Danish Farmer Reverses Illnesses in pigs by reverting to a GM-free diet

Farm Wars ^ | 6/2013 | Dr Eva Sirinathsinghji

[Boogieman]

You’re still not making sense. The leftists with power, not the “sheeperal”, are villifying Monsanto and trying to use the legislative power of government against them. How does that square with these same leftists, according to you, giving special protection to Monsanto?

[Boogieman]

“Corps who use the their influence w Gov’t to manipulate markets are not free-marketeers.”

Who cares? Corporations are supposed to make money, not support free market values. To expect them to do so is just foolish. Monsanto also isn’t any exceptional case when it comes to lobbying the government for special favors. I think you’d be hard pressed to find a major company that doesn’t do that.

[Tea Party Terrorist]

You’re right, who cares. You missed my point though, which was “Supporting Corps is not the same thing as supporting Free Markets and vice versa.”

[Boogieman]

Alright, but what do you call reflexively bashing corporations that happen to be the left’s target of the moment? Is that supporting the free market?

Today it’s Monsanto, tomorrow Walmart, Halliburton, Microsoft, Chik-Fil-A, ad nauseam.

[Mase]

What's truly amazing is that none of the anti-Monsanto crowd seems able or willing to articulate exactly what it is that makes Monsanto so reprehensible. Reflexively bashing, indeed.

From what I read it looks like Monsanto:

• Makes products that people willingly purchase over and over again, because they find value in doing so.
  
• Provides seeds that allow farmers to grow more food, at lower costs, and in a more sustainable manner.
  
• Makes seeds that grow food that no legitimate scientific evidence can be offered to question the nutritional content or safety of that food.
  
• Makes seeds that have been used for almost 20 years without any proven negative effects.
  
• Makes seeds that grow food that requires less land, less water, less tilling, less fertilizer, less pesticides, less toxic pesticides, less herbicides, less toxic herbicides and less soil erosion, so the ecosystem is less impacted.
  
• Protects its intellectual property so that its massive spending for research and development delivers a return for the millions of people who own their stock.
  
• Wants not to be sued into oblivion by frivolous lawsuits brought by money hungry lawyers, rabid collectivists, scientific illiterates, and competitors in the organic industry and elsewhere.
  
• Believes success should be rewarded.
  

Bastards. They're Satan personified, I tell ya.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, but science is hard.

[OldNewYork]

Interesting.

[Boogieman]

Well, the most legitimate sounding points I’ve heard are just that they lobby the government to get favorable legislation (like every other company and industry) and try to get a chunk of our tax money (also like every other company and industry).

Sure, those may be legitimate concerns, but what makes Monsanto special in that regard that they deserved to be targeted for our ire? Why not an oil company or a pharmaceutical company? And why are all of the “hit piece” style articles focused on the sensational, but unsubstantiated accusations related to food safety and unethical practices, instead of these run of the mill complaints that might actually be legitimate?

[drinktheobamakoolaid]

After being termed a luddite by you in the past, I did some research on Mosanto. You are correct. They have done some great things in the past and continue to do so. They have and still make some great products. But, like other companies, they have had some issues with one or two of their products. So for the sake of the GMO argument, let’s take Monsanto completely out of the picture.

Now, let say you have a passion of not buying products made in countries other than America. However the label showing that the product was Made in China is not required (The Textile Fiber Products Identification Act). You want to buy only American made items. Let’s say for the sake of the argument that Nike has some, but not all of their products, made in China. You go in to buy some Nikes. And you buy the shoes thinking they were made in the US. You will never know. But by having been made in China, American jobs are lost and child labor may have been used to make this product. Don’t you, as a consumer, have the right to know where a product was made?

Given this example, is it not more important to know what you put in your body more important than what you wear? GMO is an amazing process. So what is the problem with labeling a food that uses ingredients made with this amazing process? The companies should be proud of this process and should say so.

Maybe I don’t want to drink milk made from cows that have been given rBGH. One of the local chains has “rBGH” free on all of their milk cartons. That is what I buy. Am I a bad person for doing this?

What if the maker of Advil thought “You know we don’t need to be put the actual ingredient on the package of Advil. We know more about pain relief than the common folk do.”

Can we not compare the same argument to GMO made food to those examples listed above?

Signed, the “Coolaid drinking luddite” ;-)