Posted on 01/13/2010 8:56:07 AM PST by Fractal Trader
Genetically Modified crops (or GM) are genetically modified organisms (GMO) that have been altered to meet a specific profile. They have also been the subject of controversy almost since their introduction two decades ago. A new study pinpoints three variations of GM corn (maize) as being linked to organ damage in mammals.
The three varieties in question are Mon 810, Mon 863, and NK 603. The "Mon" is for, you guessed it, Monsanto and the NK is also a Monsanto product, being engineered for herbicide tolerance. The study was conducted by the Committee of Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN) and the Universities of Caen and Rouen in France.1
The study used the same data that was used by Monsanto to gain approval in several parts of the world. The data was released publicly in 2005 by European authorities when the three GM strains were approved for human consumption in both the U.S. and Europe.
Gilles-Eric Seralini, a molecular biologist at the University of Caen and one of the principals in the study, says that the data "clearly underlines adverse impacts on kidneys and liver, the dietary detoxifying organs, as well as different levels of damages to heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system."
Each of the three strains produced differing amounts of adverse impact, but the impact on vital organs was universal for all three GM crops.
The study was completed in December 2009 and appears in the International Journal of Biological Sciences1 (IJBS). It conforms with and substantiates an earlier study done by CRIIGEN in 2007 on Mon 863.2 The results of that study were rejected by Monsanto.3
(Excerpt) Read more at naturalnews.com ...
The NK might stand for Northrup King, a large seed company which has been in business for many years. We used NK seeds on the farm when I was a kid, in the late 40’s and the 50’s.
I don’t know if Monsanto now owns a controlling interest in Northrup King, and I am disturbed by the total control Monsanto has over the products of their seeds...and how they treat the farmers who are their customers.
Genetically Modified crops such as corn, rice, wheat and other cereal crops are necessary to feed the growing world population and to reduce chemical use for insect and plant disease control. GM has been used for years in the USA and most research does not support the ill effects touted in this biased article.
The greens and natural foodies seem united in the belief that excess population must be controlled to save earth. They back birth control and starving the masses as only then will a world statist government have a controllable Eden to rule over.
“Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.”
Monsanto sells him a fishing permit, limit ONE FISH ONLY. Violators will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
I have heard Jeffrey Smith, an anti-GMO guy, making the rounds on several talk shows lately.
Businesses want to sell things to happy customers. If the customers are happier buying from a different company, then they will do so.
Sure as hell is. Same crap that went on when they introduced BT enhanced potatoes to farmers and the Watermelons went nuts. They finally were successful in getting it banned.
Sounds like something right out of X-Files.
Monsanto gets upset when folks illegally reproduce an item on which they hold a patent for the same reason Eli Lilly or ATT&T or GE gets mad. If you don't like the terms upon which Monsanto offers a product for sale, don't buy it.
see post #30
How do you think the government forces a farmer to buy Monsanto patented seed corn?
I’m being lazy here ... what happened to the watermelons?
Worse, it means our food supply is no longer sustainable without a technological infrastructure.
If there was a world-wide catastrophe, we’d be starving in a year because we wouldn’t have enough crops that would generate plantable seeds.
Well now that’s a situation I hadn’t thought of. Good point.
Dependence is indeed something to be minimized, not fostered. If anyone should be able to see this, we FReepers should.
It’s a very interesting societal issue, because what is good for an individual farmer could be very bad for society as a whole.
Each farmer, making their own decision, can clearly see that, so long as Monsanto exists, the price of their seeds is less than the cost of treating their crops and losing crops to damage prevented by Monsanto’s seeds.
So, they will of course buy the seeds. There’s no reason not to, because the seeds maximize their profit. Plus, even if they wanted to try something else, they have to compete with other farmers who by using the seeds can undercut prices and gain greater yields.
However, from a societal viewpoint, it is a very bad thing to cut back on the diversity of food crops (which is what happens if everybody buys the same type of seeds). It is bad to become dependent on the ability of a company to create new seeds each year that will counter any new threats.
If some disease gets around Monsanto’s admittedly clever biologists, it could wipe out a large portion of the crops, whereas before the differing crop types were an impediment to a disease, which couldn’t attack all the differing crops.
So, we have a “tragedy of the commons” situation, where pure capitalism doesn’t work for the good of society, since it cannot appropriately value the cost of a wide-spread catyclism.
The question is what to do about it. You can ignore it and just hope. You can count on enough skeptical and worried people to avoid Monsanto seeds and breed diversity so that the risks are minimized, hoping that there are enough altruistic people. You could try to legislate the diversity and protections that are lost, by limiting how many of each type of seed can be sold, or the amount of sterile seed that can be sold.
All of the solutions are risky in one way or another. One thing you could do that might be minimally intrusive would be to require monsanto to keep one year’s supply of non-sterile versions of their seeds, comparable to the last year’s sale of sterile seeds. If no disaster strikes, those seeds can be discarded each year, and replaced with the next year’s seeds (I don’t know how long seeds keep). If there is some disaaster, the seeds can be distributed to all monsanto customers, they can plant the non-sterile versions and we are back in business.
(A farmer who purchases a Monsanto patented seed does so because he perceives it to be superior to the market alternatives, not because of government fiat.)
Were you to go to your favorite organic foods grocery and buy the best looking chemical free, organically grown apple you could find, dry the seeds and plant them, what would grow would bear no resemblance at all to the apple you got the seeds from.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.