HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » i'm just going to POST TH...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:40 AM

i'm just going to POST THIS AS LOUD AS I CAN and crush all arguments-MONSANTO=root of all evil.

Last edited Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:54 PM - Edit history (5)

i am a real farmer, over 200 acres, i know what i'm talking about.

for starters-
edit#3: (non-whacko site)
There was quite a stir amongst beekeepers and anti-gmo activists this past October 2011 when chemical and seed giant Monsanto purchased Beeologics , a small company best known for its “groundbreaking research” vis a vis the application of RNAi technology on honeybees, a mechanism meant to block gene expression.
http://truth-out.org/article/item/6661:the-buzz-behind-the-monsantobeeolgics-acquisition

***

As you may not know, the EPA does not do its own research. Chemical companies hire their own people or conduct tests in their own labs. They design the tests. They conduct the tests. They pay for the tests. It's called the Fox Guarding the Henhouse. Incidentally, Bayer made $48,267,733,920 this past year. Yah, that's in billions!

Of course, Bayer found the compound safe for bees. The EPA accepted their research, but Tom Theobald saw something very suspicious. Bayer conducted the study in Canada on a two and a half acre plot. Hello? Bees travel up to five miles to forage.

"To think this would give us any kind of valid science is ridiculous," exclaimed Theobald.

He isn't the only who calls the industry tests "bad science."
http://truth-out.org/speakout/item/12586-bee-n-to-ban-systemic-pesticides-plans-to-sue-epa

***

It's not a subject discussed much in media and not a place where Big Agriculture wants to go. So what do the swells at places like Monsanto do? The same as the nuclear industry, the telecom industry and the people who want to privatize education. They dropped a big check on the California NAACP, and sure enough that august body took a stand against California's Proposition 37.
http://truth-out.org/speakout/item/12620-california-naacp-sells-out-to-big-agriculture-on-genetically-modified-foods

***

Jeffrey Smith is a leading national expert on the dangers of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and their impact on agriculture and our health. He heads The Institute for Responsible Technology and wrote the seminal Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12715-monsanto-and-genetically-engineered-food-playing-roulette-with-our-health

***

Their misleading ad campaign falsely implied that the World Health Organization had endorsed GMO foods as safe, and that the Food and Drug Administration opposed the ballot initiative. Of course, the mainstream media didn't object.

It worked. After weeks of statewide ad runs, the poll numbers flipped, and Prop 37 was defeated.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/12741-how-monsanto-flipped-the-vote

***

http://www.paraquat.ch/data/EvB_Paraquat_Dossier_en.pdf

***

http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-gmo-seeds-farmer-suicides-every-30-minutes/
In what has been called the single largest wave of recorded suicides in human history, Indian farmers are now killing themselves in record numbers. It has been extensively reported, even in mainstream news, but nothing has been done about the issue. The cause? Monsanto’s cost-inflated and ineffective seeds have been driving farmers to suicide, and is considered to be one of the largest — if not the largest — cause of the quarter of a million farmer suicides over the past 16 years.

According to the most recent figures (provided by the New York University School of Law), 17,638 Indian farmers committed suicide in 2009 — about one death every 30 minutes. In 2008, the Daily Mail labeled the continual and disturbing suicide spree as ‘The GM (genetically modified) Genocide’

***

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/1122020/monsanto_bayer_and_dow_face_trial_for_systematic_human_rights_abuses.html
The Permanent Peoples' Tribunal (PPT), an international opinion tribunal created in 1979, will hear expert testimony from scientists, medical doctors and lawyers to prove the charges. Victims who have been injured by these products - from farmers, farmworkers, mothers and consumers from around the world - will also testify to the causes and nature of their injuries.

The cases will be heard over a four-day trial in Bangalore, India beginning December 3. While the Tribunal has no legal weight, and cannot force sanctions on companies, it aims to expose and raise awareness of large-scale human rights violations.

296 replies, 44653 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 296 replies Author Time Post
Reply i'm just going to POST THIS AS LOUD AS I CAN and crush all arguments-MONSANTO=root of all evil. (Original post)
farminator3000 Jan 2013 OP
Cooley Hurd Jan 2013 #1
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #2
jillan Jan 2013 #4
Agony Jan 2013 #7
Blue_In_AK Jan 2013 #100
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #167
JEB Jan 2013 #10
jillan Jan 2013 #21
DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #49
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #168
Viva_La_Revolution Jan 2013 #114
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #66
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #96
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #294
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #292
LWolf Jan 2013 #3
bluemarkers Jan 2013 #5
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #15
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #80
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #83
bluemarkers Jan 2013 #131
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #133
bluemarkers Jan 2013 #152
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #169
bvar22 Jan 2013 #190
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #198
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #173
mike_c Jan 2013 #72
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #84
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #282
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #284
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #286
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #285
mike_c Jan 2013 #288
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #289
mike_c Jan 2013 #290
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #291
superpatriotman Jan 2013 #6
Marrah_G Jan 2013 #23
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #67
superpatriotman Jan 2013 #74
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #179
Go Vols Jan 2013 #8
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #9
KittyWampus Jan 2013 #14
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #17
KittyWampus Jan 2013 #25
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #34
Agony Jan 2013 #47
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #54
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #126
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #129
SkyDaddy7 Jan 2013 #162
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #170
SkyDaddy7 Jan 2013 #272
Berlum Jan 2013 #40
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #55
Berlum Jan 2013 #86
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #92
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #119
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #249
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #172
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #180
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #183
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #185
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #187
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #192
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #196
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #200
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #201
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #204
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #211
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #202
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #203
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #205
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #209
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #210
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #250
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #213
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #215
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #216
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #218
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #219
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #220
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #221
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #225
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #228
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #234
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #238
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #239
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #242
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #243
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #245
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #252
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #255
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #258
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #262
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #189
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #191
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #193
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #208
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #212
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #222
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #226
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #230
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #233
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #235
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #237
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #240
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #241
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #244
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #207
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #214
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #253
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #256
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #259
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #260
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #267
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #270
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #273
PETRUS Jan 2013 #31
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #59
PETRUS Jan 2013 #115
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #135
PETRUS Jan 2013 #136
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #140
Cal Carpenter Jan 2013 #160
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #166
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #68
glinda Jan 2013 #103
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #247
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #16
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #18
KittyWampus Jan 2013 #26
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #30
Agony Jan 2013 #46
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #51
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #43
rainin Jan 2013 #32
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #42
rainin Jan 2013 #48
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #53
rainin Jan 2013 #56
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #62
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #181
frustrated_lefty Jan 2013 #39
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #44
frustrated_lefty Jan 2013 #65
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #99
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #130
bvar22 Jan 2013 #69
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #77
hopemountain Jan 2013 #227
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #70
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #109
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #60
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #64
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #79
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #81
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #95
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #97
roody Jan 2013 #121
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #132
roody Jan 2013 #138
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #139
roody Jan 2013 #158
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #159
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #223
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #232
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #236
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #277
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #279
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #280
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #281
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #283
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #287
arikara Jan 2013 #112
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #122
handmade34 Jan 2013 #150
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #11
L0oniX Jan 2013 #12
KittyWampus Jan 2013 #13
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #20
KittyWampus Jan 2013 #28
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #137
bvar22 Jan 2013 #33
oldhippydude Jan 2013 #19
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #27
bvar22 Jan 2013 #36
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #45
DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #63
riderinthestorm Jan 2013 #91
DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #113
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #147
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #182
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #184
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #186
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #194
DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #58
bvar22 Jan 2013 #75
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #148
bvar22 Jan 2013 #175
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #177
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #197
bvar22 Jan 2013 #199
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #217
handmade34 Jan 2013 #153
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #78
DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #142
tama Jan 2013 #71
bvar22 Jan 2013 #22
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #82
Fumesucker Jan 2013 #24
Odin2005 Jan 2013 #29
rainin Jan 2013 #52
SidDithers Jan 2013 #85
muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #89
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #105
forestpath Jan 2013 #35
MotherPetrie Jan 2013 #37
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #38
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #165
lunasun Jan 2013 #41
SidDithers Jan 2013 #50
Berlum Jan 2013 #87
muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #90
SidDithers Jan 2013 #93
green for victory Jan 2013 #120
randome Jan 2013 #57
saidsimplesimon Jan 2013 #61
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #248
mike_c Jan 2013 #73
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #106
samsingh Jan 2013 #76
muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #88
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #107
ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2013 #94
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #108
Blue_In_AK Jan 2013 #98
Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #101
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #157
FarCenter Jan 2013 #102
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #116
backscatter712 Jan 2013 #127
FarCenter Jan 2013 #144
backscatter712 Jan 2013 #104
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #111
backscatter712 Jan 2013 #125
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #110
lunasun Jan 2013 #141
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #149
lunasun Jan 2013 #156
bvar22 Jan 2013 #261
lunasun Jan 2013 #275
bvar22 Jan 2013 #278
randr Jan 2013 #117
LiberalEsto Jan 2013 #118
OldEurope Jan 2013 #123
ColumbusLib Jan 2013 #124
NoPasaran Jan 2013 #128
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #151
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #134
LineReply +
Sancho Jan 2013 #143
KauaiK Jan 2013 #145
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #164
niyad Jan 2013 #146
handmade34 Jan 2013 #154
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #155
Cliff Arnebeck Jan 2013 #161
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #163
Larrymoe Curlyshemp Jan 2013 #171
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #174
bvar22 Jan 2013 #176
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #178
bvar22 Jan 2013 #188
Initech Jan 2013 #195
samsingh Jan 2013 #206
Liberal_in_LA Jan 2013 #224
hopemountain Jan 2013 #229
southerncrone Jan 2013 #231
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #246
CropGun Jan 2013 #251
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #254
CropGun Jan 2013 #263
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #265
CropGun Jan 2013 #268
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #264
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #266
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #269
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #271
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #257
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #274
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #276
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #293
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #295
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #296

Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:54 AM

1. Kicked and recommended!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 12:59 PM

2. hey, thanks! if you have a garden, check this out, too...

"So, to answer the question, “is XYZ seed company safe?”: Well, I can’t say FOR SURE, but I can help you figure it out. Monsanto owns 2 seed brands for home gardeners: Seminis and De Ruiter. Seminis seems to be the main brand for the US & Canada, with De Ruiter in other parts of the world.

skip

Now, what if they are Seminis seeds? What if they a no-GMO variety? It’s up to you if you what you do. You can avoid the company all together, you can avoid just the Seminis linked seeds, you can buy the seeds if you trust they are non-GMO (and probably a few other options). It depends on the “level of separation” you want to create between you and GMO."
http://www.garden-of-eatin.com/2012/03/06/more-on-avoiding-gmo/

***

i'd go with - don't buy the monsanto seeds from any company that sells them- complain and buy other seeds so they drop the monsanto varieties

it is really complicated- monsanto owning the copyright doesn't mean the seed is GMO, but i wouldn't give them a cent.

the smaller seed companies might drop the varieties, but i doubt burpee would care.

search 'truthout monsanto' on google- there's a page and 1/2 just from 2012!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:02 PM

4. OMG - I did not even think about that!! Here I am going out of my way not to buy GMOs in the store

yet, I plant lettuce, tomatoes, spinach, onions in my backyard garden....

I never would have even thought about that
Thank you!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:14 PM

7. some pointers to seed companies here - both Monsanto and not-Monsanto

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agony (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:13 PM

100. I'm glad to see Ed Hume is not Monsanto.

I used to buy Denali Seeds, many of which were organic and which were formulated especially for Alaska gardens and were sold in all of our stores, but they've since moved exclusively online. Now I buy Ed Hume, which are also good in the northwest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agony (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:51 AM

167. That is a great list.

I just got a beautiful catalog from Territorial Seeds.

I notice that Henry Fields is not on the list. Nor is Gurney's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:15 PM

10. Here is where I get all my seeds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:23 PM

21. I have ordered from Seeds of Change in the past (phew, they are safe) but

it has been just too easy to go to Lowes and buy seed packets.

NO MORE!!!!

I will order a catalog and plan my garden ahead of time and order from them.

I will not take chances anymore.

Disgusting!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #21)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:09 PM

49. Check this out

Mostly Heirloom, tended by generation of Amish in Missouri.

www.rareseeds.com

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #21)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:52 AM

168. I have too. I like that company.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:52 PM

114. Nichols is my fave, I do get a few from Territorial too. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:38 PM

66. check out Seed Savers Exchange, everybody!

http://www.seedsavers.org/


Seed Savers Exchange is a non-profit organization dedicated to saving and sharing heirloom seeds. Since 1975, our members have been passing on our garden heritage by collecting and distributing thousands of samples of rare garden seeds to other gardeners.


they have an awesome yearbook! (online, too) (i always wonder why they don't say amaranth to zucchini...)

Our Work

Seed Savers Exchange offers an alternative model to big agriculture through our work, encouraging participatory preservation among our members, and by signing the safe seed pledge. Seed Savers Exchange knows that the future of our planet depends on a genetically diverse food supply and carries out our important work by:


- Maintaining thousands of varieties of different plant types—from amaranth to watermelon—in one of the largest seed banks of its kind in North America.

- Regenerating seed in isolation gardens and storing them in ideal conditions.

- Documenting valuable cultural information on varieties and their histories.

- Distributing heirloom varieties to members and the public through the Seed Savers Exchange Yearbook and the Seed Savers Exchange Catalog

- Storing varieties in back-up locations at the USDA Seed Bank in Fort Collins, CO and at Svalbard Global Seed Vault in Norway. These off-site deposits remain the property of SSE.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:02 PM

96. no seed company is 'safe,' as where companies like monsanto don't own the seeds, they may

 

still own the genes in the seeds. which means that monsanto still gets a cut of every packet sold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #96)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 11:55 AM

294. hey, check out #66 and #292

monsanto can't own the genes of open pollinated varieties, just the "name" i believe.

i hope!

meaning, big M can only 'own' GMOs or hybrids.

i HOPE!

gotta keep your eye on them...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 11:49 AM

292. here's a good seed company...

About Adaptive Seeds

The Seeds of the Seed Ambassadors Project

We grow and steward rare, diverse and resilient seed varieties and distribute these to other ecologically minded farmers, gardeners and seed savers. Most of our seed is adapted to the Pacific Northwest and short season northern climates. All of our seed is grown by us and a few local friends who act as our isolation gardens. We strictly sell only public domain, open-pollinated (OP) seed, and some diverse genepool mixes. NONE of our seeds are proprietary hybrids (F1), patented (PVP) or genetically modified (GMO) and all of our seed is grown without the use of chemical fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides.
http://www.adaptiveseeds.com/node/4

does everybody above this post on the thread get notified when i answer my own post? or just jillian?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:01 PM

3. No argument here.

Well, maybe not THE root of ALL evil, but definitely a big root.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:09 PM

5. no bees - no food

no food - no people

The love of money is the root of all evil.... evil works for me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluemarkers (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:19 PM

15. So .... how is Monsanto killing bees?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #15)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:03 PM

80. There is the possibility that pesticides are a contributing factor to CCD

 

Most indications are that CCD is due to a combination of stresses on the colony. Pesticides may be one of those contributing stresses.

That said I'm unsure whether or mot Monsanto produces pesticides. Frankly, I'd be more inclined to believe they have a strong self interest in insuring the causes of CCD are identified and corrected given their production of seeds etc., many of which will be dependent upon bees for pollination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #80)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:11 PM

83. +1. And, ...

actually, there has been some fantastic research on CCD, and the indicators are pointing neonicotinoids. It's an interesting discussion as to how the bees are exposed, the impacts, and how to control the problem.

A fascinating three way staring match has developed between the bee keepers, the producers of high-dollar crops that depend on the bees, and the manufacturers of the neonicotinoids. EPA is no longer sitting on their hands and has taken positive steps toward teasing it out. The final decision, unfortunately, will be bureaucratic/political and may be removed from the science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #80)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:05 PM

131. A corn based diet

Frankly it worries me too that Monsanto wants to control the conversation about bees, but in the opposite way. What do they know .... and want to keep secret? Corn, soy and cotton are the big three for them. A corn based diet is not a good thing.

I agree completely If we want to continue to eat a variety of food, we need honey bees. Who trusts Monsanto or any big corporation to solve the problem? not me

oh, modified plants produce their own "pesticides" ... It's horrible to think of what they want us to ingest

so I guess Monsanto's cheerleader troll will beat this post up, but that company needs to close up shop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluemarkers (Reply #131)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:09 PM

133. Nobody is a "Monsanto cheerleader troll" here.

 

Bees are not pollinators of corn and only consume corn pollen when no other pollen is available in the region.

Seriously, the science shows the most likely pesticide culprit for CCD would be neonicotinoids, and Monsanto produces no neonicotinoids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #133)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:13 PM

152. yes I know.

Monsanto clearly has an interest in corn. However the seeds are garbage and grows garbage plants. They need more and more pesticides. If we went back to pre genetically modified corn, we would reduce nicotine based insecticide in the environment. If the connection between GM corn and CCD is covered up, then bully for monsanto! (Bayer is one of the biggest manufacture)

we don't know why colonies are collapsing - it appears the neoicotinoids weaken the colony, making them susceptible to mites, and other problems.

and no I'm not calling you or anyone in particular a troll. they are out there though.

I guess the best we can do is educate ourselves and try to eat locally grown foods.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluemarkers (Reply #152)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:57 AM

169. I have lots of bees in California. I let the wood sorrel grow. The tiny yellow

flowers just cover the ground under my avocado trees. The avocado trees need to be pollinated by bees.

The one year that I got rid of the wood sorrel, I had very few avocados.

I'm wondering whether maybe the problem with bees has to do with the fact that farmers so intensely attempt to get rid of all weeds including those the bees love. I'm just basing this on my personal and very limited experience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluemarkers (Reply #131)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:39 PM

190. Commercial Bee Keepers DO feed their Bees Corn Syrup.

Many, like yourself, are under the delusion that since Bees do not naturally forage on Corn, there is No Way that GM Corn and GM Corn Byproducts can enter their systems.
You, and all the others are WRONG.

Commercial Bee Keepers DO feed their Bees Corn Syrup,
especially the overcrowded Commercial bee yards.
There is NO possibility for THAT high a concentration of Bees to forage for natural food withing their radius,
so Corn Syrup is the preferred commercial "factory feed" for Commercial Factory bees, and Factory Bee Commercial Honey.
What effect this Corn Syrup has ON the Bees has not been determined.

We are small scale, decentralized Organic Bee Keepers,
and we refuse to feed our bees corn syrup.
We have never had an incidence of CCD in the 7 years we have had our bees.

Can you be sure that Corn Syrup is completely, 100% free from GM pollen contamination or other GM contaminants from the manufacture, handling, packaging, and transportation of Corn Syrup?

BTW: That "Pure, Natural Honey" you bought at the Supermarket last week?
It was probably nothing but corn syrup that had been reprocessed through the digestive system of a Honeybee in an overcrowded commercial Factory Bee yard.

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #190)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:12 PM

198. That's why I'll only buy honey from local beekeepers I know

 

Commercial honey is crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #80)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:58 AM

173. Not "pesticides" - Imidocloprid, an insecticide. Need to be more specific.

Roundup, a Monsanto product, is a herbicide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluemarkers (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:56 PM

72. two thirds of food crops and ALL staple grains are wind pollinated....

Sheesh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #72)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:12 PM

84. and, hive-dwelling bees are not the only pollinators.

Honey bees are important, but....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #84)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:40 PM

282. yeah, but they're the most important ones by far, which you can learn in 60 seconds try google

More than 100 agricultural crops in the United States are pollinated by bees. This means bees are important, if not essential, for the production of nearly $7 billion worth of agricultural crops produced annually in Arizona. Examples of bee pollinated crops include watermelons, cantaloupe, citrus and apples (see story below). Although some of these crops are pollinated by bee species other than honey bees, honey bees are the only ones that can be easily managed, moved around and are known to exploit a wide variety of crops.
http://ag.arizona.edu/pubs/insects/ahb/inf10.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #282)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:43 PM

284. Too late, Bubba. I busted you in a flat lie.

I am through with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #284)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:49 PM

286. you actually posted some plagiarism, from a guy called UncleAdolf, so i'm glad to see you go

you are being overpaid to post propaganda. have fun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #72)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:46 PM

285. just grains, which corn is, you don't know what you're saying. 2/3 of food crops=totally false

Pollination of Fruits and Nuts - Purdue University
www.hort.purdue.edu/ext/ho-174.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
wind, splashing rain, moths, butterflies, birds, or honey- bees, depending on the plant species. Most fruit trees are pollinated primarily by bees,

***
Iowa State: (one veg by wind)
Listed below are several common vegetables and their method of pollination.

Asparagus(Insect) Bean(Self) Beet(Wind)
Broccoli (Insect) Cabbage(Insect) Carrot (Insect)
Cauliflower(Insect) SweetCorn(Wind) Cucumber(Insect)
Eggplant (Self) Muskmelon (Insect) Pea (Self)
Pepper(Self) Pumpkin(Insect) Squash(Insect)
Tomato (Self) Watermelon (Insect)

As the gardening season is getting under way, consider the wonders of seed production. Pollination and fertilization allow the species to survive and give gardeners a chance to harvest a bountiful crop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #285)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 06:21 PM

288. I'm an insect ecologist by profession-- I know quite well what I'm talking about....

Actually, that 1/3 estimate is the one most often quoted, but the data suggest that human dependence on bee pollinated crops is even lower than 30% of food production. Here's a brief paper from a University of Georgia bee researcher that appeared in the newsletter of the British Bee Keepers Association. The author, Keith Delaplane, is a professor in the Georgia Master Bee Keeper program. This particular dept of entomology, btw, is where I did my own PhD work.

Delaplane cites a recent FAO report that downgrades the importance of ALL animal pollination in agriculture EXCEPT in regards to farm profit in specific crop species, such as almonds (not to mention the economic importance-- but not necessarily food security importance-- of honeybee keeping's main by-product, honey):

http://www.ent.uga.edu/bees/OnEinsteinBeesandSurvivaloftheHumanRaceHoneyBeeProgramCAESEntomologyUGA.html

If there were awards for the most-quoted article in the pollination canon, it would have to go to S.E. McGregor for his 1976 statement that, “it appears that perhaps one-third of our total diet is dependent, directly or indirectly, upon insect-pollinated plants.” This is the proof text behind the popular paraphrase, “honey bees are responsible for every third bite of food we eat.” I suspect that even in 1976 this estimate was generous and applicable only to the most affluent economies where hay-powered beef and dairy products, oilseeds, and fruits make up a significant fraction of the diet. What seems certain is that this estimate is not global. A recent analysis of yearly crop data maintained by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) from 1961 to 2006 reached some divergent conclusions and shed light on the interacting complexity of the question “How important is animal-vectored pollination?”

The authors of the FAO analysis concluded that the proportion of global food production attributable to animal pollination ranges from 5% in industrialized nations to 8% in the developing world. These numbers are in stark contrast with McGregor and can be explained by the fact that his and other earlier estimates tended to minimize the degree to which crops vary in their dependence on animal pollinators. About 75% of the world’s crops benefit to some degree from animal pollination; only 10% of that 75% depend fully on animal pollination. A second explanation is that pollinator-dependent crops tend to have lower average production levels than non-pollinated crops. One can summarize from this paper that most of the calories that sustain human life derive from non-pollinator-dependent crops. This in no way denigrates the importance of pollination at the local level. One need only imagine the economic fallout of a pollinator crash on the California almond industry or Costa Rican coffee. But is it true, sensu stricto, that human life depends on bee pollination? No.

more@link


Although important, especially locally, honey bee pollination accounts for only a subset of all animal pollination. And that appears to be a subset of 5%-8% of annual global food production.

on edit-- I deleted one of the internal citations because it interfered with DU's text formatting. You can see the citations in full at the original link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #288)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 08:11 PM

289. then why aren't you talking about genetic diversity or all of the OTHER pollinators also dying?

i read the FAO analysis (a science paper, by an NIH statistics wonk) your teacher based his 'opinion' on... (delaplane's NOT a scientific paper at all)

An invitational editorial first appearing in the newsletter of the British Bee Keepers Association

Keith S. Delaplane, Professor, Dept. Entomology,


the main problem is right here, where he throws up a bunch of stuff that was not in the NIH 'report' he cited-

About 75% of the world’s crops benefit to some degree from animal pollination; only 10% of that 75% depend fully on animal pollination. A second explanation is that pollinator-dependent crops tend to have lower average production levels than non-pollinated crops. One can summarize from this paper that most of the calories that sustain human life derive from non-pollinator-dependent crops. This in no way denigrates the importance of pollination at the local level. One need only imagine the economic fallout of a pollinator crash on the California almond industry or Costa Rican coffee. But is it true, sensu stricto, that human life depends on bee pollination? No.

i mean, he literally pulls that right out of his butt. he even gets the 5% wrong its actually 3%.

it says absolutely nothing of the sort in the paper.
he also goes straight from 'animal pollination' to 'bee pollination' in the same paragraph, rendering his assertion meaningless.

i'll post an actual FAO link after this bit from the NIH paper, which really seems to be some sort of statistical maze created by some people who have never planted a single plant before. i don't disagree with it, i just think it is way over complicated. plus i can't seem to open the excel sheet with all the data, so i'm doubting their 'selection' of crops.

anyway,
what the (very long) paper actually said was-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2701761/

Key Results

The expected direct reduction in total agricultural production in the absence of animal pollination ranged from 3 to 8 %, with smaller impacts on agricultural production diversity. The percentage increase in cultivated area needed to compensate for these deficits was several times higher, particularly in the developing world, which comprises two-thirds of the land devoted to crop cultivation globally. Crops with lower yield growth tended to have undergone greater expansion in cultivated area. Agriculture has become more pollinator-dependent over time, and this trend is more pronounced in the developing than developed world.

Conclusions

We propose that pollination shortage will intensify demand for agricultural land, a trend that will be more pronounced in the developing world. This increasing pressure on supply of agricultural land could significantly contribute to global environmental change.

INTRODUCTION

Animal-mediated pollination contributes to the sexual reproduction of over 90 % of the approximately 250 000 species of modern angiosperms (Kearns et al., 1998). This interaction diffusely affects human survival through its roles in sustaining much biodiversity on Earth and contributing to the integrity of most terrestrial ecosystems. However, we also depend more directly on this interaction, because many agricultural crops rely to some degree on pollinators for setting the seeds or fruits that we consume, or the seeds we sow or breed. A now well-known estimate proposed that about one-third of our food, including animal products, derives from animal-pollinated, mostly bee-pollinated, crops (McGregor, 1976). This estimate has recently been confirmed by Klein et al. (2007), although animal production was excluded. The diversity of crops that depend on animal pollination provides still more impressive estimates. For instance, biotic pollination improves the fruit or seed quality or quantity of about 70 % of 1330 tropical crops (Roubik, 1995) and 85 % of 264 crops cultivated in Europe (Williams, 1994). These figures are not obviously biased by the inclusion of many minor crops from a production viewpoint, as pollinating insects increase fruit or seed quality or quantity of 39 of the 57 major crops worldwide (Klein et al., 2007). Therefore, the production and diversity of agriculture seem to depend to a large extent on biotic pollination, particularly on the service provided by the honey-bee (Apis mellifera), the single most important pollinator species, and a plethora of wild bee species.

-skip-

Therefore, the effect of an increasing pollination shortage might manifest in a disproportionate increase in demand for agricultural land, which is surely mediated by the much higher market value of the production derived from pollinator-dependent than non-dependent crops (Gallai et al., 2009). Although this effect is more subtle than the collapse in production implicit in the language of the ‘pollination crisis’ (Allen-Wardell et al., 1998; Kremen and Ricketts, 2000; Westerkamp and Gottsberger, 2002), such increased pressure on supply of agricultural land could nevertheless contribute significantly to global environmental change.

Change over time and differences between socioeconomic regions


Several indicators reveal an increase in pollinator dependency in agriculture over time in both the developed and the developing world. We recently estimated that the percentage of crop land devoted to pollinator-dependent crops in the developed world increased from 18·2 % in 1961 to 34·9 % in 2006, and from 23·4 to 32·8 % in the developing world (Aizen et al., 2008).

***

here are some United Nations links, which are more informative and less biased than the 'editorial' you posted-

The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO)4 estimates that
out of some 100 crop species which provide 90% of food worldwide, 71 of these
are bee-pollinated. In Europe alone, 84% of the 264 crop species are animalpollinated
and 4 000 vegetable varieties exist thanks to pollination by bees5.
The
production value of one tonne of pollinator-dependent crop is approximately five
times higher than one of those crop categories that do not depend on insects6.
Has a “pollinator crisis” really been occurring during recent decades, or are these
concerns just another sign of global biodiversity decline? Several studies have
highlighted different factors leading to the pollinators’ decline that have been
observed around the world. This bulletin considers the latest scientific findings
and analyses possible answers to this question. As the bee group is the most
important pollinator worldwide, this bulletin focuses on the instability of wild and
managed bee populations, the driving forces, potential mitigating measures and
recommendations.
http://www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/Global_Bee_Colony_Disorder_and_Threats_insect_pollinators.pdf

***

Scientists are warning that without profound changes to the way human-beings manage the planet, declines in pollinators needed to feed a growing global population are likely to continue.

. New kinds of virulent fungal pathogens-which can be deadly to bees and other key pollinating insects-are now being detected world-wide, migrating from one region to another as a result of shipments linked to globalization and rapidly growing international trade

. Meanwhile an estimated 20,000 flowering plant species, upon which many bee species depend for food, could be lost over the coming decades unless conservation efforts are stepped up

. Increasing use of chemicals in agriculture, including 'systemic insecticides' and those used to coat seeds, is being found to be damaging or toxic to bees. Some can, in combination, be even more potent to pollinators, a phenomenon known as the 'cocktail effect'


. Climate change, left unaddressed, may aggravate the situation, in various ways including by changing the flowering times of plants and shifting rainfall patterns. This may in turn affect the quality and quantity of nectar supplies.

These are among the findings of a new report published today by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), which has brought together and analyzed the latest science on collapsing bee colonies.

-skip 4 ¶-

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director, said: "The way humanity manages or mismanages its nature-based assets, including pollinators, will in part define our collective future in the 21st century. The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world's food, over 70 are pollinated by bees".

"Human beings have fabricated the illusion that in the 21st century they have the technological prowess to be independent of nature. Bees underline the reality that we are more, not less dependent on nature's services in a world of close to seven billion people".
http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=664&ArticleID=6923&l=en&t=long

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #289)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 11:37 AM

290. because that's another conversation....

In this conversation, we were talking about whether or not loss of honeybee pollination services would severely impact food security for humans. Actual data-- rather than scaremongering-- suggest that the primary impact would likely be economic, not catastrophic, and confined to specific agriculture sectors. Those dependent upon managed pollination services, for example, as well as the honey industry.

I'm not sure where you got the impression that Delaplane is my "teacher." He's a colleague-- I left UGA twenty years ago, and am currently at the California State University. Yes, I linked an "opinion piece" because it's short and easy to read-- most DUers are not academics, I suspect-- and Delaplane's opinion is certainly a well informed one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #290)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 11:32 AM

291. not really. if you have a PhD, you should know that entire ecosystems are much more than data, and

that a scientific study is more than a single data point.

you claim-
Actual data-- rather than scaremongering-- suggest that the primary impact would likely be economic, not catastrophic, and confined to specific agriculture sectors. Those dependent upon managed pollination services, for example, as well as the honey industry.

but that is not what the NIH study says at all- as i posted before-
Key Results

The expected direct reduction in total agricultural production in the absence of animal pollination ranged from 3 to 8 %, with smaller impacts on agricultural production diversity. The percentage increase in cultivated area needed to compensate for these deficits was several times higher, particularly in the developing world, which comprises two-thirds of the land devoted to crop cultivation globally. Crops with lower yield growth tended to have undergone greater expansion in cultivated area. Agriculture has become more pollinator-dependent over time, and this trend is more pronounced in the developing than developed world.

Conclusions

We propose that pollination shortage will intensify demand for agricultural land, a trend that will be more pronounced in the developing world. This increasing pressure on supply of agricultural land could significantly contribute to global environmental change.


i read that to say 'even a small decline in bees alone could cause people to starve', not 'bees don't really matter'

the effects are more than financial- not just pollinator services and the honey industry, but genetic diversity, survival of ecosystems, and food shortages.

i disagree with his opinion, and yours. i prefer the FAO's own analysis of their data.

and the problem with big M goes way beyond bees!

i don't think you could possibly say, for instance, that a 'teminator gene' would be safer than healthy bee populations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:11 PM

6. What do you farm?

and where?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #6)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:26 PM

23. All sorts of things!

In my backyard with heirloom seeds and no pesticides.

Someday I even hope to have my own little farm so I can provide for even more people.

The monsanto way of farming is killing our soil, our environment and our seed stocks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #6)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:40 PM

67. fruits and vegetables

in the good ol' USA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #67)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:57 PM

74. Yeah, thanks

I feel much more informed now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #74)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:14 PM

179. sorry, didn't mean to sound snarky!

just don't want to say where i am exactly!

squash, corn, berries, potatoes, etc, and plenty of grains and clovers for cover. daikon radish is the newest thing in cover crops.

rye, wheat,oats...

you name it, i'll grow it really! (as long as the M word isn't involved)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:14 PM

8. GMO Trilogy - Unnatural Selection









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:15 PM

9. Great rant, but...

GMO crops are not killing bees.

Bummer you led off with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:18 PM

14. The corporate model that is being imposed on farms is what's killing bees. Monsato is the architect

of that model & the enforcer & the prime beneficiary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #14)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:20 PM

17. Ok... I guess. What does that mean? (At least you are not defending "GMOs kill bees")

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:30 PM

25. Industrial scale bee-keeping & use of pesticides & mono-cropping all combine

to create a toxic environment for all life.

The farming industry as it exists today under Monsato is horribly toxic in so many ways.

And it's proven that organic gardening using 4 crop rotation yields just as much food while helping the environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #25)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:37 PM

34. True, mostly.

Monsanto did not invent monocropping, and GMOs do not provide any further motivation for monocropping than the original native seeds.

If we look at corn, for example -- it is not pollinated by insects. It is self pollinating, but the pollination is most effective if you have large fields. You don't need hundreds of acres, but a single row of corn is not going to do as well as ten long rows. From there, it's a matter of scale.

I do not disagree with you about crop rotation and organic gardening, but I have trouble blaming Monsanto for all of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #34)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:07 PM

47. "GMOs do not provide any further motivation for monocropping than the original native seeds. "

Ha Ha Ha! you are so silly. where'd you come up with that crap? GMO are all about mono cropping.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agony (Reply #47)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:23 PM

54. Your post makes no sense.

When did monocropping start? With the invention of Bt corn or Roundup Ready soybeans? You really believe that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #34)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:49 PM

126. Corn is wind pollinated. "Self pollinated" means a plant pollinates itself. Corn doesn't.

Soybeans, OTOH, are self pollinated. So is wheat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #126)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:02 PM

129. You are, of course, correct.

I was making the contrast between insect pollinated crops and those in which insects are involved.

Self-pollinated crops do not need a high population of plants for successful pollination whereas wind pollinated crops do.

Thanks for the clarifications.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #34)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:10 PM

162. I just want to know where...

All the SCIENCE is that supports many of these claims being made against GMO. I fully understand it is an industry that needs to be very careful but I have not read one peer reviewed study that comes to any of the conclusions I read about here on DU. People like Jeffrey M. Smith are not scientist they are authors making a lot of money telling people what they want to hear.

I know I will be accused of being a shill or sheep or whatever but I have to say I do not buy most of the claims being made here or by folks like Jeffrey M. Smith. The man has DVDs & books for sale but not much science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SkyDaddy7 (Reply #162)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:35 AM

170. Being called a shill is a rite of passage. Sorry.

The science is not there to support a lot of the fear surrounding GMOs. Some things are true about the overuse of Roundup, but the fears about consumption of GM corn, soybeans, etc appear to be unfounded.

Perhaps we may learn differently in the future, but not right now.

You'll have to excuse me -- I need to leave to pick up the bazillion dollar check waiting for me at Monsanto HQ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #170)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:51 PM

272. Nice to see...

A fellow Monsanto employee here on DU!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:46 PM

40. Genetically Mutant corporate crap sure as HELL ain't doing bees any good either

Since GMOs typicaly require gallons upon gallons of death-dealing herbicides and other chemicals. Bees don't go for that patented synthetic death-dealing crap.

So in the truest sense, GMOs are killing bees -- maybe not as directly as you would like, but dead is dead -- and GMOs are altogether culpable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #40)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:24 PM

55. Well, that was baseless.

Carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #55)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:18 PM

86. It's a fact, Jack

Deny reality all you want. It's till real. And the bees are still dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #86)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:45 PM

92. Opinion, Jimson!

Here are the facts:

The bees are dead.

The rest you got wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #40)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:06 PM

119. Herbicides have no effect whatsoever on bees.

 

Pesticides, especially neonicotinoids, do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #119)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:56 AM

249. and i'm done. synergy. horizontal gene transfer. untested chemicals. surfactants. sad story, really.

i'll give you that it isn't the CHEMICAL in ru, so much as the surfactant oil that goes with it.

but there's still the brand new pathogen thing, so...


http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=579

Research by USGS and other scientists has identified many deadly virus infections and chytrid fungus as causes of some recent amphibian die-offs and local population declines. Scientists are actively investigating other hypotheses that could help explain these worldwide declines, including increased exposure to ultraviolet radiation due to ozone thinning, the spread of non-native predators, contamination from pesticides and other chemicals, and rising temperatures. Many biologists suspect a combination of factors may be responsible.

***

http://www.tucson.ars.ag.gov/unit/publications/PDFfiles/657.pdf

Surfactants Drowned Bees
Small amounts of surfactants (100
to 500 ppm) in their water supply
drowned large numbers of bees when
the bees had no other source of water,
as in flight cages or dry field locations.8
Drowning occurred as long as six
months after the water had been con
taminated with a surfactant. In ex
tremely hot weather, the loss of water
carriers by drowning caused the col
onies to die within a few days. When
the weather was moderately warm, the
colonies lost their unsealed brood al
most immediately and did not raise
any more brood as long as the only
available water contained a surfactant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #40)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:55 AM

172. Roundup is killing bees? Got a link for that?

Seriously, the main herbicide used in conjunction with GMOs is glyphosate (Roundup) and this is the first I have heard that bee mortality can be attributed to glyphosate. Would like to see the link for that please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #172)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:18 PM

180. here ya go!

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/11462-monsanto-is-bad-for-the-bees-and-bad-for-us

Maybe, the beekeepers in Poland have the correct reaction to this cynical move to protect the threat Monsanto poses to bees, agriculture and life itself:

On March 15, over 1,500 beekeepers and anti-GMO protesters marched through the streets of Warsaw, depositing thousands of dead bees on the steps of the Ministry of Agriculture in protest of genetically modified foods and their pesticides which are together largely responsible for the killing off of bees, butterflies, moths and other beneficial pollinators in great numbers.

Later that day the Minister of Agriculture, Marek Sawicki, announced plans to ban MON810, which has already produced millions of hectares of pesticide resistant "superweeds" in the US.
The Polish Beekeepers Association organized the protest, joining forces with International Coalition to Protect the Polish Countryside (ICPPC) and the Coalition for a GMO Free Poland. Targeting Monsanto's MON810 GM corn in particular, they also called for a complete ban on all genetically engineered crops as well as the pesticides found to be most damaging to the environment (and particularly to bees).

Too bad, the White House appointed the former Monsanto vice president for publc policy, Michael Taylor, as second in charge at the Food and Drug Admimistration.

Bad for the bees; bad for us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #180)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:24 PM

183. That says nothing about RoundUp killing the bees.

 

They do make mention of the pesticides, but that is a problem with all crops, not just GMO.

And specifically, neonicotinoids are the culprit:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/30/science/neocotinoid-pesticides-play-a-role-in-bees-decline-2-studies-find.html?_r=0

Monsanto manufactures no nenicotinoids and holds no patents for any neonicotinoid.

Please keep in mind, this specifically goes to the issues surrounding bee CCD and says nothing about Monsanto's business practices nor their work in transgenic organisms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #183)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 05:25 PM

185. i've actually seen a PET killed by round up, please don't remind me of it

The Illinois Ag Dept. illegally seized privately owned bees from renowned naturalist, Terrence Ingram, without providing him with a search warrant and before the court hearing on the matter, reports Prairie Advocate News.

Behind the obvious violations of his Constitutional rights is Monsanto. Ingram was researching Roundup’s effects on bees, which he’s raised for 58 years. “They ruined 15 years of my research,” he told Prairie Advocate, by stealing most of his stock.
http://foodfreedomgroup.com/2012/05/22/illinois-illegally-seizes-bees-resistant-to-roundup-kills-remaining-queens/

***

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_25845.cfm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #185)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 05:58 PM

187. That claim is bullshit. His bees were seized due to American Foul Brood

 

He concocted his story after multiple attempts were made by the IDoA to get him to correct the issue with American Foul Brood and they had no choice but to seize and destroy his colonies by burning them and burying the ashes.

The beekeepers around him are the ones who constantly contacted the IDoA because his colonies were spreading AFB to his neighbors and they had no choice but to not only destroy the colonies, but to destroy all of the woodenware as well.

This case is well known in Illinois to anybody who knows anything about bees here.

The guy is a crackpot who made up woo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #187)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:42 PM

192. just like he did about the bald eagle, sure.

ok, monsanto doesn't take out HUNDREDS of lawsuits against anybody they want...

and they've never spent any money lobbying or discrediting scientists.
why would they have an issue with an ENVIRONMENTALIST?


why defend them? post a link about how its BS, maybe. or don't because it isn't.

http://www.eaglenature.com/history.php

Terry Ingram and His Eagles Nominated for the CLASSY Awards

The Eagle Nature Foundation in Apple River, IL has been selected as a Top 5 Finalist in Environmental Protection for the 4th Annual CLASSY Awards. From a pool of 2,400 nominations, the Foundation’s achievement story stood out as one of the best of the best. The Foundation was founded by Terrance Ingram.

Starting July 9, the public will have the opportunity to vote for their favorite candidate once per category per region by visiting http://www.stayclassy.org/classy-awards/vote. Voting ends at 11:59 P.M. PST on July 26, 2012.

The Eagle Nature Foundation is the only non-profit in the nation which has been fighting for 50 years to save the Bald Eagle and its required habitat. Many times they are the only organization speaking out for the preservation of this habitat. It has largely been through their efforts that there are eagle related events across the nation. They sponsored the nation’s first Bald Eagle Days Celebration in 1967 and are planning another International Bald Eagle Days in Minnesota this fall.

Since 1967, the group has:

-raised $4,000,000

- raised $72,650 in the past year

- helped 20,000,000+ people

- helped 100,000 people in the past year

- and has been instrumental in saving and protecting over 20,000 acres of vital bald eagle habitat in more than 12 different locations in the United States and Canada.

To learn more about the Eagle Nature Foundation, please visit www.eaglenature.com.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #192)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:03 PM

196. That has nothing to do with the bee bullshit

 

Once again, somebody is called on bullshit woo woo and they redirect.

Here are the facts from the IL State Beekeepers Association, obtainable by asking via email:

These are the facts concerning the AFB affected hives:

1) An Illinois State Bee Inspector inspected the hives and found the presence of American Foul Brood. The inspector reported these findings to Supervisor Steve Chard, Illinois Department of Agriculture, and the initial findings were also reported to to the hives' owner.
2) Mr. Chard sent another Bee Inspector to the apiary in question, along with original Inspector, who confirmed the presence of American Foul Brood.
3) Samples were taken from the hive and sent to the USDA Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville Maryland. They confirmed that it was indeed American Foul Brood.
4) The owner was notified that he was in violation, was sent a copy of the USDA laboratory results and was told to destroy the hives in accordance with Illinois State statutes.
5) After numerous notices from the Illinois Department of Agriculture the owner refused to destroy the infected colonies.
6) The Department abated the nuisance, as specified by the Illinois Bees and Apiaries Act.
7) A hearing was held in Springfield. where the owner was present and was allowed to rebut any and all statements, plus allowed to ask any questions of Department staff present at the hearing. The State then issued a penalty to the owner for failure to abate the nuisance.

ISBA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #196)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:18 PM

200. those aren't facts, those are one persons "story"

what do you know about bees? or farming? when the plant is 'resistant' to a chemical, it still soaks up the poison, it just isn't affected by it because of some immoral gene tampering- and then it gets passed on to people and bees.

i know 4th graders who understand this process


According to Ingram, quoted from Kocal's article:

"When Round-Up kills the adult bees there are not enough bees left in the hive to keep the young bees (brood) warm, and the young bees die from the cold (chilled brood). I tried to prove that just because foulbrood can be detected once the hive has been disturbed, doesn't mean the hive has foulbrood.

Inside a honeybee hive is one of the cleanest places you can find. Anything that is a problem, if the bees can't remove it, they cover it with propolis, which is an antiseptic... When you go into the comb and cut it up, disturb it like the investigators did, then send it to a lab, it exposes foulbrood to the world. In the beehive, it's covered up. The bees aren't affected by it. But you can find it by sending it in to a lab."

Ingram has studied the effects of Roundup on honeybees for the past 15 years, and he believes he had built up sufficient amount of data to show that the herbicide causes not just bee die-offs, but also Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)—a mysterious phenomenon that has decimated an estimated one-third of all honey bees since 2006.

-skip-

... "Is Illinois becoming a police state, where citizens do not have rights?" Ingram asked in desperation. "Knowing that Monsanto and the Dept. of Ag are in bed together, one has to wonder if Monsanto was behind the theft to ruin my research that may prove Roundup was, and is, killing honeybees. Beekeepers across the state are being threatened that the same thing may be done to their hives and livelihood. I was not treated properly, I don't want to see this happen to anyone else in this state, and I want this type of illegal action to end."
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/05/monsanto-roundup-effects-on-honeybees.aspx

***

As far back as 2005, Haefeker ended an article he contributed to the journal Der Kritischer Agrarbericht (Critical Agricultural Report) with an Albert Einstein quote: "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man."

Mysterious events in recent months have suddenly made Einstein's apocalyptic vision seem all the more topical. For unknown reasons, bee populations throughout Germany are disappearing -- something that is so far only harming beekeepers. But the situation is different in the United States, where bees are dying in such dramatic numbers that the economic consequences could soon be dire. No one knows what is causing the bees to perish, but some experts believe that the large-scale use of genetically modified plants in the US could be a factor.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/collapsing-colonies-are-gm-crops-killing-bees-a-473166.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #200)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:20 PM

201. And now you pull out mercola woo woo bullshit

 



Why am I unsurprised?

IL has very strict laws regarding beekeeping. Ingram was in violation of the law.

He was fined for it, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #201)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:28 PM

204. read the real story, maybe, and a link, maybe? not some prepared email?

http://www.pacc-news.com/5-2-12/heart_ingram5_2_12.html

Going back to the summer beekeepers picnic in July, in a phone call to Kivikko on Monday, April 30, she confirmed that yes, Ingram had asked her to look at a frame that his bees ignored, and asked her to test it for chemicals. She did have the comb tested for foulbrood, and yes, the comb did test positive. Ingram did not receive an Apiary Inspection Site Report, since he gave the frame to Kivikko at a picnic. But he did not receive a Disease Notice or Bee Disease Diagnosis from that sample.

“All combs, frames, honey and bees must be destroyed by burning . . . Hive bodies, supers, bottom boards, inner and outer covers may be salvaged by sanitizing with a scorching flame, such as a propane torch.” The notice was signed by Kivikko, and said Ingram must comply with the order by November 25, 2011.

-skip-

In the letter, Ingram was “required to abate the nuisance by burning all bees, combs, frames and honey in a pit at least 18 inches deep and then covering the ashes with at least 6 inches of soil. You are to carry out this procedure within 10 days from the date of this letter and Ms. Kivikko will visit your apiary to ensure that the subject colonies have been destroyed. Evidence of the burning pit will confirm that you have complied with this notice.”

This requirement is noticeably different than the requirement stated in the Nov. 9 Disease Notice.

-skip-

A hearing was set for April 4, a full 3 weeks after the events of March 14, when the IDofA confiscated the bees.

Yet, another part of the statute states, “No person shall transport a colony of bees or items of used bee equipment between counties within this State without a permit or compliance agreement which shall be issued based upon an inspection certificate from the Department. (Source: P.A. 88-138.)

“No person” - except that it’s OK for the IDofA to transport apiary equipment and bees intrastate - especially potentially contaminated equipment and bees?
Of course. They have a permit! This double standard makes no sense, especially if the disease is as contagious as they claim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #204)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:57 PM

211. They were abating the nuisance

 

Terry Ingram demonstrated in prior visits an ability to become agitated and threaten violence.

Seriously, dude. For me this is a local story. The woo that went viral on the net has nothing to do with the truth. It's just the bullshit the guy concocted after he was found to have AFB in every hive he kept and refused to destroy the hives. Every IL beekeeper in the region knew what an asshole he is. The dumbass told his story to RWNJ survivalist web sites, got picked up, and the idiotic woo woo went viral.

In fact, the dude would go to local beekeeping society meetings and complain about how he had to buy new packages every year because he lost his colonies over winter. There's no way he could have been conducting research with that. His problem was, AFB had set into his wooden ware and he kept infesting every new colony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #196)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:22 PM

202. number 1, for instance...

1) An Illinois State Bee Inspector inspected the hives and found the presence of American Foul Brood. The inspector reported these findings to Supervisor Steve Chard, Illinois Department of Agriculture, and the initial findings were also reported to to the hives' owner.

kinda funny Ingram says he gave her a sample at a picnic and asked her to test it for "contamination" by monsanto's crap?

some email you could have just typed up yourself? looks like a prepared statement to me...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #202)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:25 PM

203. Ingram lied.

 

His neighbor beekeepers bugged the ISBA constantly because they kept finding AFB contamination in colonies close to Ingram's home.

He was warned and warned and warned.

The tests from Maryland were conslusive.

The man is a crackpot who violated the law and was fined for his violation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #203)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:33 PM

205. prove it. link? story?

you know this man? his neighbors?

Terrance Ingram has been working to raise awareness about the devastating impact of these agro-chemicals on bees as well as other beings such as the Bald Eagle. He has been monitoring the impact and decline for many years. Terrance Ingram is a well-educated farmer who holds degrees in physics and math, with minors in history, biology and education. He has been farming for over 50 years, has been a beekeeper, apiary instructor and bee researcher for over 56 years. He was also a columnist with the prestigious American Bee Journal. Terrance has been the Executive Director and President of the Eagle Nature Foundation since its inception in 1995. He has studied bald eagles for various businesses and organizations for close to 50 years. He also received the Sol Feinstone Environmental Award amongst many others for his efforts on behalf of the Bald Eagle. Terrance also is the author of the book, “Eagle” published by Friedman Publishers. Terrance is also an expert on eagles and has edited more material about the bald eagle than anyone else. In this segment of The Organic View Radio Show, host, June Stoyer will speak to Terrence Ingram about his work. Stay tuned!
http://www.podfeed.net/episode/Terrence+IngramThe+Impact+of+Round-Up+On+Bees++Bald+Eagles+-+Apr+192011/3001643

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #205)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:07 PM

209. Claims must be supported by actual research, not appeals to reputation (authority). What actual

research results has Mr. Ingram published showing Roundup kills bees and has his research been peer reviewed and replicated?

The burden of proof is on people making the claim, in this case, Mr. Ingram and by extension, you, if you are repeating his claims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #209)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:38 PM

210. i'm sure he has more 'research' to back him up than monsanto

Michael Hansen, a biotechnology expert for Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports, told Truthout that the study does not definitively link Roundup and NK603 to cancer, "but it raises questions that absolutely need to be answered."

If ANSES and Séralini's detractors say the study is flawed, Hansen said, then they must also extend that criticism to the Monsanto-funded studies Séralini mimicked over a longer time period.

In its statement, ANSES claimed that Séralini's study "did not cast doubt on previous assessments of ... NK603," but the agency called for large-scale studies on "insufficiently documented health risks."

In a way, the ANSES announcement dismissing the results of the study while calling for more like it is a victory for Séralini and his supporters. Séralini has publicly wrangled with Monsanto for years over the safety of its products and is supported by an activist group pushing for long-term, mandatory studies of genetically engineered crops, which are not required for regulatory approval in the United States or Europe.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12284-inside-the-controversy-over-a-french-gmo-study-and-the-monsanto-information-war

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #210)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:22 PM

250. There you go again. Your link has nothing to do with Roundup and bees or Ingram.

You have real trouble staying on topic and it appears you have little understanding of how scientific research works. It is not logical to defend Ingram's claims by talking about an entirely different type of research. The link you cited was about possible effects on rats. Mammals and insects can have very different ways of exposure to and/or metabolizing specific toxins so one is not necessarily relevant to the other - and furthermore the rat study you cite has not been successfully replicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #205)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:03 PM

213. Terry Ingram is a nutjob

 

You keep posting woo.

Why?

Monsanto's business practices suck big time and they are attempting to become a seed monopoly. That's bullshit and I'm with you on that.

Monsanto's genetic experiements are making people be guinea pigs the world over and I have major prblems with that which puts me on the same track as you.

But when you start pushing woo that Roundup causes CCD when all of the science points to the neonicotinoids produced by Bayer as the culprit, you lose your credibility on the very real issues around Monsanto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #213)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:16 PM

215. you haven't posted a damn thing

or read anything, so, whatever.

what science?

do you mean the studies paid for by monsanto that they use to get their crap 'approved'?

or the studies that they sue people for and pay people to badmouth on the internet, that never get seen?

http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-infertility-linked-roundup-found-in-all-urine-samples-tested/

http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin?lang=en

how about the science that you are peeing 5-20 times the amount allowed in water?

how's that sound for science?

how long was DDT used before we figured out it was bad?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #215)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:22 PM

216. Fine

 

Anything you post about Monsanto I will consider to be the opposite of the truth because you push woo.

Nothing you have to say about Monsanto can be taken seriously because you push woo.

Woo takes away from credibility and you push woo about Roundup and CCD when EVERYTHING in science points to neonicotinoids and NOTHING in science points to Roundup.

You cannot be trusted about anything related to Monsanto.

You push woo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #216)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:29 PM

218. you seem to be the only one disagreeing with me here

or trying to, at least.

EVERYTHING points to one thing and one thing only? NOTHING says roundup is bad?

riiiight.

neonica-crap kills them instantly. roundup takes longer. so what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #218)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:32 PM

219. Because it is late night on a Sunday

 

Seriously, if you want to be taken seriously outside the woo community, push reality, not woo.

And you push woo, ergo, your opinions about Monsanto are about as useful as a Birther's opinions about citizenship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #218)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:42 PM

220. BTW, peer reviewed articles about neonicotinoids and the correlation to CCD

 

http://www.institut-fuer-bienenkunde.de/_bienenkunde/images/default/iwasa_mechanism%20for%20the%20differential%20toxicity%20of%20neonicotinoid%20insecticides%20in%20the%20honey%20bee.pdf

http://sverigesradio.se/diverse/appdata/isidor/files/83/7239.pdf

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4419-6445-8_8?LI=true

REgular articles regarding the same:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/30/science/neocotinoid-pesticides-play-a-role-in-bees-decline-2-studies-find.html?_r=0

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/chemicals/pesticides/insecticides-bees/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/9257431/The-nerve-poison-harming-our-bees.html

I could go on...

There is not a single peer reviewed study where Roundup is demonstrated to have any negative effect on honey bees.

Not one.

Bayer is the monster when it comes to the bees. This does not detract from the evils on Monsanto in other areas, it simply means that Bayer is the bad guy with CCD and bees and Monsanto is the bad guy in an array of other issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #220)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:20 AM

221. bayer is just a foreign company that monsanto sells its crap to so it won't get an anti-trust suit

and they both sell poisons that kill bees

you've got the bt corn pollen, the roundup filled weed pollen, and insecticides on top of that.

corn that has 1 insecticide on the seed coat, 1 in the pollen GENETICALLY, and herbicide buildup, too. riiiight....

the idea that it is one and only one thing causing the problem is ludicrous-

ever occur to you they probably gave the nico-crap to bayer because they're in germany and thus can avoid our LAWS?

***

I've made a career of sorts writing about the "big six" agrichemical companies—Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, DuPont, Syngenta, and BASF—that produce the great bulk of the world's pesticides and, increasingly, seeds. But last week, I did something different. Rather than investigate and critique these companies in print, I broke bread with some of their executives. And then, in a public forum live-cast on the internet from DC's Newseum, I told them bluntly what I thought of their industry.
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/05/dinner-pesticides-monsanto-bayer-syngenta-dow-croplife
***

2007

Monsanto joins the Chicago Climate Exchange® (CCX), North America's only voluntary, legally-binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction, registry and trading program. As part of this program, Monsanto agrees to reduce its own direct carbon emissions from major U.S. operations or purchase carbon emission offsets. Additionally, the company will work with farmer groups to discuss reducing carbon dioxide in the air by practicing no-till agriculture.

Monsanto sells Monsanto Choice Genetics, Inc., the company’s swine genetics business, to Newsham Genetics, LLC.

Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences announce a cross-licensing agreement aimed at launching SmartStax™, the industry’s first-ever eight-gene stacked combination in corn.

Monsanto and Bayer CropScience AG announce a series of long-term business and licensing agreements related to key agricultural technologies.


Monsanto acquires Delta and Pine Land Company and divests the Stoneville and NexGen cotton businesses.

Monsanto forms International Seed Group, Inc. (ISG), an investment holding company that provides specialized, regional vegetable and fruit seed companies with access to capital and technology.

Dr. John Franz is inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame® for the discovery of glyphosate – the active ingredient in Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides.

Monsanto and BASF announce a long-term joint research and development (R&D) and commercialization collaboration in plant biotechnology. The collaboration will focus on the development of high-yielding crops that are more tolerant to adverse environmental conditions, such as drought.
http://www.monsanto.com/whoweare/Pages/monsanto-history.aspx

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #221)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:36 AM

225. Monsamto manufactures no neonicotinoids.

 

Monsanto holds no patents on neonicotinoids. In your fervor to make Monsanto the bad guy in everything, you have damaged your credibility in all things related to Monsanto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #225)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:14 AM

228. MONSANTO and BAYER are PARTNERS in BUSINESS. get it?

Unprecedented Market Consolidation

Through a mix of tactics outlined below, the agricultural input sector has become one of the most highly consolidated, integrated and collusive in the world.

Mergers & acquisitions. Since the 1990s, the Big 6 have been on a spending spree, buying up the three key segments of the agriculture industry (pesticides, seeds, and biotech) to assemble proprietary lines of chemicals, seeds, and genetic traits that are engineered to go together.
Cooperative strategies and collusive practices between the few major competitors, notably through the establishment of elaborate cross-licensing structures (see box).
Vertical integration upward along the food chain, with the establishment of food chain clusters that combine agricultural inputs with the grain handlers' extensive processing and marketing facilities.
http://www.panna.org/issues/pesticides-profit/chemical-cartel

***

As we head into peak corn planting season throughout the U.S. Midwest, bees will once again “get it from all sides” as they:

fly through clothianidin-contaminated planter dust;
gather clothianidin-laced corn pollen, which will then be fed to emerging larva;
gather water from acutely toxic, pesticide-laced guttation droplets; and/or
gather pollen and nectar from nearby fields where forage sources such as dandelions have taken up these persistent chemicals from soil that’s been contaminated year on year since clothianidin’s widespread introduction into corn cultivation in 2003.

GE corn & neonicotinoid seed treatments go hand-in-hand.

Over the last 15 years, U.S. corn cultivation has gone from a crop requiring little-to-no insecticides and negligible amounts of fungicides, to a crop where the average acre is grown from seeds treated or genetically engineered to express three different insecticides (as well as a fungicide or two) before being sprayed prophylactically with RoundUp (an herbicide) and a new class of fungicides that farmers didn’t know they “needed” before the mid-2000s.....

.....It’s expensive to use inputs you don’t need, and was once the mark of bad farming.

Then, in the mid-to-late 1990s, GE corn and neonicotinoid (imidacloprid) seed treatments both entered the market — the two go hand-in-hand, partly by design and partly by accident. Conditions for the marketing of both products were ripe due to a combination of factors:

regulatory pressures and insect resistance had pushed previous insecticide classes off the market, creating an opening for neonicotinoids to rapidly take over global marketshare;
patented seeds became legally defensible, and the pesticide industry gobbled up the global seed market; and
a variant of the corn rootworm outsmarted soy-corn rotations, driving an uptick in insecticide use around 1995-96.

Then, as if on cue, Monsanto introduced three different strains of patented, GE corn between 1997 and 2003 (RoundUp Ready, and two Bt–expressing variants aimed at controlling the European Corn Borer and corn root worm). Clothianidin entered the U.S. market under conditional registration in 2003, and in 2004 corn seed companies began marketing seeds treated with a 5X level of neonicotinoids (1.25 mg/seed vs. .25).

... and in the space of a decade, U.S. corn acreage undergoes a ten-fold increase in average insecticide use. By 2007, the average acre of corn has more than three systemic insecticides — both Bt traits and a neonicotinoid. Compare this to the early 1990s, when only an estimated 30-35% of all corn acreage were treated with insecticides at all.
http://www.panna.org/blog/ge-corn-sick-honey-bees-whats-link

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #228)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 07:46 AM

234. THEY PARTNERED IN TRANSGENIC ORGANISMS, NOT NEONICOTINOIDS.

 

I have a caps lock, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #234)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:04 AM

238. do you have glasses, also? you seem to be missing some key points, here

so, your 'idea' is that monsanto has magically done an environmental 360 on roundup, even though they have never ONCE been concerned about safety in the past?

suuuuure. makes perfect sense!


In the 1970s, Monsanto began manufacturing the herbicide Roundup, which has been marketed as a safe, general-purpose herbicide for widespread commercial and consumer use, even though its key ingredient, glyphosate, is a highly toxic poison for animals and humans. In 1997, The New York State Attorney General took Monsanto to court and Monsanto was subsequently forced to stop claiming that Roundup is “biodegradable” and “environmentally friendly.”

Monsanto has been repeatedly fined and ruled against for, among many things, mislabeling containers of Roundup, failing to report health data to EPA, and chemical spills and improper chemical deposition. In 1995, Monsanto ranked fifth among U.S. corporations in EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory, having discharged 37 million pounds of toxic chemicals into the air, land, water and underground.

Since the inception of Plan Colombia in 2000, the US has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in funding aerial sprayings of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicides in Colombia. The Roundup is often applied in concentrations 26 times higher than what is recommended for agricultural use. Additionally, it contains at least one surfactant, Cosmo-Flux 411f, whose ingredients are a trade secret, has never been approved for use in the US, and which quadruples the biological action of the herbicide.

Not surprisingly, numerous human health impacts have been recorded in the areas affected by the sprayings, including respiratory, gastrointestinal and skin problems, and even death, especially in children. Additionally, fish and animals will show up dead in the hours and days subsequent to the herbicide sprayings.

In the 1980s and early 1990s, Monsanto was behind the aggressive promotion of synthetic Bovine Growth Hormone, approved by the FDA for commercial sale in 1994, despite strong concerns about its safety. Since then, Monsanto has sued small dairy companies that advertised their products as free of the artificial hormone, most recently bringing a lawsuit against Oakhurst Dairy in Maine.
In August, 2003, Monsanto and its former chemical subsidiary, Solutia, Inc. (now owned by Pharmacia Corp.), agreed to pay $600 million to settle claims brought by more than 20,000 residents of Anniston, AL, over the severe contamination of ground and water by tons of PCBs dumped in the area from the 1930s until the 1970s. Court documents revealed that Monsanto was aware of the contamination decades earlier.
http://www.monsantowatch.org/index.php?page=none

***

Biotechnology was increasingly seen not just as a valuable complement to Monsanto's chemical technology but as a way of enabling it to further expand into agriculture and secure its "cash cow". This lead to Monsanto selling off its plastics business to Bayer in 1996, and its phenylalanine facilities to Great Lakes Chemical Corporation (GLC) in 1999. Much of the rest of its chemicals division was spun off in late 1997 as Solutia, as already noted. This helped Monsanto distance itself to some extent not only from direct financial liability for the historical core of its business but also from its controversial production and contamination legacy.
http://gmwatch.org/gm-firms/10595-monsanto-a-history

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #238)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:08 AM

239. You put words into my mouth constantly

 

All I have said is Roundup is not causing CCD in bees.

Other issues surrounding Roundup and Monsanto are irrelevant to that single point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #239)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:41 AM

242. you put words on the internet constantly. if roundup isn't PART of the cause, where's a link??

nicotine kills insects immediately. it is an insecticide.

an herbicide, like ru, obviously will not cause instant death, but the possibility of it causing cancer in humans is seen by a red flag for some.

actually, for pretty much anyone who isn't being paid by the big M.

also, the 'other issues' may very well be the CAUSE of an herbicide combining with other crap to create new pathogens

synergy? horizontal gene transfer? you've been brushing up on those lately?

if those things are irrelevant to you, i think you are part of a very small minority, and might want to reconsider...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #242)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:42 AM

243. And the end game of woo comes in, demand proof of a negative.

 

Good bye. I put woo woo crap on ignore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #243)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:48 AM

245. yes, providing a link that isn't PAID FOR by monsanto saying their crap is safe is just a crazy idea

pardon me!

pretending you don't understand a thing is not arguing, it is called spouting propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #218)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:25 PM

252. Make that at least one more person because I disagree with you.

You really do not know what you are talking about and are making assertions based on bias, not science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #252)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:30 PM

255. well, you're wrong, too, then

Ten years later, a biologist conducting studies for Monsanto in streams near the Anniston plant got quick results when he submerged his test fish. As he reported to Monsanto, according to The Washington Post, “All 25 fish lost equilibrium and turned on their sides in 10 seconds and all were dead in 3½ minutes.”

When the Food and Drug Administration (F.D.A.) turned up high levels of PCBs in fish near the Anniston plant in 1970, the company swung into action to limit the P.R. damage.
An internal memo entitled “confidential—f.y.i. and destroy” from Monsanto official Paul B. Hodges reviewed steps under way to limit disclosure of the information. One element of the strategy was to get public officials to fight Monsanto’s battle: “Joe Crockett, Secretary of the Alabama Water Improvement Commission, will try to handle the problem quietly without release of the information to the public at this time,” according to the memo.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #255)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:05 PM

258. And the relevance to Roundup and bees is........????

Every post you do illustrates the truth that you don't understand how science based debate works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #258)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:10 PM

262. the relevance of you saying 'that's not true' is...? and the other hundreds of things besides bees?

which is worse, causing diseases in humans or killing off all the bees? tough one, huh?

you haven't posted a single thing, now, have you?

you obviously don't understand how nature works.

you also don't seem to get that the last thing monsanto wants is science based debate, if that actually was allowed they'd be out of business. they only want to sell as much poisonous crap as possible.

or maybe you do understand, because you appear to be trying to help/defend them, which i find more than a bit odd.

'oh, i'm going to get on the internet and defend monsanto, they're really misunderstood'?!?!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #185)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:31 PM

189. Antifreeze kills cats and dogs. And bees, too?

Sure, if you feed it to them.

But, antifreeze is not behind CCD. Neither is Roundup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #189)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:18 PM

191. post a fact instead of just nothing please

if you believe something is safe because M says so, you must be working for them...


Most GMOs are "herbicide tolerant" and therefore have high amounts of herbicides such as Roundup, which is absorbed into the food. Roundup is directly toxic, linked with cancer, birth defects, endocrine disruption, Parkinson's and other diseases. A study released last month showed that rats fed Roundup in their drinking water at levels considered safe suffered massive tumors, premature death and organ damage. Other lab animals showed severe reproductive failures, such as sterility, smaller and fewer offspring, infertile offspring, huge infant mortality and even hair growing in the mouths of hamsters. Roundup also kills beneficial gut bacteria, and can render trace minerals unusable by our system.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12715-monsanto-and-genetically-engineered-food-playing-roulette-with-our-health

***

Michael Hansen, a biotechnology expert for Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports, told Truthout that the study does not definitively link Roundup and NK603 to cancer, "but it raises questions that absolutely need to be answered."

If ANSES and Séralini's detractors say the study is flawed, Hansen said, then they must also extend that criticism to the Monsanto-funded studies Séralini mimicked over a longer time period.

In its statement, ANSES claimed that Séralini's study "did not cast doubt on previous assessments of ... NK603," but the agency called for large-scale studies on "insufficiently documented health risks."

In a way, the ANSES announcement dismissing the results of the study while calling for more like it is a victory for Séralini and his supporters. Séralini has publicly wrangled with Monsanto for years over the safety of its products and is supported by an activist group pushing for long-term, mandatory studies of genetically engineered crops, which are not required for regulatory approval in the United States or Europe.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12284-inside-the-controversy-over-a-french-gmo-study-and-the-monsanto-information-war

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #191)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:44 PM

193. You brought me to this subthread because I said Roundup was safe for humans to use if used properly.

This subthread, however, bore the title of pets, not humans. Then you broke off into some alleged business/legal practice used by Monsanto. Now, you're ranting about the correlation of Roundup and cancer when Roundup is used in excess with Roundup ready crops.

I entered this thread stating one thing: your claim that Monsanto is responsible for CCD in bees in wrong. I gave you a link that went to dozens of other studies. You want me to post it again, or are you about to launch off on some other tirade?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #193)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:03 PM

208. you started with 'gmo crops are not killing bees'

then you claim you said 'monsanto is not responsible for CCD'

i don't see any "link" or "studies" backing up your (well-meaning, i'm sure) "defense" of monsanto on any of the internets.

it is toxic poison, and not really necessary to grow food.

end of story. oh, wait, look in the toilet next time you pee...

A recent study conducted by a German university found very high concentrations of Glyphosate, a carcinogenic chemical found in herbicides like Monsanto’s Roundup, in all urine samples tested. The amount of glyphosate found in the urine was staggering, with each sample containing concentrations at 5 to 20-fold the limit established for drinking water. This is just one more piece of evidence that herbicides are, at the very least, being sprayed out of control.

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-infertility-linked-roundup-found-in-all-urine-samples-tested/

***

The urine of city workers, journalists and lawyers, who had no direct contact with glyphosate, was examined for glyphosate contamination by a research team at the University of Leipzig. The study found glyphosate in all urine samples at values ranging from 0.5 to 2 ng glyphosate per ml urine (drinking water limit: 0.1 ng / ml). None of the examinees had direct contact with agriculture.
http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin?lang=en

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #208)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:01 PM

212. Monsanto isn't klling bees.

 

The primary culprit for CCD is neonicotinoids, which are produced by Bayer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #212)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:32 AM

222. they are killing pretty much everything. with a BRAND NEW PATHOGEN!! how can you know what it does?

Don Huber, emeritus professor of plant pathologiy at Purdue University, gave a two-and-a-half hour indictment of glyphosate herbicide and genetically modified crops at the Acres USA conference in December.

Dr. Huber detailed the negative impacts of glyphosate and GM crops on plants, soils, and the environment and animal and human health. He called glyphosate the “most abused chemical in the history of agriculture” and described GM crops as a “failed system.”


-skip-

New pathogen causing abortions in pigs and cows?

Last year, Huber caused a stir when he wrote a letter to US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack warning him about a “pathogen new to science” that has been linked to glyphosate and Roundup Ready crops. Huber said the pathogen, which he describes as a microfungus, is linked to illness and reproductive problems in animals and poses threats to human health.

Since writing the letter, Huber has received many letters and emails from veterinarians reporting problems with animals fed GM feed. A veterinarian in Michigan wrote him about a sow (hog) herd that has had an increasing number of deaths and reproductive problems. The cause is unknown, and the vet wonders if it is the pathogen Huber identified. Similar reproductive problems have been reported in cows. Last November Hoard’s Dairyman reported that cows are losing up to 20% of pregnancies.

“We shouldn’t expose the entire agricultural infrastructure to a massive experiment,” Huber said.
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/march2012/scienceGMOsfuturegenerations.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #222)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:38 AM

226. Provide the peer reviewed studies.

 

You cannot because none exxst. Stop trying to make Monsanto the bad guy in everything with woo and concentrate on those areas where Monsanto is an actual villain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #226)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:25 AM

230. email the guy if you want to argue with him same scientist from Purdue

i think he's probably completely right

BS that you know anything about the bee guy, you haven't posted a damn thing.

you say he's a nutjob, but you post imaginary emails...

USDA Scientist Reveals All
Glyphosate Hazards to Crops, Soils, Animals, and Consumers

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/USDA_scientist_reveals_all.php

Food and Feed Safety Concerns

Nutrient-deficient, transgenic plants suffering from disease that also harbour herbicide residues, presents an array of possible safety hazards to animals and humans. According to Huber, possible harm include direct toxicity of glyphosate itself, which has been shown to cause endocrine disruption, DNA damage, reproductive and developmental toxicities, neurotoxicity, cancer, and birth defects (see Glyphosate Toxic and Roundup Worse,SiS26; Death by Multiple Poisoning, Glyphosate and Roundup,SiS42; Ban Glyphosate HerbicideNow.SiS43; Lab Study Establishes Glyphosate Link to Birth Defects,SiS48). Furthermore, allergies are on the rise, and animals are showing allergy responses, including inflamed irritated stomachs (Figure 3), discoloration of stomach lining, leakage of intestines as well as behavioural symptoms of irritability and anti-social behaviour in cows (abnormal for herd animals). Inflammatory bowel disease in humans has risen 40 percent since 1992, which may be related to consumption of GM foods, although this has not yet been proven.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #230)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 07:44 AM

233. The crackpot hasn't published anything

 

Let alone published anything in a peer reviewed publication.

And you continue to cite things that have absolutely nothing to do with bees, Roundup, and CCD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #233)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:32 AM

235. well, you've posted, in total, 1 questionable email, which is much easier than publuishing a study..

remember the good ol' days? mad cow disease and prions? things were so much simpler then...


Monsanto, GM foods & Health Risks

Courtesy Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist, Consumer Reports:

SUMMARY: Based on the scientific uncertainty surrounding both the molecular characterization of genetically engineered (GE) crops as well as the detection of potential allergenicity, there is more than enough uncertainty to decide to require labeling of foods produced via GE as a risk management measure as a way to identify unintended health effects that may occur post approval. If foods are not labeled as to GE status, it would be very difficult to even identify an unexpected health effect resulting from a GE food.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Monsanto

***

Monsanto Notable Quotes

"Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the F.D.A.'s job" - Philip Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications. "Playing God in the Garden" New York Times Magazine, October 25, 1998.

"Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety" — FDA, "Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties" (GMO Policy), Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 104 (1992), p. 229

"It is not foreseen that EFSA carry out such studies as the onus is on the applicant to demonstrate the safety of the GM product in question". . Comments from the European Food Safety Authority

"Wait a second. What Robert Shapiro says is one thing. But what we do is something else. We are here to make money. He is the front man who tells a story. We don’t even understand what he is saying" - Unnamed Monsanto Vice President speaking to Kirk Azevedo, one time facilitator for GM cotton sales in California and Arizona and later turned whistleblower.

"These Monsanto scientists are very knowledge about traditional products, like chemicals, herbicides and pesticides, but they don’t understand the possible harmful outcomes of genetic engineering, such as pathophysiology or prion proteins. So I am explaining to him about the potential untoward effects of these foreign proteins, but he just did not understand.... Anything that interfered with advancing the commercialization of this technology was going to be pushed aside." - Kirk Azevedo
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Monsanto_Notable_Quotes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #235)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:41 AM

237. More irrelevent BS

 

I tell you what, do what I did, contact the ISBA about Terrence Ingram:

http://www.ilsba.com/contact.html

Edited to add: Once the test for AFB came back positive, there was no appealing what had to be done. The colonies had to be destroyed under the law. Ingram refused to do it so the state had to step in and do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #237)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:32 AM

240. if i emailed them, i'd ask how much they got paid by M to harass the poor guy

The notice may be served personally or by certified mail with a return receipt requested. The directions for abatement of a nuisance may consist of a printed circular, bulletin or report of the Department, the United States Department of Agriculture or others, or an extract from such document.
If the person so notified refuses or fails to abate the nuisance in the manner and in the time prescribed in the notice, the Department may cause the nuisance to be abated. The Department shall certify, to the owner or beekeeper, the cost of the abatement. The owner or beekeeper shall pay to the Department any costs of that action, within 60 days after certification that the nuisance has been abated. If the costs of abatement are not remitted, the Department may recover the costs before any court in the State having competent jurisdiction.


***

or maybe i'd ask them where the legally required paperwork is in this case? or the physical evidence?


Interesting protocol: Find a citizen guilty, abscond with his personal property, have a hearing with no physical evidence presented, fine him $500 over the cost of his missing equipment, then allow him the right to appeal to a Circuit Court.

Stay tuned . . .

http://www.pacc-news.com/5-16-12/heart_ingram5_16_12.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #240)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:35 AM

241. Okay, I'm done talking to you

 

You are soooooo full of woo there can be no discussing anything with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #241)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:44 AM

244. you mean typing AT me

the idea that big M is benign in any way whatsoever is beyond the pale.

you might as well ride around on a unicorn with a flugelhorn shouting it to the skies...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #180)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:01 PM

207. Link is about a protest by Polish beekeepers, not about Roundup killing bees. Do you have an

link about any research showing that Roundup kills bees, not assertions, but actual research?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #207)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:11 PM

214. can you not read bold type?

But Monsanto’s past, especially its environmental legacy, is very much with us. For many years Monsanto produced two of the most toxic substances ever known— polychlorinated biphenyls, better known as PCBs, and dioxin. Monsanto no longer produces either, but the places where it did are still struggling with the aftermath, and probably always will be.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805


***
here- according to the company BOUGHT OUT by MONSANTO
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/11462-monsanto-is-bad-for-the-bees-and-bad-for-us

According to Beeologics, a firm that is attempting to restore a healthy and growing bee population, it is due to a syndrome called Colony Collapse Disorder:

Collapse Disorder (CCD) of honey bees is threatening to annihilate US and world agriculture. Indeed, in the recent outbreak of CCD in the US in the winter of 2006-2007, an estimated 25%, or more than 2.4 million, honey bee hives were lost because of CCD. An estimated 23% of beekeeping operations in the US suffered from CCD over the winter of 2006-2007, affecting an average of 45% of beekeepers' operations.

According to the Beeologics website, a couple of possible sources include "large scale monoculture has resulted in a lack of natural weeds, and all too often pesticide-laden crop forage."

-skip-

. Yes, Monsanto purchased Beeologic without much fanfare late last year. In short, a company that was independently looking at the collapse of bee colonies and believing that pesticides and GMO development may be a contributory factor is now owned by the primary multi-national company that creates those products likely contributing to the bee die-off.

Maybe, the beekeepers in Poland have the correct reaction to this cynical move to protect the threat Monsanto poses to bees, agriculture and life itself:

On March 15, over 1,500 beekeepers and anti-GMO protesters marched through the streets of Warsaw, depositing thousands of dead bees on the steps of the Ministry of Agriculture in protest of genetically modified foods and their pesticides which are together largely responsible for the killing off of bees, butterflies, moths and other beneficial pollinators in great numbers.

***

USDA Scientist Reveals All
Glyphosate Hazards to Crops, Soils, Animals, and Consumers
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/USDA_scientist_reveals_all.php

Food and Feed Safety Concerns

Nutrient-deficient, transgenic plants suffering from disease that also harbour herbicide residues, presents an array of possible safety hazards to animals and humans. According to Huber, possible harm include direct toxicity of glyphosate itself, which has been shown to cause endocrine disruption, DNA damage, reproductive and developmental toxicities, neurotoxicity, cancer, and birth defects (see Glyphosate Toxic and Roundup Worse,SiS26; Death by Multiple Poisoning, Glyphosate and Roundup,SiS42; Ban Glyphosate HerbicideNow.SiS43; Lab Study Establishes Glyphosate Link to Birth Defects,SiS48). Furthermore, allergies are on the rise, and animals are showing allergy responses, including inflamed irritated stomachs (Figure 3), discoloration of stomach lining, leakage of intestines as well as behavioural symptoms of irritability and anti-social behaviour in cows (abnormal for herd animals). Inflammatory bowel disease in humans has risen 40 percent since 1992, which may be related to consumption of GM foods, although this has not yet been proven.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #214)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:31 PM

253. Yes - the bold type was about the protest - not a link to research.

in protest of genetically modified foods and their pesticides which are together largely responsible for the killing off of bees, butterflies, moths and other beneficial pollinators in great numbers.

A protest making claims is not research and cannot be cited as such. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #253)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:41 PM

256. here- knock yourself out- they banned it in poland so, i guess they were right. not hard to find...

http://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/Krupke_journal.pone_.0029268.pdf

When maize plants in our field
reached anthesis, maize pollen from treated seed was found to contain clothianidin and other pesticides; and honey bees in
our study readily collected maize pollen. These findings clarify some of the mechanisms by which honey bees may be
exposed to agricultural pesticides throughout the growing season. These results have implications for a wide range of largescale
annual cropping systems that utilize neonicotinoid seed treatments.
Citation: Krupke CH, Hunt GJ, Eitzer BD, Andino G, Given K (2012) Multiple Routes of Pesticide Exposure for Honey Bees Living Near Agricultural Fields. PLoS
ONE 7(1): e29268. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029268

***

http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/on-call/2009/08/24/weed-killer-in-your-water-atrazine-roundup-research-raises-concerns/
But Atrazine isn’t the only herbicide of concern. Studies on Roundup, the herbicide that’s probably in your garage, have raised troubling questions for pregnant women, in particular.

Scientists in France last year evaluated the toxicity of Roundup on fetal umbilical cord cells. They found that every formulation of Roundup caused total cell death within 24 hours. You can see a summary of the study here.

Frightening as this data is if you’re expecting, it’s not hard to protect yourself. Hardware stores sell under-sink water filtration systems for less than $100, and a plumber can install it for you for about $100 more. I took that step when I was expecting my first child, before the Roundup study was published. I’m so glad I did. Have you taken steps to filter your water? Why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #256)


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #256)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:27 PM

260. Roundup/bees????????????

hint: neonictinoids such as imidocloprid are insecticides; Roundup = glyphosate is a herbicide.


And despite the insinuations in the article, it provides no basis for saying that glyphosate gets into ground water.

Once again you spew data and research hoping something, anything will stick. Once again, there is no there there. Critical thinking is clearly not your strength.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #260)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:09 PM

267. will you pay attention please? big M just bought the only people doing research into the

Last edited Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:55 PM - Edit history (1)

cause of bee death.
http://truth-out.org/article/item/6661:the-buzz-behind-the-monsantobeeolgics-acquisition
¶ 8 and 9

***
http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin?lang=en

Contamination of Human Urine

To determine if only individuals who are in direct contact with contaminated feed or glyphosate laced compounds are at risk of glyphosate poisoning a study was conducted in December 2011 of an urban population in Berlin. The urine of city workers, journalists and lawyers, who had no direct contact with glyphosate, was examined for glyphosate contamination by a research team at the University of Leipzig. The study found glyphosate in all urine samples at values ranging from 0.5 to 2 ng glyphosate per ml urine (drinking water limit: 0.1 ng / ml). None of the examinees had direct contact with agriculture.
.


Health Risks of Glyphosate

Several disconcerting health related effects of glyphosate are well known to the plant protection agency in Germany (see: Anfrage der Grünen im Bundestag and the NABU-Study). However, little is known about the spread of glyphosate contamination through fodder and food and the subsequent health risks.

Detection of glyphosate is relatively difficult and can as of yet only be carried out in a few specialized laboratories. Glyphosate in soil is strongly absorbed and bound by soil particles. It inhibits useful bacteria and kills off algae, resulting in an increasing prevalence of phytopathogenic fungi. In addition, glyphosate can cause micronutrients, especially manganese, to become unavailable and thus lead to deficiency diseases. A similar process is suspected to take place in the digestive tract of humans and animals. In certain circumstances, glypohosate can affect the microflora of the gastrointestinal tract of humans and animals. The first studies dealing with this topic fear that the gradual negative impact on the intestinal microflora is most likely the cause of long-term health consequences. However, more research is needed to determine if and to what extent the inhibition of bacteria and reduction of micronutrients has an influence on human health .

Glyphosate is becoming increasingly implicated in infertility and embryonic development of humans and animals. Adverse affects on fertility in cattle has been observed. Moreover, glyphosate is suspected to enhance cancers of the lymphatic system and promote the development of skin tumors in humans. By entering the digestive tracts of humans and animals, glyphosate becomes a time bomb that can be ignited by stress or an unbalanced or bad diet.
In early 2009, Prof. Gilles Seralini and his team of the University of Caen were able to prove (see here), that even small amounts of Roundup lead to the death of human cell cultures.

Please consult for further information the highly important research paper: Shehata, Awad a., Schrödl, Wieland, Aldin, Alaa. A., Hafez M., und Krüger, Monika. „The Effect of Glyphosate on Potential Pathogens and Beneficial Members of Poultry Microbiota in Vitro“. Curr Mirobiol. doi:10.1007/s00284-012-0277-2. In this paper is impressively shown that Glyphosat suppresses already at small doses beneficial microorganisms in the digestive system while important pathogens like Salmonella were highly resistant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #267)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:57 PM

270. "big M just bought the only people doing reasearch into the cause of bee death."

No they didn't actually. Lots of people are doing research on CCD. Beeologics is a small company doing research on one part of CCD, not even the part having to do with toxics as a possible cause, but rather, the role of parasites.

"Beeologics is developing a line of RNAi-based products to specifically address the long-term well being of honey bees, including the control of parasites and how they’re involved in Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)."

Once again, your bias beats out your actual facts.

And the rest of your screed, once again, is cut and paste assertions about Roundup and all kinds of other evils, none of which have anything to do with bees. Your big gun is that small amounts of Roundup can cause death of human cell cultures? Please. Small amounts of salt can kill human cell cultures. A small change in pH or temperature will kill human cell cultures. And how does Roundup come into contact with human cells to kill them? Roundup is a problem in the human digestive tract? No one says you should drink it. In fact it says right there on the label that it is harmful if swallowed. So do not swallow it. And don't allow animals to ingest it.

HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED OR INHALED.
DOMESTIC ANIMALS: This product is considered to be relatively nontoxic to dogs and
other domestic animals; however, ingestion of this product or large amounts of freshly
sprayed vegetation may result in temporary gastrointestinal irritation (vomiting, diarrhea, colic, etc.). If such symptoms are observed, provide the animal with plenty of fluids to prevent dehydration. Call a veterinarian if symptoms persist for more than 24 hours.

http://www.mamacoca.org/docs_de_base/Fumigas/Roundup_orig_sample_label_11-02-2002.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #270)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:51 PM

273. did you even read the article about it? because your "quote" is from beelogics website

your lack of facts makes your argument a bit weak.

see the other post for a few studies about roundup-
posting the label, printed by big M, to prove it is safe is pretty lame. really.

from previous link-

Since its inception in 2007, Beeologics has been developing Remebee,® an anti-viral treatment for use in honeybees affected with Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus (IAPV), a bee-specific virus, which originated from Australia and found and named in Israel in 2002.

I first heard about Beelogics, which is headquartered both in both Florida and Israel, in April 2008 when President and CEO Eyal Ben-Chanoch reached out toVanishing of the Bees via email after viewing our trailer and spotting some familiar faces.

Eyal explained that Beeologics was assembling scientists, beekeepers and business people “to create the missing corporate support” in an industry that traditionally has only been supported by a few hardware manufacturers. Sure there were hives, tools, bee suits and the like being offered but very little had been invested in technology and medicine for the bees — until Beeologics came along that is.

To put things in context, many scientists were all abuzz about IAPV at the time. Many firmly believed that it was a primer for Colony Collapse Disorder. Remembee, meanwhile, was regarded as a first line of defense to control the virus and its effect on bee mortality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to PETRUS (Reply #31)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:26 PM

59. Sure. This is a well-known effect of monocropping.

Monocropping did not start with GMOs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #59)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:52 PM

115. Who says it did? I was replying to $14, which was making a different point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #115)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:21 PM

135. It may have been your intent to reply to #14, but in was posted in response to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #135)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:24 PM

136. If you say so...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #136)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:32 PM

140. I found your post as a response on the "My Posts" tab at the top of the screen.

Trace the thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #140)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:20 PM

160. Must be a glitch

It says this right on Petrus' post:

Response to KittyWampus (Reply #14)

His post isn't a reply to yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cal Carpenter (Reply #160)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:35 PM

166. Definitely a glitch

 

The lines of the thread say otherwise, but you are correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #31)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:41 PM

68. thanks!

i was gonna post that one at some point! tally ho!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #31)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:19 PM

103. We live in the middle of farms (lots of corn) and we have very few insects. Frogs all die also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glinda (Reply #103)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:42 AM

247. frogs are dying everywhere, like canaries in the coal mine...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:19 PM

16. You are a scientist, or bee-keeper, or both? Isn't it odd how Monsanto killed a test hive and bought

 

a company doing research on the subject? Along those lines, Scientology bought the Cult Awareness Network, which was founded to provide to the public, info on cults and their dangers. See what I mean? Fox->Henhouse. And it doesn't even begin to consider the facts of the millions of dollars they spend to defeat public education on the GMO issue. If their product is so good, you'd imagine they'd WANT it very clearly labelled as GMO, so people would know to buy it. Instead, the reverse. Silence, secrecy, obfuscation. Know them by their fruits (pun intended).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #16)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:21 PM

18. There is some logic in there somewhere, but no science.

GMO crops do not kill bees. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:31 PM

26. No, but the pesticides required to grow them might be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #26)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:33 PM

30. And these pesticides do not differ from the pesticides used on non-GMO crops.

The key here is the choices being made. Monsanto and their products are just one choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:00 PM

46. GMO crops may be increasing pesticide use - not decreasing like was sposed to happen according to

industry claims - those corporate scientists... sheesh

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-study-pesticides-idUSBRE89100X20121002

U.S. farmers are using more hazardous pesticides to fight weeds and insects due largely to heavy adoption of genetically modified crop technologies that are sparking a rise of "superweeds" and hard-to-kill insects

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agony (Reply #46)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:12 PM

51. No argument here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #26)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:54 PM

43. Chemtrails might be killing the bees also

Just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:34 PM

32. Show your proof of what is killing the bees.

Stop making everyone do your research for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #42)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:08 PM

48. I hate to be rude,

but you went to the EPA for your proof that Monsanto isn't behind Colony Collapse? Was James Watt your go-to guy for environmental issues? Anyway, thanks for playing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rainin (Reply #48)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:17 PM

53. How ignorant. (Any, despite your hate for it, you were rude)

James Watt is running EPA? Was running EPA?

And somebody running the Dept of INTERIOR thirty years ago has some sort of relevance to the EPA today?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #53)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:25 PM

56. Not ignorant.

I know what department he was from. My memory goes back a long way. I remember him well. He stands out as an example of corruption of our government agencies that used to protect the public interest. We can no longer trust that these agencies will protect us.

That doesn't change that the ignorant ones are the ones who blindly accept the position of the EPA on anything.

But, I'm sure it felt good to put me in my place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rainin (Reply #56)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:29 PM

62. You invoked Watt while being nasty and rude.

Sorry you didn't like how it turned out.

As for your blanket lack of trust of EPA -- your choice. We differ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rainin (Reply #32)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:21 PM

181. look at post#180

eight letter word, starts with M?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:45 PM

39. I'm not sure the question is so conclusively answered.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20024947

Pest Manag Sci. 2010 May;66(5):520-5. doi: 10.1002/ps.1902.
Impact of Bacillus thuringiensis strains on survival, reproduction and foraging behaviour in bumblebees (Bombus terrestris).
Mommaerts V, Jans K, Smagghe G.
Source

Laboratory of Cellular Genetics, Department of Biology, Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

"Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) and its protein crystals are used worldwide, either as a spray or when expressed in transgenic crops, for the control of pest insects. However, owing to their intensive use, there exists a debate regarding the involvement of this microbial insecticide in bee colony losses. In this study, in a tiered approach using laboratory microcolonies, an evaluation was made of the potential lethal and sublethal hazards on colony reproduction and foraging behaviour of workers of the bumblebee Bombus terrestris (L.) of two commercial Bt strains: kurstaki (Dipel) and aizawai (Xentari). Bumblebees, like honey bees, are intensively used in modern agriculture for pollination and fulfil a crucial role in the natural ecosystem.
RESULTS:

Exposure of bumblebees dermally or via treated pollen to either of the two Bt formulations at their field recommended rates (0.1%) caused no reduction in survival. However, when applied in the feeding sugar water, aizawai killed all workers at a concentration of 0.1%, but this lethal effect was lost at 0.01%. With respect to reproductive effects, kurstaki was harmless, while aizawai at 0.1% delivered in the feeding sugar water and pollen reduced reproduction by 100 and 31% respectively. Lower doses of 0.01% aizawai in the sugar water showed no more effect. In addition, kurstaki at 0.1% and aizawai at 0.01% in the feeding sugar water did not impair the foraging behaviour, resulting in normal nest colony performance."

Other studies suggest Bt-crops may impact feeding and learning in bee populations, which might impact survival. All of this is NOT to say GMO crops are killing bees. It's equally premature to insist GMO crops are having no deleterious effects. There are simply too many unknown variables at this point to make such a definitive claim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frustrated_lefty (Reply #39)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:55 PM

44. No. Not Bt corn.

Bees do not pollinate corn. The growing scientific evidence has moved completely away from Bt corn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #44)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:36 PM

65. And

impacts on both feeding and learning have been described in GM cotton. It remains unclear how significantly these effects impact colony health.

Ecotoxicology. 2010 Nov;19(8):1452-9. doi: 10.1007/s10646-010-0530-z. Epub 2010 Aug 11.
Quantification of toxins in a Cry1Ac + CpTI cotton cultivar and its potential effects on the honey bee Apis mellifera L.
Han P, Niu CY, Lei CL, Cui JJ, Desneux N.

Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2008 Jun;70(2):327-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2007.12.002. Epub 2008 Feb 21.
Does Cry1Ab protein affect learning performances of the honey bee Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera, Apidae)?
Ramirez-Romero R, Desneux N, Decourtye A, Chaffiol A, Pham-Delègue MH.

Again, I don't think the question has been conclusively answered. Personally, I'd like to see more scientific evidence. Unfortunately, primary literature searches don't pull up many results on the subject. It's an area which is understudied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #44)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:10 PM

99. perhaps bees are allergic to corn pollen, which is blown hundreds to thousands of yards by the wind

or maybe it's just poisionous...

Consequently, honeybees bring the systemics back to the hive in the form of pollen and nectar and store it in their honeycomb. When future generations dip into their reserves, they ingest toxins that target their central nervous system, affect their navigational capabilities and impair their memory. More importantly, the chemicals compromise their immune system – the number one key to fighting any kind of insult to the body, including a virus like IAPV.
http://truth-out.org/article/item/6661:the-buzz-behind-the-monsantobeeolgics-acquisition

there's no 'car wash' for bees.

they also pollinate many crops that ARE sprayed with nico-doo-doo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #44)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:04 PM

130. One small note, bees still collect corn pollen.

 

Bees eat pollen and especially feed it to the larvae. It is the primary source of protein for bees. Bees will collect the pollen of corn, especially when other pollens are unavailable in the area.

That said, any Bt levels in pollen are going to be extremely low in the Bt GMO corn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:44 PM

69. WHY there is "no science" on the effects of long term use og the toxins and GMOs:

Monsanto blocks research on GMO safety
http://redgreenandblue.org/2011/02/14/monsanto-blocks-research-on-gmo-safety/

The USDA and the FDA are run and infested by Monsanto Shills and Factory Farm advocates.
Like the voices for Medicare Expansion, the voices advocating Green, Sustainable, Diverse MultiCulture have not been allowed to have seats at the table in the Bush/Obama Administrations.

Google: Tom Vilsack & Monsanto

Google: Michael Taylor & Monsanto

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:00 PM

77. I suppose there is some science in your post.

Geez, man. It's all innuendo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #77)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:11 AM

227. "innuendo"?

what would one call your posts?

propaganda.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:45 PM

70. see post #60

and remember GMOs are supposed to REDUCE pesticides, not create superweeds and such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:37 PM

109. Not science, yet. Crime? Yes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:28 PM

60. ....but nuthin'. the bummer is monsanto is a greedy scumbag!

if you define a corporation as a person, which is also an evil thing to do...
Natural News
"genetically-modified (GM) crops and their pesticides and herbicides"


***

by the director of "Vanishing of the Bees"- linked in article- (you have to read this, too complicated to explain)


While CCD is a complex issue no-doubt, I told Eyal that our findings pointed to another cause: newfangled chemicals called systemic pesticides. Instead of being applied to leaves, they are enrobed on seeds and/or entrenched in the soil, allowing for the poison to literally become part of the plant.

-skip-

If seeds are any indication, Apis Melifera may also soon belong to Monsanto. Kill the bees with GM and pesticides, offer a band aid solution by creating a bee that is resistant to all the crap peddled on the market and then persuade/force beekeepers to buy Monsanto bees or else. It’s wicked genius.

But surely Monsanto and many others would call all of this paranoid phooey.
http://truth-out.org/article/item/6661:the-buzz-behind-the-monsantobeeolgics-acquisition

***

"The EPA …continues to look the other way while Clothianidin and other systemic pesticides continue to harm our bees," said Jay Feldman Executive Director, Beyond Pesticides. "Bees have shown persistence in trying to hang in there and so will we. We need to impress upon the EPA that we are not going away."
http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=12586&Itemid=228

***
http://www.vanishingbees.com/press/
Quotes from the Press

“The most important documentary film since An Inconvenient Truth.”
Filmstar

“An essential documentary…If you like eating, see this film.”
Channel 4

“Verdict – Fascinating subject expertly covered.”
Empire

“A ‘bees knees’ of a film. Powerfully argued and very timely.”
Sunday Times

“Be advised, this is more than a documentary”
The Independent

“Alarming enough to convince you that this is an issue that needs action at the highest level.”
The Daily Express

“This Bee Movie has a real sting.”
The Times




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #60)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:34 PM

64. You threw a big enough net that you actually caught the real culprit.

Neonicotinoids.

Unfortunately, Monsanto does not own any.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to farminator3000 (Reply #79)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:05 PM

81. Who owns what pesticides is a matter of public record.

Your first link: a planned cooperative development project between Bayer and Monsanto on development of more crops, not chemicals.

Your second link: ditto.

You are clearly a smart and informed guy. Slow down and consider the information you are posting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #81)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:59 PM

95. i didn't just fall off the turnip truck. obviously bayer and mon-ster-santo are in cahoots!

Monsanto, Pesticide Companies Spend $5.5 Million More to Defeat Right to Know GMO Labeling Measure; Opposition Funds Total $32 Million
Posted by Stacy Malkan on September 17, 2012

Sacramento, Calif. -- Monsanto just gave an additional $2.89 million to defeat Proposition 37, which would require labeling of genetically engineered foods in California. Monsanto’s total contribution against Proposition 37 now stands at $7.1 million, according to campaign finance disclosure records filed with the California Secretary of State.

Other major pesticide companies also just made major additional contributions to defeat Proposition 37, including DuPont ($874,800), Dow AgroSciences ($815,200), Bayer CropScience ($381,600), BASF Plant Science ($357,700) and Syngenta ($178,700).
http://www.carighttoknow.org/5_million_more

i think you can tell who's in charge by that list...

who owns WHO is the ???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #95)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:04 PM

97. Nevermind.

It's tough to battle emotion-charged innuendo.

Have at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #64)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:08 PM

121. Is Monsanto your employer, or your

grant giver?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #121)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:08 PM

132. Neither. Are you paid to ask these questions?

Or are you just gifted in the art of asking ridiculous questions?

I love it when those who are almost completely ignorant about the science of a certain subject encounter someone with a contrasting opinion and automatically accuse them of being a whore for the other side. You, of course, will claim to be totally knowledgeable about GMOs, CCD, and all other related topics. So, let's get after it and talk about the basics of the science. I'll let you choose where to start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #132)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:28 PM

138. My only income comes from teaching public

school. Any disclosure from your end?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #138)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:31 PM

139. Still trolling.

When you want to talk science, just let me know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #139)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:10 PM

158. Always trolling the GMO threads,

I see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #158)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:19 PM

159. You have an opportunity to discuss the science

You have chosen to annoy me instead, then infer that I am the troll.

Fascinating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #159)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:33 AM

223. discuss this

Don Huber, emeritus professor of plant pathologiy at Purdue University, gave a two-and-a-half hour indictment of glyphosate herbicide and genetically modified crops at the Acres USA conference in December.

Dr. Huber detailed the negative impacts of glyphosate and GM crops on plants, soils, and the environment and animal and human health. He called glyphosate the “most abused chemical in the history of agriculture” and described GM crops as a “failed system.”


http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/march2012/scienceGMOsfuturegenerations.php

New pathogen causing abortions in pigs and cows?

Last year, Huber caused a stir when he wrote a letter to US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack warning him about a “pathogen new to science” that has been linked to glyphosate and Roundup Ready crops. Huber said the pathogen, which he describes as a microfungus, is linked to illness and reproductive problems in animals and poses threats to human health.

Since writing the letter, Huber has received many letters and emails from veterinarians reporting problems with animals fed GM feed. A veterinarian in Michigan wrote him about a sow (hog) herd that has had an increasing number of deaths and reproductive problems. The cause is unknown, and the vet wonders if it is the pathogen Huber identified. Similar reproductive problems have been reported in cows. Last November Hoard’s Dairyman reported that cows are losing up to 20% of pregnancies.

“We shouldn’t expose the entire agricultural infrastructure to a massive experiment,” Huber said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #232)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:40 AM

236. weak. you seem to be missing the part about how monsanto THREATENS AND OWNS SCIENTISTS

MONSANTO’S BIG LIE
Then Monsanto drops what might appear to be an innocuous disclaimer: “Monsanto is not aware of any reliable studies that demonstrate Roundup Ready crops are more susceptible to certain diseases or that the application of glyphosate to Roundup Ready crops increases a plant’s susceptibility to diseases.”

If you listen closely, you can hear scores of scientists laughing aloud at that one. The key word therein, of course, is “reliable.” By whose definition would dozens, if not hundreds, of studies be considered reliable? By Monsanto’s definition, if the St. Louis conglomerate did not conduct or commission the study, it must not be reliable.

With that statement, Monsanto is clearly flat-out lying, according to numerous sources, many who do not want their names mentioned for fear of retribution. One scientist who would go on the record was, however, direct.

“The statement in Monsanto’s letter of response is disingenuous,” said Dr. James E. Rahe, Professor Emeritus, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, B.C.
“The published research from my lab done during the 1980s and 1990s showed that glyphosate (Roundup) causes increased susceptibility of dicot species to infection by root rot fungi such as pythium and fusarium.”

Rahe is retired now to life as a row-crop farmer and has less at stake than his younger counterparts who still toil in laboratories that depend, largely, on funding from Monsanto and its brethren to conduct their work. He said he is inclined to accept Huber’s letter and inherent warnings to the USDA.
http://www.safelawns.org/blog/2011/02/monsanto-begins-smear-campaign-on-huber/

***

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/USDA_scientist_reveals_all.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #236)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:07 PM

277. Weak? I gave you a link that DESTROYED your "research".

Huber's own university -- and his tenure department -- wrote a scathing letter of rebuke and backed it up with multiple peer reviewed articles. A second, world-renowned university blew him out of the water as well.

That's weak?

No. What's weak is to then criticize Monsanto for stating the undeniable truth that no credible research is out there.

You are obsessed to the point of total blindness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #277)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 02:12 PM

279. that's actually laughable what you did there. thanks for reminding me to dissect your tranparency

Huber's own university -- and his tenure department -- wrote a scathing letter of rebuke and backed it up with multiple peer reviewed articles. A second, world-renowned university blew him out of the water as well.

for some reason, you used a URL redirect to this:
XXX://pesticidetruths.com/2011/03/02/purdue-university-discredits-own-professor-environmentalist-col-ret-don-m-huber-glyphosate-animals-and-miscarriages-no-scientific-data-fearmongering/

no comment on the 'intent' of that website. seems designed for people who don't read much. do you detect a slight bias?

UncleAdolph's main objective is to eradicate the Environmental Lies and Misinformation relating to Health Canada Approved Pesticides.

Cancer Victim Nicole Bruinsma says no to Life Saving Drugs made by Pesticide Manufacturer and dies – Selina Robinson said Yes and lives
Shutting Down Golf Facilities – Sharp Park Golfers Win In Court – Golfers Triumph Over Snakes & Frogs In Dispute – Environmental-Terrorist-Organizations Face Setback – Sierra Club – 2012 12 07




then your 'link that destroyed me' is the first 2 and LAST paragraphs of an article that DOESN'T EVEN MENTION HUBER!!

so you plagiarized perdue, using an article NOT ABOUT HUBER! woo hoo!

you see- it jumps from the 2nd paragraph to OVERALL,

when the real article has a 3rd ¶, a 4th that starts:
"The claim that herbicides, such as glyphosate, can make plants more susceptible to disease is not entirely without merit. Research has indicated that plants sprayed with glyphosate or other herbicides are more susceptible to many biological and physiological disorders (Babiker et al., 2011; Descalzo et al., 1996; Johal and Rahe, 1984; Larson et al., 2006; Means and Kremer, 2007; Sanogo et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1992).

and many ¶ s in between.

it gets even more laughable- scroll down on your 'link' and you see this:

A Letter from the President
The American Phytopathological Society
Dear Fellow APS Members:
Many of you may be aware of a recently released open letter to USDA Secretary Vilsack from Dr.Don Huber. Although Dr. Huber is a member of APS and is coordinating a meeting through APSon behalf of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS), Dr. Huber does notspeak as a representative of APS or the NPDRS.

We appreciate Dr. Huber bringing forth an issue that he believes is of concern, and look forward to the availability of the data appearing in appropriate peer-reviewed outlets to support his claims sothat the breadth of the scientific community across plant, animal, and human health can fully understand his concerns.


wow, that's some destructive language!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #279)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:06 PM

280. Unreal. You did not even read it.

You spend so much time spreading insanity. And you do not even recognize it for what it is.

The sad part is your inability to recognize science when you see it.

I will leave you to wallow in your ignorance. Enjoy it. It is all you have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #280)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:36 PM

281. i did read it that's the problem. the link you posted was totally bogus. you are the hysterical one

Huber suggested that Roundup Ready crops, treated with glyphosate, had higher levels of mycotoxins and lower nutrient levels than conventional crops. When consumed, the GM crops were more likely to cause disease, infertility, birth defects, cancer and allergic reactions than conventional crops.

Huber claimed that consumption of food or feed that was genetically modified could bring the altered genes in contact with the microbes in the guts of the livestock or people who ate them.

He felt this increased diseases such as celiac disease, allergies, asthma, chronic fatigue syndrome, diabetes, gluten intolerance, irritable bowel disease, miscarriage, obesity and sudden infant death syndrome.

Much of the data Huber showed here seemed correlational: the diseases and the use of glyphosate increased in a similar pattern over time.

This isn’t proof that the diseases are caused by the glyphosate, but it suggests a pattern to be investigated.

He feels safety evaluations have been inadequate, suggesting that research was “substandard and extremely misleading interpretation of results” or worse.


Because of difficulties for independent researchers to examine the licensing agreements for GM products, third party opinions are hard to come by.

The allegations that Huber has compiled are incredibly damning of GM products and the inherent increase in glyphosate that goes with the Roundup Ready products. Those people who have confidence in the wisdom of our governing and regulating bodies will find these stories hard to believe. Some will suggest that science has shown these technologies to be safe. That would be misinterpreting the science.
http://www.producer.com/2012/12/scientist-raises-concerns-about-gm-crops-and-glyphosate/

In the meantime, some of us may wish to avoid products using this technology. Some may claim this is fear mongering. If this is, in the end, a subject upon which we must agree to disagree, labelling of GM products would at least give us the ability to disagree in a meaningful way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #281)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:41 PM

283. Thank you for demonstrating that your blatant lies are fully intentional.

I could not decide if you are obsessive, eccentric, delusional, or a manipulative liar.

Now I know.

If you had read one word of the letters from Purdue or Iowa State, you would not have made your next post.

Good bye and good riddance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #283)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 05:21 PM

287. say hi to UncleAdolf and his wonderful site

that is sensationalist propanganda. good for you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:49 PM

112. That is open to debate.

There are a lot of things that stress the bees. I would not be surprised if unnatural gmo plants are one of the factors and I bet Monsanto has factual data hidden away somewhere far away from view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arikara (Reply #112)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:13 PM

122. I wouldn't be surprised, either, but it is not the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arikara (Reply #112)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:12 PM

150. since Monsanto now owns the organization

that does much research on bees...

((only the facts as printed... I personally think Monsanto is doing its part to destroy the environment))

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/company-report?symbol=MON

"Monsanto Company (Monsanto), along with its subsidiaries, is a provider of agricultural products for farmers. The Company's seeds, biotechnology trait products, and herbicides provide farmers with solutions that improve productivity, reduce the costs of farming, and produce better foods for consumers and better feed for animals. It manages business in two segments: Seeds and Genomics, and Agricultural Productivity. In April 2010, the Company completed the acquisition of a corn and soybean processing plant located in Paine, Chile from Anasac, a company that provides seed processing services. In October 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of Seminium, S.A. (Seminium), a corn seed company.
In February 2011, the Company acquired Divergence, Inc. In September 2011, the Company acquired Beeologics.
In June 2012, the Company purchased a planting technology developer, Precision Planting, Inc."

"The Fox (Monsanto) Buys the Chicken Coop (Beeologics)"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-schiffman/the-fox-monsanto-buys-the_b_1470878.html

http://www.beeologics.com/about-us/

"Beeologics LLC is an international firm dedicated to restoring bee health and protecting the future of honey bee pollination. Beeologics’ mission is to become the guardian of bee health worldwide. Through continuous research, scientific innovation, and a focus on applicable solutions, Beeologics is developing a line of RNAi-based products to specifically address the long-term well being of honey bees, including the control of parasites and how they’re involved in Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD).

Beeologics was founded in 2007 upon many years of research conducted by some of the world’s leading scientists. This unique integration of diversified talent and progress toward achieving its mission has enabled Beeologics to quickly command worldwide attention. The company is recognized by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the USDA-ARS, the media, beekeepers and leading entomologists worldwide.

Since 2011, Beeologics has been a unit of Monsanto Company, headquartered in St. Louis, MO."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:16 PM

11. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:16 PM

12. K & R ...the corporate war on farmers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:17 PM

13. Life on earth depends on diversity. GMO's are, by definition, exact replicants = no diversity.

Farmers may not save seeds from one growing season to the next and must buy them every year.

Crops are developed depending on use of chemical fertilizer and pesticides.

They ultimately benefit only Monsato economically and poison our environment in multiple ways.

4 crop rotation and animal manure do the same job as well IF NOT BETTER since there's no environmental pollution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #13)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:22 PM

20. ???? How do GMOs differ from standard hybrids (used for a century)?

An entire county growing the same hybrid of corn has NO diversity. Why are GMOs different?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:32 PM

28. Standard hybrids have SOME diversity within their DNA. They are not all exact replicants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #28)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:24 PM

137. GMO organisms are not exact replicants, either.

 

The only thing identical in GMO organisms is a single gene.

Such conditions exist in multiple heirloom plants. A single gene identical in every member of the progeny, yet there is still a level of genetic diversity.

same holds true for GMO organisms.

Only clones are exact replicas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:36 PM

33. Standard Hybrids, produced by cross pollination, are limited by nature...

... in their divergence from the original plant.
Hybridization is a thoroughly natural process that has occurred since the beginning of life.
The impact will be minimal from year to year.
Even "mutation" is limited in divergence from the original species.

This is NOT true for GM species.
The product of Gene Splicing (Recombinant dna) are TRUE alien Life Forms and Invasive Species
that could NEVER occur in nature.
Through International Marketing and Distribution without adequate, LONG TERM testing,
they ARE capable of precipitating a Worldwide catastrophe.

Monocrop Agriculture is a different problem.
Though hazardous in its own right,
it is a topic for a different discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:21 PM

19. i'm just going to POST THIS AS LOUD AS I CAN and crush all arguments-MONSANTO=root of all evil.

round up = the evil of all roots

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldhippydude (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:32 PM

27. Round up is no worse than any other pesticide. It's the over-application that is awful.

What we are seeing today was predicted by a lot of people: when you use one chemical to replace many and to replace simple tillage operations, eventually you will start seeing resistant weeds. And, because of the enormous quantities of roundup being applied, we are seeing toxic effects.

DDT had its place, but we did the same damn thing.

The learning curve isn't that steep; we simply choose to keep climbing it over and again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:42 PM

36. ...and My Wife & I choose to ban those products from our immediate environment.

They are NOT allowed on our little hilltop,
chosen for its isolation from others who don't see the dangers posed by these products.
YOU can choose to live in and consume poisons, and force your children to do so too.

We choose not to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #36)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:56 PM

45. Good deal! No doubt, we can live better without them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #36)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:30 PM

63. What do you use for control?

Or do you just let everything grow at will?

Do you have grasses or just trees?

Just wondering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #63)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:45 PM

91. We use a cultivator, rototiller and pull weeds by hand in the organic veggie gardens.

On the pastures we soil test and apply fertilizer as necessary. We overseed heavily with rye grass seed in pastures when they become overgrazed (which I'm sure you know grows very rapidly) in order to "choke" out weed growth and pre-empt them. We mow regularly before any weeds head out.

So for us, its maintenance. Never chemicals on the gardens and pastures.

I admit to some Round Up usage for spot areas on the farm that aren't conducive to weed whacking (for example some of my boarders keep horse trailers here and I don't like to weed whack around their parked trailer tires so I'll spray Round Up around that area). But that's very infrequent, and very minimal usage, so I haven't had any resistance issues... yet. I'm leery of the product for many reasons and try to stay away from using it as much as possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #91)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:50 PM

113. You are doing the right thing

With minimal and proper application, there is no residual issue.

Unfortunately, Monsanto fails to inform users on proper application. The time to use RU is when a plant is healthy and growing.

I do not know if you read my reply to Buzz Clik

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2137331

Before we apply RU to a site, we wait for the growing season (which can vary, of course), apply a high-Nitro fertilizer and water the heck out the site. We wait to apply RU until the foliage is thriving. RU will go to work immediately and leave no residue.

But, of course, Monsanto wants to enjoy year-round sales and conveniently "forgets" to advise users of these very important facts.

RU applied to dormant flora is a waste of money and a threat to the environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #113)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 07:55 PM

147. There are other Roundup problems as well:

-- precipitation of salts (salting out) when using hard water
-- salting out in cold weather. If you haven't used the concentrate through the winter, shake vigorously before mixing
-- as mentioned above, most effective when plants are actively growing and respiring.
-- pretty long kill periods, up to 2 weeks. Be patient!


Roundup has the advantage of binding strongly to soils, giving very little infiltration and little threat of groundwater contamination. But, it will move when the water chemistry is just right, and it does accumulate in soil. Judicious use is key.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #147)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:23 PM

182. that sounds like a round up AD...see post #180

and stop defending them, please

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #182)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:27 PM

184. Um ... no. i will defend the product against ignorant claimts.

You know, like a big chunk of the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #184)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 05:27 PM

186. see #185

and try a little harder?

why do you defend them?

they don't need any help. really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #147)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:48 PM

194. those are only the problems from the monsanto memo

also there are these-

While Roundup has been associated with deformities in a host of laboratory animals, its impact on humans remains unclear. One laboratory study done in France in 2005 found that Roundup and glyphosate caused the death of human placental cells. Another study, conducted in 2009, found that Roundup caused total cell death in human umbilical, embryonic and placental cells within 24 hours. Yet researchers have conducted few follow-up studies.

“Obviously there’s a limit to what’s appropriate in terms of testing poison on humans,” said Jeffrey Smith, executive director of the Institute for Responsible Technology, which advocates against genetically modified food. “But if you look at the line of converging evidence, it points to a serious problem. And if you look at the animal feeding studies with genetically modified Roundup ready crops, there’s a consistent theme of reproductive disorders, which we don’t know the cause for because follow-up studies have not been done.”

“More independent research is needed to evaluate the toxicity of Roundup and glyphosate,” he added, “and the evidence that has already accumulated is sufficient to raise a red flag.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/24/roundup-scientists-birth-defects_n_883578.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:26 PM

58. You are so right

Actually, RU - used properly - is hands-down the best herbicidal treatment.

The problems are caused by user error.

We build the finest meadows in the world, from Switzerland, Dubai, Australia, North and South America - everywhere. Sustainable, drought-resistant Native (mostly) meadows.

In order to rid the site of unwanted vegetation, we use only RU. It is amusing to watch the reaction on clients' faces when we tell them were are going to treat the site with RU. Usually, they want us to cover the site with plastic in orfer to kill the plants.

Plastic.

Now, that's some Green Living for you.

Yeah, kill all of the microbes and earthworms. That will insure some healthy growing conditions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #58)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:58 PM

75. "Used Properly"

"Actually, RU - used properly - is hands-down the best herbicidal treatment.
The problems are caused by user error."


The above is an admission that these toxins are capable of catastrophic damage.
"Used Properly" does not justify the unregulated release of the toxins into our environment.

It only takes one asshole using them "improperly" to cause a whole lot of long term dmages,
not to just himself, his family, and his property,
but to all those who live near him,
or occupy that property in the future.

"Used Properly" !!!!!
What a crock.

How many Home Owners in the suburbs use these "properly".
How many upscale Golf Courses use these poisons "properly."

Like most poisons, low doses won't do a lot of damage,
but I still believe children should not be allowed to play with cyanide.
Nor do I believe that uneducated, untrained, unlicensed, unbonded, unaccountable, and unsupervised people
should have unrestricted and unregulated access to the purchase and use of these very powerful poisons.


Thank You for the admission that these poisons are very powerful,
and that improper usage can cause grave and long lasting damage.

One thing we KNOW for sure is that they are NOW being used improperly,
and will continue to be used improperly until they are regulated, supervised, and violaters held accountable!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #75)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 07:59 PM

148. That's a bit strong.

The labels on the chemicals are detailed and specific. It is a simple matter to apply the chemicals properly. Abuse is possible, but it can be a violation as well.

Golf courses, due to the nature of the business, only use educated, trained, licensed, bonded, accountable, and supervised people to apply all their chemicals, and I doubt that Roundup is one of their big ones. Not to say that golf courses don't bathe the planet in chemicals, but Roundup isn't one of them.

As for the toxicity, Roundup isn't a big problem unless someone decides to drink it or has no ability to follow the label.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #148)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:05 PM

175. OK Lets take a "Real World" look at your rebuttal.

We live in a country where 50% of the adult population is too stupid and too irresponsible to vote.

Of the 50% who DO vote, 50% of THEM are too stupid and too ill informed to vote in their own economic interest.

Now, with a straight face, you are going to argue that 100% of Americans will:

*take the time to read the very fine print instructions on the labels of these powerful poisons?

*have the intelligence to comprehend these instructions?

*are responsible enough to comply 100% with these instructions?

....ALL voluntarily, without ANY oversight, supervision, enforcement, or penalties???

...even when their wallet is threatened by the appearance of the new
Super Weeds and Pesticide Resistant Bugs?

"Perfectly SAFE when used as directed" ???


You really gonna stick with that??!!!
I almost never use the rolf smilie,
but today, you earned one:





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #175)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:53 PM

177. In many ways you are right, but you are wrong in all important ways.

Properly handled, cars should cause no deaths. But, we don't handle them properly, and we kill ourselves and each other at a staggering rate. Ban cars? No.

If improperly handled by an ignorant public, bleach, peroxide, solvents, oven cleaner, gasoline, propane, and table salt can be lethal. We can count on some people to act in their own worst interests and kill themselves with these household chemicals. Ban them all?

Bathrooms are inherently dangerous, and most household accidents occur in the bathroom. Seal off the bathrooms to protect us from ourselves?

Although you had yourself a good laugh, your sensitive funny bone will not win this argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #177)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:09 PM

197. no, he is just right

see #194

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #177)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:18 PM

199. YOU are only re-inforcing MY argument.

Remember, YOU are the one who has invested in the
"Safe when used as directed" argument.

I am the one who pointed out that VERY FEW Americans use ANYTHING "as directed".

YOU added to the list of things Americans do NOT use "as directed".
You missed the big one though.
Alcohol, when used as directed, is also safe to drink.
How many more deaths, disfigurements, and destroyed lives and families must we suffer because something has a label that says, "Safe when used as directed."?

Thank You.
I am glad we both agree that just because there are instructions printed on the label,
that does NOT mean the these powerful poisons are SAFE to introduce into our environment.

Case Closed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #199)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:28 PM

217. Case closed? Roundup is now banned for home use?

No. Not closed.

The one thing ... the only thing .... closed here is your mind.

I won't change that. Carry on without me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #75)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:16 PM

153. +1 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DollarBillHines (Reply #58)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:02 PM

78. Great post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:46 PM

71. During the time I studied gardening

 

EU banned most pesticides so a special test for handling poisonous pesticides and herbicides etc. became meaningless and was no more required. Roundup and other qlyphosates remain so far in the EU market not because it's safe or better than other banned products (independent studies show opposite), but because of lobbying and wide use. And because US authorities supposed to control poisons like glyphosate have revolving door with Monsanto people and are totally corrupt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:24 PM

22. No argument here.

The problem is HUGE.
Monsanto has become so powerful.
they OWN a BIG part of the White House and the Obama Administration.

Tom Vilsask (the King of Iowa monocrop GM Corn) was appointed to head the USDA (US Dept of Agriculture) in 2008.
Google: "Vilsack & Monsanto"

Monsanto shill & lawyer Michael Taylor was appointed to head the FDA (Food & Drug Administration)
Google: "Michael Taylor & Monsanto"

And THAT is only the tip of the iceberg.
The agencies that control agriculture in the US are infested with Monsanto and BIG Corpo Factory Farm shills and former employees.
I wouldn't be so upset
IF voices from Organic, Green, Sustainable, Healthy Agriculture were appointed to counterbalance the POWER of Monsanto in the Obama Administration,
but like the voices for Expanding Medicare, these advocates were also purposely excluded.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:09 PM

82. thanks for your help!

the more people know about it, the smaller the problem, at some point, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:29 PM

24. You sly little farminator you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:33 PM

29. Natural News is a Woo-Woo site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #29)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:15 PM

52. I wish Mike Adams would stick to health issues.

He is ahead of his time on so many health issues and then he throws in how Obama is going to take all your guns and he loses all credibility. What a waste! Stick to nutrition, Mike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rainin (Reply #52)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:16 PM

85. Ahead of his time!!...



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rainin (Reply #52)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:38 PM

89. He's a far right nutter, that no-one on DU should have anything to do with

see links in reply #88. Don't touch him with a ten foot barge pole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #89)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:29 PM

105. sorry about that, i updated the OP

too much coffee...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:40 PM

35. K&R - along with all the politicians in their pockets.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:43 PM

37. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:44 PM

38. Doesn't the farm bill help Monsanto?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #38)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:35 PM

165. probably!

Another upcoming matter of great interest to Monsanto: the new farm bill, an omnibus piece of legislation that sets the nation's agricultural policy and deals with nearly every aspect of the country's farming and food industries. The current bill expires in 2013; when it went through Congress, Monsanto filed more lobbying reports on it than any other organization. The process of piecing together a new proposal is already well under way.

The company's access to members of Congress who are likely to be key in shaping the final legislation may be eased by the contributions of its very active PAC, the Monsanto Citizenship Fund. Already this cycle it has spent $383,000. The biggest recipient of that money so far is Rep. Frank D. Lucas (R-Okla.) who has received $20,000 from Monsanto's PAC -- $10,000 for his campaign committee and $10,000 for his leadership PAC. Lucas happens to be the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee -- no farm-related legislation is passed without his say-so.

Monsanto has hedged its investment with the agriculture committee, though -- it also gave $13,500 to Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), the top-ranking Democrat on the committee. So far this election cycle, Monsanto's PAC has given $77,500 to 17 members of the House agriculture committee, or their leadership PACs.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/05/monsantos-deep-roots-in-washington.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:48 PM

41. here in the USA, M just buys its way out of any controversy as with the bee research above

reported in NN ,or prop 37@CA but other countries have been able to keep them out so there is global hope (sort of)

plenty do not want to listen in USA
carry on and comply
or believe M is one of the best things going for humanity

So you can try and alert but it is much like D's trying to talk sense to a teabagger = good luck
but thank you for your post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:11 PM

50. Naturalnews. And woo week moves into day 2...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #50)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:28 PM

87. Scientific Materialists with their narrow, idiosyncratic 'beliefs' tend to...

...denigrate all they are incapable of understanding by tagging it with a demeaning name, like woo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #87)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:40 PM

90. OK, how about "Natural News is a far right hate site"?

See links in #88.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #87)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:48 PM

93. Keep defending woo...

'Cause then we'll always have something to laugh at.



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #93)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:07 PM

120. On the Woo Woo Choo Choo

 

You're an Engineer!



hey by the way, I didn't quite manage to expose 20,000 people to the dangers of SSRI drugs, but I did get to 8,000 or so. Next week I'll do better, I promise.

All Aboard!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:25 PM

57. 'Root of all evil' is not the way to persuade people. No matter how LOUDLY you scream it.

IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:28 PM

61. farminator, my father suspected that the death of bees

was a result of pesticides. He was not a scientist, just a simple farmer. I tried his
methods of using red pepper, and other natural methods to control pests. In addition, I've tried his method of planting lettuce and carrots closest to areas where bunnies and deers roam. There was so much produce; I couldn't give it all away, nor find anyone willing to harvest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saidsimplesimon (Reply #61)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:45 AM

248. good for you!

like this guy:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2142831


Research by USGS and other scientists has identified many deadly virus infections and chytrid fungus as causes of some recent amphibian die-offs and local population declines. Scientists are actively investigating other hypotheses that could help explain these worldwide declines, including increased exposure to ultraviolet radiation due to ozone thinning, the spread of non-native predators, contamination from pesticides and other chemicals, and rising temperatures. Many biologists suspect a combination of factors may be responsible.
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=579

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:57 PM

73. your source is utter anti-science crap....

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #73)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:31 PM

106. written a book, have you?

Jeffrey Smith is a leading national expert on the dangers of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and their impact on agriculture and our health. He heads The Institute for Responsible Technology and wrote the seminal Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12715-monsanto-and-genetically-engineered-food-playing-roulette-with-our-health

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:00 PM

76. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:37 PM

88. Please replace your link to the far right Natural News with a non-obscene one

if you want to know the kind of crap Natural News publishes, try these:

Obama seizes control over all food, farms, livestock, farm equipment, fertilizer and food production across America

What does an Obama re-election mean for the next four years in America? Now that he's in his second and last term, of course, Obama no longer needs to restrain his actions according to popularity. He can simply unleash any desirable executive order and rule by decree, bypassing Congress as he has frequently promised to do.

http://www.naturalnews.com/037872_obama_election_predictions.html


Try a reputable source for the story about Monsanto buying Beeologics, like this: http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/19f6f7b2-1c8a-50f8-b84f-47c351ec044d.html

or, if you want commentary on it, Huffington Post (which, while its science coverage can be a bit nuts at times, is not a far right pile of crap, unlike Natural News): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-schiffman/the-fox-monsanto-buys-the_b_1470878.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #88)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:32 PM

107. sorry! done.

(myself)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:49 PM

94. OP, why are you using conspiracy trash sites to make your case and

then, when called on it, and despite posting "AS LOUD AS I CAN" with the purpose of "crush(ing) all arguments", you disappear from your own thread?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #94)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:36 PM

108. there was more than one link i believe

i wasn't really referencing anything on the site but 1 paragraph, in spirit, anyway...just the 1st thing i saw under 'monsanto bees'

i'll be back! (terminator joke..)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:07 PM

98. You will get no argument from me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:16 PM

101. K&R even though I disagree.

Monsanto is not the root of all evil.

Dick Cheney is the root of some of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #101)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:54 PM

157. the biggest, oldest root on the tree? here's a video..with Dick! (Cheney, of course)

Last edited Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:05 PM - Edit history (1)

shotgun Dick makes a (very) brief appearance here- (nsfw + totally bizarre)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:17 PM

102. GMO woo is to the left as climate change denial woo is to the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #102)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:53 PM

116. so was Silent Spring when it came out...maybe 'right' is 'wrong' on occaision?

Public opinion of DDT today is rooted in Carson's work and the popularity of the book.

Criticism

In the 1960s, biochemist and former chemical industry spokesman Robert White-Stevens stated, "If man were to follow the teachings of Miss Carson, we would return to the Dark Ages, and the insects and diseases and vermin would once again inherit the earth."

Silent Spring continues to be criticized by a number sources, and in recent years Carson and her book have come under increasing attack from authors, particularly libertarians who claim restrictions and stigmas of DDT have caused millions of deaths indirectly by preventing its use to combat malaria. In 2002, economist Ronald Bailey wrote in Reason magazine that the book had a mixed legacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #116)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:51 PM

127. There's a kernel of truth in both sides. But Monsanto & GMO needs to be put on a leash.

On one hand, GMO, if done right, can be a very useful technology. On one hand, we can get crops with better food, more food, drought resistance - it could be another Green Revolution.

Monsanto, OTOH, IMHO, is being very sloppy with its GMO crop development, and our regulatory-captured government isn't getting on top of this problem.

But because Monsanto's being sloppy, we get freaky things like wheat that causes allergic reactions in those allergic to shellfish, Roundup-Resistant(TM) crops that breed round-up resistant insects, and may also be contributing to bee colony collapse disorder.

Then there's the whole patenting, monopolizing and predatory business practices problem that results in farmers being forced to sell their souls to Monsanto, resulting in the suicides in India, farmers here getting sued into bankruptcy and losing their farms because seeds from a neighbor's crop blew onto their fields, etc.

I'd say what we have is a health & environment problem exacerbated by regulatory capture, and we have a monopoly/predatory business problem, where Monsanto is but one offender.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #127)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 07:34 PM

144. The main backlash against Monsanto is due to patents and to European farmers and the subsidy regime

As for the bees, imidacloprid and neonicotinoids are more likely to be a problem than glyphosate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:19 PM

104. You had me... until you posted the woo site.

Natural News is not credible. And they're filled with right-wing libertarian nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #104)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:49 PM

111. try this guy- it was a caffiene-induced oversight...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #111)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:43 PM

125. Thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:41 PM

110. ALRIGHT ALREADY!!! natural news is a cuckoo site, i xxxx'd it! back on topic, please!

Obama Administration Gives Tentative Approval to Frankenfish
Friday, 28 December 2012 11:25 By Dan Bacher, The Fish Sniffer | Report

On December 21, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a draft environmental assessment (EA) finding, in spite of much evidence to the contrary, that genetically engineered (GE) AquaAdvantage salmon pose no risk to the environment.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/13594-obama-administration-gives-tentative-approval-to-frankenfish


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #110)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:41 PM

141. Link talks about Obama's admin bad moves also = you may have to remove this link too yaknow!!!



"The Obama administration's abysmal record on salmon, fish and water

The Obama administration's tentative approval of GE salmon for human consumption occurs in the context of an administration that has continued and expanded some of the most odious environmental policies of the Bush administration.

The Obama administration is the first-ever federal administration to officially endorse the construction of a peripheral canal or tunnel, a project that will hasten the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta and longfin smelt and other fish species by diverting massive quantities of water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to corporate agribusiness and southern California.

The Obama and Brown administrations also presided over record Delta water exports and massive fish kills at the state and federal pumping facilities in 2011. The record water exports resulted in the "salvage" of a record 9 million Sacramento splittail and over 2 million other fish including Central Valley salmon, steelhead, striped bass, largemouth bass, threadfin shad, white catfish and sturgeon.

These fish kills couldn't occur at a worse time. An analysis by the Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA) has found that since year 2000 over one hundred million fish (102,856,027) have been sucked into the Delta pumps. This figure includes twenty six million valuable game fish, many of which are endangered."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunasun (Reply #141)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:05 PM

149. i opened a can of worms there, whoops! not his fault the FDA is such a mess! he's trying!

the FDA's salmon thing has been kicking around for 17 years...kinda like this guy...

i don't quite know what to make of this:

http://signon.org/sign/tell-obama-to-cease-fda

maybe obama is counting on the public's help on this one?

***

So the FDA ends 2012 with its reputation in tatters, its failures documented by Estabrook's piece, its regulatory power steamrolled by Big Meat, and its timidity exposed by a federal court. Only one person can save it, and that's President Obama. He can either stand aside as the FDA slinks deeper into its role as industry lapdog—or revive it as a force for the public good.
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/12/only-obama-can-revive-tattered-fda

***

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_25275.cfm


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #149)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:53 PM

156. Oh I saw nothing wrong with any of your posts ....

...........even the original ones!!
Just predicting some other poster's over the top ire at the new post now for the Obama diss
You knew you might get beat up and were brave for the OP
hang in there

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunasun (Reply #156)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:30 PM

261. Obama has EARNED a dissing for his aid to Monsanto.

He had given Monsanto control of the USAD and the FDA by appointing known Monsanto Shills or actual Monsanto employees to head these vitally important departments.

Google: "Tom Vilsack & Monsanto"

Google: "Michael Taylor & Monsanto"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #261)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 07:46 PM

275. Oh I know Monsanto /Vilsack around see my post #41

remember his bid for prez in 08??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunasun (Reply #275)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:20 PM

278. How can president Obama have put THAT "Man from Monsanto"...

...IN CHARGE of the US Department of Agriculture,
and then make a BIG Marketing Hoop-A-La about putting an "Organic Garden" on the White House Lawn.

It is ALL about the Window Dressing!


And then there is THIS:
&feature=player_embedded

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 04:57 PM

117. Sign a petition to the White House

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:03 PM

118. That's why I call it MonSATAN

An incredibly evil, anti-life corporation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:15 PM

123. Bookmarked this to get it kicked from time to time.

In Germany the resistance against GMO is quite strong, we want those at least to be declared clearly.
I'd like to support you and any other farmer in this world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:20 PM

124. Baker Creek recc

Baker Creek seeds is fiercely anti- GMO, anti- Monsanto, pro- heirloom seeds. Amazing varieties, catalog, prices, and service. I feel like I'm doing my small part by buying their seeds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:56 PM

128. Root of ALL evil?

Even the Designated Hitter?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoPasaran (Reply #128)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:13 PM

151. i tried!

On March 6, 1969, two games utilized the new DPH rule for the very first time. Two newly formed expansion teams, the Montreal Expos and the Kansas City Royals would participate in one such game, (wiki)

blame Canada?

***

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_O._Finley

this is about as sinister as DH gets-
Hired Stanley Burrell (who would later gain worldwide fame as MC Hammer) as Executive Vice President when he was just a teenager to be his "eyes and ears."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 06:15 PM

134. Monsanto wants to help the bees...

like Walmart wants to stimulate the economy. They have an ulterior motive, and have done many bad things in the past. They aren't the root of all evil, that would be greed. And Monsanto is driven by nothing but greed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 07:08 PM

143. +

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 07:51 PM

145. Destroying Kauai

Monsanto, Syngenta, Du Pont, et al are destroying Kauai with the genetically modified seed which is cross pollinating with Native Hawaiian species. They pay in excess of market to rent ag land to plant corn and have built a "campus" here. The pesticide run off is killing the coral reef off of west Kauai.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KauaiK (Reply #145)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:32 PM

164. have you seen millions against monsanto hawaii on FB?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 07:53 PM

146. thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:27 PM

154. even India is smart enough

to have banned Monsanto...

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_govt-bans-mahyco-monsanto-biotech_1726118


"The Director of Inputs and Quality Control (DIQC), the licensing authority in Maharashtra, has banned Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (MMB) in its final order.

A notice has been sent under the provisions of the 2009 Maharashtra Cotton Act which states that all trade activities of the company are illegal..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:44 PM

155. "occupy monsanto" list of seeds/plants and snoop alert - site seems to be sane

DuPont competitors Monsanto have been known to relentlessly sue small-time farmers who have been caught abusing their own patented GMO products, but the latest maneuver is being considered by some a form of intimidation. DuPont has cut a deal with Saskatchewan-based Agro Protection International, a company that contracts mostly retired police officers to patrol potential violations of IP law.

“Everyone always goes to the idea that we are trying to intimidate people and nothing could be further from the truth,”Agro President Dennis Birtles tells Bloomberg. “We are trying to create deterrence.”

According to that report, Agro already has around 45 employees patrolling farms in Canada, and a DuPont senior manager has confirmed to the media that around three dozen will start searching for IP violations in the United States starting next year.

http://www.occupymonsanto360.org/2012/12/04/gmo-giant-hires-retired-cops-to-hunt-down-farmers/

***
this bold part below seems to imply that most GMO seeds are for corn and soybean farmers, and that they can't sue you for saving your own seeds if they only own the name. i think?

If you are the type of gardener who purchases vegetable seeds or seedlings, including tomato plants from a local garden center, be mindful the varieties you choose. Conversely, you might be placing money into the hands of Monsanto Corporation. Below is the list of Seminis / Monsanto home-garden vegetable variations.

Print this list, and keep a copy in your wallet. Don’t be caught off guard the next time you impulse shop at a big-box garden center.

The seed varieties you have obtained as “heirlooms” from heirloom or organic seed companies are “NOT” GMO seeds, even though they are officially “owned” by Monsanto. As far as we know, the only GMO vegetable seeds available for sale today are new hybrid varieties of zucchini and summer squash, so be sure you order these from certified organic suppliers.

Please understand that Monsanto only owns the trademark names for these “heirloom” varieties. This stretegic move holds two advantages for Monsanto:

1.) prevents new companies from naming new varieties with these or very similar names.

2.) it is an effort to stop lucrative sales by these other companies trying to leverage the heirloom name and consumer loyalty for those heirloom varieties.

http://www.occupymonsanto360.org/2012/03/17/monsanto-owned-seednames/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:07 PM

161. Corrupt elections lead to corrupt government that fails to regulate/prosecute corrupt businesses

The undue influence of unregulated money, carpet bombing commercial propaganda, voter suppression and cyber vote count count rigging undermine democracy and the ability of the people and their government to pass laws in the public interest.

The corruption of our food supply is indeed evil. However, our inability to remedy that problem is the result of the corruption of our elections.

Cliff Arnebeck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cliff Arnebeck (Reply #161)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:25 PM

163. yessir!

The biotech industry plays hardball in Congress as well. One week before Roundup Ready alfalfa was deregulated, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack testified before the House Committee on Agriculture, where Chairmen Frank Lucas (R-Oklahoma) led a charge to press the USDA to fully deregulate the alfalfa. A political action committee and individuals associated with Monsanto donated $11,000 to Lucas' campaign last year, and Lucas has received $1,247,844 from the agribusiness industry during his political career, according to watchdog site www.opensecrets.org. Since 1999, the top 50 companies holding agricultural or food patents have spent more than $572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying efforts, according to a report released last year.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/9:why-monsanto-always-wins

***

Another upcoming matter of great interest to Monsanto: the new farm bill, an omnibus piece of legislation that sets the nation's agricultural policy and deals with nearly every aspect of the country's farming and food industries. The current bill expires in 2013; when it went through Congress, Monsanto filed more lobbying reports on it than any other organization. The process of piecing together a new proposal is already well under way.

The company's access to members of Congress who are likely to be key in shaping the final legislation may be eased by the contributions of its very active PAC, the Monsanto Citizenship Fund. Already this cycle it has spent $383,000. The biggest recipient of that money so far is Rep. Frank D. Lucas (R-Okla.) who has received $20,000 from Monsanto's PAC -- $10,000 for his campaign committee and $10,000 for his leadership PAC. Lucas happens to be the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee -- no farm-related legislation is passed without his say-so.

Monsanto has hedged its investment with the agriculture committee, though -- it also gave $13,500 to Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), the top-ranking Democrat on the committee. So far this election cycle, Monsanto's PAC has given $77,500 to 17 members of the House agriculture committee, or their leadership PACs.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/05/monsantos-deep-roots-in-washington.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:11 AM

171. Monsanto worships Money

 

So I guess it's one root removed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:06 AM

174. monster-santo is also trying to mess with OUR SACRED HERB!

if you aren't up on medical MJ, the THC (and CBD) are the medicine, so trying to take it out is basically the dumbest thing i've ever heard...

Researchers from the College of Biological Science of the University of Minnesota have identified the genes in the Cannabis plant that produce tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC), claiming in a press release that it is “a first step toward engineering a drug-free Cannabis plant”. George Weiblen, an associate professor of plant biology and a co-author of the study, said “Cannabis genetics can contribute to better agriculture, medicine, and drug enforcement”.

http://coto2.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/prop-19-monsanto-and-gmo-terminator-cannabis/

(very long ^^^, from 2 years ago...things are worse now, no doubt!)

At his Amsterdam glasshouses, he nods conspiratorially at the healthy- looking garden produce. “Don’t say anything yet, but we are also working on putting THC into tomatoes,” he confides. Then he cackles reassuringly: “Only kidding!”

David Watson has stated “HortaPharm has built up over many years the most extensive ‘Living Library’ of Medicinal Cannabis varieties in the world”.

-skip-

Under the agreement GW Pharma will be responsible for the development of specific drug delivery technologies to administer the pharmaceutical grade medicinal cannabis. This work will include a vaporizer for which HortaPharm has a patent pending.
(look up Sativex, they did it!)

-skip-

“”Physicians will be able to monitor patient usage remotely,” continued Guy. “People won’t be able to tamper with our devices, even though they are portable and easy to use. You’d need a metal saw or a blowtorch to get into one of them. These controls answer concerns of those who worry that our extracts will be used inappropriately. And, these devices can be adapted for other medicines, ensuring patient safety and medical efficacy.”“

“Dr Guy and his representatives have engaged in high level discussions with the DEA, FDA, the Office for National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA) and senior state officials in California and Maine.”

-skip-

“”GW occupies a lead position world-wide,” concludes Guy. “We are uniquely placed to become the first company to achieve regulatory approval for prescription cannabis-based medicines.”“

-skip-

http://www.cannabisculture.com/node/19879
“Patented Pot vs. the Herbal Gold Standard by David Malmo-Levine”

“How patented marijuana strains and medicines may threaten the re-legalization movement, curb information sharing, set up a monopoly for certain breeders and medicine producers and limit users to a more expensive and inferior product. Their economic value to the pharmaceutical houses which produce them will be directly proportional to the severity of the prohibition against the use of cannabis.”

-skip-

“GW Pharmaceutical was granted a license to grow cannabis for medical research in 1998 and it’s partner Bayer was granted a patent for Sativex in 2006. Sativex comes in a 5.5 ml spray bottle for $102 U.S. Dollars, which supplies about 51 sprays – enough for an average ten day supply. It is now available in Canada for MS and cancer pain, and has most recently become available in Britain and parts of Spain for use in the treatment of some other symptoms and syndromes.”

“GW Pharmaceutical has even patented a strain of cannabis called “Grace” in Canada. It was patented in 2005 under the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act. Under this 1994 Act, all plant species (except algae, bacteria, and fungi) are eligible for “protection” (exclusive rights to sell) for 18 years. Medicine patents last between ten to twenty years depending on the country.”

-skip-

“The modern version of this monopoly began in 1910 with the Flexner Report – a report that succeeded in closing down all the naturopathic and herbal medicine schools by the 1930′s. This report was partially engineered by the Rockefeller Foundation. The removal of these schools would assist the Rockefeller family in protecting their investments in pharmaceuticals from botanical competition. The Rockefeller Institute and Rockefeller Foundation were also key players in the development of the sciences of genetics and molecular biology – the fields in which the concepts of patenting of life-forms originated. Standard Oil – now Exxon/Mobil and a host of other oil companies – was the Rockefeller Foundation’s source of income. Interestingly, in 1927 Standard Oil became business partners with Bayer – the marketer and distributor of Sativex in Canada.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:20 PM

176. Our Honey Bees, Free Range Chickens,

and Poison Free Veggies and Fruits,
and our wildlife, earth worms, butterflies, frogs, Lightening bugs, Humming Birds,
cats, dogs, tame deer, grass, weeds, healthy natural soil....
Everybody & everything on this little hill top in The Woods of rural Arkansas...
Bur especially my Wife & I,
thank you for your efforts!


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1182412

Come & Join us in the Rural/Farm Group!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1182

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #176)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:04 PM

178. that's some SWEET lookin' honey (no pun...)

what kind of wildflowers are in that stuff?

thanks for the invite, see you soon!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #178)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:20 PM

188. The first "honey robbing" was in May,

...and it was mostly Fruit Trees (a few domestic, but mostly wild plums), white clover
and early wild flowers and wild blackberries. (that is the light honey in the photos)

There are no cultivated crops within their 3 mile foraging range
besides our few fruit trees and cultivated berries, so whatever is blooming in the woods & fields plus our small gardens will be what they store.

We had a decent early Spring, but the rain stopped in mid-May, followed by drought
that killed all the clover and most of the visible wild flowers.
We gave up on any additional Summer Honey harvests,
and checked the hives in mid-July to see if we needed to start feeding them.
But instead of empty, the hives were FULL of a much darker honey.
Where they got it, we have no idea.
We took some, and left them a bunch for Winter.

We prefer the darker who-knows-what July Honey with an earthier, molasses flavor but most people prefer the lighter Spring honey.
This is no surprise because we also prefer the darker beers,
like Dos Equiis Amber and Modelo Negra.

It will be good to see you in Rural/Farm. That will make 4 of us. LOL
Rural Farm used to be much busier, but most have left for Greener Pastures,
less polluted by the Monsanto Apologists and Factory Farm boosters.

We have some more photos and text about our little place in the Arkansas Woods that you might enjoy:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1182456

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=280x57204

If you're ever in the neighborhood,
drop in for non-toxic Green Beans & Cornbread.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:52 PM

195. No arguments here!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:34 PM

206. it is evil

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:34 AM

224. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:24 AM

229. yes! monsanto is evil

power & profits over human and all species health & quality of planetary life. what will happen when gmo fornicated dna seeps into the soil and water tables and on up through the food chain?

thank you for your insightful posts, farminator3000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:58 AM

231. Yep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:40 AM

246. i think i deserve a shout out for not getting booted from my own thread for an insult...

it WASN'T easy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:25 PM

251. Lot of heat for a little light.

I stumbled on this thread and went to the trouble of joining DU just to reply to it so this is my first (and probably last) post. Since Food Inc. seems to have become an instant cult classic, Monsanto seems to have supplanted Dick Cheney as the leftist antichrist. Monsanto is a big company and has some questionable business practices however it has merely adapted to a corrupt political system dating back to Credit Mobilier and before.

I have been a crop duster for the last 25 years so I've been out in the trenches for the entire GMO sequence. Since the advent of GMO it requires FAR fewer pesticides to raise a corn crop. The pesticides that are still used are FAR more benign from an environmental and toxicological standpoint.

Up until '96 or so a typical season would require preplant herbicides such as Triazines, first brood corn borer control with granules including Dyphonate, Parathion (until the late 80's), and late season root worm beetle controls. I sprayed every acre of corn ground within a 50 mile radius with methyl and ethyl parathion in late season--twice. Ethyl parathion is a great product although it is extremely toxic in acute dose. It has a very short half life, readily photodegrades and biodegrades. It does what it is supposed to do then goes away but is a huge problem around bees.

Today we use none of those products, in fact many that the feds don't like have lost registration. A couple of seasonal applications of Roundup is completely benign compared to what was going on out there 20 years ago. Of course I'm posting in a thread where some numb nuts alleges trauma after seeing a pet killed by Roundup so that typifies the type of ignorance that I'm up against in here. Did Rover stumble into the barrel and drown? My condolences.

The older raddled leftists in here will recall the great apocalyptic screeds of the 60s and 70s. "Silent Spring" and Paul Ehrlich's "The Population Bomb". We were all supposed to be starving to death 20 years ago under that scenario. Why aren't we? Because we have figured out how to take up the slack with production agriculture.

If you want to do some digging at the UN website you will find that each person on earth is currently surviving on about a half acre of arable land. Maybe Ehrlich will ultimately be proven correct and just has the date wrong.

As far as Monsanto being guilty of spending money to function in the corrupt political system it is required to operate in I would like to point out that it is chump change compared to the environmental lobby. The Sierra Club alone has an annual budget of 100 million dollars and there are dozens of them.

As an industry (aerial application) we sit across the table from them at EPA meetings year after year while they attempt to guide the entrenched bureaucrats and earnest young earth muffins that populate that agency toward draconian solutions in an attempt to put us out of business. The '300 buffer proposal would damn near shut us down but we have managed to forestall that in the interim. They are able to outspend us by a couple of orders of magnitude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CropGun (Reply #251)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:27 PM

254. thank you for your paid spokesman nonsense. you are a perfect example of the problem.

however it has merely adapted to a corrupt political system dating back to Credit Mobilier and before.

i think you mean monsanto and bayer, etc. CREATED a corrupt system that they now exploit by giving people horrible diseases.


I have been a crop duster for the last 25 years so I've been out in the trenches for the entire GMO sequence. Since the advent of GMO it requires FAR fewer pesticides to raise a corn crop. The pesticides that are still used are FAR more benign from an environmental and toxicological standpoint.


you can't be very good at it. how do you fly a plane in a trench? is that where the crops are planted?

your statement about less used and less dangerous is just plain untrue, i could post 12 links..here's one:
http://www.panna.org/blog/ge-corn-sick-honey-bees-whats-link
How corn farming went off the rails
In the early 1990s, we were really good at growing corn using bio-intensive integrated pest management (bio-IPM). In practice, that meant crop rotations, supporting natural predators, using biocontrol agents like ladybugs and as a last resort, using chemical controls only after pests had been scouted for and found. During this time of peak bio-IPM adoption, today’s common practice of blanketing corn acreage with “insurance” applications of various pesticides without having established the need to do so would have been unthinkable. It’s expensive to use inputs you don’t need, and was once the mark of bad farming.

Then, in the mid-to-late 1990s, GE corn and neonicotinoid (imidacloprid) seed treatments both entered the market — the two go hand-in-hand, partly by design and partly by accident. Conditions for the marketing of both products were ripe due to a combination of factors:

regulatory pressures and insect resistance had pushed previous insecticide classes off the market, creating an opening for neonicotinoids to rapidly take over global marketshare;
patented seeds became legally defensible, and the pesticide industry gobbled up the global seed market; and
a variant of the corn rootworm outsmarted soy-corn rotations, driving an uptick in insecticide use around 1995-96.

Then, as if on cue, Monsanto introduced three different strains of patented, GE corn between 1997 and 2003 (RoundUp Ready, and two Bt–expressing variants aimed at controlling the European Corn Borer and corn root worm). Clothianidin entered the U.S. market under conditional registration in 2003, and in 2004 corn seed companies began marketing seeds treated with a 5X level of neonicotinoids (1.25 mg/seed vs. .25).

... and in the space of a decade, U.S. corn acreage undergoes a ten-fold increase in average insecticide use. By 2007, the average acre of corn has more than three systemic insecticides — both Bt traits and a neonicotinoid. Compare this to the early 1990s, when only an estimated 30-35% of all corn acreage were treated with insecticides at all.


***

Of course I'm posting in a thread where some numb nuts alleges trauma after seeing a pet killed by Roundup so that typifies the type of ignorance that I'm up against in here.


yeah, your own (purposeful) ignorance! in your own head!

As an industry (aerial application) we sit across the table from them at EPA meetings year after year while they attempt to guide the entrenched bureaucrats and earnest young earth muffins that populate that agency toward draconian solutions in an attempt to put us out of business.

hopefully, a sucessful attempt! Bt and all the other crap are ruining people lives! giving people cancer and such. not a very nice thing to do in the name of 'industry' is it?


***

http://archive.truthout.org/war-over-genetically-modified-crops-gets-ugly-birth-defects-superweeds-and-science-intimidation64915
War Over Monsanto Gets Ugly

Tuesday 09 November 2010

by: Mike Ludwig, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

War Over Monsanto Gets Ugly

A delegation of politicians and community activists gathered on August 7 in La Leonesa, a small farm town in Argentina, to hear Dr. Andres Carrasco speak about a study linking a popular herbicide to birth defects in Argentina's agricultural areas.

But the presentation never happened. A mob of about 100 people attacked the delegation before they could reach the local school where the talk was to be held.

Dr. Carrasco and a colleague locked themselves in a car as the mob yelled threats and beat on the vehicle for two hours. One delegate was hit in the spine and has since suffered lower-body paralysis. Another person was treated for blows to the head. A former provincial human rights official was hit in the face and knocked unconscious.

Witnesses said the angry crowd had ties to local officials and agribusiness bosses, and police made little effort to stop the violence, according to human rights group Amnesty International.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #254)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:10 PM

263. Heh

Last edited Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:41 PM - Edit history (1)

i think you mean monsanto and bayer, etc. CREATED a corrupt system that they now exploit by giving people horrible diseases.

They created a system that predates them? Wow, they are more evil than I imagined.

you can't be very good at it. how do you fly a plane in a trench? is that where the crops are planted?

Heh, I see what you did there. I surmise that was what passes for a witty riposte in your world?

your statement about less used and less dangerous is just plain untrue, i could post 12 links..here's one:
http://www.panna.org/blog/ge-corn-sick-honey-bees-whats-link
How corn farming went off the rails
In the early 1990s, we were really good at growing corn using bio-intensive integrated pest management (bio-IPM). In practice, that meant crop rotations, supporting natural predators, using biocontrol agents like ladybugs and as a last resort, using chemical controls only after pests had been scouted for and found. During this time of peak bio-IPM adoption, today’s common practice of blanketing corn acreage with “insurance” applications of various pesticides without having established the need to do so would have been unthinkable. It’s expensive to use inputs you don’t need, and was once the mark of bad farming.



Yeppers, PANNA is always the place I go when I need straight information. I'm giving you a first person observation of pest management practices in the heart of the corn belt from 1989 the present day. If you think the growers were all out there with ladybugs before BT corn you are delusional, well you ARE delusional, let's say more delusional. We used to spray every corn field in the region with organophosphates fence to fence multiple times a year, now we use insecticides much more selectively in special cases. There is a kernel of truth there though; farmers don't like to spend a lot of extra money bringing in a crop. Many of the problems we have had historically with pest management are related to growers trying to cut rates to save a buck. That was true in the past and is true in the present day. If you can't demonstrate a verifiable financial benefit to them they are loath to treat pests.

hopefully, a sucessful attempt! Bt and all the other crap are ruining people lives! giving people cancer and such. not a very nice thing to do in the name of 'industry' is it?


Jesus, now I'm going to have to cry myself to sleep again. farminator3000 thinks I am doing a disservice to humanity and should be out of business.

Where is all this cancer? Why isn't it showing up in the practitioners of my profession that are exposed to these products at many orders of magnitude greater than the populace at large? Why is the U.S. lifespan at an all time high?

Now I don't have a problem with organic farming, I spray organic crops. Many of them still use pesticides when they are required to...they just pick 'em off a different list.

If you think that the majority of cancer and disease is related to farming practice rather than the appalling dietary and lifestyle choices that people make you are delusional...but we already knew that.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CropGun (Reply #263)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:52 PM

265. if that's the best you've got, just give up now

They created a system that predates them? Wow, they are more evil than I imagined.

i mean the agricultural monoply, not the government.

I'm giving you a first person observation of pest management practices in the heart of the corn belt from 1989 the present day.


from the monsanto website, no doubt

We used to spray every corn field in the region with organophosphates fence to fence multiple times a year, now we use insecticides much more selectively in special cases.
If you can't demonstrate a verifiable financial benefit to them they are loath to treat pests.


i'm beginning to doubt you are for real- forcing farmers to pay more for chemicals they don't really need is completely backwards. the crap is supposed to make things 'easier', it never does, and monsanto sues little guys for BS 'patent' things 100s of times a year.
of course you spread less crap around, its BUILT INTO THE PLANTS now. but not really that much less crap...

see that 33 million pounds # down there? enough to kill every living thing in the country, one drop is all it takes.

Pesticide News Story: EPA Releases Report Containing Latest Estimates of Pesticide Use in the United States
For Release: February 17, 2011
EPA's report, Pesticides Industry Sales and Usage: 2006 and 2007 Market Estimates, is now available at http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/pestsales/. This report contains the latest estimates of agricultural and nonagricultural pesticide use in the United States. It illustrates graphically historical trends and levels of use over the last 20 years. Also included are data on imports, exports, and pesticide producers and users. The report contains statistics on pesticide sales and usage based on available information taken from Agency records of registrations, USDA surveys of pesticide use, and other public and proprietary sources. Highlights include:

In the United States, pesticide sales were approximately $12.5 billion at the user level, which accounted for 32% of the nearly $40 billion world market in 2007.Pesticide use in the United States was 1.1 billion pounds in 2007, or 22% of the world estimate of 5.2 billion pounds of pesticide use.
Total pounds of U.S. pesticide use decreased by approximately 8% from 1.2 to 1.1 billion pounds from 2000 to 2007.
Use of conventional pesticides decreased about 3% from 2002 to 2007 and 11% from 1997 to 2007.
Approximately 857 million pounds of conventional pesticide active ingredient were applied in 2007.
Organophosphate insecticide use decreased about 44% from 2002 to 2007, 63% from 2000 to 2007, and 55% from 1997 to 2007.
About 33 million pounds of organophosphate insecticides were applied in 2007.
Eighty percent of all U.S. pesticide use was in agriculture.
Herbicides remained the most widely used type of pesticide in the agricultural market sector.
Among the top 10 pesticides used in terms of pounds applied in the agricultural market were the herbicides glyphosate, atrazine, metolachlor-s, acetochlor, 2,4-D, and pendimethalin, and the fumigants metam sodium, dichloropropene, methyl bromide, and chloropicrin.
Herbicides were also the most widely used type of pesticide in the home and garden and industrial, commercial, and governmental market sectors, and the herbicides 2,4-D and glyphosate were the most widely used active ingredients.
http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb_page/updates/2011/sales-usage06-07.html

***

Jesus, now I'm going to have to cry myself to sleep again. farminator3000 thinks I am doing a disservice to humanity and should be out of business.
Where is all this cancer? Why isn't it showing up in the practitioners of my profession that are exposed to these products at many orders of magnitude greater than the populace at large? Why is the U.S. lifespan at an all time high?
Now I don't have a problem with organic farming, I spray organic crops. Many of them still use pesticides when they are required to...they just pick 'em off a different list.
If you think that the majority of cancer and disease is related to farming practice rather than the appalling dietary and lifestyle choices that people make you are delusional...but we already knew that.


i absolutely think you should be out of business.

type monsanto and cancer into google, read the latest study NOT paid for by big M. why don't you tell everybody about the warning labels on those poisons? how you have to wear a gas mask to handle some of it?

i DO have problems with organic farming- the USDA standards are hoooey. and 'organic' products are too goddamn expensive, both the 'pesticides' and produce. nobody is REQUIRED to use pesticides. overuse comes down to laziness, basically. the only reason you would HAVE to use chemicals is if you had KILLED your soil with poison previously. there are farms of thousands of acres that don't spray a drop. and NEITHER DO I.

you are the delooney one if you are trying to say that farming has nothing to do with diet! ha! that's a GOOD ONE!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #265)


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #254)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:49 PM

264. "Bt and all the other crap are ruining people lives! giving people cancer..." Link?

Better tell the organic farmers and the people who eat organic fruits and vegetables because Bt is one of the pesticides allowed for production of certified organic fruits and vegetables. I would think you would know that as a fruit and vegetable producer. Even if you aren't an organic producer, Bt is used by many conventional producers as well.

Bacillus thuringiensis http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/insect/05556.html

by W.S. Cranshaw1 (12/08)
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a naturally occurring bacterial disease of insects. These bacteria are the active ingredient in some insecticides.
Bt insecticides are most commonly used against some leaf- and needle-feeding caterpillars. Recently, strains have been produced that affect certain fly larvae, such as mosquitoes, and larvae of leaf beetles.
Bt is considered safe to people and nontarget species, such as wildlife. Some formulations can be used on essentially all food Crops.

The following are Bt products:

Kurstaki strain (Biobit, Dipel, MVP, Steward, Thuricide, etc.):
Used on many caterpillars including corn earworm

San diego/tenebrionis strains (Trident, M-One, M-Trak, Foil, Novodor, etc.)
Used on beetle pests including Colorado Potato Beetle

Israelensis strains (Vectobac, Mosquito Dunks, Gnatrol, Bactimos, etc.)
Used on mosquitoes, blackflies and fungus gnats

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #264)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:57 PM

266. like i just told your buddy...also, i know what bt is, thanks for that anyway

you are out of your element-
bt is allowed for 'organics' as a spray, not BUILT INTO THE PLANT.
so just give up.

i DO have problems with organic farming- the USDA standards are hoooey. and 'organic' products are too goddamn expensive, both the 'pesticides' and produce. nobody is REQUIRED to use pesticides. overuse comes down to laziness, basically. the only reason you would HAVE to use chemicals is if you had KILLED your soil with poison previously. there are farms of thousands of acres that don't spray a drop. and NEITHER DO I.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #266)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:21 PM

269. Well it is not my fault you are so careless in your language.

You made a statement about Bt. "Bt" is not the same thing as a "Bt variety". Sorry - you want to engage in a scientific debate, the expectation is that you speak a little more precisely. Words have meaning. Someone says Bt, it means Bt, not the crop variety containing Bt. And given the sloppiness of your arguments and link behavior (such as linking to sites simply because they support your view of Monsanto without regard as to what kind of site it is.......

EDIT#1: ok, i didn't look at that site ^^^ beyond the monsanto stuff, SORRY! (i also have a 2-year old) it is totally whacko, i apologize (see the Xs?)


Sorry, but "SORRY!" won't do when that is the constant M.O. and sorry but you don't get the benefit of the doubt as how much you really do know about farming or anything having to do with Bt crops, glyphosate resistant crops, or anything else, for that matter. Post some scientific arguments backed by credible links and we can talk. Otherwise I will end with this:

"there are farms of thousands of acres that don't spray a drop. and NEITHER DO I."

The second part I believe, because I don't believe you farm even one acre, let alone 200.
I call bs on the whole profile you have presented here. I work with lots of farmers, organic and conventional, and none of them spew the way you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #269)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:37 PM

271. Bt means Bt and spraying the bacteria in its natural state is WAY different than genetic splicing

great, you sell their seeds or something. good for you. if you really work with farmers, you should tell them how dangerous this stuff is.



http://archive.truthout.org/war-over-genetically-modified-crops-gets-ugly-birth-defects-superweeds-and-science-intimidation64915

Debate Gets Ugly

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, has long been considered less toxic than other herbicides. The EPA considers glyphosate a noncarcinogen for humans and a chemical of relatively low toxicity.

Monsanto took the EPA's initial evaluation and ran with it, and in 1996, the state of New York filed a lawsuit against Monsanto over an advertising campaign that claimed Roundup to be as safe as table salt.

In recent years, teams of independent scientists like Carrasco's have come forward with studies showing that Roundup and glyphosate is more toxic than the regulators will admit. For years, Roundup critics charged that the "inert" ingredients like surfactants and solvents in Roundup and other glyphosate herbicides make the products more toxic to people and the environment.

Carrasco's report, on the other hand, showed that glyphosate itself caused malformations in embryos similar to those found in humans who live in agricultural areas dominated by genetically engineered crops. The report establishes that the toxic "inert" ingredients made it easier for the glyphosate to invade cells and cause damage.

But Carrasco is not the first scientist to identify this relationship between glyphosate and Roundup's "inert" ingredients.

Jeffrey Smith, GM critic and author of the books "Seeds of Deception" and "Genetic Roulette," told Truthout that many scientists have been verbally threatened and denied tenure for publishing studies critical of Roundup and GM crops.

***

The rapid expansion of GM RR soy has led to large increases
in the use of glyphosate. It is often claimed that glyphosate is
safe for people and the environment. But scientific research
challenges these claims.

Studies show that glyphosate has serious toxic effects on health
and the environment. The added ingredients or adjuvants in
Roundup increase its toxicity.
Harmful effects from glyphosate and Roundup have been found
even at levels that are commonly used in agriculture and found
in the environment.

-skip-

Indirect toxic effects of glyphosate
Glyphosate is marketed as a product that breaks down rapidly
and harmlessly in the environment. But this is not true.
In soil, glyphosate has a half-life (the length of time it takes to
lose half its biological activity) of between 3 and 215 days.37 38 In
water, glyphosate’s half-life is 35–63 days.39
Glyphosate reduces bird populations40 and is toxic to
earthworms.41 42
Claims of the environmental safety of Roundup have been
overturned in court in New York43 and France.44

http://www.gmwatch.org/files/GMsoy_SustainableResponsible_Sept2010_Summary.pdf

***
looks pretty scientific, i'd say!-

http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/fileadmin/files/gmo-free-regions/GMO-Free_Europe_2010/Carrasco_ChemResToxAug2010.pdf

***

if you do really care about farmers, read this- 4,000 acres. organic. no-till. no round up.

http://cookingupastory.com/the-unconventional-harvest-a-large-no-till-organic-farm
Emily is among the scant 7.7 % female farmers growing crops in the moonlike landscape that is South Dakota. Of that small percentage my guess is that she was probably one of the very few female farmers who were growing grains on a large scale. The story got a few degrees hotter when I learned that her 4,000 plus acres were farmed with no-till practices and certified organic. If you ever find yourself on a long stretch of remote highway in South Dakota, stop and take a look around. More than likely you are surrounded by farmland that is growing a genetically modified crop. Of the 31,300 farms in South Dakota, only 103 of them were certified organic. My encounter with Emily was the equivalent of finding the needle in the South Dakota haystack.

For most of you reading this: 4,000 acres is more farmland than you have ever seen.

-skip-

Anyone who grows vegetables (or any crop for that matter) with organic practices knows and understands how difficult it can be to achieve high quality yields and avoid failure. Pests, blight, diseases, and drought count for just a fraction of the obstacles and complications organic farmers are desperately trying to mitigate. Now close your eyes and multiply that by a few thousand. Blue Blanket was no organic veggie plot with a few interns trying to get ahead of the potato beetles. This was large-scale crop production without the use of synthetic pesticides, herbicides, and other toxic sprays.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:03 PM

257. The way to "crush arguments" isn't to be AS LOUD AS YOU CAN BE and throw out

miscellaneous links about how evil Monsanto is. It is to make reasoned arguments backed up by links to credible sources. You have failed on both parts in this thread. Through it all, you haven't made one credible argument or linked to a credible source which supports your main claim that glyphosate kills bees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #257)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 06:18 PM

274. you have only linked to yourself as a credible source, so there's that

you have yet to make a point or post a link, so...

1st point of OP was-
big M just bought one of the biggest bee studying firms- sounds shady to me.

2. big M's crap is bad for bees AND people

3. big M bought the vote in the GMO labeling thing, with all their buddies.

4. same as #2

5. same as #3

6. paraquat

7. indian farmers committing suicide every 30 minutes

8. large scale human rights violations

this ^^^ was the OP.

are you obsessing with one part of the larger argument because you have no foundation for your 'ideas'?

me- "round up causes birth defects and cancer"

you- "it won't hurt the bees! trust me!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:31 PM

276. "ORDER 81: Re-engineering Iraqi agriculture The ultimate war crime: breaking the agricultural cycle"

"Likewise, long before Abu Ghraib became the world’s most infamous prison, it was known for housing not inmates, but seeds. In the early 1970s samples of the many varieties used by Iraqi farmers were starting to be saved in the country’s national gene bank, situated in the town of Abu Ghraib. Indeed one of Iraq’s most well known indigenous wheat varieties is called ‘Abu Ghraib’."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/order-81-re-engineering-iraqi-agriculture/870

***

also-
The most crippling for the people and the economy of Iraq was Order 81 which deals, among other things, with plant varieties and patents. The goal was brutally clear-cut and sweeping — to wipe out Iraq’s traditional, sustainable agriculture and replace it with oil-chemical-genetically-modified-seed-based industrial agriculture.

There was no public or parliamentary debate for the conquered people who never sought war. The conquerors made unilateral changes in Iraq’s 1970 patent law: henceforth, plant forms could be patented — which was never allowed before — while genetically-modified organisms were to be introduced. Farmers were strictly banned from saving their own seeds: this, in a country where, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, 97 per cent of Iraqi farmers planted only their own saved seeds.

With a single stroke of the pen, Iraq’s agriculture was axed, while Order 81 facilitated the introduction and domination of imported, high-priced corporate seeds, mainly from the US — which neither reproduce, nor give yields without their prescribed chemical fertiliser and pesticide inputs. It meant that the majority of farmers who had never spent money on seed and inputs that came free from nature, would henceforth have to heavily invest in corporate inputs and equipment — or go into debt to obtain them, or accept lowered profits, or give up farming altogether.

The US has now completely revamped Iraq’s agriculture, uninvited and against the will of local farmers. It’s not for nothing international researchers have termed the deliberate annihilation of Iraqi agriculture the ‘ultimate war crime’.

It was in the early seventies that Henry Kissinger devised the chilling plan to control countries by replacing their self-sufficiency with food and seed dependency.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/342986/control-by-seed/

***


Mutant Seeds for Mesopotamia
by Andrew Bosworth, Ph.D.
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m47991&hd=&size=1&l=e

***

page 200:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/115892147/Seeds-of-Destruction-the-Hidden-Agenda-of-Genetic-Manipulation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 11:52 AM

293. i found another good seed compnay- from oregon

About Adaptive Seeds

The Seeds of the Seed Ambassadors Project

We grow and steward rare, diverse and resilient seed varieties and distribute these to other ecologically minded farmers, gardeners and seed savers. Most of our seed is adapted to the Pacific Northwest and short season northern climates. All of our seed is grown by us and a few local friends who act as our isolation gardens. We strictly sell only public domain, open-pollinated (OP) seed, and some diverse genepool mixes. NONE of our seeds are proprietary hybrids (F1), patented (PVP) or genetically modified (GMO) and all of our seed is grown without the use of chemical fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides.
http://www.adaptiveseeds.com/node/4

does everybody above this post on the thread get notified when i answer my own post?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:21 PM

295. here's the best list of seeds/plants to avoid this planting season, and lots of other stuff

"As a person that used to be involved in brokering deals like this, I can tell you that Monsanto wants to be front and center."
http://horticulturetalk.wordpress.com/2011/09/24/who-owns-who-where-and-how-monsanto-has-their-sticky-little-fingers-in-the-home-garden-seed-industry-3/

***

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regulation/New-Mexico-GMO-labeling-bill-heads-for-state-legislature

***

It has been estimated that upwards of seventy percent of processed foods in the US today - from soda to soup, crackers to condiments - contain genetically engineered ingredients.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/are-un-labeled-geneticall_b_2433223.html

***

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/campaign/genetically-engineered-food/crops/

***

What is of greater concern is that the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) that should be looking into GM labeling have kept quiet for most part. In an RTI response, filed by Greenpeace, the FSSAI under the Ministry of Health and family welfare, which is the nodal agency for labeling of GM food, had said that it is not looking after the labeling of GM food. In its response letter it was said that Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) under the Ministry of Environment and Forests, which is the nodal agency for any environmental release of GM crops, is responsible. And the GEAC in a RTI response at about the same period said the opposite, putting FSSAI as the agency in charge of labeling rules. (hmm....)
http://www.cseindia.org/node/4388

***

However, a large and growing body of scientific and other authoritative evidence shows that these claims are not true. On the contrary, evidence presented in this report indicates that GM crops:

Are laboratory-made, using technology that is totally different from natural breeding methods, and pose different risks from non-GM crops
Can be toxic, allergenic or less nutritious than their natural counterparts
Are not adequately regulated to ensure safety
Do not increase yield potential
Do not reduce pesticide use but increase it
Create serious problems for farmers, including herbicide-tolerant “superweeds”, compromised soil quality, and increased disease susceptibility in crops
Have mixed economic effects
Harm soil quality, disrupt ecosystems, and reduce biodiversity
Do not offer effective solutions to climate change
Are as energy-hungry as any other chemically-farmed crops
Cannot solve the problem of world hunger but distract from its real causes – poverty, lack of access to food and, increasingly, lack of access to land to grow it on.

http://earthopensource.org/index.php/reports/58

***

“The decree is in the works. It introduces a complete ban on the MON810 strain of maize in Poland,” Sawicki told reporters, adding that pollen of this strain could have a harmful effect on bees.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/04/poland-to-ban-monsantos-genetically-modified-maize/

***

big one-
http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO_Myths_and_Truths/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3b.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 05:19 PM

296. more stuff about which seeds/plants to avoid. it is confusing

http://www.hawkeshealth.net/community/showthread.php?t=9375&page=1

***

Transnational corporations can't build communities, they can't celebrate identity. Only we can do that, and we can do it with every seed we plant.
http://www.countrysidemag.com/issues/90/90-2/Jerri_Cook.html

***

interesting, from the owner of territorial seeds- (way down at bottom)
The aggressive actions of Monsanto with regards to their hugely profitable GMO corn, sorghum, and soy beans have earned them much bad press. It has brought calls by some people to boycott their products. By directing calls to action towards the home garden seed division will only help to speed the elimination of the smallest and, in my mind, the best part of this huge company.
http://inspirationgreen.com/organic-vegetables-start-out-as-seed.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread