Do you really think profoundly evil Monsanto gives a about the amt of good grown, or the population? They are in business to sell chemicals to put on crops, and sell sterile seeds modified to resist those chemicals.
There are farmers that are fed with their annual chemicals bills and learning to grow natural foods without artificial/synthetic crutches. Monsanto certainly has its private s noting who those farmers are.
Another (foreign) evil chemical company.
If you can't get a hard , it could be because of the chemical companies.
How Syngenta Investigated the Press and Shaped the News About its Controversial Weed-Killer Atrazine
Do ents obtained by the Center for Media and Democracy, recently unsealed as part of a major lawsuit against Syngenta, reveal how the global chemical company's PR team investigated the press and spent millions to spin news coverage and public perceptions in the face of growing concerns about potential health risks from the widely used weed-killer "atrazine."
This story is part of a new series about this PR campaign to influence the media, potential jurors, potential plaintiffs, farmers, politicians, scientists, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the midst of reviews of the weed-killer's potential to act as an endocrine disruptor, over the past decade or so.
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/154046
^you think that's bad? BPA that's in EVERYTHING is another endocrine disruptor, does the same thing and causes prostate and breast cancer. some say it's responsible for the increase in sexuality in america as of late but that's not yet proven nor the point. BPA is a synthetic estrogen and they knowingly pump it into everything.
Eliminating Ethanol subsidies was a good start. Not handcuffing farmers into seed leases by companies like Mansanto is another great idea.
It's actually not at all that simple.
Monsanto, and other big food/agriculture/beverage/etc. companies have made subsistence farming nearly impossible in much of the global south (heart of the feared overpopulation). Genetically modified foods are nothing more than an attempt to solve a manufactured problem.
Why Do We Want to Spray More Agent Orange on Our Crops? Are We at War with Ourselves (and Our Children)?
One of the two active ingredients that made up Agent Orange is 2,4-D. Despite what Agent Orange did to Vietnam and the Vietnamese people, not to mention a generation of American soldiers, 2,4-D is currently the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the third most commonly used in North America. But apparently we aren’t using this poison enough. By using seeds engineered to withstand it, much more can be applied to our soil and crops.
One of the biggest reasons for genetic engineering of crops is that the harsh poisons used to kill weeds also tend to kill the crops themselves. Scientists genetically alter the crops’ DNA so they will resist damage from the herbicides. Most of the attention to date has been on the creation of Roundup Ready seeds—that is, seeds and crops that can withstand the herbicide Roundup from Monsanto. According to USDA figures, 94 percent of soybeans and more than 70 percent of corn and cotton planted in the US contain the Roundup-resistant gene.
Not at all surprisingly, weeds are becoming increasingly resistant to Roundup, creating “superweeds” which are “galloping through the Midwest.” So Dow AgroScience created a strain of corn that has been genetically engineered to withstand a different class of herbicides—those containing 2,4-D, a known carcinogen.
Dow is now seeking to freely use this 2,4-D-resistant corn. GE modification to create resistance means they will be free to use ever-increasing amounts of the herbicide, with no limits whatsoever.
These new herbicide-resistant crops will be planted alongside conventional and organic crops. This increases the potential for cross-contamination, and for the spillover of toxic herbicides into the groundwater and neighboring farms.
http://www.anh-usa.org/agent-orange-on-our-crops/
There's no stopping the poisoning of our food, air, water, lands by corporations, aided and abetted by govt, seeking profit above all else.
Monsanto's patents will expire. Don't accept leases into these crops. All this spouting off of how "evil" they are is hilarious. Without these crops most of these farms would fail. If they want to use an alternative method, go for it. Good luck, I genuinely hope they succeed.
Lee, all that shows is that the ty seeds have gone away and the successful ones have prospered. Monsanto has found a way to be paid for something they invented *gasp* and have reaped the benefits. If you don't like it, find a better way or lure a foreign company in to help you out. Being at a school like A&M there are all sorts of discussions like this constantly - and a wide variety of opinions on the matter. However, food, like anything else, has its patents and people want to (and should) be rewarded for their creations. Sorry you don't like the way the world works, boutons. Singing kumbaya and talking about evil corporations doesn't feed the world. "Evil" corporations feed the world.
wow, a monsanto proponent
Monsanto's target isn't at all interested making food better, but enslaving agriculture to its seeds and x-icides.
Monsanto is indefensible at all levels, along with all the other chemical companies.
I don't think you know what monsato is or what their seeds do, besides grow food.
Because my opinion isn't strictly based on "Food Inc."?
Riiight, because over thousands of years farmers never saved the hardiest, highest yielding seeds and crops to try and ensure good harvests in the future.
I think that's precisely what that graph illustrates. As technology increased, the best of the best were discovered more quickly and eliminated the need for the varieties that had more deficiencies.
Right, because you need technology to notice when you had a good harvest, and which crops performed well where. Good point! It's a wonder humans were able to farm successfully until this century.
Actually, yes. Technology is used at an infinitely more frequent rate in today's farming than it was in 1903.
That's funny. Neither is mine. Ive never even seen the movie.
Your turn
And what technology literally kills off its compe ion?
That's great. I was shown the do entary in an agriculture course I took last semester that had many people who grew up on farms in it. Let's just say not every farmer hates monsanto. It doesn't bother me if everyone on here hates or loves monsanto because at the end of the day, none of us are farmers (or lobbyists).That's funny. Neither is mine. Ive never even seen the movie.
Your turn
Buying being an equivalent of killing.
"Literal"
Buying being an equivalent of killing.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...foods-market/2
Canadian researchers this year reported that the blood of 93 percent of pregnant women and 80 percent of their umbilical cord blood samples contained a pesticide implanted in GMO corn by the biotech company Monsanto, though digestion is supposed to remove it from the body. "Given the potential toxicity of these environmental pollutants and the fragility of the fetus, more studies are needed," they wrote in Reproductive Toxicology.
the specific GMO that's supposed to get chewed up in the gut or liver but is actually making it into serum is microRNAs, genetic stuff aggressively studied for its role healthy/cancerous cell growth.
Monsanto has no ing idea of what their GMO does to animals and humans.
If they know bad stuff (they do), they're hiding it and lying about it, just like BigPharma suppresses negative results and hypes the positive results.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
