems a lot of the shouting and hollering is baseless and emotional demagoguery. Like Aloha says, these are the same people telling us that CO2 emissions are killing the planet (even though they ignore the fact that CO2 isn't a very good greenhouse gas and only contributes to 7% at best of the so-called "global warming"), and that Fracking is evil (when it clearly is not). Forgive my skepticism, but Jhood makes a very valid point that when the same people who have been wrong about almost every position they take (global warming, oil/gas development, gun control, drug use) you really have a hard time believing anything they put up in an argument. Afterall, capitalism is terrible, right? I'll continue to eat the food that I eat, as I feel healthy as ever, and if I croak prematurely due to GMO foods, well I assume I'll probably be the last to know, and by then I'll be ashes spread on the Continental Divide, so I won't really care. [Coffee]

[Aloha_Shooter]

a documentary or short film like "Food inc"

Just a quick aside -- "Food, Inc" is a documentary in the same way "Bowling for Columbine" or "Farenheit 9/11" are considered documentaries by the Left. "Food, Inc" is a case study in Stalinist-style agit prop and I continually find it amazing that the Left gets away with this obvious crap. The emotional plays, made-up "facts", skewed presentation ... I've seen fast food, soda, and cereal commercials that were more subtle.

[PSS]

A quick Lexis-Nexis search proves you very very wrong.

What they do is file a TRO on you, then get an injunction forcing you not to sell your crops until they can be tested (and only THEY are allowed to test - lest thier secrets get out) - so your crops rot. The injunction also says you can't replant until the testing is done - so your screwed for the next year as well. Effectivly bankrupting anyone who wants to challenge them.

They do lots heavy handed tactics and they have a whole metric fuck ton of case law that let's 'em do it.


I would like to see a link where a farmer had cross contaminated seed and replanted it without any knowledge of it being that way and Monsanto sued them. I'm not saying it doesn't exist. I see a lot of they and them and so on but there aren't names being put out there. It could change my mind. All I know I grew up in a convention farming community and there was zero animosity and zero problems with Monsanto. Except for the price of seed going up everyone loved Monsanto products. And not many balked at paying the price. There were farmers who replanted patented seeds but not many that got caught. Everyone wanted the technology but there were a few who didn't want to pay for it.

I'm just saying that from a farmers standpoint in Kansas (southeast and western Kansas), you simply don't see the supposed heavy handed tactics of Monsanto. The ones that got caught was stupid enough to even tell people that they were replanting patented seed. Happened more when the seeds first came on the market. When they found out that Monsanto wasn't fooling around it became a lot more rare. Or maybe they just smartened up. I have zero sympathy for the ones who bought Monsanto seed and after signing a document agreeing not to plant seed harvested from those crops doing exactly that. Even those that managed to get the seed without signing such an agreement almost certainly knew. You don't go buy seed without a lot of research. Especially not seed that is much more expensive. Of course I would be against suing farmers where his crops were contaminated by cross pollination. I tend to agree with the courts that they knowingly replanted seed that had those genes. Why didn't they contact Monsanto to complain when they where suspicious that it had happened. In Schmiessers case he replanted the seed from the surviving plants. Again to me it looked like he hoped to gain something by that.

If Monsanto is running around suing farmers for simple cross pollination why is there news stories like this one.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/06/12/190977225/court-to-monsanto-you-said-you-wont-sue-so-you-cant
Farmers suing Monsanto in case they start suing for simple cross pollination.

According to most people writing news articles for or against Monsanto, the company has filed around 150 lawsuits and reached settlement with all but 9 of those. They also reached about 700 settlements without filing lawsuits. That's since 1997. Considering that 275,000 farmers plant Monsanto that doesn't seem to be a lot when you hear the left claiming there are thousands. I just don't see the facts supporting such an evil empire.

[spittoon]

when there stock's crashed they took well i lost a cash pot

[PSS]

I find myself conflicted a bit with this all. So much of the organic farmers appear a bit loony to me with all their conspiracies. It's hard for me to take them serious. Maybe I'm wrong. I grow my own vegetables and am hoping to grow some of my own meat soon. Rabbits, chickens, and hogs. I grew up on a conventional farm with a confinement swine operation. Peta and other animal rights kept screaming how we were sadistic factory farms, beating and mutilating animals for fun. The lady that ran the farrowing operation would physically assault you if she thought you was abusing one of her sows. We hired kids from high school to help and I saw more than one get a verbal thrashing for being a little too rough on the animals. The hogs were healthy, seemed content, and we resented the fact that some person with their nose up in the air would accuse us of being the bad guy.

It's fine if the majority wants to eat local and organically. I support the local part. Don't give a shit either way about the organic. I can take it or leave it. But since the prices seem mostly insane I usually leave it. I very much like the idea of the local growers. It seems more right to me to support a small farmer that is in my community that a ag giant. But the truth is the vast majority want cheap food. As long as there isn't good evidence that large farms are destroying our health I'm fine with it too. To the idea that big ag is evilly suppressing proof that the food they are producing is actually killing us, I say the people with the proof isn't trying hard enough. There are a lot of people with huge amounts of money, governments that would love to prove gmo's unsafe so they could compete with US farmers, and the entire extreme left and some on the right that would support them. I just can't believe the proof exists. Maybe they are keeping the proof in the fema camps. (That was a little facetious, sorry)

[bryjcom]

Monsanto is the wonderful company that brought you Agent Orange.

Now they just sell you mutant corn with pesticides engineered in them for you to ingest into your body.

Yummmmmm.

[Waywardson174]

I grew up on a corn farm in SW Kansas. When Monsanto released roundup ready corn it revolutionized the industry. When my father started raising corn 43 years ago, he struggled to grow 100 bushels an acre. Now he is having a bad year when he can't crank out 200. His water input has fallen by 75% over the same time period. Corn was sold for less than 3 dollars for decades because the production capacity increased so much while Monsanto pushed the production envelop. Yes it's expensive as hell. The input costs are astronomical. The seed (for corn) is single generational. It requires no less than six previous generations to produce the retail kernel. Disclaimer, my father grows test plots for Pioneer. What he sees in test varieties is the potential to double production without an increase in water input over the next decade. Without GMO, production capacity would be unthinkably low. I'm not saying its not causing cancer, but I'll continue to gorge on corn fed beef because its tasty and cheap. GMO corn killing people would be an extinction level even in the USA b/c corn syrup is used in EVERYTHING processed.

Monsanto as a corporation has one goal, make money. I don't believe they are evil, but when they invest the GDP of a small nation into development of a new super crop, I expect them to get mad when a licensing agreement is violated b/c a farmer wants to increase his margin by .5%. The profits of today pay for the miracles of tomorrow (scientific I mean). I left Kansas to avoid being a fourth generation farmer. But my dad is still there and my brother is in the corporate side of the industry now (implements, not genetics). I've never met or even heard of a single farmer complain about Monsanto other than seed prices going up again (especially in a time of record crop prices). No one got sued that I'm aware of. Anecdotal I know, but I grew up in a place where cattle outnumber people 5 to 1 and the majority of their feed is grown less than 20 miles from the pen.

btw, celiac and other auto immune disease are instantly cured by infecting yourself with hook worm. Brazil has almost no auto immune disease and they run Monsanto corn full board. My vote is for hyper hygiene, not GMO as the cause.

-not a scientist, just a farm boy.

[PSS]

The same pesticides organic farmers have been using for 50 years.

http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1135


The pesticide resistant plants have been engineered to produce a protein isolated from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (known generally Bt). Each strain of Bt produces a different version of the protein, known as Cry, each highly specific to a limited number of related species. Bt has evolved these proteins as a key part of a reproductive strategy in which they kill insects that ingest them and then eat nutrients released by the dying host. The Cry protein found in Bt spores must be activated by a protein-cleaving enzyme found in the host gut and then bind to a specific protein on the surface of cells in the digestive system, which Cry then destroys. Insects, who are not huge fans of this strategy, eventually evolve resistance by modifying one or both of these proteins. Bt stains that rely on this insect adapt in turn, creating highly-specific strain-insect relationships.The irony of Cry becoming a major bugaboo of the anti-GMO movement is that, until the gene that produces it was inserted into corn, it was the poster-child of a “natural” insecticide, preferred over chemical pesticides because of the potential for extreme host specificity and complete biodegradability. Bt spores were sprayed on crops for decades, and are still widely used to control pests by organic farmers. But the effectiveness of Bt as an insecticide is limited because it degrades in the matter of days – more rapidly when it rains. This led agricultural biotechnology companies to try and insert Cry genes directly into the plants, and there are now many varieties on the market, each targeting pests that are a particular problem for a given crop (some varieties of Bt corn, for example, targets the European corn borer).
- See more at: http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1135#sthash.J4PjElZK.dpuf

[PSS]

Monsanto is the wonderful company that brought you Agent Orange.

Now they just sell you mutant corn with pesticides engineered in them for you to ingest into your body.

Yummmmmm.

Statements like this does absolutely nothing to persuade me that gmo is bad.

[bryjcom]

Statements like this does absolutely nothing to persuade me that gmo is bad.

Persuade yourself.... The info is out there.

Just thought I'd mention something else about what monsanto has created.


Just remember that our bodies are biological computers that have code fed to it. That "code" is DNA of the stuff we eat. When you start artificially corrupting the "code" then bad stuff can happen. Don't forget that the bad "code" can corrupt other "code" as well.

[gos]

They have sued farmers who grew their specific genetic strands of seeds, even though those seeds were contaminants from a neighbor's field.

[Bailey Guns]

Statements like this does absolutely nothing to persuade me that gmo is bad.

No shit. So Monsanto produced agent orange. Companies all over the world produce things, often at the request of governments, that ultimately harm people.

If Monsanto produced agent orange and then unilaterally sprayed cornfields planted with competitors corn and intentionally harmed people in the process, I'd be outraged. Hell...I can remember playing in the insecticide fog sprayed by trucks to kill mosquitoes as a kid. Probably contained all sorts of harmful shit. We really didn't know, nor did we really care, back then.

[Ronin13]

No shit. So Monsanto produced agent orange. Companies all over the world produce things, often at the request of governments, that ultimately harm people.

If Monsanto produced agent orange and then unilaterally sprayed cornfields planted with competitors corn and intentionally harmed people in the process, I'd be outraged. Hell...I can remember playing in the insecticide fog sprayed by trucks to kill mosquitoes as a kid. Probably contained all sorts of harmful shit. We really didn't know, nor did we really care, back then.
Yep. I'm actually more worried about the harm caused by extensive exposure to our FOB burn pit in Afghanistan than I am from GMO/Monsanto products... like you say, we didn't know what is in that smoke, and it was right outside the FOB perimeter.

[Kraven251]

Crops that are engineered to stop one insect or another is not a big deal as long as there are not any unintended consequences.

Soybeans that are resistant to nematodes, corn resistant to corn borer and other pests is all fine and good as long as that is as far as it goes. These subtle changes do make some minor hits to the ecosystem, food chain etc, but does not shatter anything (that we are aware of). BUT...if this jumps species or takes a mutation and starts impacting bees on a large scale we could literally starve.

As for organic crops, they are not any better based on the fertilizer choice and the increased bacterial exposure.

The biggest risk to everyone is deregulating the food we eat. If things are not researched and tested properly before being released as a foodstuff we are inviting trouble.

[sellersm]

The biggest risk to everyone is deregulating the food we eat. If things are not researched and tested properly before being released as a foodstuff we are inviting trouble.

The logic behind this eludes me...? How did we survive as humans, for this long, without the 'regulation' that you say we so desperately need? If people eat 'bad food' from a farm, won't that farm eventually either change its ways or go out of business? Is it really our gubment's job to "protect us from the food we eat"? If so, where's the outcry against excitotoxins, color dyes, white sugar, HFCS, etc. etc.?

I don't agree with GMO foods, at least as Monsanto and others are using it, and I don't like the Monsanto company's actions & policies. How has the 'regulation' benefited us, when, for example, the potus signs what is known as the 'Monsanto Protection Act'? Should any one conglomerate have that much power? For the record, I don't trust any of the three letter agencies including the ones with 'food' in their name, so ymmv.

[Kraven251]

The logic behind this eludes me...? How did we survive as humans, for this long, without the 'regulation' that you say we so desperately need? If people eat 'bad food' from a farm, won't that farm eventually either change its ways or go out of business? Is it really our gubment's job to "protect us from the food we eat"? If so, where's the outcry against excitotoxins, color dyes, white sugar, HFCS, etc. etc.?

I don't agree with GMO foods, at least as Monsanto and others are using it, and I don't like the Monsanto company's actions & policies. How has the 'regulation' benefited us, when, for example, the potus signs what is known as the 'Monsanto Protection Act'? Should any one conglomerate have that much power? For the record, I don't trust any of the three letter agencies including the ones with 'food' in their name, so ymmv.

Most people that ate truly bad food as we evolved, died. Now imagine something unforseen gets into the Soybean Oil or Corn Syrup derivatives, which is a worst case scenario, but is valid.

And that bill is deregulation in the guise of regulation... What I am referring to is to make sure that food and food additives are essentially safe for consumption. I don't always like some of the things that the FDA weighs in on, or in their ultimate decisions, but they do serve a purpose. Otherwise it stops being an FDA issue and starts falling under the umbrella of the CDC.


and the color dyes are regulated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_coloring

It is not the issue of "Is something unhealthy for us?" it is the question of "Is exposure to this modification going to result in converting something considered safe into something lethal on accident?"

[Ronin13]

The logic behind this eludes me...? How did we survive as humans, for this long, without the 'regulation' that you say we so desperately need? If people eat 'bad food' from a farm, won't that farm eventually either change its ways or go out of business? Is it really our gubment's job to "protect us from the food we eat"? If so, where's the outcry against excitotoxins, color dyes, white sugar, HFCS, etc. etc.?
I'd say the regulation became a necessity once food started to become mass produced, processed, and made with unnatural/synthetic ingredients, like the over preservation of our food so it lasted longer. Not all of those methods are exactly "safe" so they need someone to ensure they aren't done. Is there too much regulation now? Probably. But at one point in history, at least a basic/rudimentary regulatory process, was needed. Read the Jungle by Upton Sinclair and you'll see that we needed it in the past, but probably not nearly as much regulation is required now. You really have to pay attention when shopping to make sure you don't get something that is safe to eat, but not exactly good for you.

[rondog]

No shit. So Monsanto produced agent orange. Companies all over the world produce things, often at the request of governments, that ultimately harm people.

If Monsanto produced agent orange and then unilaterally sprayed cornfields planted with competitors corn and intentionally harmed people in the process, I'd be outraged. Hell...I can remember playing in the insecticide fog sprayed by trucks to kill mosquitoes as a kid. Probably contained all sorts of harmful shit. We really didn't know, nor did we really care, back then.

God only knows what I may have done to myself in my youth. My hands were always in parts cleaning solvents, paint thinners, and who-knows-what when I was a machinist. Not to mention all the exposure to paint fumes from painting motorcycles with acrylic lacquer and Imron paints. It's a wonder I have any brain cells left. http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/smilies/mad_smile.gif

[Inconel710]

Monsanto also brought Anniston, Alabama into the news. They started producing PCBs there in the 20's and knew in 1969 that PCBs were bad, yet they kept dumping it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-528581.html

Monsanto's Wikipedia page is also an interesting read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

When it comes to GMO, it's the unintended consequences that concern me. Yes, Roundup-Ready corn has increased corn production, but have you ever wondered how much Roundup ends in your corn chips? Roundup is absorbed by the plant, that's how it kills weeds. Some of it has to end up in the seed head. How much is accumulating in our bodies, like mercury concentrating in tuna (another apex predator). Now, that may not be worth our time worrying about, but has anybody studied it?