It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Monsanto - Bayer Engineering Death: Bees, Bats and You?

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 03:57 AM
reply to post by backinblack

That has nothing to do with what i was saying it's odd how you read what you want to be there. I asked for evidence that GM crops have not helped to feed the world especially in drought ridden areas, i asked for evidence that GM crops are always bad.

If you check my previous replies you will find i have said multiple times that many GM crops are a disgrace and should not be allowed in the biosphere, so basically you bringing this up to reply to me is utterly pointless because i already agree on that issue. Crops which produce their own pesticide and are for human or livestock consumption = bad, crops which don't produce viable seed = bad etc.
edit on 14-12-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 04:05 AM

Originally posted by amazed
Not once did I make a comment stating "people hear genetic engineering and think they will somehow take these genes into their own genome." Where did you get that from what I said? I DO believe it can be harmful to humans, and harmful to the environment. If YOU like it, eat it, but I should have the right to choose NON GMO foods. But I do not have that right, because foods are not labeled GMO.

I never said you did i said some people do. Foods should of course be labelled GM i fully support that movement.

Originally posted by amazed
Again, I don't care how much GMO apologist claim genetic engineering and natural selection = the same thing, I recognize it is NOT. Nature does NOT put scorpion genes into cabbage, or silk spider genes into goat milk, or human genes into chicken eggs. GENETIC engineering by humans is what does that. Not to say that if I was starving, and I found a scorpion, I wouldn't eat it, I just may.

Once again, i am not aware of any crop that currently contains animals genes that are being used for human consumption. When i talk about GM i simply mean the acceleration of natural processes. Plants can be naturally drought resistant but it might take 100 generations to reach the same effects that can be achieved in a lab in a matter of a few years.

Originally posted by amazed

Scientists have recently taken the gene that programs poison in scorpion tails and combined it with cabbage. Why would they want to create venomous cabbage? To limit pesticide use while still preventing caterpillars from damaging cabbage crops. These genetically modified cabbages produce scorpion poison that kills caterpillars when they bite leaves — but the toxin is modified so it isn’t harmful to humans.

People may soon be getting vaccinated for diseases like hepatitis B and cholera by simply taking a bite of banana.

Harm None

Is any of that in the food chain? I somehow doubt it, that stuff is in labs and covered fields but looking at it i don't see the issue. You can drink the venom of many animals without being harmed, it has to be injected to harm you. Even so i think that's an area which we should maybe leave alone. But again your argument is talking about animal/plant mixes rather than simply GM plants that use other plants genes or modify existing genes.

All i have said is that not all GM is bad and it can just be an acceleration of the processes that would happen if we bred plants for a hundred generations or so.

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:16 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Is any of that in the food chain? I somehow doubt it, that stuff is in labs and covered fields but looking at it i don't see the issue.

The claim made is GMO crops are used for reducing famine. You called the reduction in farmers "Conspiracy theory" Although it most certainly is not.

"Despite all the hype, present GM varieties actually have lower yields than their conventional counterparts..."

"We strongly object that the image of the poor and hungry from our countries is being used by giant multinational corporations to push a technology that is neither safe, environmentally friendly nor economically beneficial to us."
Delegates from 20 African Countries to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN meeting on Plant Genetic Resources. GM Watch

January 8th 2010 ~ "global hunger is as much to do with power and control of the food system as with growing enough food".

"Critics of GM point out that a UN-sponsored four-year review, involving more than 400 international scientists and chaired by Watson, concluded in 2007 that GM technologies were unlikely to have more than a limited role in tackling global hunger. According to the Watson-led review, the scientific evidence on the claimed benefits of GM suggests they are variable, with increases in yield in some areas but decreases in others, and both greater and lesser pesticide use in different contexts. The report concluded that global hunger is as much to do with power and control of the food system as with growing enough food.

Interesting then that a contributor to the FAO's Forum, Professor El-Tayeb, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Industrial Biotechnology at Cairo University commented that: "..currently available (GMO's) mostly contribute negatively to poverty alleviation and food security - and positively to the stock market."

"... Scientists have found genetically engineered insecticide in crops can leak and kill beneficial soil fungi" and the article notes: "Official trials in Britain showed that growing GM crops was worse for wildlife than cultivating conventional ones. Worse, genes escape from the modified plants to create superweeds and to contaminate normal and organic crops..." Read Geoffrey Lean's
Extract from concluding Q and A section::

"Can they feed the world?
Almost certainly not. Despite all the hype, present GM varieties actually have lower yields than their conventional counterparts.
The seeds are expensive to buy and grow, so wealthy developing-world farmers would tend to use them and drive poor ones out of business, increasing destitution. The biggest agricultural assessment ever conducted - chaired by Professor Robert Watson, now Defra's chief scientist - recently concluded that they would not do the job."

Dr Robert Watson, Defra Chief Scientist, Farmers Guardian (30 Jan 2009, p.14) "We don't need GM to solve the hunger problem of today...David King [previous Government Chief Scientist who claimed hunger in Africa was because they had not embraced GM crops] was absolutely wrong. Farmers in Africa can't afford the better seeds, they have no access to fertilisers and sprays and they have severe constraints over irrigation - you don't need GM to solve that." Warmwell via

French study: Glyphosate Formulations Induce Apoptosis and Necrosis in Human Umbilical, Embryonic, and Placental Cells shows Roundup formulations and metabolic products caused the death of human embryonic, placental, and umbilical cells in vitro even at low concentrations.

Soil Association press release reports that the Austrian Government's call for research in a long-term feeding trial found mice fed on GM corn or maize had fewer offspring and lower birth rates.

"Unlike ordinary drugs or pesticides, which have to be tested for three-months in three mammalian species, then with one mammalian species for one year, and yet another for 2 years, current regulation does not require such tests for 'biopesticides' produced continuously in open fields; nor for the herbicides and herbicide residues accumulated by herbicide-tolerant GM crops. The two traits, biopesticides and herbicide tolerance now account for practically all GM crops grown in the world today."


According to a study by Jose Romero and Alicia Puyana carried out for the federal government of Mexico, between 1992 and 2002, the number of agricultural households fell an astounding 75% - from 2.3 million to 575, 000

2001 Polish entry into the European Union:EU Chair states intent to remove 1 million Poles from their land, Portugal delegate states 60% of Portugal's farmers have already been removed. The Battle to Save the Polish Countryside[/b]

April 2007 Monsanto, Cargill and Maseca-ADM sign agreements to establish regional seed banks in the center and south of Mexico.

Farmer suicides in India: Now the full toll—surely among the largest sustained waves of suicides in human history—

.... Cultivation costs have shot up in these high input zones, with some inputs seeing cost hikes of several hundred per cent... Meanwhile, prices have crashed, as in the case of cotton, due to massive U.S.-EU subsidies to their growers. All due to price rigging with the tightening grip of large corporations over the trade in agricultural commodities."

In the EU, there is now a list of 'official' vegetable varieties. Seed that is not on the list cannot be 'sold' to the 'public' To keep something on the list costs thousands of pounds each year...Hundreds of thousands of old heirloom varieties (the results of about eleven thousand years of plant breeding by our ancestors) are being lost forever, due to some rather poorly drafted EU legislation. &"

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 08:38 PM
I just found out that the pesticide that was banned in France, Fipronil, is the main ingredient in Frontline Flea Killer for our pets.
I do not feel good about putting this on my pet.
This article is from 2003.

On February 23, after some hesitation, the French agriculture minister, Hervé Gaymard, ruled on the highly controversial issue of fipronil, an active ingredient used in insecticides, which beekeepers in southwest France claim has been responsible for deaths of billions of bees. He suspended the future sale and use of several fipronil-based products, including Regent, a seed coating currently produced by BASF, one of the world's largest chemicals manufacturers. Gaymard added, however, that this spring farmers will be allowed to sow fipronil-coated seeds already in their possession. Similarly, wholesalers will be permitted to dispose of all their existing stocks.

He charged the firms with "the sale of a toxic product harmful to the health of human beings and animals", "complicity in the destruction of livestock" and "the marketing of a product without authorisation"

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 01:56 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

I have read the studies about lower yield and they are usually related to corn varieties and not all GM crops, however your point is moot because you haen't factored in total crop failure. In a drought a crop can completely fail, so if a GM crop yields more but survives then it actually still feeds people whereas the non GM crop won't feed anyone.

Oh and pelase stop quoting from the African countries, they were duped. Green peace told a few of the countries that GM crops would kill all of their people, poisoning them and the African nations bought that, so now they're repeating green peace lines without evidence.

edit on 15-12-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 03:43 AM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Oh and pelase stop quoting from the African countries, they were duped. Green peace told a few of the countries that GM crops would kill all of their people, poisoning them and the African nations bought that, so now they're repeating green peace lines without evidence.


South African farmers suffered millions of dollars in lost income...

..Mayet says Monsanto was grossly understating the problem.According to her own information, some farms have suffered up to 80% crop failures. The centre is strongly opposed to GM-food and biologically-manipulated technology in general. "Monsanto says they just made a mistake in the laboratory, however we say that biotechnology is a failure. You cannot make a 'mistake' with three different varieties of corn."

Excerpt from a Letter straight from someone in Kenya:

Yes we have allot of Government interference but the biggest thread to our survival is the Billion of American tax money and any other rich countries sending to Africa for poverty eradication.I will foreword you the article I wrote about the donor money to Africa.  

The government and big malty national cooperation's are our number one enemy.In my village the large Sugar industry is killing us. first they asked people to clear the forests to grow sugar cane , sugar cane takes two years to harvest, but because of corruption it takes up to seven years sometimes if you do not pay kick back they will never come to harvest your sugar cane,and even if they cut after seven years they deduct so much fees that most small scale farmers wind up owing them money.  

The worst thing they did is that they coursed so much land degradation of small farmers by using too much nitrogen phosphate chemical fertilizers and over relying on just one crop without rotation.This has created the top soil to be so acidic and since the villagers cleared the trees to make room for sugar cane crops there is nothing to prevent top soil from getting washed into the rivers then on to lake Victoria.Please google the effect of nitrogen phosphate into Lake Victoria and you can see the damage to the lake. All the river streams flowing into the Lake are carrying so much soil and Chemical fertilizers in such a way that in a few years there will be no Lake Victoria.Here is what new york Times write about ...

I would say the Africans have plenty of first hand experience not hearsay.

You keep talking about drought resistant. However farm saved seed has been bred over thousands of years to be the seed best at surviving in that farm's micro-climate. Commercial seed often does not do as well. Both the African above and the farmers in India complain that the commercial seed has to have commercial fertilizer, lime, pesticides and other chemicals or it will not grow where as farmer saved seed does. I do not have time to dig out that article.

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 04:32 AM

--------Thread Update--------

Good new threads up

Leaked document shows EPA allowed bee-toxic pesticide despite own scientists' red flags

It's not just the State and Defense departments that are reeling this month from leaked documents. The Environmental Protection Agency now has some explaining to do, too. In place of dodgy dealings with foreign leaders, this case involves the German agrichemical giant Bayer; a pesticide with an unpronounceable name, clothianidin; and an insect species crucial to food production (as well as a food producer itself), the honeybee.

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 05:22 AM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Thanks for the update.

One of the really interesting things is Food and Water Watch removed a pdf file on the 2007 Farm Policy from their web site. It was a really good article showing the amount of money and the number of personnel involved in the FDA and USDA from each of the Ag/Pharma Giants.

On February 13th, 2007 Dow Chemical settled with the SEC for $325,000 in an administrative case charging Dow's subsidiary DE-Nocil with bribing Indian officials in excess of $200,000 over a 6 year period to register Dow's pesticides in India.
Dow bribed officials to register Dursban in India - a product banned for home use in the United States because it has caused dozens of children permenant injury or even death.

Today, large corporate farms account for nearly ¾ of all farm sales in the U.S

About half of the world’s maize is grown in the United States,....each US farmer produces enough to feed more than 60 additional people.... More than 2.4 billion people are supported
by intensive subsistence agriculture.[feeds family with a little for trade] In the densely populated countries of Monsoon Asia such as India and China, it provides the economic base.

Although famines are associated with widespread crop failure, most are the result of social or political processes that disrupt traditional agricultural production strategies....

Why are so many million hungry and malnourished when there is more than enough food produced in the world each year, and which is adequate to feed everyone?

There are a number of social, economic, political and environmental reasons. War, the ownership of land and the structure of agriculture, commercialisation, poverty, the geography of food production and food aid are some of the important reasons. The hungry throughout the world have one common trait that they are poor. The landless and unemployed do not have means or money to acquire food. Commercialisation is aimed at exports, rather than providing subsistence food for the local people.

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:59 AM
Deluded superiority of nature will kill us all

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:00 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

Once again you are saying all GM crops are bad without evidence that all of them are, you extrapolate a few bad ones to every single one I have happily stated that some crops are rubbish and others quite scary but i have the good sense to realise that not all of these crops are dangerous and some could help feed the world.

But tbh as i have already stated the way we farm is not sustainable and if we adopted hydroponics we could feed the world 8 times over using less land and virtually no pesticides.

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:46 AM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

But tbh as i have already stated the way we farm is not sustainable and if we adopted hydroponics we could feed the world 8 times over using less land and virtually no pesticides.

On that one I will agree.

However the nastiness of Monsanto and friends means I do not trust a thing out of that company and I do not trust the Monsanto run FDA to do the testing. Given Monsanto funds many of the universities, I do not trust academics either.

The climate gate e-mails and the slicing and dicing of the Scientific Method by the Climate pseudo-scientists, especially the biologists who jumped on the funding band wagon leaves me with a band taste in my mouth.

In a word the math (Statistics) suck - This from a guy at NASA

He explains the problems with the data set much better than I do. (Yes I have taken Stat and done design of experiments professionally)

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 04:56 PM
Another Nail in Monsantos coffin

Germany bans cultivation of GM corn

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:16 PM
And, the last news I've read on that ban was that the ban was upheld in court, despite Monsanto trying to sue Germany. So, taking that article at face value, it was good news.

Monsanto deserves jail time for what they have done. It's hideous. And these freaks act like we owe them something. If their seeds blow over onto your field they want to sue you for using their seeds. How psychotic do you have to be to do something like that?

I mean seriously. If I were to do something that poisoned a bunch of people, don't you think they would throw my butt in the slammer? Sure they would. Oh, but not Monsanto, they still have the capacity to sue people? What is that? That's like a Charles Manson copycat getting sued by Charles Manson for using his trademarked killing technique.

I'm sorry, but you have given up most of your rights when you engage in massive destruction like Monsanto has. And, you certainly have no right to take anyone to court.

Ok, again, thank you Germany!!
edit on 15-12-2010 by cybertroy because: missing a letter

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:18 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Hey, SLAY:

RE: Bees, and your thread premise. Have you seen this news?:

Can you see a way to make it fit? I mean, things are ALWAYS more complex than we can sometimes realize, I ....realize.....

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:25 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Yeah I saw the story and tossed a link onto a thread of that topic but I think it was closed down.

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 07:13 PM
I like to see you narrow the gray area

Sure for freedom of speech but come will fight their case to the death. And perhaps they deserve to die

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 07:24 PM
A tad of a side topic, but still related. Have you guys seen this Monsanto video? It's in 10 parts on Youtube.

"The World According to Mansanto"

It covers some history, the Monsanto lies over the years. FDA coverup. etc. It seems like a lot went into making this video. You should check it out. It really gives you a fuller picture of what kind of organization Monsanto really is. If you aren't already convinced Monsanto is bad news, this will help.


posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:23 PM
reply to post by cybertroy

I am sorry troy but this is less interesting than arguing nonsense. I cannot watch this as I then may not be able to talk so much sh*it.I also may have to come to terms with my understanding of nature and moral values.

I much prefer the belief these people will act in our best interest and defend them as I have proof they act in our best interest or something because im smart.

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:47 PM
Well, ok, PFdiddy. Not sure if you're on my side or what?

Anyway folks, the video is quite informative, pulling from history, documents, videos.

It's worth the time of watching it. About the time of watching a movie. I've seen parts of it before, but apparently not the whole thing.


posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 08:18 AM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Thanks for that news, something that we were suspecting all alone, but then again any corrupted crocks going to jail for killing bees intentionally for profits?

No, nobody is going to jail, I imagine that Monspanto and bayer will be working already on a genetically enhanced bee that will not die from eating their poison crops.

I can only picture Mospanto working already on the problem.

After all for Mospanto and big pharma "nature" is just a steeping stone that can be easily manipulated, if the people were no so pesky and touchy about mutations.

new topics

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in