- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Genetically Modified Foods Article...
Posted on 3/2/11 at 10:15 am to Powerman
Posted on 3/2/11 at 10:15 am to Powerman
quote:
Genetically modified crops have been around forever though
genetically modified =/= genetically engineered
You want to argue that humans have been genetically modifying plants and animals by selectively breeding and getting certain traits to appear then by all means, make that argument.
Genetically engineered crops have only been available for purchase since 1994 and no studies have been done to determine health consequences to eating those crops on a long-term, population wide level. Until those studies are done, you can't attribute a certain symptom or illness to eating genetically engineered crops because you don't know what eating genetically engineered crops does to the human body on a long-term scale.
Smoking one cigarette isn't going to give you lung cancer overnight, but smoking a pack a day for 20 years will greatly increase your chances for a number of detrimental health conditions. Same with genetically engineered crops. Eating one genetically engineered ear of corn or eating one tomato won't kill you tomorrow, but having them as a staple of your diet for 20-30 years could cause serious health issues. The problem is that we just don't know, and until we do, I'm going to do my best to eat natural plants and animals.
1
Posted on 3/2/11 at 10:27 am to Khameleon
quote:
genetically modified =/= genetically engineered
You want to argue that humans have been genetically modifying plants and animals by selectively breeding and getting certain traits to appear then by all means, make that argument.
Genetically engineered crops have only been available for purchase since 1994 and no studies have been done to determine health consequences to eating those crops on a long-term, population wide level. Until those studies are done, you can't attribute a certain symptom or illness to eating genetically engineered crops because you don't know what eating genetically engineered crops does to the human body on a long-term scale.
Smoking one cigarette isn't going to give you lung cancer
I've been saying that for 3 days. But it seems like most that are for GM seeds don't get the point. Maybe hearing it from someone else will get it to sink in?
Just a little more info on Monsanto:
The non-profit Center for Food Safety[112] listed 112 lawsuits by Monsanto against farmers for claims of seed patent violations.[24] The Center for Food Safety's analyst stated that many innocent farmers settle with Monsanto because they cannot afford a time consuming lawsuit. Monsanto is frequently described by farmers as "Gestapo" and "Mafia" both because of these lawsuits and because of the questionable means they use to collect evidence of patent infringement.[24]
Monsanto is responsible for more than 50 United States Environmental Protection Agency? Superfund sites, attempts to clean up Monsanto Chemical's formerly uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.[24]
As of May 2008, Monsanto is currently engaged in a campaign to prohibit dairies which do not inject their cows with artificial bovine growth hormone from advertising this fact on their milk cartons.[24]
Gary Rinehart of Eagleville, Missouri was sued by Monsanto in 2002, who claimed that he had violated their Roundup Ready Soybean patent. Rinehart is not a farmer or seed dealer, but he still had to spend money for his legal defense. Monsanto eventually dropped the lawsuit, but never issued an apology, admitted to making a mistake, or offered to pay for Rinehart's legal expenses.[113] This is not the only case of aggressive, misconstrued action on the part of Monsanto. Monsanto has been accused of showing up at farmers' houses, making accusations, and demanding records.[113]
Monsanto sued the Pilot Grove Cooperative Elevator in Pilot Grove, Missouri, claiming that offering seed cleaning services to farmers was tantamount to inducing them to pirate Monsanto seeds. The Pilot Grove Cooperative Elevator had been cleaning seeds for decades before companies such as Monsanto could patent organisms.[24]
Monsanto has had a controversial history in India, starting with the accusation that Monsanto used terminator genes in its seeds, causing demonstrations against the company. Later, its GM cotton seed was the subject of NGO agitation because of its higher cost. Indian farmers cross GM varieties with local varieties using plant breeding to yield better strains, an illegal practice termed "seed piracy".[96][97] In 2009, high prices of Bt Cotton were blamed for forcing farmers of the district Jhabua into severe debts when the crops died due to lack of rain.[98]
In March 2010, Monsanto admitted that insects had developed resistance to the Bt Cotton planted in Gujarat. The company advised farmers to switch to its second generation of Bt cotton - Bolguard II - which had two resistance genes instead of one.[99] However, this advice was widely slammed by critics and even the Government of India who claimed that the admission by Monsanto was more of a business strategy. Maharastra Seeds, a Monsanto subsidiary, conducted several illegal trials in India and fields growing the GM seed were eventually burned in large scale protests
There are many more examples of unethical business practices and general asshol-ery. Yeah, I didn't spell a made up word correctly probably. Deal with it.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 10:51 am to BROffshoreTigerFan
quote:
The main problem that I have with this is that in the majority of those cases, the farmer didn't intentionally plant his strain of seeds. Wind-borne contamination can take place up to 25 miles away. There's not another situation that I can think of where this comes up with another corporation. Microsoft cannot sue T-bob's computer shop because the wind blew Microsoft's programming code into T-bob's shop.
Though the Food Board may not be the best place to have this debate, I'll make a final point and give you the last word.
In the cases cited on the wikipedia page, it was fairly clear there was sufficient evidence to show the farmers intended to defraud. LINK and LINK.
There were no cases cited where "windblown seeds" were a valid defense, although it was attempted in one of the cases above. The farmer's attempt is frankly, laughable. It's the equivalent of "I don't know who put that cocaine in my pocket." There were at least 2 examples where the farmers lied. Under one case, the farmer actually served time in prison for the scale of fraud committed. I believe it was over 40 tons of seed.
Of course seed gets blown. Monsanto must know that. The fact that they've only acted as a plaintiff in so few cases when practically every non-Monsanto customer is likely to have traces of Monsanto seed in their fields speaks to how careful they appear when pursuing litigation.
The farmers that Monsanto seems to pursue are the ones who knowingly violate their contractual agreements. They attempt to re-use seed rather than repurchase seed each year as they contractually agreed to. Farmers claim it is an efficiency to re-use seed and that's the way it's always been. That would be fine if they had not signed a contract to do otherwise. Monsanto claims their contractual agreements are designed to not only help Monsanto recoup their costs, but to help the farmer represent to potential buyers that they are getting the quality of what they paid for. The point has been made on this thread that genetically modified foods taste better. Wouldn't a buyer pay a premium for pure seed rather than risk buying crops of degraded quality? Shouldn't we also see that as farmers attempting to screw buyers and consumers...and obviously Monsanto?
When I buy a bottle of Makers Mark whiskey, I don't expect it'll be a watered down version. I want a consistent product quality. How can you defend practices that water down product quality? Why should corn buyers have to do business under a system that knowingly allows farmers to defraud them? If you pay for X at Y% purity, you should not receive something that is mostly X at something more than a standard deviation less than Y% purity.
Tell me why I'm wrong.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 11:03 am to Willie Stroker
Aw geez - not this shite again.. 
As long as the world population continues to exponentially increase as it has done for the last 200 years, we will need to develop more efficient methods of feeding ourselves. You have the right to choose what you put in your mouth. Lucky you. Most people don't.
And BTW, for both sides in this fight, Wikipedia as a reputable reference? GMAB!
Willie - sorry. I didn't mean to respond to your post. I agree with you!
As long as the world population continues to exponentially increase as it has done for the last 200 years, we will need to develop more efficient methods of feeding ourselves. You have the right to choose what you put in your mouth. Lucky you. Most people don't.
And BTW, for both sides in this fight, Wikipedia as a reputable reference? GMAB!
Willie - sorry. I didn't mean to respond to your post. I agree with you!
This post was edited on 3/2/11 at 11:12 am
Posted on 3/2/11 at 11:09 am to GRITSBabe
quote:
As long as the world population continues to exponentially increase as it has done for the last 200 years, we will need to develop more efficient methods of feeding ourselves.
That's part of the problem. 7+ billion people isn't sustainable
Posted on 3/2/11 at 11:18 am to BROffshoreTigerFan
quote:
The non-profit Center for Food Safety[112] listed 112 lawsuits by Monsanto against farmers for claims of seed patent violations.[24] The Center for Food Safety's analyst stated that many innocent (their biased judgment)farmers settle with Monsanto because they cannot afford a time consuming lawsuit (though they engaged in actions which risked it). Monsanto is frequently described by farmers as "Gestapo" and "Mafia" both because of these lawsuits and because of the questionable (but not illegal?) means they use to collect evidence of patent infringement.[24]
quote:
Gary Rinehart of Eagleville, Missouri was sued by Monsanto in 2002, who claimed that he had violated their Roundup Ready Soybean patent. Rinehart is not a farmer or seed dealer, but he still had to spend money for his legal defense. Monsanto eventually dropped the lawsuit, but never issued an apology, admitted to making a mistake, or offered to pay for Rinehart's legal expenses.[113] This is not the only case of aggressive, misconstrued action on the part of Monsanto. Monsanto has been accused of showing up at farmers' houses, making accusations, and demanding records.[113]
Monsanto's version:
quote:
We dismissed the case against Gary Rinehart.
Monsanto eventually reached an agreement to settle the case with Tim Rinehart, his brother’s son. The settlement involved Tim Rinehart agreeing to settle on the seed that he had planted. Interestingly, Tim Rinehart never followed through with the agreed settlement. The matter with Tim Rinehart remains unfulfilled to this day. Monsanto has not collected one cent and this farming operation remains unlicensed to use this technology.
quote:
Monsanto sued the Pilot Grove Cooperative Elevator in Pilot Grove, Missouri, claiming that offering seed cleaning services to farmers was tantamount to inducing them to pirate Monsanto seeds. The Pilot Grove Cooperative Elevator had been cleaning seeds for decades before companies such as Monsanto could patent organisms.[24]
Monsanto's version:
quote:
On July 16, 2008, legal proceedings ended with a mutually-agreeable settlement and Pilot Grove acknowledged violation of patent infringement. Under the terms of the settlement, Pilot Grove Cooperative Elevator, Inc., will deposit $275,000 in an account -- and the income from that account will fund scholarships for the Cooper County, Missouri, FFA and 4-H programs. The Pilot Grove Co-op will also develop and adopt a stewardship policy to avoid future patent infringement, and will work with a third-party organization to provide training for employees.
quote:
In 2009, high prices of Bt Cotton were blamed for forcing farmers of the district Jhabua into severe debts when the crops died due to lack of rain.[98]
quote:
In March 2010, Monsanto admitted that insects had developed resistance to the Bt Cotton planted in Gujarat. The company advised farmers to switch to its second generation of Bt cotton - Bolguard II - which had two resistance genes instead of one.[99] However, this advice was widely slammed by critics and even the Government of India who claimed that the admission by Monsanto was more of a business strategy. Maharastra Seeds, a Monsanto subsidiary, conducted several illegal trials in India and fields growing the GM seed were eventually burned in large scale protests
Monsanto's version:
quote:
Bollgard I products continue to control bollworm pests other than pink bollworm in the four districts in Gujarat where pink bollworm resistance has been confirmed....Resistance is natural and expected, so measures to delay resistance are important. Among the factors that may have contributed to pink bollworm resistance to the Cry1Ac protein in Bollgard I in Gujarat are limited refuge planting and early use of unapproved Bt cotton seed, planted prior to GEAC approval of Bollgard I cotton, which may have had lower protein expression levels....Furthermore, farmers must adopt measures such as need-based application of insecticide sprays during the crop season, and properly manage crop residue and unopened bolls after harvest. Examples of such practices include tillage and cattle grazing to minimize the survival and spread of pink bollworm.
For what it's worth, I found the India protests funny. It reminded me of an Indian fella at Der Weinerschnitzel near LSU who went crazy on me when I went back to the window for another packet of ketchup (he only gave me one). That crazy fricker came out of the window screaming about how I was trying to screw him over. He kept telling me each packet costs him 2 cents and customers like me were more interested in taking food from his children's mouths. We ended up in a pushing match, that resulted in me throwing my hotdog through the open window he came from. He called the police on me, but....surprise, surprise, they didn't feel charges were warranted.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 11:27 am to Willie Stroker
For Gritsbebe and Willie.
I used Wikipedia for general references, not as 100% accuracy. I'm not investing the time to google each individual Monsanto accusation and back it up.
There are 2 sides to every claim, I know this. Sure, there are farmers who probably defrauded Monsanto. There's people like that in every walk of life. I gave other instances of unethical practices used by this company.
If GM foods can safely cure world hunger, hey, I'm all for it. But there is not a single farmer that is out there growing to cure world hunger. They are all farming for government subsidies. I have a friend that works for the Department of Ag. I've gone to him for help in the past with problems I've encountered growing (botany major). A few months ago I started fabrication of a box in my garage to grow various fruits/veggies. One of the chambers of the box is to experiment with strains not normally grown either in Louisiana, or indoors. I wanted to try growing blueberry plants indoors in a controlled environment, and grow them hydroponically. The next day he called me back and told me that if I could prove that I could yield the same per square foot as the organic blueberry farm in Ethel, I could qualify for over $200k of subsidies. To grow blueberries in my garage. It's all a money game.
There's no undeniable data to back up the claims that these seeds are 100% safe, and are the end all cure to world hunger. In fact, some of their claims for bigger yields and more durable resistant plants have proven untrue in field tests.
I don't know the details of the contracts these farmers got into with Monsanto, and neither do you. Only the attorneys, farmers and Monsanto know the full details. I find it hard to believe that these farmers knowingly and willingly signed into a contract where they couldn't use seeds left over from a previous years crop. Since the beginning of time, farmers have always manufactured their own seeds, created their own hybrids for their own needs, and had the ability to create their own seeds. If stored properly, seeds can be viable for years with no outcome on the plant once grown. Now suddenly, these farmers decided that making their own seeds wasn't necessary, and instead are opting to purchase new, more expensive seeds.
What practice am I defending that waters down the quality? The ability for farmers to create their own seeds?
I used Wikipedia for general references, not as 100% accuracy. I'm not investing the time to google each individual Monsanto accusation and back it up.
There are 2 sides to every claim, I know this. Sure, there are farmers who probably defrauded Monsanto. There's people like that in every walk of life. I gave other instances of unethical practices used by this company.
If GM foods can safely cure world hunger, hey, I'm all for it. But there is not a single farmer that is out there growing to cure world hunger. They are all farming for government subsidies. I have a friend that works for the Department of Ag. I've gone to him for help in the past with problems I've encountered growing (botany major). A few months ago I started fabrication of a box in my garage to grow various fruits/veggies. One of the chambers of the box is to experiment with strains not normally grown either in Louisiana, or indoors. I wanted to try growing blueberry plants indoors in a controlled environment, and grow them hydroponically. The next day he called me back and told me that if I could prove that I could yield the same per square foot as the organic blueberry farm in Ethel, I could qualify for over $200k of subsidies. To grow blueberries in my garage. It's all a money game.
There's no undeniable data to back up the claims that these seeds are 100% safe, and are the end all cure to world hunger. In fact, some of their claims for bigger yields and more durable resistant plants have proven untrue in field tests.
I don't know the details of the contracts these farmers got into with Monsanto, and neither do you. Only the attorneys, farmers and Monsanto know the full details. I find it hard to believe that these farmers knowingly and willingly signed into a contract where they couldn't use seeds left over from a previous years crop. Since the beginning of time, farmers have always manufactured their own seeds, created their own hybrids for their own needs, and had the ability to create their own seeds. If stored properly, seeds can be viable for years with no outcome on the plant once grown. Now suddenly, these farmers decided that making their own seeds wasn't necessary, and instead are opting to purchase new, more expensive seeds.
quote:
When I buy a bottle of Makers Mark whiskey, I don't expect it'll be a watered down version. I want a consistent product quality. How can you defend practices that water down product quality? Why should corn buyers have to do business under a system that knowingly allows farmers to defraud them? If you pay for X at Y% purity, you should not receive something that is mostly X at something more than a standard deviation less than Y% purity.
What practice am I defending that waters down the quality? The ability for farmers to create their own seeds?
Posted on 3/2/11 at 11:37 am to GRITSBabe
quote:
As long as the world population continues to exponentially increase as it has done for the last 200 years, we will need to develop more efficient methods of feeding ourselves. You have the right to choose what you put in your mouth. Lucky you. Most people don't.
Agreed 100%
Feel free to put whatever you want in your own body. It's your choice. But don't try to boss other people around.
quote:
nd BTW, for both sides in this fight, Wikipedia as a reputable reference?
It's one of the more reputable references out there. Just think of it as a starting point. It's as accurate as any printed group of encyclopedias. No source is flawless.
Posted on 3/2/11 at 11:41 am to Willie Stroker
quote:
For what it's worth, I found the India protests funny. It reminded me of an Indian fella at Der Weinerschnitzel near LSU who went crazy on me when I went back to the window for another packet of ketchup (he only gave me one). That crazy fricker came out of the window screaming about how I was trying to screw him over. He kept telling me each packet costs him 2 cents and customers like me were more interested in taking food from his children's mouths. We ended up in a pushing match, that resulted in me throwing my hotdog through the open window he came from. He called the police on me, but....surprise, surprise, they didn't feel charges were warranted.
Is it possible that we're related? Because I see me doing the exact same thing. 
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News