Obama Gives Monsanto Get Out of Jail Free Card

[The DirtMerchant]

I think I may have had a misunderstanding of the term GMO. I think of GMO to include, among other things, crossing strains of produce (say large strawberries with sweet strawberries producing large sweet strawberries, or a somehow hearty crop of cotton/wheat/corn with another version producing a stronger version of the crop). And the idea spread about of "destroy all GMOs" (and that Flint rails against) has seemed dumb to me. But, if GMO means this:
Genetically Modified Organisms. They are created in a lab by genetically engineering viruses and bacteria and inserting them into the dna of the seed. This is what the biotech industry does and it CANNOT happen except in a lab. HYBRIDIZATION or CROSS POLLINATING occurs in nature and therefor outside the lab! It's VERY different and the biotech tries to mislead people with this disinformation.

I am not for just destroying it outright...but I do want more info available. A lot more. Regardless of interpretation...

 

[Huey]

A GMO doesn't always have to happen in a lab. Take for instance a Liger, a cross between a tiger and a lion. The end result is a genetically modified organism, different dna than both the lion or the tiger. Also, I don't believe it is always a virus or a bacteria that is used to change it, I believe in Roundup Ready Soybeans it was a protein that was inserted in to make the plant Roundup Ready. Which is a really neat process in how they did it. If you ever hear of them talking about a gene gun, that's truly what it was, a .22 caliber gun that shot the protein at high velocity into the cell material.

It's always good to be informed, but so far science has not found any negative affect in GMO products. It reduces pesticide concentrations in the environment, makes for a healthier crop, which in turn should cut down on greenhouse emissions, and what they use in the case of corn, is a naturally occurring bacteria that is very effective in controlling certain pests.

 

[Botch]

Awhile back I'd read a study that linked gluten intolerance with GM wheat, thought about posting it here. I'm glad I didn't because now, just last week, a pretty rigorous study showed that gluten intolerance is, mostly, psychosomatic. d'Oh. :doh:

 

[DIYer]

Awhile back I'd read a study that linked gluten intolerance with GM wheat, thought about posting it here. I'm glad I didn't because now, just last week, a pretty rigorous study showed that gluten intolerance is, mostly, psychosomatic. d'Oh. :doh:

There are many like that. Look up Dr. Ancel Keys report on heart disease and cholesterol. We've been duped for half century.

 

[Huey]

Awhile back I'd read a study that linked gluten intolerance with GM wheat, thought about posting it here. I'm glad I didn't because now, just last week, a pretty rigorous study showed that gluten intolerance is, mostly, psychosomatic. d'Oh. :doh:

And especially since there's never been any GMO wheat released to the marketplace.

 

[The DirtMerchant]

A GMO doesn't always have to happen in a lab. Take for instance a Liger, a cross between a tiger and a lion. The end result is a genetically modified organism, different dna than both the lion or the tiger. Also, I don't believe it is always a virus or a bacteria that is used to change it, I believe in Roundup Ready Soybeans it was a protein that was inserted in to make the plant Roundup Ready. Which is a really neat process in how they did it. If you ever hear of them talking about a gene gun, that's truly what it was, a .22 caliber gun that shot the protein at high velocity into the cell material.

It's always good to be informed, but so far science has not found any negative affect in GMO products. It reduces pesticide concentrations in the environment, makes for a healthier crop, which in turn should cut down on greenhouse emissions, and what they use in the case of corn, is a naturally occurring bacteria that is very effective in controlling certain pests.

This is the kind of thing I like to hear. It does not assuage my fears, but it is good.
The Bees dying and the increase of allergies and all the other little things that engender that fear
are still out there, which is why I would like continued testing and more availability of information.

 

[The DirtMerchant]

And then stuff like this makes me not feel so good.
A Harvard study...

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/05/smoking-gun-bee-collapse

 

[Huey]

Why? I stated before that a big change that has happened in the last five years was that most soybean seed is now treated with an insecticide before planting, and if that is what is causing the colony collapse, we'll see a shift to a different class of insecticides. One that is safe for the bees, but may not be as effective on the insects, but nobody wants to lose the bees.

 

[Flint]

Nobody, especially the farmers and thusly the seed producers, wants to lose the bees. Without bees no one will buy the seeds.

I get frustrated that people preach that the big biotech firms are recklessly killing us for their own gain. The last thing they want to do is put their customers out of business and kill their customers' customers.

 

[Huey]

Nobody, especially the farmers and thusly the seed producers, wants to lose the bees. Without bees no one will buy the seeds.

I get frustrated that people preach that the big biotech firms are recklessly killing us for their own gain. The last thing they want to do is put their customers out of business and kill their customers' customers.

Mark this day down as we actually agree on something. :happy-smileygiantred: Bees pollinate soybean plants, so it would make sense if in fact it is the seed treatment that is doing it. Without bees, we have no soybeans, and alot of other things as well.

 

[The DirtMerchant]

Why? I stated before that a big change that has happened in the last five years was that most soybean seed is now treated with an insecticide before planting, and if that is what is causing the colony collapse, we'll see a shift to a different class of insecticides. One that is safe for the bees, but may not be as effective on the insects, but nobody wants to lose the bees.

Why does it make me feel not so good?
Because the consequences of insecticides (and other things) show up. And with such large scale business, especially in the agri-business, it is such a behemoth that changes do not happen quickly. The bee CCD was really noticed in 2006. That is 8 years ago. How much longer does it need to go before we actually get the changes done? I'm not saying the corporations are evil, but the response from Bayer does not make me feel like they are a wonderful company either. They'll come around, right? But when and how quickly?

from the article:
"...as neonic producer Bayer puts it in its "Honey Bee Health" pamphlet. As for Lu's study, Bayer is dismissive. In a response published on the trade website Ag Professional, Bayer accused Lu of overdosing the bees in his study:
Feeding honey bees levels of neonicotinoids greater than 10 times what they would normally encounter is more than unrealistic—it is deceptive and represents a disservice to genuine scientific investigation related to honey bee health."

And this issue was found and studied because without bees, the world is in deep shit, in other words it is a HUGE problem.
But what about the small issues that do not appear to be a huge problem? And don't have $$ backing them? Down the line could
it morph into a big problem? Could they have studied it more? Stopped it before it started? Just fears...

 

[The DirtMerchant]

Nobody, especially the farmers and thusly the seed producers, wants to lose the bees. Without bees no one will buy the seeds.

I get frustrated that people preach that the big biotech firms are recklessly killing us for their own gain. The last thing they want to do is put their customers out of business and kill their customers' customers.

But the first thing they want is $.
And sometimes they ignore warning signs to get the $
and sometimes realize later than they should that there are danger signs.
So, maybe not directly killing us for their own gain...but indirectly? unwittingly? slowly?

 

[Flint]

Nobody, especially the farmers and thusly the seed producers, wants to lose the bees. Without bees no one will buy the seeds.

I get frustrated that people preach that the big biotech firms are recklessly killing us for their own gain. The last thing they want to do is put their customers out of business and kill their customers' customers.

But the first thing they want is $.
And sometimes they ignore warning signs to get the $
and sometimes realize later than they should that there are danger signs.
So, maybe not directly killing us for their own gain...but indirectly? unwittingly? slowly?

Believe it or not, very few businessmen act they way they are portrayed in movies or TV shows. They are people, too. With families, cares, educations, etc. They watch the same TV shows, news reports and movies we watch. They read the same magazines, newspapers, and websites we read. This insane notion that businesses don't care about people is wrong. They do. There are always exceptions, but there are no more exceptions in the business world than in the farmers' world or the environmentalists' world.

I don't accept the notion that Monsanto, or any serious agricultural business, would ever willingly risk our lives just for a quick buck. There may be small dumb mistakes that happen, but the notion that entire ecosystems will be destroyed before someone is caught hiding the truth is just conspiracy nonsense.

 

[The DirtMerchant]

Nobody, especially the farmers and thusly the seed producers, wants to lose the bees. Without bees no one will buy the seeds.

I get frustrated that people preach that the big biotech firms are recklessly killing us for their own gain. The last thing they want to do is put their customers out of business and kill their customers' customers.

But the first thing they want is $.
And sometimes they ignore warning signs to get the $
and sometimes realize later than they should that there are danger signs.
So, maybe not directly killing us for their own gain...but indirectly? unwittingly? slowly?

Believe it or not, very few businessmen act they way they are portrayed in movies or TV shows. They are people, too. With families, cares, educations, etc. They watch the same TV shows, news reports and movies we watch. They read the same magazines, newspapers, and websites we read. This insane notion that businesses don't care about people is wrong. They do. There are always exceptions, but there are no more exceptions in the business world than in the farmers' world or the environmentalists' world.

I don't accept the notion that Monsanto, or any serious agricultural business, would ever willingly risk our lives just for a quick buck. There may be small dumb mistakes that happen, but the notion that entire ecosystems will be destroyed before someone is caught hiding the truth is just conspiracy nonsense.

You may not accept it, but in small ways it does happen. Do you think BP wanted people to die and the Gulf of Mexico to have a huge oil "spill" in it? I don't. Yet they leave hundreds (thousands?) of improperly capped wells. That are KNOWN issues that WILL fail. Monsanto continues to come up with new GMO techniques and avenues for the general betterment of the food supply. The bee community has known about CCD since 2006. 8 years ago. EIGHT YEARS and they are still denying any wrongdoing whatsoever. So, look...business people are people just like anywhere else. They watch the same TV shows, they read the same information. But under direction and from a place of authority, people will do unspeakable things.

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

So, I agree with you. On purpose or due to absolute evil, absolutely not. But again...unwittingly? Mistakenly? Willfully blindly? And with the size and expansiveness of the agri-business (or basically any other zaibatsu type business these days) that one mistake when it shows through is tremendous in scope.
Wrong e-coli strain in meat, recall tons across a dozen states. e-coli strain in lettuce, recall tons across a dozen states. Repeat ad nauseum. And in general, the feeling when faced with a crime or imposition of guilt...is to defend yourself and say "I didn't do it". I expect every company and person to have that same "but it wasn't us/me". Every human has that reaction. So, do I think Monsanto is purposefully risking our lives for a quick Billion...no. Do I think they don't have all the answers and are plowing ahead (literally) with science and assumptions mixed together, absolutely. And I think we are slowly catching up and finding the issues.

 

[The DirtMerchant]

Another perfect example of big companies doing bad:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...intimidated-by-citigroup-wins-31-million.html

I was let go along with 16,999 other people in 2007. Then, since November 2008, the bank has slashed about 25% of its staff. The 11,000 job cuts that were announced in 2012 amounted to 4% of Citigroup's workforce at the time, which stood at 261,000 full-time employees at the end of September 2012. Citi is one of the biggest reasons for the 2008 crash, the TARP and economic hatred for Bush/Obama. Are they an evil corporation? I suppose not. I worked there for 8 years. I and everyone I worked with were nice guys. But what that bank and those people did was pretty damn near unforgivable.

 

[Huey]

DirtMerchant, I think you might be getting some things mixed up. There are a lot of people that are hoping GMO's are the reason for the CCD, but it looks like things are more pointing towards seed treatments on soybeans. Keep in mind, that bees pollinate soybeans, and with the systemic insecticides that are being used now in seed treatments, that's a pretty direct path for the bees to pick up the insecticide. Bees don't pollinate corn, so there would be little reason for them to be in a corn field, where they could potentially pick up the bt from the corn.

I will say, since the introduction of GMO crops, farmers have changed how they treat their crops. With the threat of most insects taken away on the corn, beyond rainfall, the most yield impacting force on crop yields, they have branched off into other forms and practices of increasing yields through seed treatments, fungicides, etc. Soybeans are starting to follow that path now as well.

 

[The DirtMerchant]

Ah, I see. Thanks Huey. Replace Monsanto with Bayer then. Same type of thinking applies from my end.