Food Inc. Full of...???

12346

Comments

  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    chiquimonkey wrote:
    the thing that bothers me about this movie is that some of the claims are just outright lies. not based in science but using scare tactics instead. it's good to know where one's food comes from, and while michael pollan, who is involved in the movie, is a good writer, he's also a radical activist. an elitist one, the worst kind.

    i just find it disappointing that pearl jam would back something like this without offering a counter-perspective, i.e. one that does involve some actual science. i work with a ce specialist who talks about ag biotech, and she's also a scientist, so we approach the issues from that point of view. the anti-gmo folks have some good points, but unfortunately a lot is just plain incorrect. i'l have to share some more links to help educate folks here when i have time, just because i feel that it is unfair to offer one side of the issue.


    did you ever find the time to post these links exposing the lies?

    and actually it did show the other side. first, companies like Tyson, Perdue, Smithfield, Monsanto....all refused to give them an interview.

    second, it spotlights stoneyfield, a company that makes organic food like yogurt and milk. the head of that company DID allow to be interviewed and talked about having to sign corporate contracts with places he'd never imagine dealing with like wal-mart but he doesn't see it as selling out, he sees it as making that type of sustainable, compassionate farming more mainstream and hopefully a standard. also, he says it helps because organic products are taking up shelf space in those places instead of companies that cut corners and use rbgh and other practices
    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'
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    vedderman71 wrote:
    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...

    i just watched food, inc and frankly am baffled how people think this has anything to do with 100% of US farms or any family farms. the , INC in the title should be enough but within the first few minutes it is obvious it is only dealing with corporate farms. the back of the box mentions this, as well

    i didn't see any of the 'claims' in this doc to be false. it seems from the OP and other replies people are reacting saying things like 'my farm isn't like that!!' cool, however, this doc only dealt with corporate farms and now 5 companies control more than 80% of the meat industry. it showed how the chickens engineered to grow faster and have bigger breasts that parts of their bodies grow so fast their bones can't keep up with the weight and if they can move at all it's just a few steps....companies like Tyson and Perdue impose all these demands onto the chicken growers and the growers never even own the chickens....also, the contract demands the chickens be in darkness their entire lives. 1 chicken grower had agreed to allow the inside of his buildings be filmed but after a few visits from Tyson representatives he changed his mind. it's a felony in colorado to talk negatively about meat from the state?? the other libel laws, like the mother of the kid who died from the burger with e. coli isn't allowed to talk about what she eats is crazy. it's even crazier there's a push to ban filming or photographing feedlots and these things in some states.

    it also showed how government regulation and these corporations are so closely linked and the back and forth of people like the chief lobbyist for the meat packing industry ending up being chief of staff for the USDA, execs, lawyers....getting jobs and ending up as heads in the FDA....people who do things like fight as lawyers to fight labeling getting jobs writing labeling regulations....specifically how these scum got jobs in the USDA and FDA then changed the law so the government isn't allowed to shut down a facility that continually puts out contaminated food. certain places have had numerous e. coli outbreaks and do NOTHING to prevent future ones and just keep doing it because they don't want to spend the money fixing the problem. it shows part of a news report saying con agra was recalling lots of peanut butter for salmonella but knew about the problems 2 years earlier. also, in 1972 the FDA conducted roughly 50,000 food safety inspections, in 2006 they conducted 9,164. these industries are influencing and writing the laws to regulate themselves, like a little boy got e. coli from jack in the box and died, on aug 1st of that year they tested the plant that made the meat and it showed to have e. coli present....they didn't do a recall of the meat until 26 days later, wtf?? and the USDA has no authority in shutting that place down or doing much about it! it also said in the 70's there were thousands of slaughterhoueses now only 13 handle the majority of the meat in the country

    it shows how even if you don't eat fast food because of things like mcdonalds being the biggest buyer of meat the industry changes to those corporate 'standards'

    also, i think it is right about corn, we have far too much in our diets, the film shows how many things like xanthem gum are corn based and there is so much corn in pretty much everything we eat. the film didn't mention omega-6 but look it up, it can be beneficial but not in large doses. it promotes things like blood clotting and inflamation and is beneficial for animals when they hibernate, though. and things like grass have omega-3's which ARE beneficial to us and animals, even in large doses. 1 in 3 kids born after 2000 will contract early diabetes, 1 in 2 for minorities....

    i also don't think it's a lie when it shows cramped quarters and huge piles of cow shit and seeing cattle with shit caked on their coats.....plus with how many cows are in just 1 hamburger, the quick, assembly line butchering....it's no wonder there's e. coli outbreaks. i forget the number the doc says have occurred in the past so many years.

    also, the waste and images the doc shows can not be refuted and obviously it is not implying this is how every single farm looks like and how they operate. so, maybe if you have pigs you don't keep them in those tiny pens (that shot in the doc was so sad) good for you, don't consider yourself part of the corporate farming this doc is about.

    i also got the future of food from netflix and will see how close these 2 documentaries are
    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'
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    GlttrGrrl wrote:
    chiquimonkey wrote:
    the thing that bothers me about this movie is that some of the claims are just outright lies. not based in science but using scare tactics instead. it's good to know where one's food comes from, and while michael pollan, who is involved in the movie, is a good writer, he's also a radical activist. an elitist one, the worst kind.

    i just find it disappointing that pearl jam would back something like this without offering a counter-perspective, i.e. one that does involve some actual science. i work with a ce specialist who talks about ag biotech, and she's also a scientist, so we approach the issues from that point of view. the anti-gmo folks have some good points, but unfortunately a lot is just plain incorrect. i'l have to share some more links to help educate folks here when i have time, just because i feel that it is unfair to offer one side of the issue.

    The thing that bothers me about your post is that I'm still looking for an "outright lie" in the film. I think calling Pollan "a radical activist. an elitist one, the worst kind" doesn't prove that anyone is lying.

    Even the following isn't a lie:
    vedderman71 wrote:
    Beef cattle feed lots large or small allow cattle to walk about their lots. A large "corporate" feed lot is made up of many consecutive pens, many a half an acre to an acre (about the size of many lots houses sit upon).
    Most video coverage is of "feeding time" when the cattle are being fed in a long bunk, where they are sticking their head through a gate to eat. When they are done, they are free to "roam" about their pen. Many producers have large dirt mounds in these pens that allow the cattle to seek "high ground" when it rains.
    Many large dairy operations have gone to a similar method of feeding their milk cows. Many times you see similar footage of the cows eating, but they are free to move about when they are done. Many states have out-lawed "tethered" feeding practices of any livestock.

    showing them during feeding time isn't a lie, particularly if it's shown during the part of the film when they're talking about what the cattle eat. Having driven past many of these large feed lots, and seeing what a waste of the earth they are and not being able to breathe for miles around them, I don't consider them any more humane than tethering them, and they are certainly not "good" for the planet, in my definition of "good."

    Anyway, I saw this article today, and it made me come back to this thread...
    "Farmers feed 1 million to 2 million tons of poultry litter to their cattle annually, according to FDA estimates."
    poultry litter includes feces, spilled chicken feed, feathers and poultry farm detritus
    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-f ... 7725.story


    i am having trouble finding these 'lies', as well....

    there's a lot of good stuff/info in the special features, too, especially the deleted/extended scenes. in some states they are trying to make it illegal to videotape or photograph feed lots and places like that and Tyson and Perdue refused to let their chicken houses be filmed....you have to ask why??? why should they be so afraid? if it is taken out of context i'm sure more than a few 'news' shows would want them on to say stick up for themselves. are we going to get a glimpse of some new, cutting edge chicken nano-technology that would be stolen, bankrupting these companies if we saw what it was like in there?? the chickens bodies can't keep up with bioengineering and can barely make it a few steps before falling down, sitting in total darkness and since they can barely move they are obviously sitting in their shit and since it is dark it seems like that would make it hard to clean on a routine basis.....they don't want people seeing their freak chickens convulsing in their own shit and thinking that's 'what i'm feeding my kids'

    it made a good point about Upton Sinclair's 'The Jungle' and the push for better standards to what it is now....
    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'
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    i also think it made a great point about how we've skewed our food system. we can buy a double cheeseburger for 99cents but we can't buy a head of lettuce or broccoli for that little
    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'
  • stuckinline
    stuckinline Posts: 3,406
    Pepe Silvia wrote:
    i also think it made a great point about how we've skewed our food system. we can buy a double cheeseburger for 99cents but we can't buy a head of lettuce or broccoli for that little
    i agree, and it saddens me that this is true.
    i watched it this weekend. thought it was an ok movie, but if the movie gets discussion started about food choices and may make a person change their eating/food shopping habits then the movie was effective.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    ok ... i finally saw the movie yesterday and like some here are looking for where this film "lies" ... are the stats wrong? ...

    i do think the film fails on one large front - the entire debate on industrialized food comes down to this:

    **industrialized food "seeks" to make more food on less land for a lot cheaper - what is wrong with that!?**

    the film doesn't really tackle this notion enough
  • embrace
    embrace Posts: 849
    polaris_x wrote:
    ok ... i finally saw the movie yesterday and like some here are looking for where this film "lies" ... are the stats wrong? ...

    i do think the film fails on one large front - the entire debate on industrialized food comes down to this:

    **industrialized food "seeks" to make more food on less land for a lot cheaper - what is wrong with that!?**

    the film doesn't really tackle this notion enough

    For me the film urges serious discussion about your question asking, "at what cost is this okay?" We are focused on the price tag of the product (ie" $.99 fast food), but is it worth the harm done to our bodies or our environment? (and thus the dollars spent to correct these problems) I think they could've added more solutions/real world applications for combatting the issues of industrialized farming but I wonder if the aim was simply to promote thought and discussion rather than to sway.
    got a car...got some gas...oh let's get out of here-get out of here fast...
    I hope you get this message but your not home...I will be there in just a minute or so...
    I want to go but I want to go with you.

    Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime. -MT

    I've had enough, said enough, felt enough. I'm fine, still in it.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    embrace wrote:
    For me the film urges serious discussion about your question asking, "at what cost is this okay?" We are focused on the price tag of the product (ie" $.99 fast food), but is it worth the harm done to our bodies or our environment? (and thus the dollars spent to correct these problems) I think they could've added more solutions/real world applications for combatting the issues of industrialized farming but I wonder if the aim was simply to promote thought and discussion rather than to sway.

    i think the film does aim to sway the viewer to see that these factory farms are:

    *cruel to the animals
    *breeding ground for disease
    *bad for workers
    *bad for the environment

    but as a society - let's face it ... most people don't care about any of those things ... how do we connect society that the whole foundation of our food supply concerns itself with profits above everything else?

    EDIT: oh yeah - FUCK MONSANTO
  • embrace
    embrace Posts: 849
    Good points- I wasn't looking at the exposure to these conditions as a "sway", but more of a "guess what's hiding behind this curtain".
    My hope is that with media saturation, education people/society will want to make a change- we are all fundamentally good and want what's good, right? I was amazed at the line this past Saturday, at my local Farmer's Market, of people happily lined up to pick up their turkeys from a local farmer...For me it is a sign, however small, that changes are occurring. I don't have the answers but I have always believed that change comes from within and of "being the change you want to see in the world". Perhaps one day it will be the "cool" thing to treat workers well and raise unaltered produce and then society will join the train...
    I actually even overheard a college aged girl purchasing some apples say to her friend that it wasn't feasible for her to buy everything there due to price, but she did what she could afford and that these apples were soo good :)

    polaris_x wrote:
    embrace wrote:
    For me the film urges serious discussion about your question asking, "at what cost is this okay?" We are focused on the price tag of the product (ie" $.99 fast food), but is it worth the harm done to our bodies or our environment? (and thus the dollars spent to correct these problems) I think they could've added more solutions/real world applications for combatting the issues of industrialized farming but I wonder if the aim was simply to promote thought and discussion rather than to sway.

    i think the film does aim to sway the viewer to see that these factory farms are:

    *cruel to the animals
    *breeding ground for disease
    *bad for workers
    *bad for the environment

    but as a society - let's face it ... most people don't care about any of those things ... how do we connect society that the whole foundation of our food supply concerns itself with profits above everything else?

    EDIT: oh yeah - FUCK MONSANTO
    got a car...got some gas...oh let's get out of here-get out of here fast...
    I hope you get this message but your not home...I will be there in just a minute or so...
    I want to go but I want to go with you.

    Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime. -MT

    I've had enough, said enough, felt enough. I'm fine, still in it.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    embrace wrote:
    Good points- I wasn't looking at the exposure to these conditions as a "sway", but more of a "guess what's hiding behind this curtain".
    My hope is that with media saturation, education people/society will want to make a change- we are all fundamentally good and want what's good, right? I was amazed at the line this past Saturday, at my local Farmer's Market, of people happily lined up to pick up their turkeys from a local farmer...For me it is a sign, however small, that changes are occurring. I don't have the answers but I have always believed that change comes from within and of "being the change you want to see in the world". Perhaps one day it will be the "cool" thing to treat workers well and raise unaltered produce and then society will join the train...
    I actually even overheard a college aged girl purchasing some apples say to her friend that it wasn't feasible for her to buy everything there due to price, but she did what she could afford and that these apples were soo good :)

    yeah - i agree but this is what i'm thinking as i'm at my local farmers market (btw - i got some great carrots and parsnips this week) ... i'm thinking this market would be sold out if even 0.5% of the city came here today in like 25 mins ... there is for sure a great movement happening - like more restaurants serving grass fed beef and local produce but for every place like that we still ship in garlic from china ... i mean - garlic ... it's so easy to grow garlic but yet a huge percentage of our garlic comes from china ...
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    polaris_x wrote:
    embrace wrote:
    Good points- I wasn't looking at the exposure to these conditions as a "sway", but more of a "guess what's hiding behind this curtain".
    My hope is that with media saturation, education people/society will want to make a change- we are all fundamentally good and want what's good, right? I was amazed at the line this past Saturday, at my local Farmer's Market, of people happily lined up to pick up their turkeys from a local farmer...For me it is a sign, however small, that changes are occurring. I don't have the answers but I have always believed that change comes from within and of "being the change you want to see in the world". Perhaps one day it will be the "cool" thing to treat workers well and raise unaltered produce and then society will join the train...
    I actually even overheard a college aged girl purchasing some apples say to her friend that it wasn't feasible for her to buy everything there due to price, but she did what she could afford and that these apples were soo good :)

    yeah - i agree but this is what i'm thinking as i'm at my local farmers market (btw - i got some great carrots and parsnips this week) ... i'm thinking this market would be sold out if even 0.5% of the city came here today in like 25 mins ... there is for sure a great movement happening - like more restaurants serving grass fed beef and local produce but for every place like that we still ship in garlic from china ... i mean - garlic ... it's so easy to grow garlic but yet a huge percentage of our garlic comes from china ...


    i know and to think they fought labeling the country of origin on food....thankfully there's a lot of farmer's markets in my town and surrounding area and 2 grocery stores that sell produce, meat, milk and eggs from local farms. i get most of my food from this place http://www.veginout.net/home.html they use a lot of local stuff, as well
    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'
  • embrace
    embrace Posts: 849
    Polaris X- Made me laugh to think of my local farmers market getting swarmed and everyone fighting for the last squash (in abundance right now) :lol: Maybe one day ;) Also, sometimes it amazes me how far our pantry "staples" have traveled - and to think...if I had a tzotchke from China others might consider it exotic!

    Here are a few of my fave sites- with search engines for local goods.

    www.localharvest.org
    www.eatwild.com
    got a car...got some gas...oh let's get out of here-get out of here fast...
    I hope you get this message but your not home...I will be there in just a minute or so...
    I want to go but I want to go with you.

    Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime. -MT

    I've had enough, said enough, felt enough. I'm fine, still in it.
  • theoceansmademe
    theoceansmademe Posts: 1,132
    Travels With wrote:
    chiquimonkey wrote:
    i'm all for buying local, and love going to farmers markets just cuz the produce is fresh. but just wanted to share this link as far as 'organic' goes:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceN ... ZJ20090729

    i just hope people don't buy this movie as gospel (especially if it has a PJ stamp of approval), and try to educate themselves more about the issues.

    Great point. It so much better to buy local than to buy organic. I love when people buy organic produce and it's from Chile or some other distant land -- I'm sure that was organic jet fuel that brought over to your Safeway :) If you can, buy local!

    LMAO off that's so right.

    I love the local farmers market during the summer.

    Here's another kicker when buying organic, many of the markets down here place the organic produce in styrofoam, wrap it with plastic. What a f'in joke.
  • stuckinline
    stuckinline Posts: 3,406
    polaris_x wrote:
    embrace wrote:
    Good points- I wasn't looking at the exposure to these conditions as a "sway", but more of a "guess what's hiding behind this curtain".
    My hope is that with media saturation, education people/society will want to make a change- we are all fundamentally good and want what's good, right? I was amazed at the line this past Saturday, at my local Farmer's Market, of people happily lined up to pick up their turkeys from a local farmer...For me it is a sign, however small, that changes are occurring. I don't have the answers but I have always believed that change comes from within and of "being the change you want to see in the world". Perhaps one day it will be the "cool" thing to treat workers well and raise unaltered produce and then society will join the train...
    I actually even overheard a college aged girl purchasing some apples say to her friend that it wasn't feasible for her to buy everything there due to price, but she did what she could afford and that these apples were soo good :)

    yeah - i agree but this is what i'm thinking as i'm at my local farmers market (btw - i got some great carrots and parsnips this week) ... i'm thinking this market would be sold out if even 0.5% of the city came here today in like 25 mins ... there is for sure a great movement happening - like more restaurants serving grass fed beef and local produce but for every place like that we still ship in garlic from china ... i mean - garlic ... it's so easy to grow garlic but yet a huge percentage of our garlic comes from china ...

    the garlic grown in the states is a lot stronger than the garlic from china. i agree garlic is so easy to grow, plus the added waste of energy to ship garlic in from china. i read one statistic than about 75% of the garlic sold in the usa is from china. wtf?

    is anyone having a 'local' thanksgiving? only buying food that comes from within 100 miles of where you live?
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    stuckinline wrote:
    the garlic grown in the states is a lot stronger than the garlic from china. i agree garlic is so easy to grow, plus the added waste of energy to ship garlic in from china. i read one statistic than about 75% of the garlic sold in the usa is from china. wtf?

    is anyone having a 'local' thanksgiving? only buying food that comes from within 100 miles of where you live?

    yeah - that's the number i heard too but i didn't want to source it so i didn't mention it ... haha

    thanksgiving is so easy to do local ... with root veggies in season now ...
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    stuckinline wrote:
    the garlic grown in the states is a lot stronger than the garlic from china. i agree garlic is so easy to grow, plus the added waste of energy to ship garlic in from china. i read one statistic than about 75% of the garlic sold in the usa is from china. wtf?

    is anyone having a 'local' thanksgiving? only buying food that comes from within 100 miles of where you live?
    UGH! I eat so much garlic but can only buy it locally during harvest season (September-ish). That makes me ill knowing that the garlic in the market could be from China.
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    Jeanwah wrote:
    This doc. looks just like The Future of Food, which was very good, but I'm not going to watch Food, Inc. if it's basically the same info. Is it? Anyone? D2D?


    i finally got around to watching the future of food last night and only a little bit of information is repeated and that's mainly stats like how many companies control 80% of the meat, when they showed the revolving door between companies like Monsanto and governmental regulatory agencies it repeated some of the same names and i think 1 of the farmers Monsanto went after for violating their seed patents when nature cross pollinated his crop with their genetically engineered strain was in both documentaries.

    i think the future of food was a lot more about the science of GM foods, like the terminator gene, how researchers found when they feed Monarch caterpillars some kind of GM corn 40% died suddenly, another researcher fed GM potato's to rats and a lot of them developed lesions in their stomach, how corporations are patenting cancer cells and charging ridiculous fees for people to be allowed to use them to find a cure....whereas food, inc was mainly about corporate farming and consolidation of markets (which the future of food also briefly touched on)

    the future of food spotlighted the science behind GM foods and their impact and shitty actions by companies like Monsanto in going after small farmers and food, inc spotlighted factory farming. also, the future of food went into other countries like what the EU's stance on GM foods is, Mexico, Canada... where food, inc was pretty much just about the US
    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'
  • vedderman71
    vedderman71 Posts: 62
    The "terminator gene" is a internet myth. All of our GMO grain will readily reproduce itself. Besides, the terminator gene would have to been registered w/ the US Patent office, and there is none. We have to sign "technology agreements" every crop year that states we know what we are planting and we know how to plant refuge acres (non Bt hybrids), etc. legal BS, et.al. There is NO mention of the terminator gene. Trust me, these GMO crops will readily reproduce. If growers kept back the soybeans for seed and Monsanto caught them, the fines would be significant (another part of the tech agreements we sign- that we will NOT keep back the grain as seed).

    I finally just got Food Inc. from the local library. It seems even in our small town there was quite the demand and waiting list. Watching this doc on this snowy Midwestern afternoon sounds more productive than fighting the masses at the Indy malls.

    I will report back later.
    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
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    vedderman71 wrote:
    The "terminator gene" is a internet myth. All of our GMO grain will readily reproduce itself. Besides, the terminator gene would have to been registered w/ the US Patent office, and there is none. We have to sign "technology agreements" every crop year that states we know what we are planting and we know how to plant refuge acres (non Bt hybrids), etc. legal BS, et.al. There is NO mention of the terminator gene. Trust me, these GMO crops will readily reproduce. If growers kept back the soybeans for seed and Monsanto caught them, the fines would be significant (another part of the tech agreements we sign- that we will NOT keep back the grain as seed).

    not according to the FDA, USDA and Monsanto.....

    http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys ... 005768.pdf


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_us ... technology

    Genetic use restriction technology (GURT), colloquially known as terminator technology, is the name given to proposed methods for restricting the use of genetically modified plants by causing second generation seeds to be sterile. The technology was developed under a cooperative research and development agreement between the Agricultural Research Service of the USDA and Delta and Pine Land company in the 1990s, but it is not yet commercially available[1]. Because some stakeholders expressed concerns that this technology might lead to dependence for poor smallholder farmers, Monsanto Company, an agricultural products company and the world's biggest seed supplier, pledged not to commercialize the technology in 1999.[2] Late in 2006, it acquired Delta and Pine Land company.

    The technology was discussed during the 8th Conference of the Parties to the UN's Convention on Biological Diversity in Curitiba, Brazil, March 20-31, 2006.

    Variants

    There are conceptually two types of GURT:

    1. V-GURT: This type of GURT produces sterile seeds meaning that a farmer that had purchased seeds containing v-GURT technology could not save the seed from this crop for future planting[1]. This would not have an immediate impact on the large number of primarily western farmers who use hybrid seeds, as they do not produce their own planting seeds, and instead buy specialized hybrid seeds from seed production companies. However, currently around 80 percent of farmers in both Brazil and Pakistan grow crops based on saved seeds from previous harvests.[3] Consequentially, resistance to the introduction of GURT technology into developing countries is strong.[3] The technology is restricted at the plant variety level - hence the term V-GURT. Manufacturers of genetically enhanced crops would use this technology to protect their products from unauthorised use.
    2. T-GURT: A second type of GURT modifies a crop in such a way that the genetic enhancement engineered into the crop does not function until the crop plant is treated with a chemical that is sold by the biotechnology company[1]. Farmers can save seeds for use each year. However, they do not get to use the enhanced trait in the crop unless they purchase the activator compound. The technology is restricted at the trait level - hence the term T-GURT.



    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/1999/oct/06/gm.food2

    Monsanto's pledge not to commercialise the "terminator" technology that genetically programmes plants to bear sterile seeds was yesterday hailed as a significant victory for developing countries and for farmers around the world, but others dismissed it as little more than a public relations exercise.

    "This does not mean that terminator technology is dead," said Hope Shand of the Rural Advancement Foundation in Canada, which has led criticism of the nascent technology **since it was patented in March last year. **.....

    n Britain Greenpeace challenged Monsanto, the world's second biggest seed company, to sell it the patent for £1. "Nobody will ever trust a biotech company not to use an invention it owns. If they were really committed to not using it, they could sell it to us. This changes nothing. The shadow is still there."

    US patent number 5,723,765 has been the spark that lit a fire under Monsanto and the other GM companies that have been buying up seed companies and moving heavily into farming in poor countries.

    **The patent for "gene protection" - dubbed terminator by environmental groups when it was approved last year** - has united in protest agronomists, agricultural scientists, farmers, environment and development groups, churches, intellectuals and new democracy movements from India to Africa and Latin America.....

    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.**
    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'
  • vedderman71
    vedderman71 Posts: 62
    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
    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

Categories