**** Monsanto and the GMO Industry.

[teedubya]

After a nearly 10 month hiatus from CP... I present you with my latest tinfoil-conspiracy-kook bitch session.

---
A recent peer-reviewed study on the effects of routine exposure to "safe" levels of Monsanto's GM corn and the chemical herbicide Roundup have revealed that the two toxins are directly linked to causing cancerous tumors. Since this is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, it is noted that nearly every female rat in the study also developed mammary cancer.

This study, which was published in the highly-reputable journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, showed how rats fed a diet containing Monsanto's NK603 Roundup-resistant GM corn, which is widely cultivated in the U.S. today, died much earlier than GM-free control rats. Even rats fed just GM corn that had not been treated with Roundup ended up developing multiple ghastly tumors, indicating that some component of GM corn itself, apart from Roundup, is responsible for causing cancer.

It's fundamentally challenging for "Real" science in a world increasingly dominated by corporate influence.



http://research.sustainablefoodtrust.org/

Russia nows bans GMO corn. And in America, we can't even LABEL the GMO foods.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-...ds-on-monsanto

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Ok, so there is no point in arguing. All I ask is that GM foods are labeled, so us kooks don't have to partake in a new designer disease. Really simple since America is all about choice.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

Ok, so there is no point in arguing. All I ask is that GM foods are labeled, so us kooks don't have to partake in a new designer disease. Really simple since America is all about choice.

It comes down to the fact that labeling wouldn't really serve much of a purpose other than to quell the paranoia of people that don't understand what they're paranoid about. GM Foods are so widely used, and have been for many generations, we would be relabeling the majority of our food. There's no safety risk, and your personal piece of mind isn't worth the trouble it would take. What you're asking for would raise the price of food and cause all sorts of problems for producers.

And you still have a choice. You always have. Take those seeds from Granny's tomatoes that you're convinced are non GM, and grow your own. Control the genetics of your own food. That will guarantee you know what you're eating. Otherwise just accept that you're eating it and have been forever.

[Buehler445]

Man, stupid is in the water around this place.

Here's the reality without getting into the semantics of this argument or that argument. The food producers are taking a ****ing abusing over all this and some of it is justified, most is not. And they're coming after glyphosate? Are you ****ing me? Glyphosate is incredibly safe. It is one of the safest chemicals we have. Dad has been running glyphosate for 35 years. The actual chemical, not what has been absorbed through the plant and into his corn that was fed to a cow that he ate. And back in the stone age, safety and material handling was terrible. If glyphosate was killing people, he'd have been dead years ago.

Monsanto sucks balls. But I'M the one they are ****ing, not you guys. They get their profit from me, not convincing you guys to eat it. If you are pissed at anyone it should be FDA, it's their responsibility to keep food safe.

I'm done here and not coming back into this thread but I will leave you with this.



Widespread adoption of 2-4D (the first widespread chemical) and Anhydrous Amonia (Nitrogen) happened in the 40's (not led by Monsanto). I can't remember when hybridization came into corn (technically GMO), but I want to say it was in the 60's or early 70's. And gene splicing (BT and Roundup Ready corn) hit the market in 1995.

Pure Plow/Plant is completely unsustainable and absolutely destroys soil organic matter, not to mention the erodability, drought exposure, plow pan, nutrient/micronutrient deficiencies and weed issues. So if the degrading in yield from the early 1900's through the 1930s holds true, we would be looking at sub 20 yield numbers

You can say all you want about how bad the farming practices is are and blah blah blah, but realistically this country is ass****ed from a nutrition standpoint without it. The corn crop last year was 14 B bushels on 155 bu/acre. If you want to go back to not using technology, that number is below 20 bu/acre giving you roughly 1.75 B bushel. That means we have to import corn (which will be GMO) and most of the animal agriculture is out of the country and good luck getting any other country to give you origin labels or whatever you want to happen here. So without all this "evil", you'd just end up with it anyway and pay markedly higher prices for it.

/rant

God why the **** do I come into this place?

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

Man, stupid is in the water around this place.

Here's the reality without getting into the semantics of this argument or that argument. The food producers are taking a ****ing abusing over all this and some of it is justified, most is not. And they're coming after glyphosate? Are you ****ing me? Glyphosate is incredibly safe. It is one of the safest chemicals we have. Dad has been running glyphosate for 35 years. The actual chemical, not what has been absorbed through the plant and into his corn that was fed to a cow that he ate. And back in the stone age, safety and material handling was terrible. If glyphosate was killing people, he'd have been dead years ago.

Monsanto sucks balls. But I'M the one they are ****ing, not you guys. They get their profit from me, not convincing you guys to eat it. If you are pissed at anyone it should be FDA, it's their responsibility to keep food safe.

I'm done here and not coming back into this thread but I will leave you with this.



Widespread adoption of 2-4D (the first widespread chemical) and Anhydrous Amonia (Nitrogen) happened in the 40's (not led by Monsanto). I can't remember when hybridization came into corn (technically GMO), but I want to say it was in the 60's or early 70's. And gene splicing (BT and Roundup Ready corn) hit the market in 1995.

Pure Plow/Plant is completely unsustainable and absolutely destroys soil organic matter, not to mention the erodability, drought exposure, plow pan, nutrient/micronutrient deficiencies and weed issues. So if the degrading in yield from the early 1900's through the 1930s holds true, we would be looking at sub 20 yield numbers

You can say all you want about how bad the farming practices is are and blah blah blah, but realistically this country is ass****ed from a nutrition standpoint without it. The corn crop last year was 14 B bushels on 155 bu/acre. If you want to go back to not using technology, that number is below 20 bu/acre giving you roughly 1.75 B bushel. That means we have to import corn (which will be GMO) and most of the animal agriculture is out of the country and good luck getting any other country to give you origin labels or whatever you want to happen here. So without all this "evil", you'd just end up with it anyway and pay markedly higher prices for it.

/rant

God why the **** do I come into this place?

Buehler. Do. Not. Try. Go break something in the shop and fix it, stay away from this. It is no use. To debate it is to fall into your doom.

[King_Chief_Fan]

I don't think I trust data from someone who has their own agenda and uses mice that are bred to develop tumors if they are over fed...anything.

Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London, noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were.

"This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said. "The statistical methods are unconventional ... and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip."

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Buehler. Do. Not. Try. Go break something in the shop and fix it, stay away from this. It is no use. To debate it is to fall into your doom.

You're right. I have no idea why I even come into this godforsaken forum. This is my last post in this thread.

However, there is a push to try to get good pub out about the ag industry and try to head off ridiculous attacks like this one. After a moment to cool off, perhaps I shouldn't have been so condescending and negative in my post.

That being said, I would encourage anyone to come out and visit my farm. I would love to show people what I do and what the industry is like and visit (civilly) about these topics.

Let's not pretend that I'm not at all concerned about these topics, but some common sense is necessary in the discussion.

Anyone that has concerns, I would love to schedule a visit or talk privately (civilly) about these topics. I'm not an asshole. Just trying to do the best job I can.

[King_Chief_Fan]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

You're right. I have no idea why I even come into this godforsaken forum. This is my last post in this thread.

However, there is a push to try to get good pub out about the ag industry and try to head off ridiculous attacks like this one. After a moment to cool off, perhaps I shouldn't have been so condescending and negative in my post.

That being said, I would encourage anyone to come out and visit my farm. I would love to show people what I do and what the industry is like and visit (civilly) about these topics.

Let's not pretend that I'm not at all concerned about these topics, but some common sense is necessary in the discussion.

Anyone that has concerns, I would love to schedule a visit or talk privately (civilly) about these topics. I'm not an asshole. Just trying to do the best job I can.

good post....I love the commercials that Monsanto does for the American farmer...no matter how many times I see the commercials I have to stop and think...thank goodness farmers exist.

[HonestChieffan]

In Buehlers defense and in his support, there is a crying need for the ag sector to do a better job of education of the non ag sector. If not for the benefit of consumers, but also to have people better understand some very complex issues that get all twisted and bent to fit an agenda that some group has.

The anti GMO crowd has done double backflips to create a doomsday scenario that is simply not going to happen and to create fears of things that people should not fear. They would have us do away with hybrid corn, crossbred hogs and cattle and return to the agriculture of approximately 1930 or before.

The hard part is that these people, like any group with a fairly extreme agenda, have no interest in learning or in listening to any POV that varies from their own.

[Saulbadguy]

but but but..."frankenfood!!"

[King_Chief_Fan]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

In Buehlers defense and in his support, there is a crying need for the ag sector to do a better job of education of the non ag sector. If not for the benefit of consumers, but also to have people better understand some very complex issues that get all twisted and bent to fit an agenda that some group has.

The anti GMO crowd has done double backflips to create a doomsday scenario that is simply not going to happen and to create fears of things that people should not fear. They would have us do away with hybrid corn, crossbred hogs and cattle and return to the agriculture of approximately 1930 or before.

The hard part is that these people, like any group with a fairly extreme agenda, have no interest in learning or in listening to any POV that varies from their own.

excellent remarks

[Donger]

[teedubya]

It's a valid enough study to get many european countries to start banning or labeling GMOS... all I want are labels on the food.

And **** Monsanto. I want that company to die. The ****ing HEAD of the FDA was the main Monsanto lobbyist.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by teedubya

It's a valid enough study to get many european countries to start banning or labeling GMOS... all I want are labels on the food.

And **** Monsanto. I want that company to die. The ****ing HEAD of the FDA was the main Monsanto lobbyist.

Are you going to provide any updates on any of your predictions?

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by teedubya

It's a valid enough study to get many european countries to start banning or labeling GMOS... all I want are labels on the food.

And **** Monsanto. I want that company to die. The ****ing HEAD of the FDA was the main Monsanto lobbyist.

What food do you want labeled? Labeled for what exactly?

[King_Chief_Fan]

Originally Posted by teedubya

It's a valid enough study to get many european countries to start banning or labeling GMOS... all I want are labels on the food.

And **** Monsanto. I want that company to die. The ****ing HEAD of the FDA was the main Monsanto lobbyist.

I'll take "what do organic farmers say" for 100 Alex