Customer Discussions > Health forum

MONSANTO


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-100 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Posted on Oct 9, 2010 10:32:18 PM PDT
spookiewon says:
tree hugger, GMO means "genetically modified organism" and it is NOT sprayed. It cannot be sprayed. The corn itself is genetically modified to be resistant NOT to all herbicides, but to Monsanto's own Roundup herbicide. (The corn is called "Roundup Ready.") That way the farmer can plant the field, then spray Roundup to kill the weeds, and the corn is fine. It is certainly possible, even probable, that a farmer using Roundup is using pesticides as well, perchance even provided by Monsanto, but not necessary. If we wish to make our point we have to be fair to the other side and know the facts. Generalizing by saying that because they are using "Roundup Ready" corn they are CERTAINLY spraying pesticide, or implying we can change genetic makeup with a spray, just makes the other side's point--that we don't know what we're talking about.

You might be thinking about the fact that when Roundup Ready goes to seed, it is impossible to keep the pollen from blowing onto other fields that are not planted with Roundup ready, for whatever reason. Monsanto has sued (successfully) to charge farmers who do not plant Roundup Ready for Roundup Ready because their plants contain Monsanto's patented genetic makeup because the seed was germinated by blowing pollen from the fields of neighbors who DO use Roundup Ready. A farmer has also sued Monsanto because his corn was pollenated by neighboring farmers Roundup Ready corn and he does not wish his corn to be Roundup Ready. He was less successful than Monsanto.

Furthermore, corn is particularily non-nutritive. Mostly it is empty calories and it makes what eats it FAT, be it cows or people. Our reliance on corn for a huge part of our food supply is why America is FAT.

If it were possible to change genetic makeup with a spray we'd all be mutants by now, as genes are genes.

Marc Stacy--So you think the whore is worse? Really. Whores sell a product that belongs to them and someone wants to buy. Both buyer and seller get something from the transaction. If we're minding our business, prostitution harms no one and is NOT an ethical or moral issue. Pimps sell something that belongs to someone else. Even minding one's own business this is an ethical and moral problem. An easy way to check whether it's the purview of law is to ask, "Does it harm the person or property of a non-consenting adult other?" If the answer is "No," it's not my or your business. So, prostitution, not my or your business; pimping, our business.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2010 11:08:40 PM PDT
spookiewon says:
Media certainly do skew, but usually in the direction of Monsanto and Big Pharma, not against them. And in eating a bag of Doritos one may or may not (although may is certainly more likely as a lot of the corn grown in the US is Roundup Ready, Monsanto's GMO corn) expose one to GMO corn. That's EXACTLY the point. The USDA and FDA are not allowing the public to know whether the corn and corn products they eat contain GMO's or not. And many of us would like to know. Furthermore, Monsanto is being allowed to subsidize the use of Roundup Ready, artificially reducing the price and keeping independent farmers from competing. Further, Monsanto is being allowed to charge farmers who do not plant Roundup Ready for Roundup Ready if the farmer's crop of non-Roundup Ready is contaminated, completely outside the farmer's control and against the farmers will, by his neighbor's Roundup Ready crop. That is, farmers who oppose the use of GMO's and plan their fields with seed they keep from last year's crop, are being forced to pay Monsanto if their crops are contaminated by Roundup Ready from someone else's field. These farmers cannot control the wind or the pollination that bees engage, yet they are held responsible for it PLUS their crop is no longer salable to those of us who would prefer NOT to eat GMOs.

It seems to me that if Monsanto is able to test whether corn from an organic farmer's field contains contamination from his neighbor's Roundup Ready corn, they could test for the same GMO in the food supply. The question isn't whether it is possible to tell if my bag of Doritos contains any GMOs, but that the FDA and USDA have decided I shouldn't know, lest I be "confused." As they have decided that GMOs are safe, they are concerned that I may decide they are not safe enough for me and if enough of us did, Monsanto wouldn't be able to subsidize Roundup Ready enough to get farmers to plant it.

The danger here is that we are becoming an nation of idiots. It is easier to assume the government will protect us as long as we don't question. Unfortunately, I am a child of the '60's, and I naturally "question authority." Our founding fathers questioned authority, too. It's what America was founded upon, and we should not forget that.

Also, Monsanto dwarfs Pioneer, Syngenta and Bayer. And Roundup Ready, a Monsanto brand, is, by far, the most planted corn in the USA. Addressing Monsanto as the worst of the worst doesn't excuse others, and governmental regulation requiring that the use of GMO in foods would not apply only to Monsanto and corn but to all foodstuffs. Further, it wouldn't imply good or bad, simply IS. Why would it be objectionable to let those who want to know whether they are eating GMOs or not? You could still choose to eat them, but those who consider them dangerous would be comfortable in knowing they could choose not to.

BTW, I have not seen Food, Inc., or any of the other documentaries mentioned. I do my own research, and, while I am not convinced that GMOs are unsafe in all cases, Roundup Ready does cause me some concern. This is a Monsanto product, so I DO tend to single out Monsanto because they designed this questionable product.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2010 11:15:52 PM PDT
spookiewon says:
YES! And, so far, NONE has "stolen" the seed. Every one wanted to NOT have Roundup Ready in his/her field! Monsanto should be forced to pay them for their contaminated crops.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2010 11:21:46 PM PDT
spookiewon says:
Yes, it is sprayed, usually with herbicides and insecticides. BUT, GMO, is done in the lab. Genes from one thing are spliced to another thing. That can't be sprayed.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2010 11:35:40 PM PDT
spookiewon says:
I have a in psychology, and I DO NOT advocate the use of antidepressants, with the exception of lithium carbonate to balance a true chemical imbalance in those with bipolar disorder, and occasionally very resistant major depressive disorder MIGHT benefit from small doses of tricyclics. I am very concerned about the safety of the SSRI (selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor) and SNRI (serotonin and norepinepherine re-uptake inhibitor) classes of antidepressants. (Paxil is an example of an SSRI; Effexor is an example of an SNRI.) THAT SAID, the argument that antidepressants cause thoughts of suicide is unfair. When depression is very deep, people have little initiative to do anything. They don't commit suicide, not because it doesn't occur to them but because it's too much work. Whether by antidepressant or by psychotherapy or by exercise (a great way to fight depression, BTW), as deep depression eases, some initiative returns, and there is a danger that one has enough initiative now to follow through and kill oneself. The trick is to get past that point until one feels well enough not to consider suicide.

Posted on Oct 9, 2010 11:36:42 PM PDT
seriousmny says:
Monsanto used to be in my mom's home town. They left a mess and town sued but didn't really get anything since the lawyers got their cut off the top. It was pitiful. The lawyers walked away with most of the money and the towns people who had been affected got a few thousand if that. I don't trust anything produced by Monsanto.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 4:25:08 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 10, 2010 4:34:59 PM PDT
spooky- it IS sprayed- with roundup. that's the whole point of the crops being genetically modified- to resist the effects of the herbicide sprayed to kill all the weeds. Why , you even said it yourself, that they are roundup ready- READY to be sprayed. What's your point? Do you or have you ever worked with said crops or Roundup? Because I have on a professional level, and I do understand exactly what goes into using the product and spraying crops, etc.I also am very familiar with all the spraying the farmers around me do to their genetically modified crops. GMO does not mean they don't spray with pesticides or herbicides, and the herbicide I obvious refer to in Monsanto's case is obviously Roundup. I don't see where you are going with your post to me, as you certainly weren't quoting me. I never directly or indirectly said spraying herbicides causes genetic mutations, however, I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 4:39:41 PM PDT
Of course GMO is done in a lab, but in the case of free pollinating crops such as canola, it is very easy for those lab-created organisms to hybridize and proliferate in another farmers crops unwittingly. It is not accurate to say they are not contaminating our natural foods, and making mutant crops out of organic farmers' yields.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 5:31:54 PM PDT
Jennifer says:
Hummingbirder, do you understand that original good intensions like the ones you are talking about, by developing seeds that were hardier is not what Monsanto has become. Do you understand that when you patent a seed like the Monsanto seeds and they cross pollinate or "infect" the rest of the natural world then you are at the mercy of Monsanto. And if those crops are proven to give you cancer, there is nothing you can do about it because there will eventually be NO more places were you can get natural seed that is not GM. It is the potential to do harm to everyone and that is the direction they have taken their seed. The US supreme court should overturn the ruling which lead to Monsanto patenting their seeds. You cannot patent life itself.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 5:41:14 PM PDT
Jennifer says:
Watch the movie food inc. It is a documentary about some of the problems with the food industry today and sites several farmers in the video with interviews.

As for the hog...yes if a hog gets sick it should be given antibiotics. If my son gets sick they don't give antibiotics to the entire 3rd grade class. It goes on a case by case basis. I am absolutely against giving the hogs or cows or chickens antibiotics without being sick. Any hog that was given antibiotics should not be sold as meat. Studies have proven that antibiotics given in mass and those animals eaten by us creates bacteria that are resistent to antibiotics. Case in Point, MRSA has claimed the lives of more people in the past year than AIDS.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 5:50:03 PM PDT
cherod70 says:
Hummingbirder-
Food should be natural not "developed". Food should not be changed for profit. Monsanto is a large corporation, large corpaorations are interested in growth and profit only.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:04:53 PM PDT
cherod70 says:
Humminbirder-
Food should be natural not "develpoed". GMO produce has the pesticided within the seed so it's part of the fruit/vegetable. Monsanto is a corporation and a corporations focus is growth and profit not for the greater good, so the point you made about not seeing it in your area means it's only a matter of time-

If food was grown naturaly there would be no need for antibiotics. Yes, of course someone who grows animals for food would be worried because it's thier bottom line and someone sold them the idea of antibotics. Think about the other side of the coin, what if years from now when all food has antibotics or GMO's and we find that it's not healthy, where do we go then? It's nature we are playing with there is always risk and nothing is a sure thing. Our society has become such that we think a pill fixes everything- what about taking care of ourselves and growing healthy food.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:10:15 PM PDT
Jennifer, would you care to pony up and tell a subsistence farmer he has a moral imperative to NOT plant Monsanto's seeds?

Would anyone here care to do that? Take away the ability to feed one's family? Do you hate corporations enough to tell your fellow man he can just starve because you think they're dealing with the devil? That is lunacy. Why not quit complaining about GMO and getting off your own butts to develop seeds that are viable in difficult growing conditions?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:20:00 PM PDT
cherod70 says:
I would tell a farmer to not buy seeds from Monsnto no matter the cost and choose another profession. Why do we need to develop seeds? Things should be grown where and when thay can be, this is our food we are talking about!! Do you care about anyones health? Do you think it's a coincidense that since we have changed farming that people are sicker? We are little puppets eating what the big corporation are telling us to.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:34:43 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:39:24 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 10, 2010 6:46:20 PM PDT
cherod70 says:
Goodbye- but, please take a moment to see both sides here and realize the beauty of nature :) Why couldn't that farmer plant an organic farm for thier local community? Neccesity is the seed of invention. Monsanto knows what they are doing- making a profit.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:39:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 10, 2010 6:57:35 PM PDT
Matthew says:
I will be more than happy to tell any end every farmer in the world to not grow GMO foods. I will not get up in their faces and tell them to starve their families, but what I will do is cast my vote against GMOs every time I go to the grocery store and encourage everyone I know to do the same. If I have any sneaking suspicion whatsoever that it contains GMOs, it won't be in my shopping cart. I will buy everything I can organic, even with it being more expensive, simply to avoid GMOs along with a whole host of other crap that I don't want to eat. I don't want my children to be sterile! If we demand food that does not contain GMOs, the farmers will happily supply it to us. Supply and demand, it's as simple as that.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2010 6:48:29 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 10, 2010 6:53:18 PM PDT
Matthew says:
LOL! And YOU call US hypocrites!

So it's ok to sell people food that gives them cancer "in order to survive"?

I guess the guys at the heads of the tobacco companies are just trying to survive too, by putting like 500 additional chemicals in cigarettes so people are that much more addicted to something that will eventually kill them. What they are doing is completely moral, right?

If anybody is the hypocrite I think it is you! You are saying you care about people's health, but that you should be allowed to sell products that are harmful to others, because YOUR family needs to survive.

What happened to everyone else? You don't care if the products make people sterile, give people cancer, or kill people who have severe allergic reactions? I thought we were talking about survival here!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 11, 2010 10:00:13 PM PDT
S. Rubicz says:
Listen Popeye
They thought they'd meet a need, but have created a nightmare. Making the food situation even worse.
How do we know what foods Monsanto has touched? Milk for example, will it ssay something on the carton to let us know?
You love food but eat spinach out of a can?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 11, 2010 10:41:10 PM PDT
S. Rubicz says:
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"
"Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety"

I THINK THAT ITS ALL A MATTER OF WHO IS GOING TO BE IN ON THE FOREFRONT MAKING ALL THE LOOT. MONSANTO SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE QUALITY OF THE FOOD THAT IS PRODUCED THAT THEY HAVE HAD A HAND IN SOMEWHERE IN THE GROWING OR PRODUCING. FARMERS CANNOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR BUYING SEED IN GOOD FAITH THAT IS "TAINTED" fARMERS DO HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY AS FAR AS USING FERTILIZERS/PESTICIDES RESPONSIBILY. THEY SHOULD BE INTERESTED IN THEIR REPUTATIONS AS FARMERS, AND HUMAN BEINGS, TO THE CONSUMER. LOOK AT THE MESS CAUSED BY 2 EGG FARMERS IN IOWA, THEY KNEW THEY WERE OVER EXTENDED AND NOT KEEPING THE PLACE CLEAN, JUST WAITING FOR THE FDA TO CRACK DOWN. AS IN I DARE YOU. AND THE FDA, TSK TSK TSK. THEY ARE NOT OUR FRIENDS ANYMORE.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 11, 2010 10:44:59 PM PDT
S. Rubicz says:
ytwong-
you have done your homework and really know your stuff. thanks for providing us with resources to educate ourselves. we are very naive and mis-informed.
thank you

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 12, 2010 5:21:37 PM PDT
Craig says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Oct 12, 2010 7:04:16 PM PDT
Wiping out some foreign nation's seeds with the use of Terminator Technology. What would you call this?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 12, 2010 9:36:58 PM PDT
Matthew says:
Ya...

Sarcastic retorts really add volumes to the discussion as well as give you loads of credibility... please keep enlightening us with your brilliant contributions... I'm hanging on your every word.

How was that? Good?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 12, 2010 9:55:11 PM PDT
TeeDee says:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/

I hope you can open the link above. Notice 9 states adopted regulations to either ban or control GMO's. In spite of what the person below you said, GMO's are very dangerous and is already taking it's toll on human and animal health. We have got to force state legislatures out of office who cave into the corporate lobby. The only way public awareness. This is my personal mission. Notice on the link how South Dakota took a weak approach. Instead of banning GMO's they just made it a little more difficult for Montsanto and the like to sue farmers. Those politicians should get the ax. One would think the law makers in California would step up but they are just as corrupt for doing nothing. Keep writing and do your research. People will read it and study on their own. Only an absolute idiot would think GMO's are safe.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Health forum
Participants:  172
Total posts:  7204
Initial post:  Sep 23, 2010
Latest post:  18 hours ago

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 17 customers

Search Customer Discussions