It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Monsanto Getting Creepier and Creepier

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:
MBF

posted on May, 26 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
I truly think the world needs to become more agriculture aware. It would benefit alot of people if the word was spread on such things.

Our current situation in canada really really sucks.

Border to usa closed because of BSE.

horrible yields all over last year.

Prices now are a joke, selling grain for less than the inputs.
fertilizer and chemicals only go up and up every year, along with fuel.

its pretty hard to make a living when you have such little control on your market. the sad part is alot of people are quitting.


I don't know how much longer we can continue to sell our crops for way less than the input costs. People complain about the farmers here getting government payments, but there is no way to survive without them. There was a large amount of money posted on a website that I received over 5 years. If you break it down for each year, the amount that I received was just about what I paid for fuel alone. We farmers are not the ones making the money. We are the only business that takes whatever price is offered to us, we do not set our prices. Like you said,"the sad part is a lot of people are quiting",who will take our place when we quit or forced out of business? The younger generation will not do what we have. They will get a job that is not as stressful with less manual labor and you can't blame them. One day when the politicians wake up hungry things will change, but then it will be too late. They say that we can get our food from other countries cheaper,but what kind of chemicals are used on this food? What if our suppliers get mad at us and cut off the food supply? The problem needs to be solved now, not in the future.




posted on May, 27 2005 @ 01:18 AM
link   
one thing that has troubled me with the agriculture issue is that our governments send people to other countries and teach them how to farm and raise crops.

meanwhile backhome the politicians dont care. (alot of ag problems need to get more attention)

Where were they when the border first closed?

saskatchewans lorne calvert basically ignores farmers completely.

my dad has a saying, like it or not its true.

"We teach poor countries how to farm, the poor countries will teach us how to live in poverty"


Programs like CAIS in canada dont work.

If i could get one message out to the general population it would be this.

When you hear of agriculture programs, and money for farmers, dont just believe it right away and think look how much money they will be getting! When you crunch the numbers, it doesnt help out much.


Ive always said, get rid o the programs, surveys, studies and reports. get down to business.

We dont need a report every year telling us how poor or how bad of shape we are in. we just need action.



MBF

posted on May, 27 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
one thing that has troubled me with the agriculture issue is that our governments send people to other countries and teach them how to farm and raise crops.

meanwhile backhome the politicians dont care. (alot of ag problems need to get more attention)

Where were they when the border first closed?

saskatchewans lorne calvert basically ignores farmers completely.

my dad has a saying, like it or not its true.

"We teach poor countries how to farm, the poor countries will teach us how to live in poverty"


Programs like CAIS in canada dont work.

If i could get one message out to the general population it would be this.

When you hear of agriculture programs, and money for farmers, dont just believe it right away and think look how much money they will be getting! When you crunch the numbers, it doesnt help out much.


Ive always said, get rid o the programs, surveys, studies and reports. get down to business.

We dont need a report every year telling us how poor or how bad of shape we are in. we just need action.



All true. The biggest problem with agriculture is we have a bunch of politians that don't know squat about agriculture setting policy. What we need is a bunch of farmers doing this, we know what is going on and know more about how to fix the problems.

I don't know why this country gives away so much money to other countries and teaches them how to produce way more food than they need so they can push us out of the markets. These people couldn't care less for us and will kill us at the first chance they get.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Monsanto is also wanting to monopolize the livestock industry as well, given the recen genetic contamination of crops in Australia and other areas, are we willing to let them tamper with animal genetics as well? They will literally own the pigs, bad news for pig farmers, ergo bad news for the consumers, and really creepy news for the pigs...


today.reuters.com...
Crop king Monsanto seeks pig-breeding patent clout
Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:05 AM ET
Printer Friendly | Email Article | Reprints | RSS

By Carey Gillam

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (Reuters) - Monsanto Co. (MON.N: Quote, Profile, Research), already a world powerhouse in biotech crops, is shaking up the swine industry with plans to patent pig-breeding techniques and lay claim to the animals born as a result.

Agricultural experts are scrambling to assess how these patents might affect the market, while consumer activists warn that if the company is granted pig-related patents, on top of its tight rein on key feed and food crops, its control over agriculture could be unprecedented.

"We're afraid that Monsanto and other big companies are getting control of the world's genetic resources," said Christoph Then, a patent expert with Greenpeace in Germany.

The patent applications, filed with the World Intellectual Property Organization, are broad in scope, and are expected to take several years and numerous rewrites before approval.

"We applied for a patent ... for some specific reproductive processes in swine," said Monsanto spokesman Chris Horner. "Any pigs that would be produced using this reproductive technique would be covered by these patents."

Roundup is more dangerous than we were led to believe...


www.missourinet.com...
Study Finds Monsanto Weed Killer Dangerous to Critters
by Brent Martin

A new study indicates that St. Louis-based Monsanto's best-selling weed killer is doing more than killing weeds. A University of Pittsburgh ecologist says his experiments indicate Roundup is much deadlier to amphibians than previously thought. In those experiments, Roundup killed nearly all the tadpoles in simulated shallow ponds. In a separate dry experiment, Roundup killed nearly 80-percent of the young frogs and toads after one day. Monsanto points out its directions advise that Roundup shouldn't be used near bodies of water. Scientists, though, note that many amphibians live in shallow puddles and they worry that wetlands within fields and forests are accidently being sprayed.

Superweeds are not just an urban myth anymore either...


www.mercurynews.com...
Herbicide-resistant weed becoming a pest in California
JULIANA BARBASSA
Associated Press

PARLIER, Calif. - Horseweed was once merely a nuisance to farmers - hard to pull out, quick to sprout back after cutting, and capable of towering over tractors.

Now, it's becoming a full-blown nightmare worthy of an agricultural horror flick: scientists in California have found clusters of the weed that are resistant to scores of herbicides, leaving farmers to fight an increasingly formidable and costly foe.

Pete Christensen said he watched his costs soar as the most popular herbicide became increasingly powerless to stop the weeds from choking the grapes on his 75-acre vineyard near Selma.

About five years ago he started noticing that Roundup wasn't withering the weed as usual. Three years later, he had tripled the concentration of the herbicide, and had doubled the applications, but the weeds were growing thicker than ever, rising over his vines and competing with them for water, nutrients and sunshine.

I wonder why Monsanto wouldn't want to make a 'reasonable effort to get anti-trust clearance'?...


High court rejects effort by Monsanto

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS


JACKSON - The Mississippi Supreme Court has ruled that the Monsanto Co. cannot subpoena documents from three out-of-state companies to bolster its fight with cotton seed marketer Delta and Pine Land Co. over a failed merger.

In 1998, St. Louis-based Monsanto agreed to buy D&PL for $1.9 billion but later called off the proposed merger and was acquired by Pharmacia & Upjohn. Monsanto has said it backed out of the deal with D&PL because of what it called the Justice Department's unwillingness to approve the transaction "on commercially reasonable terms."

Scott, Miss.-based D&PL sued Monsanto in 2000, claiming Monsanto didn't make a reasonable effort to get antitrust clearance. D&PL is seeking millions of dollars in damages.

I wonder if the following is a good example of how geneticly modified strains can contaminate others without governmental oversight, sure seems like a good way to get out of hand to me...


www.foodnavigator.com...GM legal loophole exposed

08/08/2005 - GM crops could be grown in the UK without farmers having to notify the authorities, according to a British newspaper.

The Guardian claims that it has discovered a legal loophole that allows individuals to legally grow their own GM maize.
Farmers can apply to biotech companies for a sample pack of GM maize, provided they send back the test results and do not breach patents by selling the seed to a third party.

In effect, this would allow Monsanto maize to be grown in the UK without the need to notify the department of environment, food and rural affairs (Defra).

There remains a great deal of public opposition to genetically modified foods in Europe, a fact that has made food ingredients companies highly concerned about any possible contamination.

I couldn't agree more with the following...


www.greenpeace.org...
'It's official. Monsanto Corporation is out to own the world's food supply, the dangers of genetic engineering and reduced biodiversity notwithstanding, as they pig-.edly set about hog-tying farmers with their monopoly plans.

Brazil tells Monsanto to stick it where the beans don't grow... .88 per kilo? Jesus that's almost as high as the Gas Tax here in NC LOL.


www.truthabouttrade.org...
BZL growers reject Monsanto deal
Sao Paulo - Soy seed producers in southern Brazil rejected Monsanto's proposal to charge an 0.88 real per kilo royalty for its genetically modified seeds, in the first season that GMO soy sales will be legal in the country.

Earlier this month, Monsanto struck a deal with Brazil's national Association of Seed Producers (Abrasem) on royalty payments for using its GMO Roundup Ready soy seeds. "Monsanto's proposal is unrealistic. It promotes illegal behavior by the producers and hurts legitimate seed producers," said Narciso Barison Neto, the president of the Seed Producers Association of Rio Grande do Sul State (Apassul).

Rio Grande do Sul seed producers voted on Wednesday to reject Monsanto's GMO soy royalty.

A new law that Congress approved in March legalized for the first time the sale of Monsanto's Roundup Ready GMO soy seeds, although local growers, particularly in the south, have long ignored the ban and bought them on the black market.

Over almost a decade, illegal GMO soy planting in Rio Grande do Sul has grown to account for more than 90 percent of total soy production in Brazil's No.3 soy state.

Monsanto has struck a deal with cooperatives to extract a 2 percent royalty on RR soy at the point of sale by the producer for this year's harvest which finished in May.

Until this year GMO seed sales were illegal and it was impossible to charge the royalty on the front end.

That's today's dirt on Monsanto, if i had a better grasp of financial news there has been a wealth of recent mergers and buyouts surrounding Monsanto recently as well you guys might want to dig around and have a look, I'm pretty ignorant of financial matters but that much activity with a rising monopoly given their track record is a good indication they are gaining some serious clout.
When one or two companies owns the rights to the food on your table as well as everyone else's, it's time to worry.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   


About five years ago he started noticing that Roundup wasn't withering the weed as usual. Three years later, he had tripled the concentration of the herbicide, and had doubled the applications, but the weeds were growing thicker than ever, rising over his vines and competing with them for water, nutrients and sunshine.


Could the maker of herbicides quietly slip something into the 'formula' that would work to build this resistence, there by creating a market for their next product.....a 'patented weed', so to speak, that only their herbicide will kill.

And once they have the monoply on agriculture, what will stop them from selling everything to say, China....there by selling us all in the bargain?


MBF

posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by frayed1

Could the maker of herbicides quietly slip something into the 'formula' that would work to build this resistence, there by creating a market for their next product.....a 'patented weed', so to speak, that only their herbicide will kill.

And once they have the monoply on agriculture, what will stop them from selling everything to say, China....there by selling us all in the bargain?


About 1% -2% of some weeds have some resistantance to herbicides. When you use a low rate of herbicide it is easy for some of these to survive and reproduce and grow more resistant.

I agree that once they have a monoply it will be bad for the entire world. Food prices will skyrocketwhen they dominate food crops like they have cotton and soybeans.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 02:25 AM
link   
biblically, it's "the harvest". ya, know? seperating the wheat from the chaffe?
in beast world, it's, "roundup".



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Genetic modifications to our basic global food crops needs to be handled with the same precautions as handling deadly pathogens, the implications of contamination could be global disaster. Contamination which has already happened in many areas. This technology has been poorly researched, and handled like any other money grab and market cornering, Monsanto has been agressive to the point of criminality in in persuance of profit at the expense of safety and careful research. This never leads to anything but trouble, but in the case of genetic alterations of our crops and livestock particularly, this is gambling with the literal survival of human civilization. It isn't a matter of what they have done, it is a matter of what they are trying to do and what they could do.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
So here's a scenario:

Monsanto develops, shall we say accidentally, a gene, that gets into corn, wheat, rice, potatoes, etc. This gene shows up not only in Monsanto's patented seeds but cross-pollinates with ease.

Now what this gene does is suppress certain enzymes/peptides and this makes the food indigestible by humans unless a certain medication is taken. As it stands today, people who are lactose intolerant can take a pill that allows them to eat and digest milk products.

This new unedible food Monsanto develops, accidentally, contains a gene that alters all the sugars (all those -ose ingredients: fructose, maltose, glucose, saccharose, etc) so that our digestive enzymes are prevented from activating. These elements are fundamental to the digestive process.

If these enzymes don't work, then the sugars don't work. And if these sugars don't work, then the food is not converted into the proteins and carbohydrates, digestible vitamins and minerals.

You can eat all the corn and wheat and whatever food containg this gene you want. You are still going to starve to death. Malnutrition.

But we needn't worry because Monsanto-Searle just happens to have a medication that re-activates the sugar functions and people can now eat without starving. All Hail, Monsanto. Now, this drug isn't cheap but, hey, what price life.

Thank God, this gene did not impede the digestion of the frankenfoods by livestock and poultry. OMG ... this litle bugger gene does seem to fold more than a few proteins in the flesh of these creatures. Aw heck, what are a few prions between lifeforms especially when at great expense Monsanto-Searle was able to develop a treatment for this 'problem'.

What was fortunate for Monsanto-Searle (and us) was that one of the characteristics of this protein is that it will only fold one way, making a universal treatment possible in one formula. Truly serendipitous.

Phew, that was close. All Hail, Monsanto.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But wait, order now and Monsanto will include at no additional cost a genetic modification which makes food preparation so much easier.

Look! Our new foods can be cooked at a temperature below the boiling point of water at sea level.

Caution: Exceeding 212f/100c will cause product to explode, releasing highly corrosive acids. People preparing our foods should take extra care at higher elevations ... just kidding ... really.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Actually I really would like someone to comment on this scenario (see above). It came to me in a dream after researching the impact of food supply control by companies like Monsanto.

I think it was after watching a program on TV. I can't remember exactly what broadcast but it impacted me deeply.

It has been a while but the idea has not gone away.

Anyway, does this scenario seem to 'far out'?

Thanks for your input.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zadeh Redux
Actually I really would like someone to comment on this scenario (see above). It came to me in a dream after researching the impact of food supply control by companies like Monsanto.

I think it was after watching a program on TV. I can't remember exactly what broadcast but it impacted me deeply.

It has been a while but the idea has not gone away.

Anyway, does this scenario seem to 'far out'?

Thanks for your input.


i think your intuition is good. engineer the food with deffiencies that can be 'cured' with pharmeceuticals. it's just good business.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 05:16 AM
link   
Measure Of Sanity


Originally posted by Zadeh Redux
Anyway, does this scenario seem to 'far out'?

If it does, then it must be true.


Looks like the makings of a pretty cool novel to me. The Perfect Crime.

Nice scenario. Is it actually happening? Hard to say, but if it is, it's a pretty clever plan.

I have to admire the thinking that went into this.



posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 02:09 AM
link   
No, not far out at all IMO. The Pharmaceutical and Medical Industry have been at this sort of scenario for a long long time, and if you look at who sits on what coporate board, find the commonalities, it wouldn't suprise me at all. How many times has your doctor reccomended Valarian Root Extract for sleeping disorders, but he will be more than happy to prescribe you some Valium.
What concerns me more I think, is the genetic manipulation of food source species, it has been poorly researhced and rushed through legislations and industry quicker than scientists can decide what to look out for. The scenario I fear is gene splicing something nasty into a major food crop, and it turns out to be some genomes from say a jellyfish that creates cells to manufacture some neurotoxin. One or two experimental fields is no big deal, but if we let a company monopolize this industry and an entire crop of corn is found to be toxic, we are in serious trouble.



posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 07:00 AM
link   
www.greenpeace.org...


Look at this it seems monsanto will sue for breeding pigs in a moment!!!



posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
www.scidev.net...


A chemical that South American frogs excrete from their skin could protect potatoes and other crops from a range of diseases, according to biotechnologists in Canada.

Researchers at the University of Victoria inserted a modified frog gene into potato plants to make them produce the chemical.


also (and there's a lot more: Goooogle 'gene frog potato'):
archives.foodsafetynetwork.ca...

Hmmm ... I'm thinking of a non-PC comment about French fries.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks billybob, majic, twitchy, corinthas ... for your comments and links.



posted on Oct, 14 2006 @ 04:50 AM
link   
while assembling my latest thread, i found out that i kept bumping into the same corporate entity again and again (monsanto), so i did a search.

cross-reference:

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 10:26 PM
link   
After watching the Smith vids, it's hard to believe one can absolutely avoid all GM foods. Yikes!

Edit: PS to the OP, kudos for bringing this to the attention of ATS members.

[edit on 10/20/2007 by Landis]



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 08:11 PM
link   
It's good to see people becoming aware of the situations posted on this thread.

I remember a conversation a had with my late father 15 or 20 years ago. He was concerned about corporations gaining control of the food chain. Seems as though we are seeing it slowly come to pass.

By the time most people realize what has happened it will not be reversible.
I was talking to a tenant rice farmer about this and he didn't seemed concerned. He had just lost use of a large plot a land. The owners got government money for rice use whether the land was planted or not. With the gas production now on the land they just took the both rice and gas money and told him not to plant any longer.

This man believes it is more efficient for the single farmer to grow crop versus a corporation. Seems to me once big business has enough land and enough of the production they can do whatever they want. Any costs can be added to the price to the consumer. Where else will the majority of the people get their food. They will have to pay the price.

Just seems that most people are not getting concerned because they are not feeling the future result yet.

[edit on 10/21/2007 by roadgravel]


MBF

posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 11:40 PM
link   
If the farmers could get double what we get paid now, you would hardly notice the price increase in the stores if only the price increase was the amount that was paid to the farmers. Then we could survive for a while longer and it would help the economy from the job increases as a result of us buying new equipment. If the corporations get their hands on the food production, you WILL notice the price increase and it will be TOO LATE!!!



posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   




Source
Crops That Shut Down Pests' Genes
Monsanto is developing genetically modified plants that use RNA interference to kill the insects that eat them.
Researchers have created plants that kill insects by disrupting their gene expression. The crops, which initiate a gene-silencing response called RNA interference, are a step beyond existing genetically modified crops that produce toxic proteins. Because the new crops target particular genes in particular insects, some researchers suggest that they will be safer and less likely to have unintended effects than other genetically modified plants.


Will somebody please stop these crazy greedy bastards before this crap leaks out into the natural gene pool? Why in the world would you want to eat something that disrupts gene expressions? If I was ever against GM foods, this signed the deal for me.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join