Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All the food that you have ever eaten has been genetically modified, and has been for thousands of years, except from wild game/bush meat and wild berries.
Your differently twisted definition of "genetically modified" is rejected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg
Plant breeding, by cross-pollination and culling, is not the same as bombarding chromosomes with genes from other species.
But you know that. You're just assuming the rest of us don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
Selective breeding is not the same as GMO...
But as another poster mentioned, you knew that...
Selective breeding, taking the same species and cross-breeding to get the best traits out of it, is not even close to the same as genetically altering plants with say splicing in bacteria genes, so the plant can absorb more Roundup without it being killed, which by the way the US gov recently approved double the amount of glyphosate that can be in food.
Well, there you go.
I'm more worried about people who think fish can selectively be bred with tomatoes.
Rather than the twisted conspiratorial commentary about why monsanto is moving into organic....maybe consider because there is huge money to be made there?
Rather than the twisted conspiratorial commentary about why monsanto is moving into organic....maybe consider because there is huge money to be made there?
Well duh, it is all about money; who ever stated otherwise?
However, Monsanto's move into organic is not about making money on organic and propping up that market, it is about shutting down that market to head off competition to their much more profitable GMO products. The term is "anti-competitive practice", in which the tactic "absorption" is being used.
I don't think they'd be able to get control of all the sources of heirloom seeds. Heirloom varieties of vegetables are available at farmers' markets and local co-ops. The farmers aren't going to sell their seeds to Monsanto, because selling those varieties boosts their customer base. Heirloom varieties are actually growing in popularity. And you have stores like Whole Foods, who, nationwide, offer Monsanto-free stores. If Monsanto thinks they can control everything, they'll have a bigger uphill battle than they think they have.
Well duh, it is all about money; who ever stated otherwise?
post #1, post #2, Post #7......and so forth all state that the goal is to "destroy the organic marketplace" or introduce some other takeover conspiracy.
I'd appreciate it next time if you didn't lead your response to me with "duh" and then say something that indicates you clearly didn't read the thread, this seems to be a somewhat civil forum unlike say politics.
post #1, post #2, Post #7......and so forth all state that the goal is to "destroy the organic marketplace" or introduce some other takeover conspiracy.
I'd appreciate it next time if you didn't lead your response to me with "duh" and then say something that indicates you clearly didn't read the thread, this seems to be a somewhat civil forum unlike say politics.
"Destroy the organic market place", yes, that reason to do so would be for money. I fail to see why you think no one understands Monsanto's motive for what they are doing is for money. Destroying the organic competition is a great way to increase their profits, as it removes competition from their bread and butter. I already stated what this is, "anti-competitive practice", tactic is "absorbing".
This practice and tactic is not anything new, companies do this.
I apologize for the "duh", but it reads more severe than what I meant. But in any case, it is all about money, it is just you are viewing it from Monsanto wants to get in on the organic biz to promote it more, whereas I see this as just the typical absorption strategy. The end result of either view point is to make money.
... A larger question is why these smaller seed companies are willing to sell out to Monsanto. I don't understand how someone who valued heirloom seeds enough to start and grow a business based on them could then turn around and sell that business and those seed lines to someone like Monsanto, who will take these heirloom varieties off the market and use the genetics to produce proprietary varieties.
I attended a share-holders meeting at organic seed company. They had been party to a few campaigns fighting Monsanto. The law suits were building, and other seed companies wanted to formalize their partnership in the fight.
In the legal analysis, all of those seed companies combined had only a tiny budget as compared to Monsanto / Syngenta legal budget. At the time the organic seed companies were little more than fleas on the back of Monsanto. If Monsanto decides to seriously sue them, even without any justification or legal reasoning. All organic seed companies would go broke from the court costs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
