Indian Government Sues Monsanto over GM Eggplant

[nico2292]

Death penalty for Monsanto Owner

[kalijuri]

i wish 'anonymous' would focus on monsanto and keep doing so until it is dismantled. monsanto is KILLING ALL OF US. taking all of our food supplies and killing them, hence depopulating the planet.

[HeLpLOstGOdAny1]

Meanwhile India is chipping the whole population at 1 million people a day & down will go the ida on any freedom in the world

[opcn18]

If a normal seed company gets a crop and sells seeds to it do they owe anything extra? No. If a biotech seed company gets a crop, modifies it, and sells it on do they owe anything extra? No. Monsanto didn't make the original parent crop illegal or patent it. They are simply offering a variety that is cheaper and safer and more reliable to grow and eat, even after paying the license fees. It makes a lot of sense that they should use the local varieties that grow well in the local area.

[laughtergoodforsoul]

Good job Indian Government. Keep the fake seeds out of your food chain. Too late for the U.S. however : ( 

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul That is not the point. The Indian government does not want Monsanto "stealing" germplasm and genetic material from their country, which they can then be used to create a patented version of the crop (eggplant) and sold back to farmers in India--and the Indian gov't wouldn't get any compensation for it. They are not trying to keep "fake seeds" out of their country-India is already major consumer of GM crops.

[laughtergoodforsoul]

@farmerallis Wow, I am ignorant on this dilemma. Of course, what Monsanto is trying to do is criminal and immoral. A shame though also, that GM crops are the norm in India. I think Haitains were trying to not use GM seeds, correct? I read an article on that. Thought India was doing the same. Are there any other countries that typically use organic seeds for their country's food?

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul GM crops are surrounded by a host of misinformation and myths, and just the fact that humans are "tampering" with genetic material puts people off, especially people who do understand what is really happening when GMOs are used and developed (which is 99.99% of the people in the world). The fact is, GM crops are used and consumed everywhere, in every country, in some way. The fact of the matter is, without GM crops, much of the world would starve.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - You're trying to sound "informed" but you're just spreading disinformation. Seems you havent read all the studies. Like this: biolsci(DOT)org/v05p0706(DOT)h­tm

or Search - "Monsanto's GMO Corn Linked To Organ Failure, Study Reveals"

I would guess by the number of your posts, and your tone, you could very well be a Monsanto operative.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi I am in no way spreading "disinformation." I have been directly involved in the ag industry all of my life, worked on a conventional grain farm, and studied crop production and plant genetics in college. What are your credentials besides reading propaganda-filled Green Peace articles? And no, I am not a Monsanto rep, I just hate seeing people attack the ag industry when they do not know all of the facts; and when they fail to realize the importance of GMOs.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - High time you rethink the indoctrination you were subjected to in college. You may find that some of what you were "taught" was just compliance with a school grant from Monsanto.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Monsanto does dump a lot of money into agricultural education in high school and college. What's wrong with that? The world needs farmers and agricultural researchers, and who's going to fund programs like that? Certainly not people like you, who oppose nearly every advancement in the ag field. I find it so amazing how disconnected people have become from food (fiber and fuel, too), and the people who produce it.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - You got me all wrong. I am all for advancements in ag. I just don't consider crops that cause organ failure and sterility in the 3rd generation (look up the study) as "advancements".

Who else would fund ag education and research? Gee, how did the education system, farming, and the world get along before Monsanto? What a ridiculous argument.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi I read that article you linked me to. It does imply that the studied GM corn lines show SYMPTOMS of organ failure in rats. I would question their methods though; 11% and 33% corn diet is ridiculously high--no human being consumes that much corn on a daily basis. Sure, just about anything can be toxic at a high enough concentration. I would be interested to see what the effects are at a "normal" concentration. My hypothesis would be that it has a non-measurable affect.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi And about the funding--I spent 2 years as an ag education major as an undergraduate, and no, most public education systems do not fund ag programs. They see it as "extracurricular" and a financial burden. So no, public funding from education systems for ag ed is limited. You say "farming", which is very general. I assume you mean the ag/farm industry, which yes, they do fund ag education and research. They also include companies such as Monsanto.

[laughtergoodforsoul]

@Shroomn2hi and @farmerallis Do either of you know how farmers feel about Monsanto? I would like to hear their perspective. It seems that Monsanto ties their hands and takes freedom away. Why were gmo's even created? I have to say that God is the Creator of the seed and all created things. Does Monsanto want the world to think that their (our) very existence depends on them? They weren't there the day this world was created and has survived for millenia.

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul I can only speak for US farmers. On the whole, they like their products and what it does to boost their production. Right now their is an overwhelming majority of farmers that do feel a little threatened my Monsanto because they are so uptight about how they defend their patented plants. It's almost like they live in a little bit of fear.

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul Every year Monsanto sends around "agents" to scout farmers fields to see if they replanted any of their patented plants. Farmers have come to call them the "Monsanto Gestapo." Also, Monsanto has swallowed up many of the small local seed companies, and some farmers aren't happy about that, and it makes for purchasing seed other than Monsanto seed a little difficult. But overall in the production ag field, farmers are unified and support Monsanto and GMOs

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul GMOs were created in order to help boost yield, save farmers money, and help feed, fuel, and clothe more people. It's predicted that the world pop. will double by 2050, and we need to develop new seed varieties that are higher yielding, and more efficient in order to successfully feed, fuel, and clothe that many people. GMOs are simply another tool that we can use to achieve this goal.

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul And I certainly do not thing Monsanto wants the world to think that our existence depends on them and their products--there are MANY more companies that do the same exact work with GM seed. People should just know that it is a valuable tool which we can use in order to feed everyone. And yes, Monsanto was not around when the world was created; but again, the world population was not 6 billion. More people=more food=the need to implement new technology.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Also, interesting article you've found. I will read it in depth when I get the time. Although, from what I have read in the abstract, you have drawn an invalid conclusion. The GM corn did not lead to health issues, it was the left over Glyphosate chemical (the herbicide) which had an adverse affect on health. I'll get back to you on this when I read it fully. And also, Round Up is used on ALL crops, not just GMOs.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - your quote: "The fact of the matter is, without GM crops, much of the world would starve."

Complete BS.

More than enough food for the world can be grown without resorting to GM crops. The problem with world hunger is mostly a matter of distribution, as well as gov'ts paying farmers not to grow crops (like in the US), and even destroying crops (like in the US), in order to manipulate/protect market prices.

Please stop lying.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Prove to me that it's BS. We do have enough food to feed the world right now, but we need to advance the technology so that we can feed a world population THAT WILL DOUBLE BY 2050!! Between now and 2050, we need to produce as much food as WE EVER HAVE since we began cultivating crops 10,000 years ago. So don't sit here and tell me it's BS, because the fact is the world could very well run out of food in the near future. We should be embracing GM technology, not resisting.

[laughtergoodforsoul]

@farmerallis MSN recently highlighted an article on the fact that the Haitian and other governments hijacked most of the world's aid to Haiti after the earthquake. It is sad because there were millions of dollars that we all donated to them for food, clothing,rebuilding etc that never reached them because of corruption. I hear that often happens in Africa, Indonesia and other countries as well. Other governments simply do not allow aid into the country at all. Sad world!

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - The world population will double by 2050, eh? Really? Well, perhaps in "The World According to Monsanto".

Future population estimates are all over the place. They're just estimates. Take your pick depending on what you want to believe. Personally, I dont think the world pop. is going to double by 2050, when the US has a birthrate of 1.2, and 2.2 is required just to maintain current numbers. The same or similar is true for much of the developed world.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Are you serious? It's simple statistics. The world population growth follows a nearly perfect exponential curve. By 2050, the world population will double; you can not argue that. Yes, many developed countries have very low birth rates, but much of the world is not developed, and their population growth rate is huge. Look at just about every country in Africa (besides S. Africa and wealthy oil-holding countries like Egypt).

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - No, it not simple statistics. Yes, I am serious. More than one study or group has predicted a pop. peak -- usually at around 9B +- , time frames from 2050 to 2070.

Example: newscientist(DOT)com/article/d­n1108-global-population-to-pea­k-in-2070(DOT)html

Also...It's been shown certain GM foods can cause sterility in the 3rd gen; Monsanto is targeting 3rd-world countries where essentially all pop. growth will be... you may have discovered another goal of theirs.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi It is very simple; seriously. Plot the pop of earth vs. time and fit a curve to it. You will see it follows an exponential growth pattern. Either way you look at it; 9 billion people on earth is a hell of a lot of people, and GM technology is going to be used to support those 9 billion people. I would like to see this "GM 3rd gen sterility" study, have any links to scholarly articles about it?

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - A simple search of "GM crops cause sterility" will yield a plethora results. C'mon, show some ability to research beyond what you were "taught".

Example: vegsource(DOT)com/news/2010/04­/russian-biologists-gmo-foods-­cause-sterility-in-third-gener­ation(DOT)html

Even Leftist news reports this: huffingtonpost(DOT)com/jeffrey­-smith/genetically-modified-so­y_b_544575(DOT)html

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi These are not scholarly articles. You should never trust anything written by a news reporter. Unless the source has proper credentials, it can not be trusted.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - I am sorry, but you sound like you just graduated - full of arrogance about the piece of paper that you earned. You even chastised me for using the word "farming". LOL.

Well, you have an awakening coming - that a good portion of what you were "taught" is crap.

I went through the same thing many years ago. I have a Science degree and MBA. I had to relearn some of what I was "taught" due not only to simple errors, but outright false teachings and wrong philosophy.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi You don't need to apologize to me. Yes, I have recently graduated, and now I'm going back for a masters. I will also not sit here and let you tell me what I was taught was "crap." A degree in ag is VERY hands on, and most of what you learn is from the real world and comes directly from the horses mouth (the producers); none of that bookworm shit. Most of my undergrad career was spend side-by side with farmers. So unless you have an ag degree you don't understand.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - "So unless you have an ag degree you don't understand."

LOL. typical.

When you finally grow up, you will come to realize how immature and ignorant your statement is. You are no different than a religionist who is 200% certain THEIR religion is the right one - and if you are not part of their cult, you'll never "understand".

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi You are so very close-minded. Now you are completely veering off course; initially we were having a spirited argument about GMOs, now you have resorted to calling me green and associating me with a cult. At least I can look at the situation with an open mind, and take into consideration what others have to say and contribute to the conversation. I speak as a student and employee of the ag industry, and if you can not accept the validity of my inputs, then you have no hope

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - sometimes the truth hurts. I'm just pointing out that you have obviously been indoctrinated into the Monsanto way of thinking and are resistant to researching that which shows their point of view in error or disingenuous.

Your arguments are Monsanto-centric, so their validity is commensurate. Do yourself a favor and talk to farmers... excuse me, ag professionals... on the other side of the fence.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi "Do yourself a favor and talk to farmers... excuse me, ag professionals... on the other side of the fence."

That's exactly what I have been trying to beat into your head. I have talked, worked, learned, and BSed with countless farmers (it's okay to call us farmers btw), professors, agents, and other ag professionals. I know what these people think and believe because I am one of those people. I can not make it any more clear than that.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Also, you do not understand subsidies. Yes, subsidies are paid to farmers in order to keep market prices up. However, this is critical, because if the market crashed, farmers would go out of business and there goes our food, clothes, and fuel. So tell me how that is a bad thing? Please stop lying--most of your facts are true, but you stretch them and form them into complete propaganda. Oh, and we do not "destroy crops" in the USA.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - You do not understand economics, obviously, and are just parroting what Monsanto "taught" you. I have an MBA in addition to 2yrs of economics. Most of which was Keynesian (which is what you are spouting) and I had to re-learn later because it is WRONG. Subsidies (price-fixing) are bad; skews the mkt and leads to misallocation of resources.

And apparently you are not old enough to remember when the US feds ordered wheat crops destroyed because there was "too much".

[farmerallis]

@laughtergoodforsoul But that's not to say what Monsanto is doing is moral and correct; Monsanto often goes to extreme measures in order to make a dollar. Btw, I fully support Monsanto and what they do, but sometimes the way they go about it is wrong, especially when it comes to third world countries where bio-tech is not well understood by the general public and farmers (heck, the general public in the US has no clue what genetic engineering is).

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - Good question... is what Monatano is doing moral and correct? They take a plant, that has been cultivated by farmers for generations to obtain the attributes they desire - the natural way. Then Monsanto comes along, takes that which was brought forth by others, makes a small change, and calls it "theirs" via a patent....

How is that any different than, say, me adding or replacing a few notes in a Mozart concerto, and then calling it "mine"?

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Apples and oranges my friend. Do you realize the amount of time, money, and resources that go into breeding and/or engineering a new line of corn? You obviously do not, because it it not as easy as "changing a few notes." Also, breeding the "natural way" is the same as genetic engineering--nature does it all the time. DNA recombines in a way that gives rise to new genes. Genetic engineering is basically speeding up the natural recombination process.

[Shroomn2hi]

@farmerallis - Complete BS, once again.

You are just spreading propaganda for the GM industry.

Natural breeding does not introduce cross-species genes nor does it typically cause plants to produce the toxins found in GM foods - such as with "Round-up Ready" GM corn modified with the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis gene.

Obviously YOU know nothing about what it takes to "change a few notes" in a concerto and make it work. It takes great study and understanding of music...

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi Yes, natural breeding does not introduce transgenic genes. But you took my statement out of context once again. In nature, all gametes (sex cells) under go recombination, which creates new DNA sequences, new alleles, and even new genes. Take for example the Bt gene. You could spend millions of years breeding for an "insecticide" gene in corn, or you could just take that gene from the bacteria and insert it into the maize DNA. You basically accomplished the same thing.

[farmerallis]

@Shroomn2hi BTW, plants do produce toxins all the time in nature. Take for example caffeine and nicotine, they are produced by many plants as an insecticide. Black Wallnut produces a type of "herbicide" which retards the growth of nearly all plants growing around it (called negative allelopathy). Poison ivy and poison oak produce skin irritants. The list is endless. Please, this biological warfare has been going on for eons, and plants are natural masters at it.

[virgociously]

They are nutts and any government that allows this is irresponsible. These Monsanto people are not representing me as an American! 

[Quansan52]

@virgociously Are they not aware of the disastrous impact GMOs are having on our enviroment? We all share the same planet. Surely these Monsanto people are not that stupid and ignorant.

[shoshenkis]

@Quansan52 Blinding attachements, ignorance about how the Universe works and... Greed. Greed doesn't enter the heart of a man by reason, and thus reason and greed cannot coexist in one heart. You see it as one planet one fate, they see it as my your life, your life.

[shoshenkis]

@Quansan52 your life, my life I mean.

[farmerallis]

@Quansan52 GMOs are in no way having a "disastrous impact" on our environment.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis Tell that to the folks in Mexico trying to deal with GM hybridization with native corn varieties. Due to wind pollination, they're losing their unique crops, and the hybrids are wrong looking, sickly and do not produce well. And Monsanto don't hesitate to sue any farm that has unintentional hybrid plants. Plus, most Monsanto GM crops are DEPENDENT on toxic chemicals like Roundup to grow. Imagine if 70% of crops in the US needed Roundup, every year... no impact?!

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote GM crops are not dependent on "toxic" chemicals to grow. As a matter of fact, a recent study has found that with the use of GM crops, pesticide use has also decreased. Some GM crops are their own pesticide (ex: Bt corn and cotton). And, Round-Up and other Glyphosate herbicides are already used in the US, on every field at some point in the season. Also, 70% of the US corn crop is GM and 95% of the US soybean crop is GM too. GMOs are everywhere my friend.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis Depends how you define it. No, it doesn't need it to grow, but RR canola and cotton farmers have found that their crop doesn't compete as well as conventional crop when NOT treated, so it kinda IS dependent on it. Breeding triploid crops is one thing, but I want GMOs labeled - and Monsanto don't want that. I have a lot of allergies and since eating the wrong thing could kill me, I have a right to know if there is a gene that might cause a life threatening allergy.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote I completely respect the fact that people need to be careful of what they eat because of food allergies. But right now, there is no proof that specific genes cause allergic reactions or toxic affects on the body--some studies have showed that some genes cause some organs to exhibit symptoms of toxicity, but no signs have been found. More research should be done in that area and if it is found to be allergic or toxic, I agree, GM foods should be labeled.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote But if that labeling were the case, then just about every processed food we eat would have to be labeled. Corn and soybeans are in, and used for, just about everything, and the majority of corn and beans grown are genetically modified. If it hasn't killed us by now, I seriously doubt that it will in the future. EVERYONE eats or ware's something that was genetically modified, I guarantee it (unless everything you buy and eat is certified organic).

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis I go organic as often as I can, without being a jerk about it to other people. :) And when I was in Australia, I bought non-GMO since they actually do label food. It's hard, though, for that very reason - there sometimes is NO choice for those of us who don't want it, and I don't think that's good.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote I respect your decision to choose organic--although most people don't really know what organic is or why it is "better" than conventional. Organic is a great niche market, but cannot support an entire world population. Also, when you buy organic, be sure to buy certified organic (with the USDA label), if it doesn't have that, then it is a rip-off. And you're right, in the US it is nearly impossible to avoid GMOs; at least you realize that.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis It really is too bad they don't have "GMO Free" labeling here. If you are a farmer... you can probably see that there is a niche market here (whether you agree with the reasoning behind it or not) and some people are willing to pay more for non-GMO product. From a business perspective, it'd be something to consider. I'm surprised the farming community hasn't pushed harder for labeling, but I guess it's hard when Monsanto themselves control most of the seed supply here.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote I believe that the main reason that the ag industry hasn't pushed as hard for organic is because of all the government hoops a farm has to jump through in order to be certified organic--believe me, it is a real pain in the ass. Also, most organic farms are very small, require more labor, thus more capital to run. The farmer doesn't really pocket the extra money for being certified organic, the retailer makes the biggest profit gain.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote Also, the logistics of labeling food GMO free would be a nightmare. 1) because most farms grow a mix of GM and conventional plants. 2) grain elevators would have to separate GM from conventional. 3) the product would have to be tracked from field to customer to ensure it did not get "contaminated" with GM products. It would be a very hard task, and would most likely result in higher prices for both GM and conventional products.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis Difficult, yes.... and yet, many other first-world countries have managed it. ;) 

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote Yes, they indeed have. I have no doubt that we could do it here in the USA, but it would take a very long time to get that ball rolling.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis This is the also same company that also created PCBs, DDT and Agent Orange, and told us those things were safe when used as directed. They have a long, well documented record of failure to publicize results of unbiased LONG TERM trials of their products. They've never minded actively lying about products in the past (including Roundup!) Given this, I'd be curious to hear WHY you think it's so different now, when GM crops aren't even required to have any FDA testing?

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote All three of those are pretty horrible chemicals. Monsanto was contracted to make PCBs for GE (and others), and the US government contracted Monsanto to make Agent Orange. So blaming Monsanto for the use of those chemicals by their owners is BS--that would be like blaming Remington Firearms co. for killing people. Also, DDT is no longer used, and is illegal, but at the time it was the only way to control mosquito populations and reduce the spread of malaria.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis DDT was dying out by the time we started using it. And even if they didn't know that DDT was bad (despite the DDT found in breast milk in the 50s... took another 20 years to get banned), means they did it untested, just like GM plants. Ignorance is no excuse. DDT turned out to be bad, decades down the track.... maybe GM plants won't, but why do we always have to do it like this? Time and again, same story, new product. Nobody does anything til lots of people die..

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote I don't know, the issue of testing products is up to the government, and they hardly ever do things the correct way. Until they start mandating testing, no company is going to subjugate their product to testing unless it is required by law; so blaming Monsanto for being reckless and irresponsible is not right. Now if it was mandated and they opposed it, then that would be a problem. And malaria was not under control in the 40's; it's still a problem today.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis So it isn't right to expect a company to TEST products that it wants to market as being safe, instead of making the public PAY big bucks to be part of a large-scale experiment, so the company can pay a tiny percentage of their profits if the product turns out to not be safe? That isn't reckless??

Or is this just me living in my fantasy world where everyone tries to do the right thing as often as possible without being forced to by a governing body? I keep forgetting.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote I agree, we should try to reduce the amount of harmful toxins we put in our body. But the question to ask concerning GMOs, is, is the toxin at a high enough concentration so that it has an adverse effect on health. That question is still up in the air at this point. My guess would be that the concentrations are so low that they are null--but again, no way to know unless they're tested, like you said.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote And regarding large companies and testing; I still do not know of a large cooperation that voluntarily tests it's products in a rigorous way unless it is government mandated. Large companies don't do anything that they don't have to do.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis Of course they don't. Which is my point. Putting untested or minimally tested substances in or onto foods that people eat every single day is no less than EVIL and we should DEMAND better from both business and gov't. Dunno bout you, but Monsanto could not pay me enough to say "it's okay, it's for science" if I got cancer from Roundup residue on my food. Check Monsanto's Wikipedia entry for a good read. They're not the only bad company but they've a colorful history.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote I have to agree with you. We could do better in the food testing department.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote And yes, Monsanto does have a very interesting past. I have said this before, Monsanto doesn't always think things through, and they tend to pounce on anything that can make them a profit. They even teamed up with Scotts Turf to try and develop a Roundup Ready variety of Bentgrass, which is beyond stupid. I don't agree with everything they do, but I feel GMOs can greatly benefit society when used safely and properly.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis Sorry, I mean *Malaria* was dying out. It was already well under control before they started using it here.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote And about FDA testing of GMOs; I would not care either way if the were testing them or not. We have all been consuming them since the 90s, and I don't know about you, but I am fine and healthy (also, people are living longer than ever). If they were FDA tested, I am certain that they would pass; but if it would make the general public feel better, than it would probably be a good thing to do.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis They'll never test it now. :( Not unless a lot of people start getting sick or dying or a lot of weeds start popping up with Roundup resistance they didn't have before. I do hope that doesn't happen. This is one of those things that I really would rather be wrong about, for a variety of reasons.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote We are actually starting to see weeds showing resistance to Roundup already. Especially in grasses such as perennial ryegrass and annual bluegrass. But most of that is due to poor cultural practices. Simply rotating categories of herbicides mitigates or slows the ability for a plant to shift resistance to a single herbicide.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote And by the way, "natural" plants contain some pretty nasty chemicals and elements too. Plants will take up anything that is bioavailable to them, and some are really good at it (hyper-accumulators). For example, pit-bearing fruits (peaches, cherries, etc) are very good at accumulating cyanide and arsenic. Anything you eat is going to have some level of "harmful" toxin no matter what.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis Oh, of course. Oxygen is one of the most corrosive gaseous elements. My cells are fighting a losing battle with it (though I'll die faster if I stop breathing!) But why shouldn't we try to minimize the toxins we take in - the ones we haven't been around for thousands of years? Threshold of toxicity isn't the same for everyone and nobody comes with a label that tells them what their max safe dose is before they get cancer or endocrine dysfunction or whatever.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote Also, Monsanto does not sue farmers who have "unintentional hybrid plants" growing in their fields. They sue farmers who save patented seed and re-plant it; which they have the right to do since it is copyright infringement. Monsanto USA has roughly 300,000 customers per year since their first patented variety was released in 1997-98 or something, and out of those 300K/year, only 140 or so have been sued for infringement.

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote And as far as hybridization of GM corn with "native" corn varieties in Mexico; I will give you that one. Although the truth is stretched a little. Corn is a self pollinating plant, which means the pollen falls DOWN from the tassel to pollinate the silks on the same plant, or nearby plants. Corn pollen does not travel very well on the wind, it's too heavy. But that's not to say that it cant.

[wandering1coyote]

@farmerallis This is the same company that also created PCBs, DDT and Agent Orange, and told us those things were safe when used as directed. They have a long, well documented record of failure to conduct and publicize results of unbiased LONG TERM trials of their products. They've never minded lying about safety in the past, and were never made to prove their GM products were safe before selling 'em. I'd be happy to hear why you think that they would behave differently now?

[farmerallis]

@wandering1coyote What the Mexican govt needs to do is what we do in the US, which is to regulate how much acreage a farmer can plant in GM crops, and for the farmers there to plant refuge crops like we do in the US. Conventional and GM seed can co-exist, we do it very well in the US.

[wandering1coyote]

@Quansan52 Anything for the almighty dollar. :/ Sadly, they ARE that stupid and ignorant, and evil to boot... and they've got a noose around the neck of the US with the revolving door they have between political and corporate positions to ensure that their interests will always be served by our government, at our expense. They trespass and steal crops from farmers, then sue them for infringement. They really don't care who they hurt as long as THEY get their profits.

[shoshenkis]

although between the rampant corruption in India where you can buy a judge for a bowl of rice and USA's ''strategic interests'' I don't think this will lead anywhere.

[Quansan52]

@shoshenkis You are probably right.

[shoshenkis]

of course they steal plants left and right !