Pepe, your research is impressive.
Pepe quoted:
Monsanto is believed to have 87 terminator patents pending in developing countries but has never used the technology commercially, or even tested it in field trials. The company claims its introduction is five years away. The technology is still in its infancy and most large GM companies are developing their own versions. **Thirty-one other terminator patents have been granted.*
So this last paragraph is my point. You have provided the fact that the Terminator gene DOES exist.
I am telling you as both a farmer AND as a seed salesman for Pioneer, that Monsanto has NOT implemented this into their GMO crops.
Any time seed companies or technology developers implement new trait they MUST not only disclose that the gene is present, but also get FDA, USDA and foreign trade approval. The terminator gene has NOT gotten that far. The above quote mentions it is 5 years away, but I will believe it when I see it.
Here is my thinking, from a seed salesman perspective.
1. Any time a trait is introduced into corn or soybeans there is Always a period of a reduction in yield in the crop. The more traits we add, the more potential for an actual reduction in production. That is one of the reasons we've heard in the industry of why Monsanto hasn't implemented the terminator gene; they still don't know how the growing plant will respond.
2. A small group of Representatives of started an Anti-trust investigation against Monsanto. Monsanto did NOT meet their numbers of profitability this year. The seed division is letting people go right and left. Their dominance and business practices have really pissed off Many farmers. They are dealing with the back-lash now. Implementing the Terminator Gene would Not be a good play by them right now.
I'm not sure if any of this will sway you Pepe. Maybe I need to take some grain out of our storage and plant it and take pictures of it sprouting and growing. But then again, you would prolly tell me my "documentary" was a "right-wing conspiracy theory!" HA
that's an interesting way to say you were wrong
not really sure what kind of claims you are trying to project onto me....i never said they put it in every single seed, in fact i don't think i ever made any claims about it other than saying the future of food mentioned it, YOU were the one making claims saying there is no such thing as a terminator gene, it's all an internet myth, there are no patents for such a thing....and it really only took me less than 5 min to find those 3 articles i posted, it wasn't that hard to find.
imo, they shouldn't even test this variant! as we can see with the variations they have already they cross pollinate with non GMO plants and i think the last thing we need is creating a nonsustainable variant of food. they can't keep their current stock from cross pollinating why does anyone think this would be any different??
the only reason to even create such a thing is out of pure greed. and yes, the article said it was about 5 years away from being perfected....did you notice the date of those articles were 1999?
so, i don't know why you think i would automatically claim it was a vast right wing conspiracy if you video taped yourself growing plants from seeds.....?
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
As a 38 year old farmer who has "fed the world" my entire life, this deeply saddens me that Pearl Jam would lend it's name in support of a film full with untruths and propoganda. Animal agrilculturalists want our livestock and poultry to thrive and be healthy. The animal science industry takes better care of our animals than we as humans take care of our homeless population.
Write a song about that Ed...
He's right. I work in an animal laboratory. The pressure from outside organizations to enrich these animals lives are rediculous. I wish i could take the things we are made to give these animals and give them to the homeless.
As a 38 year old farmer who has "fed the world" my entire life, this deeply saddens me that Pearl Jam would lend it's name in support of a film full with untruths and propoganda. Animal agrilculturalists want our livestock and poultry to thrive and be healthy. The animal science industry takes better care of our animals than we as humans take care of our homeless population.
Write a song about that Ed...
He's right. I work in an animal laboratory. The pressure from outside organizations to enrich these animals lives are rediculous. I wish i could take the things we are made to give these animals and give them to the homeless.
what kind of testing do you do? just out of curiousity...
that's gotta be a pretty depressing job... yikes
so the OP is also a seed sales person for pioneer? sorry, i'm still very new to all the details of GMOs and the agriculture business... but isn't this thread a little like a Wal-Mart CEO telling us child labour is a lie?
maybe i'm mixing up the agriculture companies, correct me if i'm wrong. just was interesting to me.
(i thought basing propaganda accusations entirely on seeing a trailer clip was interesting enough... )
I watched this film over the weekend, and although a good part of it was an infomercial for Stonyfield, I thought it was a worthy audio-visual companion to Fast Food Nation (unlike Richard Linklater's attempt at dramatizing the subject).
Anyone care to attempt to find "untruths" in the article below?? Or maybe we can keep dismissing the hard work of people who actually care about what is happening to our environment and our food supply until we're totally doomed?
Five years of occupation, more than $558 billion spent, 4,182 U.S. soldiers and 655,000 Iraqi civilians dead, and it now looks like Monsanto (NYSE.MON - $71.95) is going to be the real victor in Iraq thanks to a postwar document known as Order 81.
Part of the infamous 100 Orders, Order 81 mandates that Iraq’s commercial-scale farmers must now purchase "registered” seeds. These are available through agribusiness giants like Monsanto, Cargill Corporation (a private company) and the World Wide Wheat Company (also private), but Monsanto is far and away the most significant player in the registered seed market.
Monsanto’s seeds are “terminator” seeds. This means they are inherently sterile, and any seed they produce does not give birth to more plants.
The technology behind registered seed is called genetic modification, and genetically modified (GM) seeds supposedly can’t reproduce, though “drift,” via wind currents and bird consumption, has resulted in a great many instances where GM crops ended up in fields where they were not planted.
A classic example is Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser, whose canola fields inexplicably sprouted GM varieties from Monsanto. Monsanto promptly sued Schmeiser for patent infringement.
Originally developed to avert world hunger (at least according to Monsanto), these GM crops not only do not produce more than their non-modified cousins, but the herbicide Roundup, developed in tandem by Monsanto to treat GM fields, is becoming increasingly ineffective. This has led to more herbicide purchases among farmers, greater profits for Monsanto, increasingly smaller yields, and greater environmental pollution overall.
Roundup, a glyphosate, is the direct descendant of Agent Orange (also produced by Monsanto), and is especially toxic to marine animals. Glyphosates, known as endocrine disruptors, are being increasingly implicated in neurological disorders, DNA damage and even death. However, as often (and mistakenly) reported, Roundup does not contain pesticide. Pest control is part of the genetic modification of seeds.
In the U.S., these GM varieties of corn, soy and rapeseed may have cost the U.S. economy $12 billion since 1999 in rising farm subsidies, lower crop prices, loss of major export orders and product recalls, according to Britain’s premiere organic food association, the Soil Association.
Contrary to popular belief, farm subsides do not protect small American farmers. They do drive down the profit on crops. In the US, 10 percent of farms receive 75 percent of subsidies, and all these farms are run by agribusiness giants like Monsanto. Exporting GM crops is hampered by the fact that many countries refuse to buy genetically modified crops, including Australia, the EU (except Spain), and Japan. Product recalls, involving the use of GM crops in food products sold to countries where GM food is forbidden, is not only costly but represents an ongoing bone of contention on the world market which hampers international trade relations.
In India, where regional governmental studies show Monsanto’s GM cotton producing seven times less than an indigenous variety of cotton, farmers are drinking the toxic chemicals they formerly used to treat their fields in an effort to escape rising debt and poverty. This so-called “suicide by pesticide” is the final solution for farmers locked into Monsanto contracts that benefit no one but Monsanto.
In Columbia, where Monsanto’s RoundUp Ultra has been deployed in the war against drugs (under the name Plan Columbia), local communities and human right’s organizations are charging that Ultra is destroying indigenous food crops, water sources and indeed entire protected ecologies in the Andes. Ironically, cocaine production has jumped almost 10 percent since the plan's inception, moving higher into the mountains and decimating even more remote ecologies.
Monsanto’s share of this American taxpayer-funded drug eradication enterprise ($1.3 billion) is more than $25 million. Ultra, a concentrated version of Roundup with added surfactants to increase its toxicity, has been implicated in the deaths of a number of children. DynCorp International (NYSE.DCP - $10.83), the company doing the spraying, is under contract to the U.S. government.
Order 81, by first forcing Iraq’s farmers to use GM seeds, and then by declaring natural seeds an infringement on Monsanto technology, will result in the sorts of tragedies seen elsewhere in the developing world, reducing Iraq’s farmers to drinking field-grade herbicides to escape financial catastrophe.
Nor will the Iraqi people benefit in terms of more food. Order 81, mandated under the dystopian title "Plant Variety Protection,” turns the agricultural world on its head by defining indigenous crops as invasive and GM crops as uniform and stable. Moreover, the six varieties of wheat developed for Iraq are primarily used in pasta. Since the Iraqis don’t eat pasta, one can only assume these food crops are destined for Western nations, leaving the average Iraqi that much closer to starvation.
Order 81, carefully crafted to look like humanitarian legislation aimed at rescuing a country decimated by half a decade of war, is in fact a Monsanto power play under U.S. government sponsorship. Farmers who do not comply will have seeds, farm implements and even land seized.
The infamous 100 Orders, of which 81 is only an instance, are clearly a ploy to allow multinationals like Monsanto to take over an entire nation. As Iraqi resentment over this privatization grows, expect continued resistance, more deaths, and ultimately a failure of democracy.
...Order 81, carefully crafted to look like humanitarian legislation aimed at rescuing a country decimated by half a decade of war, is in fact a Monsanto power play under U.S. government sponsorship. Farmers who do not comply will have seeds, farm implements and even land seized.
The infamous 100 Orders, of which 81 is only an instance, are clearly a ploy to allow multinationals like Monsanto to take over an entire nation. As Iraqi resentment over this privatization grows, expect continued resistance, more deaths, and ultimately a failure of democracy.
And that is perhaps the greatest tragedy of all.
There's got to be a way we kill Monsanto before they take over completely. It's truly sick what they get away with.
Ok...so I DID watch Food Inc. last night. Where to start?? "...what to say, what to say?"
To quickly answer a couple recent posts. Yes, I am a salesman for Pioneer, but far from a CEO. We work as an 100% commission basis selling directly to our neighboring farmers. Our family has had a Pioneer dealership/agency for 50 years and in three generations. That's why I take this so personally and to heart. And Yes, there have been posts (or maybe Food Inc. [FI]) stating Monsanto as being the second largest seed supplier in the World...and then yes Pioneer is the largest supplier of seed to the World. We have business units in 70 countries. But this is what I don't get (though it IS human nature); why is bigger always inherently so evil? To my point, to my knowledge, Pioneer has NOT taken any farmer to court over Round Up seed agreements. Pioneer has had waaay too much letigation w/ Monsanto over the last decade. We have no problem letting them play their bad cop role. I seriously could write a very long post on my feelings toward Monsanto and give you quotes from my neighbors and fellow farmers. More on Monsanto to follow...and absolutely NO I'm not defending them. They have screwed Pioneer over big time in the past decade...
Kenny, thanks for your post, but I can tell you that your article does have quite a bit of misinformation. I'll start w/ a few.
"Roundup, a glyphosate, is the direct descendant of Agent Orange (also produced by Monsanto), and is especially toxic to marine animals. Glyphosates, known as endocrine disruptors, are being increasingly implicated in neurological disorders, DNA damage and even death. However, as often (and mistakenly) reported, Roundup does not contain pesticide. Pest control is part of the genetic modification of seeds.
In the U.S., these GM varieties of corn, soy and rapeseed may have cost the U.S. economy $12 billion since 1999 in rising farm subsidies, lower crop prices, loss of major export orders and product recalls, according to Britain’s premiere organic food association, the Soil Association.
Contrary to popular belief, farm subsides do not protect small American farmers. They do drive down the profit on crops. In the US, 10 percent of farms receive 75 percent of subsidies, and all these farms are run by agribusiness giants like Monsanto. Exporting GM crops is hampered by the fact that many countries refuse to buy genetically modified crops, including Australia, the EU (except Spain), and Japan. Product recalls, involving the use of GM crops in food products sold to countries where GM food is forbidden, is not only costly but represents an ongoing bone of contention on the world market which hampers international trade relations."
First: Round Up IS glyphosate. It was being developed to be a ....SOAP. Not sure that it can be proven to be similar to Agent Orange. I've spilled glyphosate on me several times (the concentrate), and have yet to grow a third nipple...let alone die.
Second: Not sure how GMO crops have actually "cost" the U.S. $12b? GMO crops have ZERO to do w/ the U.S. Farm Bill or how we get our subsidies. That is entirely FALSE. Actually our crop insurance (in case of major drought) actually cost Less if we provide documentation we are planting Bt/GMO corn. The traits make the plant Healthier and survive stress Better. The British source is sketchy at best.
Third: Farm subsidies are on a per acre basis (another false hood in F Inc). The small operator gets less Gross than the larger grower, but still gets paid. The article was written in '08 and World trade of GMO grain has changed dramatically in the past few years. At one point, it was my knowledge that France was the only non importer of EU countries. Not sure about the Aussies...will have to look into that.
Just know I took about 5 pages of notes while watching the video. I'm about to check a few things before I start writing on here. I will break my counter points into different topics.
Also know as a cattleman, I FULLY support Kevin's Law. The packing industry and their plants need to be held more accountable.
I’ll say your prayers I’ll take your side
I promise a way to make light...
What's saved could be one last lifetime
vedderman71, I certainly appreciate your dedication to this subject... but I'm a bit confused.
Agent Orange was a herbicide developed by Monsanto... that's the only connection you need to make. And at the time it was sprayed on the forests of Vietnam, Monsanto and our government told us, don't worry, it won't cause any undue harm to people. But we now know that people were killed or disfigured by it, and many Vietnamese were born with horrible deformities because of it. Roundup may not be the same type of herbicide as AO, but it's made by the same company that lied about it. Glyphosate is certainly not a natural part of the ecosystem. It may not have any immediate effects on humans, but it does affect the ecology where it is used, and it certainly kills things that aren't meant to be killed. Do we have to genetically modify earthworms to make them "Roundup Ready" too? Studies are still being done on it... so WHY are we using it?
My opinion is, simply, DO NOT FUCK WITH THE WAY NATURE PRODUCES FOOD, especially when it's irreversible. Agriculture is fine of course, but I don't want the DNA of food being tampered with.
And where does it say the GMO crops have anything to do with the Farm Bill? I don't have time to research the Farm Bill, but I did find this...
Bill to Mandate GMO Research for Africa/S. Asia Passes Unanimously
by: Jill Richardson
Wed Apr 01, 2009 at 09:37:08 AM PDT
Yesterday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously approved S.384 The Global Food Security Act of 2009, which was sponsored by Dick Lugar (R-IN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Bob Casey (D-PA). In my view, this is not good news. The bill specifies that the U.S. MUST fund GMOs and biotechnology. Additionally, the hearing about the bill was so heinous that the bill's intent is crystal clear - and it's not good.
---
If the people who create websites like the one above, or who make documentaries like Food Inc. are lying so badly to us.... what is their agenda? What is the purpose? Just to conspire against mega-successful, government subsidized companies like Monsanto for shits and giggles???
I don't think the details matter so much... what matters to me is this one company having so much power over our food supply... and for commercial farmers in Iraq, where agriculture was born... they can't keep their own seeds?????? THAT IS FUCKED UP. End of story.
Ok folks my replies will have topical subject lines b/c I literally took 5 pages of notes.
First off...corn production.
Not sure where Troy Roush gets his basis for how corn production is subsidizes to a point of selling grain Below our production costs. That is Completely FALSE. (I googled Mr. Roush, couldn't find if he is the Canadian farmer some have spoke of?) Corn growers have enjoyed record Profits for the last 3 years. Though our costs were very high last year, the world demand for grain is at an all-time high. (And don't "blame" ethanol.) As countries such as India and China continue to gain wealth, their people want to be more well-fed. Also consider how weak the dollar is on a global stage.
Cost vs. Profit Example: most corn growers cost structure is around $2.50 a bushel. Much corn was sold at or above the $3.25 to $4.00 range. (corn peaked at a record high at the $6.00 level mid-summer) So do the conservative math of $0.75 profit X national ave yield of 155 bu/acre= $116.25 an acre PROFIT. In Iowa and Illinois growers can regularly expect 200+ bu/acre yields. Our family averaged around the 190 bu/A range.
With great yields and many growers doing and excellent marketing so growers enjoyed $200/acre profits.
The subsidies farmers receive are on an Per Acre basis. ONLY in times of very poor commodity prices (i.e. less than $2.00/bu) does the government step in w/ per bushel subsidies. We register our farms w/ the local county USDA office and in return get a per Acre payment in the $12-20 per acre range. Many growers take that money and buy crop insurance for...$15-25 per acre range (depending how aggressive a plan is choosen).
The crop insurance is a good "safety net" in case of severe drought. When we sign up our acres w/ the USDA, it allows the Soil and Water Conservation Office to monitor whether we have acceptable erosion levels (i.e. the T by 2000 legislation).
When we sell our grain to the local elevators their #1 customers are livestock and poultry feeders. These elevators pay us a price based on the Chicago Board of Trade and they hope to re-sell the grain to these feeders for a profit. These feeders are NOT buying the corn for Below our cost production.
Another complete False-Hood of Food Inc....and this is from only a quarter page of notes.
Only 4 3/4 pages to go.
I’ll say your prayers I’ll take your side
I promise a way to make light...
What's saved could be one last lifetime
Comments
that's an interesting way to say you were wrong
not really sure what kind of claims you are trying to project onto me....i never said they put it in every single seed, in fact i don't think i ever made any claims about it other than saying the future of food mentioned it, YOU were the one making claims saying there is no such thing as a terminator gene, it's all an internet myth, there are no patents for such a thing....and it really only took me less than 5 min to find those 3 articles i posted, it wasn't that hard to find.
imo, they shouldn't even test this variant! as we can see with the variations they have already they cross pollinate with non GMO plants and i think the last thing we need is creating a nonsustainable variant of food. they can't keep their current stock from cross pollinating why does anyone think this would be any different??
the only reason to even create such a thing is out of pure greed. and yes, the article said it was about 5 years away from being perfected....did you notice the date of those articles were 1999?
so, i don't know why you think i would automatically claim it was a vast right wing conspiracy if you video taped yourself growing plants from seeds.....?
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
He's right. I work in an animal laboratory. The pressure from outside organizations to enrich these animals lives are rediculous. I wish i could take the things we are made to give these animals and give them to the homeless.
what kind of testing do you do? just out of curiousity...
that's gotta be a pretty depressing job... yikes
maybe i'm mixing up the agriculture companies, correct me if i'm wrong. just was interesting to me.
(i thought basing propaganda accusations entirely on seeing a trailer clip was interesting enough... )
Nothing wrong with eating steak, its wrong to rape and pillage the land and animals so you can have a lump of meat next to your potatoes... :roll:
Good thing it's a tender juicy ribeye next to MY potatoes
Anyone care to attempt to find "untruths" in the article below?? Or maybe we can keep dismissing the hard work of people who actually care about what is happening to our environment and our food supply until we're totally doomed?
The Real Victor in Iraq: Monsanto
Written by Jeanne Roberts
Tuesday, 28 October 2008 12:20
Five years of occupation, more than $558 billion spent, 4,182 U.S. soldiers and 655,000 Iraqi civilians dead, and it now looks like Monsanto (NYSE.MON - $71.95) is going to be the real victor in Iraq thanks to a postwar document known as Order 81.
Part of the infamous 100 Orders, Order 81 mandates that Iraq’s commercial-scale farmers must now purchase "registered” seeds. These are available through agribusiness giants like Monsanto, Cargill Corporation (a private company) and the World Wide Wheat Company (also private), but Monsanto is far and away the most significant player in the registered seed market.
Monsanto’s seeds are “terminator” seeds. This means they are inherently sterile, and any seed they produce does not give birth to more plants.
The technology behind registered seed is called genetic modification, and genetically modified (GM) seeds supposedly can’t reproduce, though “drift,” via wind currents and bird consumption, has resulted in a great many instances where GM crops ended up in fields where they were not planted.
A classic example is Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser, whose canola fields inexplicably sprouted GM varieties from Monsanto. Monsanto promptly sued Schmeiser for patent infringement.
Originally developed to avert world hunger (at least according to Monsanto), these GM crops not only do not produce more than their non-modified cousins, but the herbicide Roundup, developed in tandem by Monsanto to treat GM fields, is becoming increasingly ineffective. This has led to more herbicide purchases among farmers, greater profits for Monsanto, increasingly smaller yields, and greater environmental pollution overall.
Roundup, a glyphosate, is the direct descendant of Agent Orange (also produced by Monsanto), and is especially toxic to marine animals. Glyphosates, known as endocrine disruptors, are being increasingly implicated in neurological disorders, DNA damage and even death. However, as often (and mistakenly) reported, Roundup does not contain pesticide. Pest control is part of the genetic modification of seeds.
In the U.S., these GM varieties of corn, soy and rapeseed may have cost the U.S. economy $12 billion since 1999 in rising farm subsidies, lower crop prices, loss of major export orders and product recalls, according to Britain’s premiere organic food association, the Soil Association.
Contrary to popular belief, farm subsides do not protect small American farmers. They do drive down the profit on crops. In the US, 10 percent of farms receive 75 percent of subsidies, and all these farms are run by agribusiness giants like Monsanto. Exporting GM crops is hampered by the fact that many countries refuse to buy genetically modified crops, including Australia, the EU (except Spain), and Japan. Product recalls, involving the use of GM crops in food products sold to countries where GM food is forbidden, is not only costly but represents an ongoing bone of contention on the world market which hampers international trade relations.
In India, where regional governmental studies show Monsanto’s GM cotton producing seven times less than an indigenous variety of cotton, farmers are drinking the toxic chemicals they formerly used to treat their fields in an effort to escape rising debt and poverty. This so-called “suicide by pesticide” is the final solution for farmers locked into Monsanto contracts that benefit no one but Monsanto.
In Columbia, where Monsanto’s RoundUp Ultra has been deployed in the war against drugs (under the name Plan Columbia), local communities and human right’s organizations are charging that Ultra is destroying indigenous food crops, water sources and indeed entire protected ecologies in the Andes. Ironically, cocaine production has jumped almost 10 percent since the plan's inception, moving higher into the mountains and decimating even more remote ecologies.
Monsanto’s share of this American taxpayer-funded drug eradication enterprise ($1.3 billion) is more than $25 million. Ultra, a concentrated version of Roundup with added surfactants to increase its toxicity, has been implicated in the deaths of a number of children. DynCorp International (NYSE.DCP - $10.83), the company doing the spraying, is under contract to the U.S. government.
Order 81, by first forcing Iraq’s farmers to use GM seeds, and then by declaring natural seeds an infringement on Monsanto technology, will result in the sorts of tragedies seen elsewhere in the developing world, reducing Iraq’s farmers to drinking field-grade herbicides to escape financial catastrophe.
Nor will the Iraqi people benefit in terms of more food. Order 81, mandated under the dystopian title "Plant Variety Protection,” turns the agricultural world on its head by defining indigenous crops as invasive and GM crops as uniform and stable. Moreover, the six varieties of wheat developed for Iraq are primarily used in pasta. Since the Iraqis don’t eat pasta, one can only assume these food crops are destined for Western nations, leaving the average Iraqi that much closer to starvation.
Order 81, carefully crafted to look like humanitarian legislation aimed at rescuing a country decimated by half a decade of war, is in fact a Monsanto power play under U.S. government sponsorship. Farmers who do not comply will have seeds, farm implements and even land seized.
The infamous 100 Orders, of which 81 is only an instance, are clearly a ploy to allow multinationals like Monsanto to take over an entire nation. As Iraqi resentment over this privatization grows, expect continued resistance, more deaths, and ultimately a failure of democracy.
And that is perhaps the greatest tragedy of all.
There's got to be a way we kill Monsanto before they take over completely. It's truly sick what they get away with.
To quickly answer a couple recent posts. Yes, I am a salesman for Pioneer, but far from a CEO. We work as an 100% commission basis selling directly to our neighboring farmers. Our family has had a Pioneer dealership/agency for 50 years and in three generations. That's why I take this so personally and to heart. And Yes, there have been posts (or maybe Food Inc. [FI]) stating Monsanto as being the second largest seed supplier in the World...and then yes Pioneer is the largest supplier of seed to the World. We have business units in 70 countries. But this is what I don't get (though it IS human nature); why is bigger always inherently so evil? To my point, to my knowledge, Pioneer has NOT taken any farmer to court over Round Up seed agreements. Pioneer has had waaay too much letigation w/ Monsanto over the last decade. We have no problem letting them play their bad cop role. I seriously could write a very long post on my feelings toward Monsanto and give you quotes from my neighbors and fellow farmers. More on Monsanto to follow...and absolutely NO I'm not defending them. They have screwed Pioneer over big time in the past decade...
Kenny, thanks for your post, but I can tell you that your article does have quite a bit of misinformation. I'll start w/ a few.
"Roundup, a glyphosate, is the direct descendant of Agent Orange (also produced by Monsanto), and is especially toxic to marine animals. Glyphosates, known as endocrine disruptors, are being increasingly implicated in neurological disorders, DNA damage and even death. However, as often (and mistakenly) reported, Roundup does not contain pesticide. Pest control is part of the genetic modification of seeds.
In the U.S., these GM varieties of corn, soy and rapeseed may have cost the U.S. economy $12 billion since 1999 in rising farm subsidies, lower crop prices, loss of major export orders and product recalls, according to Britain’s premiere organic food association, the Soil Association.
Contrary to popular belief, farm subsides do not protect small American farmers. They do drive down the profit on crops. In the US, 10 percent of farms receive 75 percent of subsidies, and all these farms are run by agribusiness giants like Monsanto. Exporting GM crops is hampered by the fact that many countries refuse to buy genetically modified crops, including Australia, the EU (except Spain), and Japan. Product recalls, involving the use of GM crops in food products sold to countries where GM food is forbidden, is not only costly but represents an ongoing bone of contention on the world market which hampers international trade relations."
First: Round Up IS glyphosate. It was being developed to be a ....SOAP. Not sure that it can be proven to be similar to Agent Orange. I've spilled glyphosate on me several times (the concentrate), and have yet to grow a third nipple...let alone die.
Second: Not sure how GMO crops have actually "cost" the U.S. $12b? GMO crops have ZERO to do w/ the U.S. Farm Bill or how we get our subsidies. That is entirely FALSE. Actually our crop insurance (in case of major drought) actually cost Less if we provide documentation we are planting Bt/GMO corn. The traits make the plant Healthier and survive stress Better. The British source is sketchy at best.
Third: Farm subsidies are on a per acre basis (another false hood in F Inc). The small operator gets less Gross than the larger grower, but still gets paid. The article was written in '08 and World trade of GMO grain has changed dramatically in the past few years. At one point, it was my knowledge that France was the only non importer of EU countries. Not sure about the Aussies...will have to look into that.
Just know I took about 5 pages of notes while watching the video. I'm about to check a few things before I start writing on here. I will break my counter points into different topics.
Also know as a cattleman, I FULLY support Kevin's Law. The packing industry and their plants need to be held more accountable.
I promise a way to make light...
What's saved could be one last lifetime
Agent Orange was a herbicide developed by Monsanto... that's the only connection you need to make. And at the time it was sprayed on the forests of Vietnam, Monsanto and our government told us, don't worry, it won't cause any undue harm to people. But we now know that people were killed or disfigured by it, and many Vietnamese were born with horrible deformities because of it. Roundup may not be the same type of herbicide as AO, but it's made by the same company that lied about it. Glyphosate is certainly not a natural part of the ecosystem. It may not have any immediate effects on humans, but it does affect the ecology where it is used, and it certainly kills things that aren't meant to be killed. Do we have to genetically modify earthworms to make them "Roundup Ready" too? Studies are still being done on it... so WHY are we using it?
It's wikipedia, so take it with a grain of salt, but ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate#Humans
My opinion is, simply, DO NOT FUCK WITH THE WAY NATURE PRODUCES FOOD, especially when it's irreversible. Agriculture is fine of course, but I don't want the DNA of food being tampered with.
And where does it say the GMO crops have anything to do with the Farm Bill? I don't have time to research the Farm Bill, but I did find this...
http://www.lavidalocavore.org/showDiary.do?diaryId=1338
Bill to Mandate GMO Research for Africa/S. Asia Passes Unanimously
by: Jill Richardson
Wed Apr 01, 2009 at 09:37:08 AM PDT
Yesterday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously approved S.384 The Global Food Security Act of 2009, which was sponsored by Dick Lugar (R-IN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Bob Casey (D-PA). In my view, this is not good news. The bill specifies that the U.S. MUST fund GMOs and biotechnology. Additionally, the hearing about the bill was so heinous that the bill's intent is crystal clear - and it's not good.
---
If the people who create websites like the one above, or who make documentaries like Food Inc. are lying so badly to us.... what is their agenda? What is the purpose? Just to conspire against mega-successful, government subsidized companies like Monsanto for shits and giggles???
I don't think the details matter so much... what matters to me is this one company having so much power over our food supply... and for commercial farmers in Iraq, where agriculture was born... they can't keep their own seeds?????? THAT IS FUCKED UP. End of story.
it was an analogy.
First off...corn production.
Not sure where Troy Roush gets his basis for how corn production is subsidizes to a point of selling grain Below our production costs. That is Completely FALSE. (I googled Mr. Roush, couldn't find if he is the Canadian farmer some have spoke of?) Corn growers have enjoyed record Profits for the last 3 years. Though our costs were very high last year, the world demand for grain is at an all-time high. (And don't "blame" ethanol.) As countries such as India and China continue to gain wealth, their people want to be more well-fed. Also consider how weak the dollar is on a global stage.
Cost vs. Profit Example: most corn growers cost structure is around $2.50 a bushel. Much corn was sold at or above the $3.25 to $4.00 range. (corn peaked at a record high at the $6.00 level mid-summer) So do the conservative math of $0.75 profit X national ave yield of 155 bu/acre= $116.25 an acre PROFIT. In Iowa and Illinois growers can regularly expect 200+ bu/acre yields. Our family averaged around the 190 bu/A range.
With great yields and many growers doing and excellent marketing so growers enjoyed $200/acre profits.
The subsidies farmers receive are on an Per Acre basis. ONLY in times of very poor commodity prices (i.e. less than $2.00/bu) does the government step in w/ per bushel subsidies. We register our farms w/ the local county USDA office and in return get a per Acre payment in the $12-20 per acre range. Many growers take that money and buy crop insurance for...$15-25 per acre range (depending how aggressive a plan is choosen).
The crop insurance is a good "safety net" in case of severe drought. When we sign up our acres w/ the USDA, it allows the Soil and Water Conservation Office to monitor whether we have acceptable erosion levels (i.e. the T by 2000 legislation).
When we sell our grain to the local elevators their #1 customers are livestock and poultry feeders. These elevators pay us a price based on the Chicago Board of Trade and they hope to re-sell the grain to these feeders for a profit. These feeders are NOT buying the corn for Below our cost production.
Another complete False-Hood of Food Inc....and this is from only a quarter page of notes.
Only 4 3/4 pages to go.
I promise a way to make light...
What's saved could be one last lifetime