Posted on 05/30/2013 8:00:45 PM PDT by Ron C.
You can do your own lit search. Why are you obsessed with glyphosate. What about any of the million natural, and man-made chemicals in the environment? Tell me, are man-made chemicals more harmful than natural chemicals?
Is natural somehow safer/better, than man-made?
You can do the case search. There are hundreds of them.
I’ll encourage you to read this link then:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2013/feb/16/india-rice-farmers-revolution
“In a village in India’s poorest state, Bihar, farmers are growing world record amounts of rice – with no GM, and no herbicide. Is this one solution to world food shortages?”
The GM and herbicides just might not be needed.
Shhhhh...
You are wasting your time discussing no-till farming and what Monsanto and some other companies have done to help reduce topsoil loss. BTW, topsoil is our nations most valuable natural resource, imho.
When you genetically alter food products you run a much higher risk that the mutations that follow are going to result in dangerous and poisonous food products. When you deliberately alter wheat at the genetic level to be resistant to poisons you have created, you clearly are playing with fire.
Messing with wheat is messing with the most basic staple of life on this planet.
The compounds added were NOT nicotine.
And no, I’m not anti cigarette.
But if you trust the big politician buying corporations then I’m not sure YOU belong on this forum.
So what were these mysterious compounds?
Why did Obama sign the Monsanto Protection Act?
Do you have any idea how labor intensive (and how economically unsustainable) the practices your article describes are? Sure, a family in India can produce a comparatively large yield on a really small field that is really intensely tilled, just like a Midwestern American farmer could produce a huge corn yield on a small parcel covered by chicken sh*t and watered with a garden hose.
If Monsanto’s seed is so superior then why do they have to resort to such heavy handed tactics to push out their competition? Why would any conservative support the use of government to stifle competition. You apparently know nothing about farming and care little about the rule of law. There is no explanation for this occurence that doesn’t involve illegal activity.
Exactly right.
Why did Obama sign the Monsanto Protection Act?
Because he has been told that controlling the population of these third world crud holes is the only way to save them. So he believes it. The problem with that idea is that we in the West have been trying to do the same thing for decades and it does not work. But frankly I could care less. If women want to engage infanticide I can't nor would I even try to stop them. The populations in these regions will continue to increase based on the help they receive from the West to feed them. It will increase because the babies will survive and that allows for more babies... My view is to stay the hell out of it. You do less damage that way. I believe humans do have a obligation to bring medical technology, vaccines, and the like to try to reduce human suffering, but everything we have done has only made the problem worse and the suffering greater because you take nature out of the equation. So to repeat, the reason Gates, and Buffet get involved in this stuff is to make themselves feel better and less guilty about their immense wealth. It keeps the rabble off their back, but it does not seem to work with you, because you resent their wealth. You resent Monsanto's wealth and power, and you resent any wealthy individual or corporation that in any way supports something you have decided is not in the interest of people who think like you do. Well that's your right, but your wrong.
People have been messing with wheat since the very dawn of time. Messing with wheat is what allowed mankind to form societal relationships.
No, they’re not *necessarily* more dangerous. The nature made ones have been ‘vetted’ so to speak by prior generations. And in a varied diet you don’t get overloaded on any one.
My issue with glypohosphate is the sheer quantity of foods it’s found in now. When you ate spaghetti and meat balls 100 years ago you got the antimicrobials in the garlic, oregano, thyme, rosemary and possibly the tomatoes. You got the wheat proteins from the spaghetti and the mammalian proteins from the meat.
Now the meat is all loaded with glyphosphate too. The cows eat feeds containing it.
Its in literally everything you get at the grocery store even IF you’re careful reading labels. It’s even used in medication formulations if they source GMO ingredients.
And there ARE no f3 studies (or even f2 studies) concerning consumption of glyphosphate OR GMO’s. I’ve looked.
So I refuse to allow my great grandchildren become the f3 study.
I don’t resent Monsanto’s wealth.
I am offended by their power. Any company wealthy enough to literally buy political favor doesn’t belong in this country.
That’s not capitalism or freedom. That’s fascism. I’m sure Monsanto would be ecstatically happy in Mussolini’s Italy. Heck, they might even become IG Farben eventually.
So what are the glyphosate residues found in meat? What level are you talking about? Are you concerned about aflatoxin in peanut butter?
I'm into making it.
You need to ask yourself, what are some of the biggest government lobbies? Monsanto doesn’t even make the short list.
It's more to protect both the farmer as Monsanto's customer and the company from additional losses while they litigate yet another frivolous suit. It seems to me that conservatives would be against manipulating the legal system and filing frivolous suits.!!!!! But I guess not..........
You gonna accuse them of enslaving Jews now...
LOL
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.