HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Farmers Rally at White Ho...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 09:27 AM

Farmers Rally at White House to Protest Monsanto's GMO Empire

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/11

Hundreds of small farmers and advocates for organic seed growers gathered outside the White House Thursday, calling on President Obama and other lawmakers to come to their aid as they continue their fight against Monsanto, one of the world's largest, most powerful—and to them sinister—industrial agriculture corporations.


The farmers and citizens assembled demanded the end of Monsanto's "campaign of intimidation against America's family farmers" and their relentless push for GMO (or genetically engineered-GE) crops. The rally followed a court hearing earlier in the day in the ongoing and landmark Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association et al. v. Monsanto case, in which OSGATA and other plaintiffs sued the biotech firm for its continual and aggressive harassment of organic farmers and independent seed growers.

"Family farmers need and deserve the right to farm. We have a right to grow good food and good seed for our families and our communities without the threat of trespass and intimidation," Jim Gerritsen, an organic potato farmer from Maine and President of OSGATA, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, told the enthusiastic crowd.

Since 1997, Monsanto has sued, or brought to court, more than 844 family farms over "patent infringement" after their GMO seeds spread to nearby farms. The legal battles are more than most small farmers can battle, and Monsanto's size and financial muscle make it nearly impossible for individual farmers to fight back. Many are forced to settle and submit to Monsanto sanctions.

85 replies, 6848 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 85 replies Author Time Post
Reply Farmers Rally at White House to Protest Monsanto's GMO Empire (Original post)
xchrom Jan 2013 OP
Berlum Jan 2013 #1
Cha Jan 2013 #40
Follow The Money Jan 2013 #2
librabear Jan 2013 #6
BlueCaliDem Jan 2013 #7
librabear Jan 2013 #11
drokhole Jan 2013 #52
BlueCaliDem Jan 2013 #81
drokhole Jan 2013 #84
Follow The Money Jan 2013 #21
librabear Jan 2013 #25
japple Jan 2013 #46
librabear Jan 2013 #47
japple Jan 2013 #50
fasttense Jan 2013 #71
librabear Jan 2013 #82
fasttense Jan 2013 #85
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #32
AlecBGreen Jan 2013 #41
NRaleighLiberal Jan 2013 #3
KittyWampus Jan 2013 #28
marmar Jan 2013 #4
AlecBGreen Jan 2013 #42
Berlum Jan 2013 #5
sunnystarr Jan 2013 #8
Jakes Progress Jan 2013 #17
AlecBGreen Jan 2013 #44
Maineman Jan 2013 #69
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #33
Tumbulu Jan 2013 #54
siligut Jan 2013 #73
Tumbulu Jan 2013 #80
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #9
Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #10
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #15
Ilsa Jan 2013 #49
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #55
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #57
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #60
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #65
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #68
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #75
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #76
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #78
Berlum Jan 2013 #16
Follow The Money Jan 2013 #22
Cha Jan 2013 #43
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #56
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #58
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #59
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #62
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #66
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #70
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #77
AlecBGreen Jan 2013 #45
gateley Jan 2013 #51
Smilo Jan 2013 #12
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #20
Follow The Money Jan 2013 #23
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #30
drokhole Jan 2013 #53
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #83
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #29
NoMoreWarNow Jan 2013 #67
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #13
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #14
Jakes Progress Jan 2013 #18
MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #19
freshwest Jan 2013 #24
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #26
freshwest Jan 2013 #31
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #36
freshwest Jan 2013 #38
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #27
fadedrose Jan 2013 #34
forestpath Jan 2013 #35
farminator3000 Jan 2013 #37
bvar22 Jan 2013 #39
patrice Jan 2013 #48
Berlum Jan 2013 #72
patrice Jan 2013 #79
Tabasco_Dave Jan 2013 #61
Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #63
SoapBox Jan 2013 #64
Greybnk48 Jan 2013 #74

Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 09:31 AM

1. Stand with the farmers who produce clean food. They need you.

And you need them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:26 PM

40. I've been "standing" with them and supporting them for over

forty years! Thanks for your support, Berlum!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:35 AM

2. small farmers are America's heroes and our future

 

we must fight together to protect them, for selfish purposes if nothing else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:01 AM

6. If they are our future....

 

We're in trouble. I'm a small farmer. The burden to entry is huge. I'd love to expand the farm, but the barriers that are in place are unbelievable. Just buying land here is a huge expense, $5000/acre for anything good. Equipment is expensive and the learning curve is steep. I lost money last year.

My accountant says I'm at risk of being classifies as a hobby farm, where I pay taxes on profits but can't claim losses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librabear (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:18 AM

7. You, and other small farmers, are supposed to get the majority of help from our Gov't,

not corporate farms. We need to support you and give you the land you need and all the tax deductions you need to thrive because you and others like you, are keeping this country healthy.

I've just learned that I am allergic to homogenized dairy products. When I drink organic milk I have NO such problem. This should tell people something. I will gladly pay more to get a higher quality of food products. It's about my health.

If any agri-business should get the full backing by We the People, it's farmers like you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:23 AM

11. Those payments go to big farmers

 

Look up the criteria for applying to get them. Even if I did get help it would be small because it's based on acreage, which I have not nearly enough of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:55 PM

52. I think you might enjoy the documentary "Farmageddon"...

Great stuff (but frightening):



I also buy "raw" milk directly from a local organic farm that utilizes "management-intensive grazing" methods (meaning, entirely grass-fed; moved daily from paddock-to-paddock). Best milk I've tasted in my entire life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to drokhole (Reply #52)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:20 PM

81. OMG. It IS frightening!

This is outrageous! The American people are being forced to buy below-grade products from heavily subsidized corporate farms and the moment there are some good, conscientious small farmers out there trying to bring the best and healthiest products to us, they get shut down! With friggin GUNS.

This is why Americans are so sick and we have all these new diseases that we hadn't had centuries before. Food, a good, wholesome diet, is the foundation of healthy bodies and minds. The worse the quality of what we eat, the worse our health becomes.

They raid small, organic farmers and allow McDonalds to open one chain after the other with nary a look, but then go SWAT after small farmers who are just trying to offer us the best possible foods for this sick nation.

I buy organic all the time. I will pay for more for a good quality food item for me and my family. I pay $4.29 for a gallon of organic milk and $4.99 for a dozen of organic eggs because these don't make me feel sick.

I'm just infuriated that our tax dollars are going to funding agricorps that then turn around and poison us and our children with their processed, low-quality products which leads to more profits for Big Pharma and ProfitCare because we inevitably get sick. I fear for our people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #81)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:10 PM

84. Couldn't have said it better myself!

The funny thing is, the milk - and pastured eggs - I get from the farm are cheaper than the organic stuff at the grocery store (like Horizon and Organic Valley).

You clearly already get it, but I highly recommend watching that entire documentary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librabear (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:33 PM

21. please tell us what we can do to help you

 

they have been attacking us on so many fronts, many people are not aware of the stealthy attack on small farmers.

Perhaps you can start informing us here, and we can back you up with our demands in emails and calls to Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:29 PM

25. It's hard to say.

 

The payments to farmers have to stop. They go to the wrong people anyway.

Other than that: the biggest problem is volatility. If I plant in may there's no telling what will happen between then and September. I've got a cost of maybe $100/acre to plant and I am planning on getting more than that. Fuel prices are huge. I might spend 5-8 gallons of diesel per acre just planting and getting my field ready. That's on soybeans. Corn can cost twice that to plant.

The burden to entry is the fact that labor is expensive and so is equipment. My tractor cost about what a used car does but it's pretty limited. It'll get the job done but a bigger one would be helpful. I hire someone to come in and do my harvesting so I don't need a combine, same with spraying. My small tractor wouldn't be a big deal if I could hire somebody to run it, but good farm labor is non existent. So, I try to fit it in when I can, but I may only have half a dozen good days to get all my planting done.

What will completely destroy small farmers is our lack of a comprehensive monetary policy. Most people don't realize that all these loans to buy land are on ARM's. There's no choice. If rates raise due to inflation and the economy suffers, many of us are sunk. I'm saving my money to buy land when that happens. Land is too expensive right now. It can only stay there with cheap interest rates and high commodity prices.


All the rest of that stuff is manageable, but high interest rates will cause a lot of small farmers to lose the farm. It happened in the 80's and it will happen again unless we stop having all these crisises. If you want to do something to help make sure that congress is keeping our money stable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librabear (Reply #25)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:13 PM

46. Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but why would a small farmer plant corn

and/or soybeans? It seems like the big agribusiness groups has the corner on that market. Wouldn't it be more cost effective to grow something else?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to japple (Reply #46)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:31 PM

47. no..

 

There's no corner on the market, except possibly the price of seed. Market prices are determined by supply and demand. I sold my beans at $15/bushel, the same price every other farmer got for them. The price was nearly twice what I was expecting, but the yield was very poor so I still lost money. I got 9.25 bushels/acre.

The biggest farmers don't really have a big advantage in what they sell, they have more land to spread the high capital costs between. It helps them control their costs better.

Keep in mind that many of the commercial farmers in this area may have 10,000 acres or so. Many of them inherited a family farm and grew it, by buying more and more land. The reason to do it is to be able to buy bigger and bigger equipment that cuts labor costs. You really can't farm full time with much less than 1000 acres. You just can't make enough money to support a family on.


As far as growing something else, this is something I have considered. If I wanted to go full time I could start a truck farm and attend farmers markets by selling tomatoes, sweet corn, chickens, beef. I have enough land to do that on, but it would be a full time job and very time intensive. I can probably make more money staying at work, so I do that for now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librabear (Reply #47)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:13 PM

50. The truck farming scenario is what I thought might work best. I don't know what kind of operation

you have, but many of the farmers in my area who sell produce at farmers markets have been fairly successful with field peas, peppers, tomatoes, sweet corn, squashes, pumpkins, green beans, and sweet potatoes. You couldn't do all of that without help, unless you wanted to rent out plots to other folks who might want to grow gardens for their own consumption. Many years ago, that's what folks did, and there were county services that set up community canning kitchens where people gathered to preserve their produce. It's probably just a pipe dream to hope that kind of effort could ever be sustained for our future. One can hope....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librabear (Reply #47)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:01 AM

71. I'm a small farmer and have less than 10,000 acres, much less.

What we do is focus on the high dollar items. For example, in our area, CNG and Organic produce is more costly but customers prefer it and are willing to pay for it. I think Retail sales for farmers is the name of the game. If we simply did wholesale, there is no way we could come close to making a living. Retail sales takes more marketing and packaging but it's really well worth the extra investment.

Diversification also helps. If you diversify you crop, you don't have to worry about one season being better for a particular produce. For example, one man told me he always plants 10 different things, that way if one fails, he has only lost 10% of his efforts. If you diversify you can do CSA baskets where the customer pays up front for weekly produce. Or you can join a co-op and pool your produce to offer CSA baskets. It does help if you have several staple products because each vegetable has it's own unique growing habits and equipment.

We grow CNG mushrooms and can sell them for $28.50 a pound retail. But if we strictly sold wholesale we would be lucky to get $8.00 a lb. Also we look for specialty items that no one else is growing. Like lamb or Kohlrabi, salad turnips, ground cherries, spaghetti squash, artichokes (in TN) etc. If you can't find produce that is unique to your area, look for specialty varieties. Heirloom tomatoes use to be rare, but at most Farmers Markets today they are easily available in season.

I very smart man once told me don't try to compete with the big boys, look for products the big guys can't or wont do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fasttense (Reply #71)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:29 PM

82. How did you get started?

 

I have 40 acres. I'd like to buy a whole farm somewhere but am scared to death that the value of farm ground will fall through the floor and I'll not be able to keep up on the payment. My wife's grandfather lost their farm in the 80's that way.

I love farming and living in the country but for the life of me can't figure out how people get started without inheriting the ground. A farm in this area will go for half a million dollars with no house on it. My solution is to grow crops that don't require a lot of labor while working full time elsewhere.

How much land do you farm?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librabear (Reply #82)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:23 AM

85. We got started when my husband's job went away.

We had already purchased a home and about 15 acres. We read about a women who could get $30,000 a year in profit by selling salad greens (from a 30x90 greenhouse) to schools in Oregon. We checked into selling to schools but TN is not very big on healthy eating. So we then started looking for produce to sell at Farmer's Markets.

If you sell at Farmers' Market find the biggest population centers in your area to sell in. Small local farmer's markets in rural areas do NOT provide customers willing to pay the cost for your product. They alway have their own gardens and want your produce at low, low prices. They also don't like brown eggs or fertilized eggs. One retired farmer who had moved into the small town told me he didn't want any rooster in his eggs.

We pasture and farm most of our acreage. We are in the foothills of the Smokey Mountains, near the North Carolina border. So we don't have much flat land. We have to till spots and build raise gardens in order to farm. The rest of the land we let the sheep graze. You would be surprised how much produce you can get out of a small plot of land if you continually rotate crops and use compost and mulch to continually enrich the soil. A greenhouse also helps and we got a used one at a good price though tearing it down and putting it back up was a real chore.

One of the reasons we grow mushrooms is to have usable rich compost after the mushrooms are spent. And we have a small chicken coupe where we raise free range hens for eggs and manure. We rotate our sheep from pasture to pasture so they are strictly grass fed and don't overgraze.

What we do is sometimes called intensive farming. Using every bit of land and pasture while getting our main soil inputs from within the farm. We aren't rich and it is a struggle to earn $30,000 a year from the farm but it is great fun, (We have always loved gardening and having animals) and you are your own boss.

We started out using the typical petroleum fertilizers and deadly insecticides. But as we got better at farming we discovered that these artificial petroleum based inputs actually made our farming more difficult and cost too much. Once I sprayed my lettuce with a petroleum bug spray and noticed I had to wait 7 days before harvest. Because of that wait, my lettuce went to seed and was unusable. Then I began to think of how that stinky poison was still on my food when I ate it. I realized that the pesticide was also killing all the good healthy microbes and worms in my soil that I worked so hard to build up. We are now Certified Naturally Grown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:12 PM

32. thank you.

That is the right question.

Really appreciate it. (No, I'm not a farmer. Juzt appreciate constructive discussion. )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:29 PM

41. the best thing you can do...

is support local agriculture. find a farmer and give him/her your business. join a CSA. grow some of your own food. even city slickers can plant a tomato in a pot in a sunny window! buy food when its in season and freeze it or can it. small, local agriculture is at the cusp of breaking back out and becoming normal again. do what you can to help that become a reality!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:38 AM

3. this seed saver Ks and Rs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NRaleighLiberal (Reply #3)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:05 PM

28. It's hard to fathom making seed-saving illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:39 AM

4. k/r


If "corporate psychopathy" has a posterchild, it's Monsanto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:31 PM

42. +1

evil incarnate. i dont use that term lightly. whether by design or by carelessness, they are moving agriculture in the wrong direction, to the detriment of us all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:54 AM

5. Quote of note

from farmer Joel Salatin:

""...Perhaps no other violation of basic Americanism and personal autonomy
could be more flagrant than the blatant trespass of patented, owned life
form slaves promiscuously crossing fences and impregnating a neighbor's
living beings..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:18 AM

8. I've never understood

why Monsanto isn't legally responsible and liable for their wayward seeds. Shouldn't they see to it that their seeds remain on their land?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sunnystarr (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:05 PM

17. Because they give money to politicians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sunnystarr (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:34 PM

44. its mind boggling

GM pollen spreads, contaminates open-pollinated/organic crops thereby ruining it, and the VICTIM is hauled into court. these are strange times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlecBGreen (Reply #44)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:49 AM

69. Calling these things strange is much too kind.

I sometimes find it difficult to distinguish between today's corporate profiteers and what we used to call organized crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:16 PM

33. the rape and forced breeding analogy

Did not go unnoticed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:12 AM

54. You know, I think that Joe Salatin has a lot to contribute

but this is a creepy quote and there are actually a lot of things about him that I dislike.

And I am a small organic farmer.plant breeder and shepherd and have been since the mid 80's.

And I have been fighting Monsanto since then as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tumbulu (Reply #54)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:23 AM

73. Saw him speak in Puyallup

He speaks well and has an intelligent sort of folksy wisdom. He is also a Libertarian and that is a big strike against him in my book.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to siligut (Reply #73)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:18 PM

80. yes, I'm fed up with Libertarians

as well, and he has a sort of "with women in their place" thing as well.....probably my biggest issue as I am a woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:20 AM

9. I can definitley get behind this.

 

Monsanto cannot be allowed to corner the market on food genetics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:23 AM

10. I despise Monsanto, but the fear of GMOs is irrational. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:40 AM

15. you don't really want to go there, trust me...

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:01 PM

49. I'd Rec your post if I could. Great summary.

Thom Hartmann has had articles on the allergenic concerns of GMO crops and GMO animals for consumption. It appears that ranch animals that consume GMO feed end up having intestinal, allergy, immune, and growth issues. These are sentinel results; it'll start happening to humans if GMO is the only thing humans can consume. Europe won't permit it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #15)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:53 AM

55. Woo site

At least one of the authors of that report heads a for-profit non-GMO certification testing company. In other words, he has a vested personal interest in ramping up the GMO hype.
http://www.fairfieldiowa.com/membership-directory/genetic-id-inc./view/

So I'm not sure you really want to go there either.

Just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #55)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:57 AM

57. goo woo yourself- what are they, supposed to do testing for free as a public service?

and big M doesn't have a 'vested personal interest' in poisoning people?

this guy is really making a huge profit off of this stuff, you think?

maybe YOU have a vested personal interest in big M, like they paid you a nickel to post poo-poo?

Michael Antoniou, PhD is reader in molecular genetics and head, Gene Expression and Therapy Group, King’s College London School of Medicine, London, UK. He has 28 years’ experience in the use of genetic engineering technology investigating gene organisation and control, with over 40 peer reviewed publications of original work, and holds inventor status on a number of gene expression biotechnology patents. Dr Antoniou has a large network of collaborators in industry and academia who are making use of his discoveries in gene control mechanisms for the production of research, diagnostic and therapeutic products and safe and efficacious human somatic gene therapy for inherited and acquired genetic disorders.

John Fagan, PhD is a leading authority on sustainability in the food system, biosafety, and GMO testing. He is founder and chief scientific officer of one of the world’s first GMO testing and certification companies, through which he has pioneered the development of innovative tools to verify and advance food purity, safety and sustainability. He co-founded Earth Open Source, which uses open source collaboration to advance sustainable food production. Earlier, he conducted cancer research at the US National Institutes of Health. He holds a PhD in biochemistry and molecular and cell biology from Cornell University.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #57)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:34 AM

60. It's not as if this is the first time you've been busted for posting woo sites

Nor is the first time you've accused someone of being a shill for Monsanto after you got busted. So if I wanted to go down the road of ridiculous and baseless accusations, I could suggest you get paid to post by the woo sites. Seems more plausible actually, which doesn't say much. So feel free to post such nonsense about me if it makes you sleep better. The more you do it, the more it reflects negatively on your own credibility.

You don't get to simultaneously use "follow the money" claims and then ignore them when you don't like where they go. When someone self publishes non-peer reviewed "studies" from which they have a vested monetary interest in the outcome, some people tend to go hmmmmm. YMMV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #60)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:25 AM

65. if i am posting woo, you are posting poo. you are either posting shill or swill

you are being ridiculous and baseless. are you saying big M should be fought without using money?

you obviously aren't a (misguided)farmer, so why the hell else would you defend the MOST HATED corporation on the planet?

do you believe in dinosaurs? anything a scientist says is to be poo-poo'd?

on one side:
John Fagan, PhD is a leading authority on sustainability in the food system, biosafety, and GMO testing. He is founder and chief scientific officer of one of the world’s first GMO testing and certification companies, through which he has pioneered the development of innovative tools to verify and advance food purity, safety and sustainability. He co-founded Earth Open Source, which uses open source collaboration to advance sustainable food production. Earlier, he conducted cancer research at the US National Institutes of Health. He holds a PhD in biochemistry and molecular and cell biology from Cornell University.

on the other side:
a guy with a fake name on the internet who can't even manage a quality childish insult.

who to believe??

i do like where the money goes (from your link): (someone has to regulate the crap, no?)

The Global ID Group (GIDG) is an international family of companies headquartered in Fairfield that is dedicated to supporting the production of safe, ethical and sustainable food. GIDG has 100 employees spread across its offices and labs in Iowa, Brazil, Germany, Japan and United Kingdom. Dr. John Fagan founded Global ID (under the name of Genetic ID) in 1996 to develop technologies to accurately detect the presence of genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. Today, GIDG's subsidiary laboratories are global leaders in offering testing for every commercialized variety of GMOS, and serve every sector of the international agribusiness industry from farmers to processors to manufacturers and retailers. GIDG subsidiaries include Genetic ID companies that offer both GMO and other food safety testing, its CERT ID companies that offer a range of third-party food safety certification services, and FoodChain Global Advisors that provide technical and advisory services.

***

Since 1997, RR soy production has increased from 5 to 30 million hectares of land in the US alone . Soybeans have been found to contain glyphosate residues up to 10 times as high as the doses that caused foetal malformations in chick and frog embryos.

With such widespread use of the herbicide, and the EU considering approval of GM crops tolerant to glyphosate for cultivation in Europe, there is an urgent need for a proper review of the herbicide, which is in line with the more stringent new EU pesticide regulation that came into force in June 2011.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/EU_Regulators_Monsanto_Glyphosate_Toxicity.php


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #65)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:42 AM

68. I'm not trying to insult you or Fagan

I'm pointing out that where you are getting your information from doesn't help your cause. When you post from a site that advocates homeopathy, it's hard to imagine just how much value they place on science. When you post from a guy who claims to be a scientist, but self publishes self serving pseudo-scientific material, you aren't helping your cause.

If you want to post information bashing Monsanto, there's plenty of peer reviewed studies that do the job a lot better. Vetting takes a bit more time, but has the added benefit of insuring you aren't posting from far right wing nuttery sites, as you've also been busted for doing.

Pointing out these things is not childish. Making baseless and completely ridiculous accusations against other DUers that point out things that are inconvenient to you might be though.

Just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #68)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:53 AM

75. first of all, homeopathy is probably older than science, and i'm still sneezing from dust from that

20 year old link.

by your line of reasoning, all of western medicine is perfectly safe because the FDA is in big pharma's pocket, too.

he doesn't just 'claim' to be a scientist:
He holds a PhD in biochemistry and molecular and cell biology from Cornell University.

cornell being one of the best ag schools in the world.

if a 'right wing nut' site is posting the same thing as a 'left wing hippie' site, perhaps that is added evidence there is some truth behind it. plus all i posted was a sentence that said monsanto bought the bee company, which is a plain fact. stop trying to change the subject-
you have absolutely nothing that will prove anything big M says is believable.

all i'm doing is pointing out your baseless and ridiculous statements, sorry for the inconvenience, but some people might want to know something closer to the truth, when so much of the planet is affected by the crap big M pumps out by the billions of tons.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/homeopathicSignalsFromDNA.php
Lack of plausible explanation the major hurdle in gaining public acceptance

The most difficult hurdle in getting general acceptance for homeopathy is without doubt the lack of an explanation, based on contemporary science, on why it would work. In my view, that is more important than getting double-blind, placebo-controlled data on efficacy. Such an explanation is beginning to emerge, and Luc Montagnier’s research team may have provided some key observations.

The Nobel Laureate has entered the fray, bravely picking up on work done by his fellow countryman, the recently deceased immunologist Jacques Benveniste, who became the centre of a major international controversy in 1988, when Benveniste and his research team published a paper in the journal Nature describing the apparent homeopathic action of very high dilutions of anti-IgE antibody on the human blood cells basophils.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #75)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:16 AM

76. If homeopathy is your idea of closer to the truth, I'm not sure what more there is to say

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #76)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:38 AM

78. if you think big M would even begin to want the truth to be known, you're delusional



ok, gene splicing is way more mainstream than natural medicine. makes perfect sense!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:04 PM

16. The concerns about GMOs are legitimate common sense and fully science based

as anyone who actually looks closely at the matter soon comes to realize.

It is, among many other things, Totalitarian Imperialism of the Soul of Nature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:37 PM

22. is fear of pesticides irrational as well?

 

The reason that Monsanto splices roundup into the genes of genetically modified foods, is so they can spray roundup on the crops we eat and they will not die.

GMO= full of pesticides= neurological damage= possible cause of autism, MS, sociopathic tendencies??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Reply #22)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:31 PM

43. Thanks for explaining why the fear of gmo is not

"irrational", Follow The Money. It's smart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:35 AM

56. Glyphosate is not a pesticide

Just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #56)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:59 AM

58. it certainly is, you have no clue what you are saying

Pesticide
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Pesticides are substances or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling or mitigating any pest. They are a class of biocide. The most common use of pesticides is as plant protection products (also known as crop protection products), which in general protect plants from damaging influences such as weeds, diseases or insects. This use of pesticides is so common that the term pesticide is often treated as synonymous with plant protection product, although it is in fact a broader term, as pesticides are also used for non-agricultural purposes. A pesticide is generally a chemical or biological agent (such as a virus, bacterium, antimicrobial or disinfectant) that through its effect deters, incapacitates, kills or otherwise discourages pests. Target pests can include insects, plant pathogens, weeds, molluscs, birds, mammals, fish, nematodes (roundworms), and microbes that destroy property, cause nuisance, spread disease or are vectors for disease. Although there are human benefits to the use of pesticides, some also have drawbacks, such as potential toxicity to humans and other animals. According to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 9 of the 12 most dangerous and persistent organic chemicals are pesticides. Pesticides are categorized into four main substituent chemicals: herbicides; fungicides; insecticides and bactericides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #56)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:18 AM

59. in fact it is the most used pesticide by a factor of 2.3 times and pollutes the Mississippi

Glyphosate, also known by its tradename Roundup, is commonly found in rain and rivers in agricultural areas in the Mississippi River watershed, according to two new USGS studies released this month.

Glyphosate is used in almost all agricultural and urban areas of the United States. The greatest glyphosate use is in the Mississippi River basin, where most applications are for weed control on genetically-modified corn, soybeans and cotton. Overall, agricultural use of glyphosate has increased from less than 11,000 tons in 1992 to more than 88,000 tons in 2007.

"Though glyphosate is the mostly widely used herbicide in the world, we know very little about its long term effects to the environment," says Paul Capel, USGS chemist and an author on this study. "This study is one of the first to document the consistent occurrence of this chemical in streams, rain and air throughout the growing season. This is crucial information for understanding where management efforts for this chemical would best be focused."

In these studies, Glyphosate was frequently detected in surface waters, rain and air in areas where it is heavily used in the basin. The consistent occurrence of glyphosate in streams and air indicates its transport from its point of use into the broader environment.

Additionally, glyphosate persists in streams throughout the growing season in Iowa and Mississippi, but is generally not observed during other times of the year. The degradation product of glyphosate, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), which has a longer environmental lifetime, was also frequently detected in streams and rain.

Detailed results of this glyphosate research are available in "Occurrence and fate of the herbicide glyphosate and its degradate aminomethylphosphonic acid in the atmosphere," published in volume 30 of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry and in "Fate and transport of glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid in surface waters of agricultural basins," published online in Pest Management Science. Copies of the reports are available from the journals or from Paul Capel (capel@usgs.gov).
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2909#.UPEM6WcYOTw

***

Monsanto’s Roundup formulation is the biggest selling herbicide in the world, and its use has dramatically increased since the company introduced glyphosate-tolerant genetically modified (GM) crops such as RR (Roundup Ready) soybean. Today, almost 80 percent of the world’s soy production takes place in the US, Brazil and Argentina, and in 2009, RR soybean accounted for 91 percent, 99 percent and 71 percent respectively of total soybean acreage in those countries. Since 1997, RR soy production has increased from 5 to 30 million hectares of land in the US alone . Soybeans have been found to contain glyphosate residues up to 10 times as high as the doses that caused foetal malformations in chick and frog embryos.

With such widespread use of the herbicide, and the EU considering approval of GM crops tolerant to glyphosate for cultivation in Europe, there is an urgent need for a proper review of the herbicide, which is in line with the more stringent new EU pesticide regulation that came into force in June 2011. Indeed, just such a review was due to take place in 2012. But shortly after the EC was notified of the latest research on glyphosate causing birth defects (which the EC dismissed), it delayed the review on glyphosate and 38 other dangerous pesticides to 2015 . Furthermore, the 2010 review will be under the old, less stringent regulations. The official reason for the delay is that they have ‘too much workload’. This means that the safety of glyphosate may not be reviewed under the new regulations until 2030.

The review delay is being challenged in a lawsuit brought against the EC by Pesticides Action Network Europe and Greenpeace. The co-authors of the OES report are also calling on the EC to conduct a prompt review without delay, and to withdraw glyphosate and Roundup from the market.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/EU_Regulators_Monsanto_Glyphosate_Toxicity.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #59)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:56 AM

62. The government also says it poses "no unreasonable risks or adverse affects"

http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/0178fact.pdf

The USGS site you referenced says nothing about the toxic effects of glyphosate. The 2nd site you referenced is a homeopathic woo site that is of little more scientific value than drunken gibberish which coincidentally gets it's information you posted from your last woo site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #62)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:37 AM

66. wow, nice 20 year old link! that really proves a lot!

you posted this:
EPA-738-F-93-011
Environmental Protection And Toxic Substances September -----> 1993




so you agree with the government always, do ya? on guns, same-sex marriage, immigration, across the board? good for you!

you also don't read too good, i guess:

How does ISIS Work?

ISIS works in close collaboration with and provide scientific advise to the Third World Network (TWN), a well-known and respected non-government organization based in Penang, which has been in the forefront of the struggle for equity and justice for the Third World. We advise and represent them on science and related issues in international forums such as the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, World Health Organization, United Nations Development Programme and the World Trade Organization (WTO). We have written numerous scientific reports and assessments for policy-makers and the general public which are used also by other public interest organizations all over the world to support their local and national campaigns and debates (see Publications at the end of this Report).

ISIS and TWN run training and capacity building programmes on genetic engineering and biosafety in developing countries and elsewhere. This has already involved several special lecture tours and visits to Ethiopia, Cameroon, Indonesia, Malaysia, Japan, Brazil, India and many countries in Europe. A lecture tour to Ecuador, Argentina and Uruguay will take place this September.

ISIS produces scientific papers for peer-reviewed journals that have played the key role in opening the GM debate within the scientific community not only on the hazards inherent to GM technology, but also on science and the precautionary principle and on social responsibility and ethics in science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #66)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:56 AM

70. You do realize glyphosate has been around for over 40 years?

It's not as if that much new information is being discovered about it and certainly none that warrants the EPA from changing its determination.

As far as ISIS goes, here's one of their articles written by its director. Read it and then tell me again how it isn't a woo site.

Water Remembers? Homeopathy Explained?

New research suggests water remembers what has been dissolved in it, even after dilution beyond the point where no molecule of the original substances could remain. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho reports.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #70)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:36 AM

77. so was DDT you keep trying to change the subject because you know you are totally wrong

ok, i'm the weirdo for insinuating that big M would have only profits at heart

and you are defending a noble corporation. gotcha.

footnote 45 is your oldie but goodie, 46 is the roundup label, and 47 is from MONSANTO'S website, so...um...


Glyphosate toxicity

Glyphosate has a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Toxicity Class of III (on a I to IV scale, where IV is least dangerous) for oral and inhalation exposure.45 Nonetheless, as with other herbicides, the EPA requires that products containing glyphosate carry a label that warns against oral intake, mandates the use of protective clothing, and instructs users not to re-enter treated fields for at least 4 hours.4546]Glyphosate does not bioaccumulate and breaks down rapidly in the environment.47
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate



and that 'woo' thing you cite references the NOBEL PRIZE winning guy, so

But on 30 April 2002, the Royal Homeopathic Hospital became a member of University College London Hospital. This marks a decisive change in attitude of the medical establishment towards homeopathy. But the scientific controversy remains.
The most recent controversy regarding homeopathy erupted around distinguished French research scientist, Dr. Jacques Benveniste, well-known for his discovery, in 1971, of PAF (Platelet Activating Factor) a mediator implicated in allergies and inflammations e.g. asthma.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/water2.php

The most difficult hurdle in getting general acceptance for homeopathy is without doubt the lack of an explanation, based on contemporary science, on why it would work. In my view, that is more important than getting double-blind, placebo-controlled data on efficacy. Such an explanation is beginning to emerge, and Luc Montagnier’s research team may have provided some key observations.

The Nobel Laureate has entered the fray, bravely picking up on work done by his fellow countryman, the recently deceased immunologist Jacques Benveniste,

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/homeopathicSignalsFromDNA.php
***

farther along in the link you poo-pood:


Now, physicist Louis Rey in Lausanne, Switzerland, has published a paper in the mainstream journal, Physica A, describing experiments that suggest water does have a memory of molecules that have been diluted away, as can be demonstrated by a relatively new physical technique that measures thermoluminescence.

In this technique, the material is ‘activated’ by irradiation at low temperature, with UV, X-rays, electron beams, or other high-energy sub-atomic particles. This causes electrons to come loose from the atoms and molecules, creating ‘electron-hole pairs’ that become separated and trapped at different energy levels.

Then, when the irradiated material is warmed up, it releases the absorbed energy and the trapped electrons and holes come together and recombine. This causes the release of a characteristic glow of light, peaking at different temperatures depending on the magnitude of the separation between electron and hole.

As a general rule, the phenomenon is observed in crystals with an ordered arrangement of atoms and molecules, but it is also seen in disordered materials such as glasses. In this mechanism, imperfections in the atomic/molecular lattice are considered to be the sites at which luminescence appears.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/WaterRemembers.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 05:36 PM

45. no its not

GMO crops are unnatural and unnecessary. please dont try and claim "its what farmers have been doing for 1000's of years!" because its not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:18 PM

51. Did you forget the "IMHO"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:25 AM

12. Monsanto aims to rule the world

and yet the Right would have you fear your next door neighbor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Smilo (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:27 PM

20. that is an understatement!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2151536

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/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:38 PM

23. as if leaving depleted uranium behind wasn't bad enough

 

WTF!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:09 PM

30. jeezus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 09:10 PM

53. Wow. I'm reminded of what happened to Cuba with Russia...

...when Russia abandoned them and left them high and dry after making them dependent on "green revolution" industrial-style farming (of course, that's not the stage we're at here...but it's where it's likely headed). It took Cuba some time to bounce back, but - through the re-education/focus of local, sustainable farming methods - they did and then some. Great documentary on the subject:

Power of Community: How Cuba survived Peak Oil Crisis

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to drokhole (Reply #53)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:29 PM

83. cuba does ok taking care of itself, sometimes. Haiti, on the other hand...


Last Spring, the agribusiness Monsanto announced it was making a $4 million gift of seeds "to support the reconstruction effort" in Haiti. The "gift" – reportedly hybrid maize and vegetable seeds – was slated to total 505 tons of seed over 12 months.

Six months after the alleged distribution of the first delivery of Monsanto seeds. Haiti Grassroots Watch decided to follow up on the controversial donation, especially of the maize hybrid seed.

• Why were the seeds accepted by government officials?

• Where were the seeds distributed?

• Did the farmers – who were slated to receive the seed for only 10 percent of the real cost – like the seed? Did they understand what "hybrid" means as far as using the seed's "offspring"?

• Were and are proper precautions being taken regarding the seeds, which are coated with potentially poisonous fungicides and pesticides?

• Will the rest of the "gift" be distributed, or has it been already?

• Does it appear likely that Haitian farmers could become dependent on highly subsidized Monsanto or other hybrid seeds, only to be slammed the full price in a few years, the way US homebuyers were hit with "exploding mortgages?"

Part 1 - Background to the "Gift"
http://truth-out.org/news/item/917

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Smilo (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:07 PM

29. now. there's a talking point!

Best possible kind...distills what's gong on to one sentence.

A compound sentence, I grant you, but a single sentence nonetheless.


Wouldn't mind having it as a bumper sticker, actually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Smilo (Reply #12)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:39 AM

67. the should be in the dictionary next to "evil corporation"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:26 AM

13. Monsanto are sick. K&R!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:37 AM

14. i didn't get the memo!

Jim Gerritsen, an organic potato farmer from Maine and President of OSGATA,

i've met that guy, you do NOT want to get into the GMO thing with him. he makes me look like miss manners...

here's a compendium of anti-big M stuff-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022136313

http://www.seedsavers.org/

http://www.adaptiveseeds.com/

what NOT to buy: (best list i've seen)
"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/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:08 PM

18. All farmers have to do

is give more millions to politicians than CorpAg. Just a couple of hundred million per farmer ought to do it.

Everyone from the president down to the newest state rep spends a huge part of their day groveling for money. In our system, those who pay get their way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:14 PM

19. Good!

Monsanto is an evil corporation if there ever was one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:02 PM

24. This woman is one I have supported here, who talks about this.

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:16 PM - Edit history (1)



India’s organic food pioneer to speak at PCC Cascade

http://news.pcc.edu/2011/01/india-food-pioneer/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:41 PM

26. they are greedy bastards is what defines them

We may not like this reality, but it is there and to deny it is to wear blinders to those who would die of malnutrition (there is an argument to be made their products cause malnutrition, but that's another issue) and the White House and progressives cannot by their philsophy, support anything that starves the poor. Those with ideas about nutrition who resist GMO and agribusiness food, may not have seen that people do survive eating what some see as swill.

this is backwards- who is being saved from malnutrition anywhere in the world by GMOs?

have GMOs helped keep people from starving ANYWHERE in the past 30 years?

But it doesn't feed the millions of Americans who don't have yards, who aren't rural, may be going to food banks and who are very dependent upon agribusiness for their food. So they get a seat at the table, since utopia has yet to arrive.


again, backwards- what kind of agri business supplies a food bank? people on WIC should be forced to eat mutant food? what?

Is this man a shill, or has he come to an inconvenient truth, one we don't want to accept and find distasteful?
Or has he simply come to realize that the Earth's carrying capacity through our beloved vision of natural agriculture, believed to be sustainable and well proven, could sign the death warrant for millions or billions of our fellow humans - even if we don't believe it will work in the long run?


the man is just plain wrong. he doesn't list a single 'fact' or 'truth' in his reasons for changing his 'mind'

I'm really at a loss to advocate either path now, unable to turn a blind eye to either the suffering of other life forms and humans I do not know.


it is easier to get a new job than a new planet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #26)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:11 PM

31. Thanks for finding every negative interpretation of my post.

I shouldn't think aloud here or ask for discussion on the ideas that I am trying to reconcile.

I do not want to eat GMO, don't want it grown, don't agree with Monsanto on anything. The guy does sound very suspect to me, but the vote in CA didn't help, either.

We are trying push through both labor friendly organic farm businesses where I live and GMO labeling, too and I'll be voting to support that, but I know I am not the one that many will go to ask for opinion. Those who are for GMO don't vote Democratically, for the most part.

They see us as hippies who want to preserve the ecosystem for future generations and not extract all the profit in a get rich quick scheme and leaving the rest of us to try to clean up the mess.

As usual. Bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #31)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:29 PM

36. sorry if i sounded snarky

i just thought you were falling for some of the deception, i guess.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/12405-support-for-california-gmo-labeling-proposal-drops-following-industry-funded-ad-blitz

as far as labeling goes, why not label foods that AREN'T polluted with GMO?

if 70% of stuff in the grocery store has GMOs in, just label the stuff that is safe- it would be easier, and then big M can't block it, maybe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #36)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:47 PM

38. That's what we're pushing for here; we already have BGH free labeling.

Also organic, country of origin and state labels which many areas don't have.

But we also have a full crop of teabaggers and libertartians running loose here. While some may support our dearest desires, some don't want any form of regulation whatsoever. They see this as part of that evil 'statist' government that stands between them and their future agrarian paradise. Which will most likely be ruled by some form of Christian Nationalist tribalism, truth to be known. So we walk a narrow line here.

And I do know many people who don't give a damn what's in their food, both working middle class and working or unable to work poor. The working middle class claim such distinctions to be irrelevant. The poor because they consider it to be elitist and they do survive.

Healthy? Not by many standards. Alive? Yes. And they say any thing might kill them off, but want to eat whatever they can afford. And there are millions and billions who don't care, like them. We are having an argument that mainly first world people with choices make. I wonder what those who have no voice in this have to say. I suspect they only want to eat, and they will be heard in this.

Okay, snarky, but you explained. I'm a bit tired of a lot of what goes on here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:04 PM

27. GO OSGATA!! WIN! WIN! WIN!

This is the way to do it! Small groups working together....WIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:25 PM

34. Just now sent email to WH asking them to support farmers...

We don't want chemically engineered foods & thank the good farmers who have the backbone to go & ask for help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:48 PM

35. Monsanto owns the Obama administration.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #35)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:37 PM

37. unbelievably, it could have been worse. so much worse.

The romance between Romney and Monsanto began back in 1977, when the recently minted Harvard Law and Business School graduate joined Bain, the Boston-based consulting firm launched in 1973, the same year Monsanto became one of its first clients. One of Bain’s founding partners, Ralph Willard, described to the Boston Globe in 2007 how “Romney learned the technical aspects of the chemical business so thoroughly that he sounded as if he had gone to engineering school instead of business school,” and that Monsanto executives soon began “bypassing” him to go directly to Romney.

John W. Hanley, the Monsanto CEO at the time, has said how “impressed” he was with the 30-year-old Mitt. Hanley became so close to Romney that he and Romney’s boss Bill Bain devised the idea of creating Bain Capital as a way of keeping Romney in the fold. Unless Mitt was allowed to run this spin-off venture firm, Hanley and Bain feared, he would leave. Hanley even contributed $1 million to Romney’s first investment pool at Bain Capital. Monsanto’s Hanley is in fact the only business executive outside of the Bain founding family to so shape Romney’s career—jumpstarting the two companies, Bain & Company and Bain Capital, that account for all but two years of Romney’s much-ballyhooed business experience.

-skip-

When The Nation questioned Monsanto spokeswoman Kelli Powers about the role played by Bain and Romney at the company, she said that “Monsanto is a different company than the one” of the Bain period. That’s partially because of the Solutia spinoff and partially because the “Old Monsanto” briefly went through two acquisitions around 2000, only to recreate itself in 2002. But the “New Monsanto” has many of the same product lines, facilities and executives as the old one, and much of the same problems. Geneva-based Covalence ranked the company dead last of 581 multinationals in its 2010 reputation and ethics index, which is distributed by Reuters and Bloomberg. Powers said a search of its archives found “no reference to Bain anywhere.”
http://truth-out.org/news/item/11531-mitt-romney-monsanto-man

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:59 PM

39. Good Luck to them, because Monsanto owns this White House.

Tom Vilscak (Mr. Monsanto, King of Iowa GM Monocrop Corn) was appointed by President Obama to head the US Dept of Agriculture (USDA) in 2008.

Google: Vilsack & Monsanto


Michael Taylor, a Monsanto Lawyer and Marketing Shill was appointed by Obama to head the Food and Drug Administration.
"Michael R. Taylor’s appointment by the Obama administration to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on July 7th sparked immediate debate and even outrage among many food and agriculture researchers, NGOs and activists. The Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto Corp. from 1998 until 2001, Taylor exemplifies the revolving door between the food industry and the government agencies that regulate it. He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government’s favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration

http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/08/14/monsanto-s-man-in-the-obama-administration/


Google: Micheal Taylor & Monsanto

...and this is just the tip of the iceberg. These agencies are staffed by a roster of "former" Monsanto and BIG AG employees.

It wouldn't be so bad
IF there were voices and representatives from the Safe Food, Green, Sustainable movements represented in these agencies,
but there are not.
Like the voices for Expanding Medicare, the Voices for healthy, Green, Sustainable food have been purposefully blocked from representation in these agencies.

Michele's "Organic Garden" on the White House Lawn is Only for Show.
It is window dressing that adds insult to injury.
Everything INSIDE the White House that affects our Food and Agriculture IS controlled by Monsanto.


&feature=player_embedded


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:58 PM

48. If it's GMO, we have a right to know, so we can $ay NO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #48)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:05 AM

72. Mutant lovers (R) also have a right to know...so they can choose GMO

Last edited Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #72)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:38 AM

79. Yikemares!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:36 AM

61. K&R n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:15 AM

63. DUrec, in solidarity with my Family Farmers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:37 AM

64. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:33 AM

74. I'm pulling for the farmers!!

The documentary, Food, Inc., opened my eyes to this company (Monsanto) several years ago. The farmers are being bullied by this corporation, that cares nothing about America, to destroy our environment and to produce an unhealthy product and we have to stop them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread