Posted on 05/24/2010 11:53:59 AM PDT by Eagles2003
(NaturalNews) Chemical and agricultural giant DuPont has accused rival Monsanto of maintaining a seed monopoly, in a complaint filed with the U.S. Departments of Justice and Agriculture.
"Monsanto has engaged in numerous practices that improperly seek to expand the scope of intellectual property rights at the expense of competition, innovation, and choice," the 18-page DuPont report reads.
DuPont, which owns the genetically modified seed company Pioneer Hi-Bred International, is Monsanto's main competitor in the agricultural biotech field. The two companies are already in court over a failed licensing deal.
The complaint alleges that Monsanto controls 98 percent of the U.S. market in soybeans, 79 percent of the market in corn and 60 percent of the market in patented soy and corn genetics. It accuses the company of using coercive tactics to rope farmers and seed dealers into agreements that make them dependent on its patented and expensive products.
"The ag biotech trait market is firmly in the grip of a single supplier, acting as a bottleneck to competition and choice... it also threatens the global goals for agriculture in the 21st Century doubling the world's food supply by 2050," the report reads.
Monsanto has been accused of many of the same practices by biotechnology critics, who allege that Monsanto's herbicide-resistant crops increase reliance on Monsanto chemicals and point to the company's aggressive prosecution of farmers who save and replant Monsanto seed. The company has also been known to sue farmers whose crops become genetically contaminated through cross-pollination with Monsanto-modified crops.
Although biotech critics tend to single out Monsanto as the world's largest supplier of genetically modified seed, they also level many of the same criticisms at DuPont, Bayer, and other biotech companies. Big seed companies in general have come under fire for encouraging farmers to plant expensive modern hybrids over native varieties, thus reducing seed diversity and exposing the world to a greater risk of food shortage.
The DuPont complaint comes ahead of five planned Department of Justice and Agriculture hearings into concerns about competition and monopoly in the agricultural marketing sector.
MS in Biochemistry - Food Science and Nutrition. 25 years in the food ingredient/flavor business, most of it in R&D. I’d be happy to answer any questions you have regarding what Snopes reported or any other concerns you might have about aspartame in general.
What are the by-products?
I no expert on elemental Hg in the blood, my comment was to that elemental mercury which is swallowed. But my guess is that getting it out of the blood is not easy, and may involve methylation, amking it actively toxic.
Look them up.
I see. I thought you were claiming that elemental mercury is not harmful, only certain mercury compounds. Thanks for clearing that up.
You don’t know them off the top of your head?
Interesting. You'd think we would have heard more about it being a major complaint and all. What "by-products" are you referring to and why wouldn't the liver be able to clear them just like the same amino acids and methanol from natural sources?
What percent of the population is at some point in their lives likely to inadequately clear the break-down products of aspartame
First, you're going to have to establish what you mean by break-down products? It appears that you're making an assumption that the components of aspartame create a "build up" of "by-products" while phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol from natural sources do not. Sounds like quite a story to me but I'll reserve judgment until you define your terms better.
It may be that the essential amino acids have to be consumed in a balanced mixture.
If you want a complete protein they do. In the case of aspartame, your gut breaks down aspartame into the individual amino acids before they are cleared by the liver. Your gut also breaks down long chains of amino acids into individual amino acids before they are absorbed and cleared by the liver. There are some small peptides that don't break down but most are individual.
I give up. Arguing with rude lunkheads is as bad as arguing with idiots. Functionally your rudeness breaks down your intellect into indigestible idiotic by-products that over time accumulate to the point of toxicity that kills the discussion.
This was a response to your challenge of another Freeper in post #51 where you asked:
So I defended the literature from Snopes as being correct because their information was based on sound science.
To this, you replied back in post #54 by saying:
And so began your quest to avoid offering any facts that refute anything Snopes offered.
Perhaps too much mercury has affected your memory?
Several flaws.
One does not typically exceed the acute limit for water consumption because of the thirst mechanism, yet the aspartame limit is far below that. When a substance cannot be used in half of your daily consuption of fluids (e.g., 1.5 liters of Crystal Lite) without giving crippling headaches, it’s in a different category. Therefore, your statements can be false if the caveat is omitted.
Secondly, is there a chronic limit for water consumption like there is for aspartame?
Etc.
I’m fine with the stuff being on the market, but let’s be honest about it—on both sides.
Still, I want to thank you for inspiring me to look things up. As you could. And the wee little mosguito-like Toddster could as well.
What are the best arguments of your opponents, in their view?
Instead of listing the natural by-products? That's disappointing.
Maybe it’s just Eosinophilia-Myalgia Syndrome. / sarc
Or maybe it’s a sign of Carcinoid syndrome. / sarc
I deal with farmers that put thousands of acres in .
Justdumbblonde is far from dumb in my book.
So, tell us. How much are they paying now for a bag of seed corn?
Thanks for the disclaimer. :-)
You weren't writing to me, but I think that you are leaving out a category. I am a scientist, normally eschewing anecdotal evidence. Yet I unintentionally blind experimented on myself a couple of decades ago.
I hadn't realized that an ingredient switch led to an increased ASP consumption. I had never heard of ASP-triggered headaches and migraines, but my deductive process led me to diet--and then to ASP. Limiting my consumption eliminated the problem, and I even had my girlfriend at the time help double-blind a confirmation.
To you, it's anecdotal. To me, it's experiential, useful empirical evidence upon which I can state a conclusion that at least one human is affected with symptoms based on acute exposure.
"Safety"? Chronic effects? Those, I don't know. Note that the CDC and others do actually acknowledge side effects, but say that most are mild.
http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/antpoison.asp
There are some telling statements in there...such as it not always working.
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.