I could not find one article that adequately exposed this international scam, but if you google monsanto with anything else you will see how far reaching the tentacles go.
While we are in Florida trying to protect our land, these government/corporate entities are swapping partners in a bed of greenbacks on the long black train to hell.
While researchers and scientists investigate the cause of our diabetes, obesity, asthma and ADHD epidemics, they should ask why the FDA approved a livestock drug banned in 160 nations and responsible for hyperactivity, muscle breakdown and 10 percent mortality in pigs, according to angry farmers who phoned the manufacturer.
The beta agonist ractopamine, a repartitioning agent that increases protein synthesis, was recruited for livestock use when researchers found the drug, used in asthma, made mice more muscular says Beef magazine.
But unlike the growth promoting antibiotics and hormones used in livestock which are withdrawn as the animal nears slaughter, ractopamine is started as the animal nears slaughter.
As much as twenty percent of Paylean, given to pigs for their last 28 days, Optaflexx, given to cattle their last 28 to 42 days and Tomax, given to turkeys their last 7 to 14 days, remains in consumer meat says author and well known veterinarian Michael W. Fox.
Though banned in Europe, Taiwan and China--more than 1,700 people were "poisoned" from eating Paylean-fed pigs since 1998 says the Sichuan Pork Trade Chamber of Commerce-- ractopamine is used in 45 percent of US pigs and 30 percent of ration-fed cattle says Elanco Animal Health which manufactures all three products.
How does a drug marked, "Not for use in humans. Individuals withcardiovascular disease should exercise special caution to avoid exposure. Use protective clothing, impervious gloves, protective eye wear, and a NIOSH-approved dust mask" become "safe" in human food? With no washout period?
The same way Elanco's other two blockbusters, Stilbosol (diethylstilbestrol or DES), now withdrawn, and Posilac or bovine growth hormone (rBST), bought from Monsanto in 2008, became part of the nation's food supply: shameless corporate lobbying. A third of meetings on the Food Safety and Inspection Service's public calendar in January 2009 were with Elanco, a division of Eli Lilly--or about ractopamine.
In fact, in 2002, three years after Paylean's approval, the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine's Office of Surveillance and Compliance accused Elanco of withholding information about "safety and effectiveness" and "adverse animal drug experiences" upon which ractopamine was approved, in a 14-page warning letter.
"Our representatives requested a complete and accurate list of all your GLP [Good Laboratory Practices] studies involving Paylean® (Ractopamine hydrochloride), including their current status as well as the names of the respective study monitors. In response, your firm supplied to our representatives multiple lists which differed in the names of the studies and their status. In addition, your firm could not locate or identify documents pertaining to some of the studies. This situation was somewhat confusing and created unneeded delays for our representatives," wrote Gloria J. Dunnavan, Director Division of Compliance.
Where was mention of the farmer phone calls to Elanco reporting, "hyperactivity," "dying animals," "downer pigs" and "tying up" and "stress" syndromes, asks the FDA letter. Where was the log of phone calls that included farmers saying, "animals are down and shaking," and "pig vomiting after eating feed with Paylean"?
But, not to worry. Despite ractopamine's dangers and the falsified approval documents, the FDA approved ractopamine the following year for cattle--and last year for turkeys.
According to Temple Grandin, Professor of Animal Science at Colorado State University, the "indiscriminant use of Paylean (ractopamine) has contributed to an increase in downer non-ambulatory pigs," and pigs that "are extremely difficult to move and drive." In Holsteins, ractopamine is known for causing hoof problems, says Grandin and feedlot managers report the "outer shell of the hoof fell off" on a related beta agonist drug, zilpateral.
A article in the 2003 Journal of Animal Science confirms that "ractopamine does affect the behavior, heart rate and catecholamine profile of finishing pigs and making them more difficult to handle and potentially more susceptible to handling and transport stress."
Nor can we overlook the effects of "adding these drugs to waterways or well water supplies--via contaminated animal feed and manure runoff-- when this class of drugs is so important in treating children with asthma," says David Wallinga, MD of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.
The FDA's approval of a drug for food that requires impervious gloves and a mask just to handle is reminiscent of the bovine growth hormone debacle.
Like rBST, ractopamine increases profits despite greater livestock death and disability because a treated animal does the work of two in a macabre version of economies of scale.
Like rBST, food consumers are metabolic, neurological and carcinogen guinea pigs so that agribusiness can make a profit.
And like rBST, "Mothers Of Growing Children" was not marked as a visiting group on the Food Safety and Inspection Service's public calendar next to the ag lobbyists.
Here's the whole Monsanto story. This company is a monster.
The World According to Monsanto is an in-depth Documentary that looks at the domination of the agricultural industry from one of the world’s most insidious and powerful companies.We are pleased to bring you the full documentary in 10 parts.
This is one of the most powerful, must see films for anyone interested in the behind the scenes world of the food industry, and how just one world dominating corporation holds the keys and patents to much of the worlds food supply. Monsanto, which started out as one of the planet's largest chemical companies is also responsible for such chemical compounds as Agent Orange, Bovine Growth Hormone, PCBs and genetically-engineered crops.
How can a documentary be illegal in the land of free speech? I'm not saying I doubt you, just wondering how that works.
My understanding is that their lawyers used trademark and copyright infringement lawsuits to keep it out of production. There are tons of websites that carry the documentary for free and it can also be found on youtube.
Is this all you have to do? I guess it is very easy to complain when your stomach is full isn't it? Why don't you tell that to the over 15 million children who die of hunger every year! Are you going to feed them with that precious 10 ft of organic irrigated garden you have? Better yet, sponsor one and send them 10.00 a month to make yourself feel better. Think about that as you drive 3 miles and spend less than 10% of your income of any possible food you can imagine. People you cannot feed the world with your backyard "organic garden" it is not possible. And while you continue to take farmers land to save your precious endangered "delta smelt" minnows, you tell me exactly how this is going to get done? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Crops have been genetically modified since the beginning of time. Did you know we have to produce more food in the next 50 years than in the last 10,000 combined? So climb down out of your tree beacause the world is not out to get you.
Is this all you have to do? I guess it is very easy to complain when your stomach is full isn't it? Why don't you tell that to the over 15 million children who die of hunger every year! Are you going to feed them with that precious 10 ft of organic irrigated garden you have? Better yet, sponsor one and send them 10.00 a month to make yourself feel better. Think about that as you drive 3 miles and spend less than 10% of your income of any possible food you can imagine. People you cannot feed the world with your backyard "organic garden" it is not possible. And while you continue to take farmers land to save your precious endangered "delta smelt" minnows, you tell me exactly how this is going to get done? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Crops have been genetically modified since the beginning of time. Did you know we have to produce more food in the next 50 years than in the last 10,000 combined? So climb down out of your tree beacause the world is not out to get you.
Genetically modified, hmmm, sounds scientific if you don't know the facts. Monsanto inserts a gene which causes plant cells in our food to produce a pesticide. This insures better crops for the Farmers that Monsanto "owns" so they can make more money at the expense of our health. We are not bugs, we are humans. Monsanto's GM corn MON863 shows kidney, liver toxicity in animal studies
Maybe a tablespoon of Monsanto's roundup at every meal would be a good experiment in genetic modification, livers and kidneys are not necessary organs, or maybe the idea is that we are expendable.
Personally if I have a caterpillar crawling on my corn, I consider that a good thing. If the bugs want it, it must not be full of chemicals.
I am lost on the minnow info, I suppose I should look that up.
If you have information to disprove this then please post it.
Genetically modified, hmmm, sounds scientific if you don't know the facts. Monsanto inserts a gene which causes plant cells in our food to produce a pesticide. This insures better crops for the Farmers that Monsanto "owns" so they can make more money at the expense of our health. We are not bugs, we are humans. Monsanto's GM corn MON863 shows kidney, liver toxicity in animal studies
Maybe a tablespoon of Monsanto's roundup at every meal would be a good experiment in genetic modification, livers and kidneys are not necessary organs, or maybe the idea is that we are expendable.
Personally if I have a caterpillar crawling on my corn, I consider that a good thing. If the bugs want it, it must not be full of chemicals.
I am lost on the minnow info, I suppose I should look that up.
If you have information to disprove this then please post it.
I'm sure that lots of traditional foods have toxicity if eaten in large enough quantities. Seriously, how could anyone without knowledge of organic chemistry, botany, genetics etc. reach a quick conclusion on the alleged dangers of roundup or GMOs? The scare tactics do not put things into perspective and do nothing to appeal to the rational scientific mind. There is a fudamentalism eerily similar to what one sees with many religious groups. Believe it or else, and don't ask questions. High fructose corn syrup is another one. FYI, plain old sugar is like 40% to 50% fructose. You want fructose? Honey is loaded with it. So are pears and bananas.
Your link indicates nothing of the quantities given to the test subjects. It does not provide comparable human equivalents. I do know that lots of plants have always contained natural pesticides. Why is natural somehow better? As humans, I feel it is our purpose to beat the living daylights out of mother nature. That's what keeps us going. If you think natural is so great, why not ask the people of Haiti and Chile if what they think of mother nature? How about the people of New Orleans? Enjoy your bugs. I'll be on the lookout for GMO microwave popcorn that doesn't burn so easily. Remind me not to eat any of your vegetables. Another thing, the more I hear about Monsanto, the more I feel like investing in them. They are on my radar screen now, that's for sure. Gotta go, my lawn needs an application of pre-emergent weed killer. I hope Wal-Mart hasn't run out.
Is this all you have to do? I guess it is very easy to complain when your stomach is full isn't it? Why don't you tell that to the over 15 million children who die of hunger every year! Are you going to feed them with that precious 10 ft of organic irrigated garden you have? Better yet, sponsor one and send them 10.00 a month to make yourself feel better. Think about that as you drive 3 miles and spend less than 10% of your income of any possible food you can imagine. People you cannot feed the world with your backyard "organic garden" it is not possible. And while you continue to take farmers land to save your precious endangered "delta smelt" minnows, you tell me exactly how this is going to get done? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Crops have been genetically modified since the beginning of time. Did you know we have to produce more food in the next 50 years than in the last 10,000 combined? So climb down out of your tree beacause the world is not out to get you.
Yes, all I have to do is concern myself with the fact that our food supply is slowly being poisoned for profit. I do this because my health and my family's health is important to me, and try as I might, I can't find a logical alternative to eating that will allow us to stay alive. I don't currently have a yard, but as soon as I do, I will grow some organic produce to provide truly edible food for my family. We already sponsor a child in Africa. His name is Elihuruma, and it's not $10, it's $35, but a bargain at any price. We also send money to his family occasionally, which they use for food, shelter and clothing.
Now, back to the subject at hand. I will have to find the scientist's name, but a few months ago, I heard an interview with someone much smarter than I and an expert in the field of genetically engineered crops. Did you know that GMO seeds are good for only one season, and produce infertile crops? Peasant farmers in poor countries are forced to buy their seeds each year from these behemoths, instead of being able to collect and re-use heirloom seeds year after year. See, Monsanto's way COSTS MORE. And I have no problem with hybrids developed to increase resistance to pests, so long as the "resistance" is not a built-in pesticide that I am forced to ingest with every bite. A huge part of the worldwide famine problem is that huge agricultural conglomerates are getting loads of government welfare, while the small farmers the program was created to help are left to their own devices. Add to that the fact that these huge companies get more money for their (GMO) corn for fuel than for food, and , well, I think you can see the problem.
I have no issue with capitalism with a conscience, but I truly don't believe that's what we're talking about here. And no, they're not out to get me - or you either for that matter. We're just what might be called "collateral damage." The fact is they're not thinking of us at all.
__________________
Instead of wondering when your next vacation is, may you ought to set up a life you don't need to escape from. - Seth Godin, Tribes
Last edited by Miss Critter; 03-07-2010 at 01:37 PM.
Reason: typo
Now, back to the subject at hand. I will have to find the scientist's name, but a few months ago, I heard an interview with someone much smarter than I and an expert in the field of genetically engineered crops. Did you know that GMO seeds are good for only one season, and produce infertile crops? Peasant farmers in poor countries are forced to buy their seeds each year from these behemoths, instead of being able to collect and re-use heirloom seeds year after year. S.
This is another situation where it's impossible to draw a reasoned conclusion not knowing all the facts. Perhaps the increased yields financially make up for the cost of having to purchase seed. The other thing is, even with fertile crops, I would think that farmers still have to purchase a certain amount of seed anyway. Do these anti-technology and progress websites have enough confidence to play devils advocate with their own assertions and really lay the facts and numbers on the table. From what I have seen, the answer to that question is NO!
I will find and post the facts to back up my assertion. Meanwhile, it's worth mentioning that I've grown so used to your contrarian ways on this subject, LS, that if you did not threaten immediate action in the opposing direction, I'd be forced to reconsider my viewpoint.
__________________
Instead of wondering when your next vacation is, may you ought to set up a life you don't need to escape from. - Seth Godin, Tribes
They are "owning" the farmers and some organic farmers that do not purchase Monsanto seeds are concerned that growing crops without pesticides may be considered unsafe by the government. As absurd and unbelievable as it sounds, some growers are concerned that organic gardening may become illegal if H.R. 875 is passed. HR 875: The End Of Organic Farming?
Yes, all I have to do is concern myself with the fact that our food supply is slowly being poisoned for profit. I do this because my health and my family's health is important to me, and try as I might, I can't find a logical alternative to eating that will allow us to stay alive. I don't currently have a yard, but as soon as I do, I will grow some organic produce to provide truly edible food for my family. We already sponsor a child in Africa. His name is Elihuruma, and it's not $10, it's $35, but a bargain at any price. We also send money to his family occasionally, which they use for food, shelter and clothing.
Now, back to the subject at hand. I will have to find the scientist's name, but a few months ago, I heard an interview with someone much smarter than I and an expert in the field of genetically engineered crops. Did you know that GMO seeds are good for only one season, and produce infertile crops? Peasant farmers in poor countries are forced to buy their seeds each year from these behemoths, instead of being able to collect and re-use heirloom seeds year after year. See, Monsanto's way COSTS MORE. And I have no problem with hybrids developed to increase resistance to pests, so long as the "resistance" is not a built-in pesticide that I am forced to ingest with every bite. A huge part of the worldwide famine problem is that huge agricultural conglomerates are getting loads of government welfare, while the small farmers the program was created to help are left to their own devices. Add to that the fact that these huge companies get more money for their (GMO) corn for fuel than for food, and , well, I think you can see the problem.
I have no issue with capitalism with a conscience, but I truly don't believe that's what we're talking about here. And no, they're not out to get me - or you either for that matter. We're just what might be called "collateral damage." The fact is they're not thinking of us at all.
how is the built in pesticide, that the plant produces, toxic for humans?
Is this all you have to do? I guess it is very easy to complain when your stomach is full isn't it? Why don't you tell that to the over 15 million children who die of hunger every year! Are you going to feed them with that precious 10 ft of organic irrigated garden you have? Better yet, sponsor one and send them 10.00 a month to make yourself feel better. Think about that as you drive 3 miles and spend less than 10% of your income of any possible food you can imagine. People you cannot feed the world with your backyard "organic garden" it is not possible. And while you continue to take farmers land to save your precious endangered "delta smelt" minnows, you tell me exactly how this is going to get done? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Crops have been genetically modified since the beginning of time. Did you know we have to produce more food in the next 50 years than in the last 10,000 combined? So climb down out of your tree beacause the world is not out to get you.
Hey, don't accuse me of this law that was passed to take away the Farmer's water for his crops in favor of saving fish.This is the first I've heard about this and I am not in agreement with a law that saves wildlife while putting humans at risk. If both could be done, it would be good, but humans take priority over animals (putting fish first ). Supposedly, this was not reported by some of the major networks??? Strange indeed. Anyway, I found this link in case others don't know about it. Hannity Again Discusses California's Congress-created Dust Bowl | NewsBusters.org
__________________
part redneck/part barbie
Last edited by Beauty hunter; 03-07-2010 at 05:00 PM.
Reason: Didn't spell an easy word correctly- DUHHH
Mice fed natural Bt-toxin showed significant immune responses and caused them to become sensitive to other formerly harmless compounds. This suggests that Bt-toxin might make a person allergic to a wide range of substances. (1, 2, 3) Farm workers and others have also had reactions to natural Bt-toxin, (4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ) and authorities acknowledge that “People with compromised immune systems or preexisting allergies may be particularly susceptible to the effects of Bt.” (9) In fact, when natural Bt was sprayed over areas around Vancouver and Washington State to fight gypsy moths, about 500 people reported reactions—mostly allergy or flu-like symptoms. Six people had to go to the emergency room. (10, 11)
The Bt-toxin produced in the GM plants is more dangerous than in its natural spray form. The sprayed-on version biodegrades or washes off. Not so with Bt corn. (12, 13) Further, the toxin inside the plant is about 3,000-5,000 times more concentrated than the spray and it is designed to be more toxic than the natural version. (14) In fact, the GM toxin has properties of known allergens and fails all three GM allergy tests recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and others. (15) Immune, toxic, and reproductive problems
Studies and reports confirm that Bt crops provoke reactions in humans and animals. For example, large numbers of Indian farm workers are getting sick from touching Bt cotton. Their allergic and flu-like symptoms match precisely with those experienced by the hundreds of people in the Pacific Northwest who reacted to Bt spray. (16)
Even inhaled Bt-toxin from pollen may be dangerous. In 2003, during the time when an adjacent Bt cornfield was pollinating, virtually an entire Filipino village of about 100 people was stricken by a disease. The symptoms included headaches, dizziness, extreme stomach pain, vomiting, chest pains, fever, and allergies, as well as respiratory, intestinal, and skin reactions. The symptoms appeared first in those living closest to the field, and then progressed to others by proximity. When the same corn was planted in four other villages the following year, the symptoms returned in each location—only during the time of pollination. A Monsanto rat study on Bt corn showed a significant increase in blood cells related to the immune system. (17) A November 2008 study by the Italian government showed immune responses in mice that ate Bt corn. (18) Rats fed Bt corn had liver lesions and indications of poisoning. (19) The intestines of mice fed Bt potatoes had damaged cells with abnormal growth patterns. (20)
In a rare long-term GMO feeding study, commissioned by the Austrian government, the longer mice were fed GM corn, the fewer babies they had. Their offspring were also smaller, and therefore less healthy. (21) None of these problems would have shown up in normal industry-funded studies, which are a maximum of 90 days and rarely look at reproductive health. About two dozen farmers in the US reported that pigs fed varieties of Bt corn became sterile, had false pregnancies, or gave birth to bags of water. Cows and bulls also became sterile from the same varieties. Other farmers blamed Bt corn for the deaths of cows, horses, water buffaloes, and chickens. (22)
When Indian shepherds let sheep graze continuously on Bt cotton plants after harvest, within five to seven days, one out of four sheep died. Thousands died in one region alone. Post mortems showed severe irritation and black patches in the intestines and livers. Investigators said preliminary evidence “strongly suggests that the sheep mortality was due to a toxin. . . . most probably Bt-toxin.” (23) In one small follow-up study, all six sheep that were fed Bt cotton plants died within 30 days, while the control sheep raised on natural cotton plants remained healthy. Buffalo that grazed on Bt cotton plants or cottonseed cakes also died or were stricken with reproductive and other problems.
In 1999, front-page stories in the British press revealed Rowett Institute scientist Dr. Arpad Pusztai's explosive research findings that GE potatoes are poisonous to mammals. These potatoes were spliced with DNA from the snowdrop plant and a commonly used viral promoter, the Cauliflower Mosaic Virus (CaMv). GE snowdrop potatoes were found to be significantly different in chemical composition from regular potatoes, and when fed to lab rats, damaged their vital organs and immune systems. The damage to the rats' stomach linings apparently was a severe viral infection caused by the CaMv viral promoter apparently giving the rats a severe viral infection. Most alarming of all, the CaMv viral promoter is spliced into nearly all GE foods and crops.
Dr. Pusztai's path breaking research work unfortunately remains incomplete. Government funding was cut off and he was fired after he spoke to the media. More and more scientists around the world are warning that genetic manipulation can increase the levels of natural plant toxins or allergens in foods (or create entirely new toxins) in unexpected ways by switching on genes that produce poisons. Since regulatory agencies do not currently require the kind of thorough chemical and feeding tests that Dr. Pusztai was conducting, consumers have now become involuntary guinea pigs in a vast genetic experiment. Dr. Pusztai warns, "Think of William Tell shooting an arrow at a target. Now put a blind-fold on the man doing the shooting and that's the reality of the genetic engineer doing a gene insertion". Increased Cancer Risks
In 1994, the FDA approved the sale of Monsanto's controversial rBGH. This GE hormone is injected into dairy cows to force them to produce more milk. Scientists have warned that significantly higher levels (400-500% or more) of a potent chemical hormone, Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF-1), in the milk and dairy products of rBGH injected cows, could pose serious hazards such as human breast, prostate, and colon cancer. A number of studies have shown that humans with elevated levels of IGF-1 in their bodies are much more likely to get cancer. The US Congressional watchdog agency, the GAO, told the FDA not to approve rBGH. They argued that injecting the cows with rBGH caused higher rates of udder infections requiring increased antibiotic treatment. The increased use of antibiotics poses an unacceptable risk for public health. In 1998, Monsanto/FDA documents that had previously been withheld, were released by government scientists in Canada showing damage to laboratory rats fed dosages of rBGH. Significant infiltration of rBGH into the prostate of the rats as well as thyroid cysts indicated potential cancer hazards from the drug. Subsequently, the government of Canada banned rBGH in early 1999. The European Union (EU) has had a ban in place since 1994. Although rBGH continues to be injected into 10% of all US dairy cows, no other industrialized country has legalized its use. The GATT Codex Alimentarius, a United Nations food standards body, has refused to certify that rBGH is safe.
NaturalNews) According to a recent report compiled from U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data, the growing of genetically engineered crops has led to a 383 million pound increase in U.S. pesticide use during the time period spanning from 1996 to 2008. The Organic Center (TOC), the Union for Concerned Scientists (UCS), and the Center for Food Safety (CFS) jointly released the report that illustrates the environmental hazards posed by the farming of GMO crops.
Since their initial unveiling, GMOs have been touted by the agricultural biotechnology industry as the discovery that will end world hunger and improve the environment. Nothing could be further from the truth. Among their many other negative consequences, "herbicide-tolerant" (HT) GMO crops have resulted in new herbicide-resistant weeds that are sprouting up in farmers' fields. When farmers respond by increasing pesticide use, ever-stronger "superweeds" continue to appear.
GMO seeds are significantly more expensive than natural seeds and have been continuing to climb in price over the years. Big AgriBio defends the higher costs by suggesting the farmer benefit from not having to use as much pesticide on GMO crops. The reality is that farmers are using much more pesticide in order to fight superweeds.
Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide, is no longer effective at treating the weeds that result from the planting of "RoundUp-ready" crops. Thus millions of acres of farmland are now plagued by superweeds that are destroying the environment, ruining crops, and ultimately ruining farmers' businesses.
All industry promises of increased yields, decreased pesticide use, and cures for world hunger have proven to be entirely bogus. Not one claim made by the biotechnology industry concerning the benefits of GMOs has proven true. Independent scientific reports continue to show that industry assertions in favor of GMOs are patently false.
Pesticide residue in foods that contain GMO ingredients is also significant. Such pesticides are linked to reproductive abnormalities, neurological disorders, birth defects, and other bodily harm. GMOs themselves are also implicated in a host of bodily disorders including digestive problems and the perpetuation of GMO fragments in the body. No long-term studies have ever verified the safety of GMOs and most independent research proves them to be dangerous in a number of different ways.
Americans must step up and demand mandatory labeling of products that contain GMO ingredients. If more people realized the extent to which GMOs have contaminated the food supply, the demand for GMO-free foods would greatly increase. Growers, producers, and retailers would surely take notice and the market would correct the problem by providing wholesome, organic options that are free of toxic GMO contaminants. Transparency in labeling would do much to curb the use of GMOs.
There's lots more. Just let me know how much you feel like reading.
__________________
Instead of wondering when your next vacation is, may you ought to set up a life you don't need to escape from. - Seth Godin, Tribes
I saw Food Inc. Not a bad movie but half-assed when it came to presenting hard data and appealing to reason. Had it been a good documentary it would have addressed counterarguments more thoroughly. It was indeed a superb propaganda piece.
how is the built in pesticide, that the plant produces, toxic for humans?
Exactly. Chocolate would be banned based on results of canine consumption. Besides aren't rats an agricultural pest? I'll be alarmed when some sicko fabricates Roundup ready dollar weed.
Safety and advantages of Bacillus thuringiensis-protected plants to control insect pests.
Betz FS, Hammond BG, Fuchs RL.
Jellinek, Schwartz and Connolly, Washington, DC, USA.
Comment in:
* Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2001 Feb;33(1):1.
Plants modified to express insecticidal proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis (referred to as Bt-protected plants) provide a safe and highly effective method of insect control. Bt-protected corn, cotton, and potato were introduced into the United States in 1995/1996 and grown on a total of approximately 10 million acres in 1997, 20 million acres in 1998, and 29 million acres globally in 1999. The extremely rapid adoption of these Bt-protected crops demonstrates the outstanding grower satisfaction of the performance and value of these products. These crops provide highly effective control of major insect pests such as the European corn borer, southwestern corn borer, tobacco budworm, cotton bollworm, pink bollworm, and Colorado potato beetle and reduce reliance on conventional chemical pesticides.They have provided notably higher yields in cotton and corn. The estimated total net savings to the grower using Bt-protected cotton in the United States was approximately $92 million in 1998. Other benefits of these crops include reduced levels of the fungal toxin fumonisin in corn and the opportunity for supplemental pest control by beneficial insects due to the reduced use of broad-spectrum insecticides. Insect resistance management plans are being implemented to ensure the prolonged effectiveness of these products. Extensive testing of Bt-protected crops has been conducted which establishes the safety of these products to humans, animals, and the environment. Acute, subchronic, and chronic toxicology studies conducted over the past 40 years establish the safety of the microbial Bt products, including their expressed insecticidal (Cry) proteins, which are fully approved for marketing. Mammalian toxicology and digestive fate studies, which have been conducted with the proteins produced in the currently approved Bt-protected plant products, have confirmed that these Cry proteins are nontoxic to humans and pose no significant concern for allergenicity. Food and feed derived from Bt-protected crops which have been fully approved by regulatory agencies have been shown to be substantially equivalent to the food and feed derived from conventional crops. Nontarget organisms exposed to high levels of Cry protein are virtually unaffected, except for certain insects that are closely related to the target pests. Because the Cry protein is contained within the plant (in microgram quantities), the potential for exposure to farm workers and nontarget organisms is extremely low. The Cry proteins produced in Bt-protected crops have been shown to rapidly degrade when crop residue is incorporated into the soil. Thus the environmental impact of these crops is negligible. The human and environmental safety of Bt-protected crops is further supported by the long history of safe use for Bt microbial pesticides around the world. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.
Last edited by LuciferSam; 03-07-2010 at 09:03 PM.
Good reading. I saw Food Inc. and do believe major companies put their profit before the health of people.
I'm skipping the butter on the popcorn just in case it's toxic too. Wonder what kind of seeds Orville grows. I think I'll go stick some out in the back yard and see if they'll grow. Probably won't.
Is this all you have to do? I guess it is very easy to complain when your stomach is full isn't it? Why don't you tell that to the over 15 million children who die of hunger every year! Are you going to feed them with that precious 10 ft of organic irrigated garden you have? Better yet, sponsor one and send them 10.00 a month to make yourself feel better. Think about that as you drive 3 miles and spend less than 10% of your income of any possible food you can imagine. People you cannot feed the world with your backyard "organic garden" it is not possible. And while you continue to take farmers land to save your precious endangered "delta smelt" minnows, you tell me exactly how this is going to get done? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Crops have been genetically modified since the beginning of time. Did you know we have to produce more food in the next 50 years than in the last 10,000 combined? So climb down out of your tree beacause the world is not out to get you.
People don't die of hunger because we cannot produce enough food using safe methods. Remember that the government actually PAYS farmers billions to produce less.
__________________
"Chemicals should not be innocent until proven guilty."
Interesting fact is that Food Inc. does not take an anti-GMO position as best as I could tell. They were too busy expressing outrage over the fact that Monsanto is going after farmers who are reusing their patented GMO Roundup ready seed. The message I got from this is that farmers should be allowed to use GMO products freely and that corporations shouldn't be allowed to patent life forms. Sounds like they took a GMO tolerant position to me.
Good reading. I saw Food Inc. and do believe major companies put their profit before the health of people.
I'm skipping the butter on the popcorn just in case it's toxic too. Wonder what kind of seeds Orville grows. I think I'll go stick some out in the back yard and see if they'll grow. Probably won't.
Now that's something that should carry a warning because the diacetyl used as butter flavoring is known to cause irreversible lung damage if inhaled. I prefer the "Simply Salted" myself though that contains palm oil.
Interesting fact is that Food Inc. does not take an anti-GMO position as best as I could tell. They were too busy expressing outrage over the fact that Monsanto is going after farmers who are reusing their patented GMO Roundup ready seed. The message I got from this is that farmers should be allowed to use GMO products freely and that corporations shouldn't be allowed to patent life forms. Sounds like they took a GMO tolerant position to me.
I thought they were pro-heirloom and non-modified seeds.
__________________
"Chemicals should not be innocent until proven guilty."
I thought they were pro-heirloom and non-modified seeds.
The issue I'm referrring to had to do with patented GM seed. In this segment, the outrage was over Monsanto trying to prevent farmers from saving this seed, not over the fact that farmers were using the seed in the first place.
They also talked about how they were taking over the industry, limiting number of choices, drawing up blacklists of farmers, and "contaminating" other fields' seeds.
Didn't think it was pro-GM, just that they chose the most extreme case to make a point.
__________________
"Chemicals should not be innocent until proven guilty."
Exactly. Chocolate would be banned based on results of canine consumption. Besides aren't rats an agricultural pest? I'll be alarmed when some sicko fabricates Roundup ready dollar weed.
Safety and advantages of Bacillus thuringiensis-protected plants to control insect pests.
Betz FS, Hammond BG, Fuchs RL.
Jellinek, Schwartz and Connolly, Washington, DC, USA.
Comment in:
* Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2001 Feb;33(1):1.
Plants modified to express insecticidal proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis (referred to as Bt-protected plants) provide a safe and highly effective method of insect control. Bt-protected corn, cotton, and potato were introduced into the United States in 1995/1996 and grown on a total of approximately 10 million acres in 1997, 20 million acres in 1998, and 29 million acres globally in 1999. The extremely rapid adoption of these Bt-protected crops demonstrates the outstanding grower satisfaction of the performance and value of these products. These crops provide highly effective control of major insect pests such as the European corn borer, southwestern corn borer, tobacco budworm, cotton bollworm, pink bollworm, and Colorado potato beetle and reduce reliance on conventional chemical pesticides.They have provided notably higher yields in cotton and corn. The estimated total net savings to the grower using Bt-protected cotton in the United States was approximately $92 million in 1998. Other benefits of these crops include reduced levels of the fungal toxin fumonisin in corn and the opportunity for supplemental pest control by beneficial insects due to the reduced use of broad-spectrum insecticides. Insect resistance management plans are being implemented to ensure the prolonged effectiveness of these products. Extensive testing of Bt-protected crops has been conducted which establishes the safety of these products to humans, animals, and the environment. Acute, subchronic, and chronic toxicology studies conducted over the past 40 years establish the safety of the microbial Bt products, including their expressed insecticidal (Cry) proteins, which are fully approved for marketing. Mammalian toxicology and digestive fate studies, which have been conducted with the proteins produced in the currently approved Bt-protected plant products, have confirmed that these Cry proteins are nontoxic to humans and pose no significant concern for allergenicity. Food and feed derived from Bt-protected crops which have been fully approved by regulatory agencies have been shown to be substantially equivalent to the food and feed derived from conventional crops. Nontarget organisms exposed to high levels of Cry protein are virtually unaffected, except for certain insects that are closely related to the target pests. Because the Cry protein is contained within the plant (in microgram quantities), the potential for exposure to farm workers and nontarget organisms is extremely low. The Cry proteins produced in Bt-protected crops have been shown to rapidly degrade when crop residue is incorporated into the soil. Thus the environmental impact of these crops is negligible. The human and environmental safety of Bt-protected crops is further supported by the long history of safe use for Bt microbial pesticides around the world. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.
Betz, Hammond, and Fuchs was one of many independent studies. As we can see, some of the other tests are posted on this board.
Jellinek, Schwartz, and Connolly worked for Monsanto. Beyond Pesticides
They also talked about how they were taking over the industry, limiting number of choices, drawing up blacklists of farmers, and "contaminating" other fields' seeds.
Didn't think it was pro-GM, just that they chose the most extreme case to make a point.
I know, I'm saying they didn't come across as strongly anti-gmo either. They did not take a strong stance. Put another way, they did not seem to have zero-tolerance for GMO. They definitely took a stance against large corporations, but actually had some good things to say about Wal-Mart.
Betz, Hammond, and Fuchs was one of many independent studies. As we can see, some of the other tests are posted on this board.
Jellinek, Schwartz, and Connolly worked for Monsanto. Beyond Pesticides
The problem I see is the lack of independent study. Seed companies like Monsanto can forbid independent research as a condition of sale of the seed. In other words a signed legal agreement. The law is on the side of the company in this situation, at least according to this article:Do Seed Companies Control GM Crop Research?: Scientific American
The problem I see is the lack of independent study. Seed companies like Monsanto can forbid independent research as a condition of sale of the seed. In other words a signed legal agreement. The law is on the side of the company in this situation, at least according to this article:Do Seed Companies Control GM Crop Research?: Scientific American
That's brilliant on the side of Monsanto, I was wondering why all the articles were so old. They already know it's a bad seed and want people to shut up. Of course the law is on their side here, they paid for it, didn't you see the long list of liaisons within the government? Do you actually think they are going to venture out financially without knowing if they are going to make a huge profit or not- I don't think so.
Just think, if their food makes you sick, you can then purchase their pharmaceuticals. They are in a win-win situation. That would put us in a lose-lose situation if we bought the bait.
That's brilliant on the side of Monsanto, I was wondering why all the articles were so old. They already know it's a bad seed and want people to shut up. Of course the law is on their side here, they paid for it, didn't you see the long list of liaisons within the government? Do you actually think they are going to venture out financially without knowing if they are going to make a huge profit or not- I don't think so.
Just think, if their food makes you sick, you can then purchase their pharmaceuticals. They are in a win-win situation. That would put us in a lose-lose situation if we bought the bait.
It's better than starvation and alternative medicine.
I appreciate a difference of opinion, that is what makes this country great. I think you are greatly misunderstanding the role of this company and what they are trying to do. To say biotech break farmers and make them poor and we force them to buy seeds is crazy talk. First this is a free country and nobody forces anyone to do anything. Farmers like anyone else have more options than ever before. They choose Monsanto's products because they are superior and it makes them more profitable, end of point.
Case in point, Monsanto held pricing on branded Roundup last year, even as generics prices bottomed. Guess what? Nobody bought it, thus Monsanto laid off 2000 workers and cut the price 50%. Man if we would just let the free market do its job, everyones life would be better.
They complain about the pricing because it is something they need not something they want. They cannot make enough money doing it as grandpa did. Yes seed costs are higher but so are yields, productivity, and efficiency and other inputs they would have had to put in are now gone. Not to mention the time it saves. Altough they have that option and no one is forcing them to choose otherwise. As a matter of fact there are more seed companies now than there were 20 years ago. The reason Monsanto is penalized so severly is that they are the leader in biotech arena and while every other company was making fun of them in the 80s and 90s as they almost went broke while investing into biotech, now they are years ahead of the competition.
To someone else's point of GMO seed does not germinate the year after you harvest it. Yes it does. How do you think Monsanto has product to sell the next year, it doesn't just magically appear.
Lastly to the retards that say biotech does not increase yield. I challenge you to call 10 farmers randomly and ask would they rather plant the hybrids that were around 10 years ago. I bet 30 bushels of corn they say no........Next.....
"I read the posts and article with some interest and did notice than none of the people responding appear to live on Molokai. I happen to have a home on the west end on the island and will tell you that water is the number one problem on the island. What most people reading this article probably do not know is that about 7000 people live there. Up until two years ago water was providedon the west end by deep wells run by the Molokai ranch. When they got upset and pulled out, closing all of their operations including the hotel, restaurant, golf course, ranch land there has been no water. The county of Maui refuses to take over the wells. The upshot of the situation is that our water bills have gone up over 100% in the past 18 months with no end in sight. The east end of the island does not seem to have as much of a problem, however, that end is where most of the rain lands so can be collected by the residents. Monsanto does provide some employment, but mostly those are individuals who are not Hawaiian, so the island economy really suffers. As they take much of the water, residents are left to either collect their own rainwater or pay the 100% annual increase in water costs passed off to the residents. Molokai residents have appealed to Maui County as well as the governor of Hawaii to interceed before the water is so expensive that vitually no residents can remain. Water costs combined with the highest electric costs in the US push the residents out of their home. Monsanto certainly contributes to that."
Monsanta or Monsatan?
The different sides of Monsanto speak on.
I appreciate a difference of opinion, that is what makes this country great. I think you are greatly misunderstanding the role of this company and what they are trying to do. To say biotech break farmers and make them poor and we force them to buy seeds is crazy talk. First this is a free country and nobody forces anyone to do anything. Farmers like anyone else have more options than ever before. They choose Monsanto's products because they are superior and it makes them more profitable, end of point.
Case in point, Monsanto held pricing on branded Roundup last year, even as generics prices bottomed. Guess what? Nobody bought it, thus Monsanto laid off 2000 workers and cut the price 50%. Man if we would just let the free market do its job, everyones life would be better.
They complain about the pricing because it is something they need not something they want. They cannot make enough money doing it as grandpa did. Yes seed costs are higher but so are yields, productivity, and efficiency and other inputs they would have had to put in are now gone. Not to mention the time it saves. Altough they have that option and no one is forcing them to choose otherwise. As a matter of fact there are more seed companies now than there were 20 years ago. The reason Monsanto is penalized so severly is that they are the leader in biotech arena and while every other company was making fun of them in the 80s and 90s as they almost went broke while investing into biotech, now they are years ahead of the competition.
To someone else's point of GMO seed does not germinate the year after you harvest it. Yes it does. How do you think Monsanto has product to sell the next year, it doesn't just magically appear.
Lastly to the retards that say biotech does not increase yield. I challenge you to call 10 farmers randomly and ask would they rather plant the hybrids that were around 10 years ago. I bet 30 bushels of corn they say no........Next.....
I think that's why Food Inc. had the good sense not to really come down really hard on bio-tech. It's ubiquitous in agriculture. How do you present farmers as victims fighting the evil empire if their alleged patent violations involve a product that's immoral for them to use in the first place?
I appreciate a difference of opinion, that is what makes this country great. I think you are greatly misunderstanding the role of this company and what they are trying to do. To say biotech break farmers and make them poor and we force them to buy seeds is crazy talk. First this is a free country and nobody forces anyone to do anything. Farmers like anyone else have more options than ever before. They choose Monsanto's products because they are superior and it makes them more profitable, end of point.
They're not free when they refuse to purchase the seeds and consequently Monsanto throws a hand full of seeds on to their fields for the sole purpose of taking them to court. Oddly when research institutions such as the University of Florida or FAMU develop a new disease resistant strain of something it is offered openly and freely.
Lastly to the retards that say biotech does not increase yield. I challenge you to call 10 farmers randomly and ask would they rather plant the hybrids that were around 10 years ago. I bet 30 bushels of corn they say no........Next.....
This bit of eloquence in your rebuttal ends any desire for me to even attempt to reason with you. You are certainly entitled to your (mistaken) opinion, and the "bum" part of your name would seem at least to be accurate.
__________________
Instead of wondering when your next vacation is, may you ought to set up a life you don't need to escape from. - Seth Godin, Tribes
This bit of eloquence in your rebuttal ends any desire for me to even attempt to reason with you. You are certainly entitled to your (mistaken) opinion, and the "bum" part of your name would seem at least to be accurate.
I think it's interesting he would use a word banned by his poster girl.
I still find it amazing that everyone continues to gang up on the fact that Monsanto is Satan of the world. People in Hawaii do not need to blame Monsanto for water problems, I mean are you serious? First they make it illegal to view a youtube clip in a free country, they rewrite laws that if anyone else would do would be tarred and feathered in the streets, now they are stealing water from Hawaiian natives. Did you notice anything about that paragraph, one blip was about Monsanto, "Monsanto certainly contributes to that." WOW, what a revelation? Sounded a like a problem with the water board more than Monsanto. Have you seen what happens when companies actually do something wrong? (Toyota, Worldcom, Enron) Are you listening to yourself?
This is not a conspiracy to take over the world as bad as you want it to be, why would they do that? Do you actually think the government will yield its power to a corporation? Ha. (E.g. Social Insecurity, Healthcare, Bailouts, GM, AIG, shoudl I go on?). Sure they are not perfect no corporation is, but the accusations you make about them are boderline insane. Yes the University of Florida relaeses varieties for farmers to use, just like every other land grant university, it is what they do. Once again they are a public program and believe it or not, nothing is free (hence the taxes and tuition they pay). On the other hand Monsanto is private and reserves the rights to charge whatever they want to as long as people want to buy it, called supply and demand. (See Roundup Example).
Also, please document one case where Monsanto sued a farmer based on a few seeds "thrown" into their field. YOU CANNOT DO IT. More importantly whenever a lawsuit is brought against a farmer if the farmer is found in the wrong all proceeds go to a youth leadership initiatives or scholarship funds, none are taken for profit. Oh by the way with the over 300,000 customers that use Monsanto every year, only 141 have been taken to court. Lets see if we do 300,000 x 13 years (number of years this patent infrigement has been around = 3.9 million times a farmer has purchased their seeds divided by 141 lawsuits = .0000361% that Monsanto takes a farmer to trial, quite the pandemic, watch out for big bad Monsanto. Ohhh! I'm scared.
By the way Monsanto was just named #31 as one of the best corporate citizens in America. Crazy how they are the spawn of Satan, they just have everyone fooled, don't they?
Last edited by 30A Beach Bum; 03-09-2010 at 07:06 PM.
I still find it amazing that everyone continues to gang up on the fact that Monsanto is Satan of the world. People in Hawaii do not need to blame Monsanto for water problems, I mean are you serious? First they make it illegal to view a youtube clip in a free country, they rewrite laws that if anyone else would do would be tarred and feathered in the streets, now they are stealing water from Hawaiian natives. Did you notice anything about that paragraph, one blip was about Monsanto, "Monsanto certainly contributes to that." WOW, what a revelation? Sounded a like a problem with the water board more than Monsanto. Have you seen what happens when companies actually do something wrong? (Toyota, Worldcom, Enron) Are you listening to yourself?
This is not a conspiracy to take over the world as bad as you want it to be, why would they do that? Do you actually think the government will yield its power to a corporation? Ha. (E.g. Social Insecurity, Healthcare, Bailouts, GM, AIG, shoudl I go on?). Sure they are not perfect no corporation is, but the accusations you make about them are boderline insane. Yes the University of Florida relaeses varieties for farmers to use, just like every other land grant university, it is what they do. Once again they are a public program and believe it or not, nothing is free (hence the taxes and tuition they pay). On the other hand Monsanto is private and reserves the rights to charge whatever they want to as long as people want to buy it, called supply and demand. (See Roundup Example).
Also, please document one case where Monsanto sued a farmer based on a few seeds "thrown" into their field. YOU CANNOT DO IT. More importantly whenever a lawsuit is brought against a farmer if the farmer is found in the wrong all proceeds go to a youth leadership initiatives or scholarship funds, none are taken for profit. Oh by the way with the over 300,000 customers that use Monsanto every year, only 141 have been taken to court. Lets see if we do 300,000 x 13 years (number of years this patent infrigement has been around = 3.9 million times a farmer has purchased their seeds divided by 141 lawsuits = .0000361% that Monsanto takes a farmer to trial, quite the pandemic, watch out for big bad Monsanto. Ohhh! I'm scared.
By the way Monsanto was just named #31 as one of the best corporate citizens in America. Crazy how they are the spawn of Satan, they just have everyone fooled, don't they?
I'd love to sink your ship, but it's already so full of holes it'd be a waste of time.
Also, please document one case where Monsanto sued a farmer based on a few seeds "thrown" into their field. YOU CANNOT DO IT. More importantly whenever a lawsuit is brought against a farmer if the farmer is found in the wrong all proceeds go to a youth leadership initiatives or scholarship funds, none are taken for profit. Oh by the way with the over 300,000 customers that use Monsanto every year, only 141 have been taken to court. Lets see if we do 300,000 x 13 years (number of years this patent infrigement has been around = 3.9 million times a farmer has purchased their seeds divided by 141 lawsuits = .0000361% that Monsanto takes a farmer to trial, quite the pandemic, watch out for big bad Monsanto. Ohhh! I'm scared.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 30A Beach Bum
Typical response when you have no facts to back up what you are saying.
You state that Monsanto has never been sued based on "seed theft" and then you go on to quote lawsuit statistics. Is that you being naive or just really bad grammar?
EXTRACT: Currently, farmers with crops that become contaminated by patented seeds or pollen have been the target of harassing lawsuits brought by biotech patent holders, particularly Monsanto. --- --- California Legislature Passes Bill Protecting Farmers Against Monsanto Lawsuits
Monsanto continues its lawsuit against a North Dakota family farm, despite an independent body’s ruling that it found no evidence of wrongdoing. Roger, Rodney and Greg Nelson grow soybeans, wheat and sugar beets on 8,000 acres outside of Amenia, ND, in the Red River Valley. (See February story about Nelson case)
"They (Monsanto) haven’t got any evidence," says Mark Fraase, the attorney representing the Nelsons. "They can’t gather any, yet they persist."
Monsanto would not comment on any aspect of this story.
The Roushes’ experience is not unique. Monsanto told Arkansas farmer Ray Dawson that it spent over $250,000 on hiring Pinkerton investigators to inspect his property for three to four weeks. The company apparently fired these investigators, as well as the attorneys that initially had been hired to handle the case, because they could not find proof of patent infringement. The second group of investigators hired by Monsanto spent two days conducting the same inspection, only this time they claimed to have found sufficient evidence of infringement.50
WASHINGTON — Jan 13, 2005 - (NATURALWIRE) - The Center for Food Safety released today an extensive review of Monsanto’s use and abuse of U.S. patent law to control the usage of staple crop seeds by U.S. farmers. The Center (CFS) launched its investigation to determine the extent to which American farmers have been impacted by litigation arising from the use of patented genetically engineered crops. Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers details the results of this research, discusses the ramifications for the future of farming in the U.S. and outlines policy options for ending the persecution of America’s farmers.
“These law suits and settlements are nothing less than corporate extortion of American farmers,” said Andrew Kimbrell executive Director of CFS. “Monsanto is polluting American farms with its genetically engineered crops, not properly informing farmers about these altered seeds, and then profiting from its own irresponsibility and negligence by suing innocent farmers. We are committed to stopping this corporate persecution of our farmers in its tracks.” Review of Monsanto's Abuse of Patent Law
"As interviews and reams of court documents reveal, Monsanto relies on a shadowy army of private investigators and agents in the American heartland to strike fear into farm country. They fan out into fields and farm towns, where they secretly videotape and photograph farmers, store owners, and co-ops; infiltrate community meetings; and gather information from informants about farming activities. Farmers say that some Monsanto agents pretend to be surveyors. Others confront farmers on their land and try to pressure them to sign papers giving Monsanto access to their private records. Farmers call them the 'seed police' and use words such as 'Gestapo' and 'Mafia' to describe their tactics" Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear.
Monsanto has sued many a farmer when their GM crops have turned up on the farmer's fields even though the farmers say they never planted them (examples [1][2]). Farmers who get into the Roundup-Ready (RR) System lose their independence, and are obliged to sign a lengthy and restrictive agreement. [3]. What's more Monsanto contracts out to private investigation firms like Pinkerton, to regularly check up on their farmers (and independent, non-GM farmers as well), taking samples unannounced from their fields to make sure they are not in violation [4][5]. It also maintains a hotline so farmers can turn in their neighbors for suspected violations.
According to Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers Monsanto pursues hundreds of new investigative leads a year, 600 in 2003 for example, aimed at farmers.
"The odds are clearly stacked against the farmer: Monsanto has an annual budget of $10 million dollars and a staff of 75 devoted solely to investigating and prosecuting farmers. The largest recorded judgment made thus far in favor of Monsanto as a result of a farmer lawsuit is $3,052,800.00. Total recorded judgments granted to Monsanto for lawsuits amount to $15,253,602.82. Farmers have paid a mean of $412,259.54 for cases with recorded judgments".
And that's just page 1 of a google search for "Monsanto lawsuits" returning 520,000 hits.
Obviously, your Monsanto retirement package has enabled you to live along 30A, which is admirable. But no self-respecting "beach bum" would take their side in this debate.
__________________
Instead of wondering when your next vacation is, may you ought to set up a life you don't need to escape from. - Seth Godin, Tribes
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Miss Critter For This Useful Post:
It should be obvious to anyone that farmers like GMO crops and they're here to stay. I've heard people say things like "how can you patent life'. Well the answer is simple, through the court system, that's how. I myself would like to learn more about some of the early rulings that set this precedent. I'm not saying I disagree with this. It makes sense that if you produce a new innovation that you should have some intellectual property rights and control.
So I'm sure some farmers like these seeds so much that they attempt to violate contractual agreements in order to save $$ on these "frankenseeds". I'm sure that some farmers rat out other farmers and the accused says "It's not my seed it blew on my property". Finally I have no doubt that occasionally that really is the case and an innocent farmer gets accused and loses a court case. I believe in the majority of situations though, farmers are happy with their agreements with the seed provider because of their improved bottom line. Maybe that makes them just as evil??
Last edited by LuciferSam; 03-10-2010 at 12:58 AM.
The Northwest Florida beach communities of South Walton County on the Emerald Coast - from east to west: Inlet Beach, Rosemary Beach, Alys Beach, Seacrest, Camp Creek, WaterSound Beach, Seagrove Beach, Seaside, WaterColor, Grayton Beach, Blue Mountain Beach, Santa Rosa Beach, Dune Allen, Sandestin, Miramar Beach - When you've said SoWal, you've said it all! Directly east is Panama City Beach, and directly west is Destin. Point Washington and Freeport on the bay round out SoWal.
Looking for free SoWal stickers?If you’re not lucky enough to be at the beach, send us the number of stickers you want and a self-addressed stamped envelope to SoWal.com, 174 WaterColor Way #114, Santa Rosa Beach, FL 32459.
Gotta go, my lawn needs an application of pre-emergent weed killer. I hope Wal-Mart hasn't run out.
). Supposedly, this was not reported by some of the major networks??? Strange indeed. Anyway, I found this link in case others don't know about it.
I'll be alarmed when some sicko fabricates Roundup ready dollar weed.
Zyklon_B
Linear Mode
