Obama signs Monsanto Protection Act

[mabrown310]

Like I said before, I am all for labeling so we know what we are eating. Problem is, there are very informative labels on most foods and one heck of a lot of Americans still don't give a crap and eat pathetically horrible crap.

 

That said, I think before GMOs are on labels (which I am not against) a very specific definition of GMO needs to be determined. Scientists might have an idea of what that is but the general public is all over the board.

 

For instance, the corn plant we have now (before GMO) is no where close to the corn plant given to white people from the Indians. All those changes were done by humans with varying levels of technology. So, is all corn now GMO?

 

What if the GMO corn is taken to an plant where some minor specific ingredient is taken out (let's say corn syrup) and used in a food. Now does that food need to be labeled GMO?

 

Do grain elevators now need to have completely different storage facilities for GMO with different transportation so that when ADM gets a load of corn, they know that? Then, does ADM need to have completely different production facilities for GMO so that it's not mixed with non GMO? If two bushels of GMO get into an entire grain bin, does that entire grain bin then have to be labeled GMO?

 

Is there a simple test that can be performed by someone like ADM when they get a load to tell if it is GMO?

 

Labeling is good and I'm all for it. But, with something like this, the practicality of it may be difficult.

Those are all very valid points. Differentiating specialty grains in shipping containers and elevators seems to work pretty well. But would the sheer volume of GMOs make this a practical approach? I dont know

[Count 'Bility]

Monsanto has ways of IDing their corn. They 'check' on farmers crops to make sure that anyone growing their corn, bought it for that specific season. It can be done.

That's interesting.

 

One of our customers plumbed the new Monsanto plant in Gothenburg. They told us the bs they had to go through whenever arriving at the leaving the grounds. Inspection of vehicles, toolboxes, clothing. Checklists of what you brought in and what you were leaving with. You name it, they checked it. Their exact words were "i didnt know if we were plumbin or meeting the president". It was quite intense, and sounded like a high level of paranoia.

[Junior]

Monsanto has ways of IDing their corn. They 'check' on farmers crops to make sure that anyone growing their corn, bought it for that specific season. It can be done.

 

A simple genetic screen can be done on seeds. Once things get broken down from the point of seeds, it would become almost impossible to test.

[beanman]

I just want to know what's in my food. I want to know if there's pink slime in it. I want to know if it contains GMOs. That shouldn't be too much to ask. It takes hours to do my grocery shopping the way it is so I can sift through the bullsh#t and find healthier foods for my kids. Not knowing if there are GMOs or not makes this even more of a challenge.

 

Odds are GMOs are fine. But we don't know for sure. So as a consumer, I should have the right to know.

[strigori]

Monsanto has ways of IDing their corn. They 'check' on farmers crops to make sure that anyone growing their corn, bought it for that specific season. It can be done.

 

A simple genetic screen can be done on seeds. Once things get broken down from the point of seeds, it would become almost impossible to test.

Its not really any different than labeling country of origin on produce. The company using GMO crops just has to disclose it. Which they do not want to do, because it might negatively impact sales. And some are willing to let companies get away with just about anything as long as it leads to better profits.

[Count 'Bility]

I just want to know what's in my food. I want to know if there's pink slime in it. I want to know if it contains GMOs. That shouldn't be too much to ask. It takes hours to do my grocery shopping the way it is so I can sift through the bullsh#t and find healthier foods for my kids. Not knowing if there are GMOs or not makes this even more of a challenge.

 

Odds are GMOs are fine. But we don't know for sure. So as a consumer, I should have the right to know.

This is my point. We have a right to know, and, we have a right to make our own decision beyond that.

 

 

I guess I'm just curious how this affects everything else. Couldnt this be a slippery slope? If we give one company and exemption from full product labeling, where do you draw the line?

 

Or am I looking at too big'a picture?

 

I dont necessarily have an opinion on this matter. i dont know all the details. But I thing rules and reg's should be for everyone. If your product is really fine, product labeling and information shouldnt be an issue. Folks should be allowed to form a fully informed opinion.

 

 

I guess I don't see in the article where Monsanto is uniquely singled out from other companies like them.

I'm essentially speaking in terms of companies in general. If this exception is made for Monsanto and anyone similar, where does it stop? The precedent is set. Precedents are a huge part of lawmaking in this country. Is colgate toothpaste going to be the next to not have to publish what they put in toothpaste?

 

My next thought is, wouldnt you think Monsanto would want to publish labeling or whatever it is? Isnt transperancy the key? You would think they would have the knowledge to know that if theyre pursuing such exemptions, that the public my suspect they have something to hide.

[Moiraine]

It would piss me off if I hadn't given up all hope for humankind a long time ago.

[mabrown310]

Monsanto has ways of IDing their corn. They 'check' on farmers crops to make sure that anyone growing their corn, bought it for that specific season. It can be done.

That's interesting.

 

One of our customers plumbed the new Monsanto plant in Gothenburg. They told us the bs they had to go through whenever arriving at the leaving the grounds. Inspection of vehicles, toolboxes, clothing. Checklists of what you brought in and what you were leaving with. You name it, they checked it. Their exact words were "i didnt know if we were plumbin or meeting the president". It was quite intense, and sounded like a high level of paranoia.

 

I have heard similar stories from one of my professors. They are very secretive and protective of their seeds and technologies. To be fair though, some of their patents are worth millions.

[BigRedBuster]

Their security isn't much different than any other technology industry. I have been to that facility a number of times and actually know the manager out there.

 

They have the right to protect their investment and I wouldn't expect anything less.

[mabrown310]

Their security isn't much different than any other technology industry. I have been to that facility a number of times and actually know the manager out there.

 

They have the right to protect their investment and I wouldn't expect anything less.

 

That would be interesting to see their facilities. Off topic, but has anyone heard about the "Doomsday" seedbank in Norway? It was built on some remote island on the side of the cave. It has over 3,000,000 seeds from around the world. Its protected by blast proof doors, motion detecters, meter thick steel reinforced concrete walls, and two airlock chambers. Now thats intense! A lot of people don't realize just how valuable and important conserving seeds is

[mabrown310]

*side of a mountain

[BigRedBuster]

Just to point out what this big mean evil corporation that doesn't care if they kill all of us is doing, two goals that I know of that they are working hard on are:

 

a) Doubling yield on the same number of plants.

b) Drastically increasing the drought tolerance of corn.

 

Just think of what those to goals (if reached) can mean to society. With the same number of acres planted and same amount of plants, our corn production could double. Farmers averaging over 300 bushels per acre? That could be fun.

 

Now, what if that same corn only needs half the water the corn now days needs. What would that mean to the Ogallala Aquifer and feeding people in extremely dry areas of the world.

 

But...hey.....they are horrible people.

[mabrown310]

Just to point out what this big mean evil corporation that doesn't care if they kill all of us is doing, two goals that I know of that they are working hard on are:

 

a) Doubling yield on the same number of plants.

b) Drastically increasing the drought tolerance of corn.

 

Just think of what those to goals (if reached) can mean to society. With the same number of acres planted and same amount of plants, our corn production could double. Farmers averaging over 300 bushels per acre? That could be fun.

 

Now, what if that same corn only needs half the water the corn now days needs. What would that mean to the Ogallala Aquifer and feeding people in extremely dry areas of the world.

 

But...hey.....they are horrible people.

I should have made it clear that my original post was supposed to be hypothetical. I have nothing against Monsanto, but the President did make an interesting, and somewhat troubling, precedent. My dad has told me about the new "super seeds" that they believe can be produced. This would do wonders for the world. Nebraska has the benefit of being on a part of the Ogallala Aquifer that can replenish some of the water used in irrigation. States like Texas do not have that luxury and many areas are being forced back into dryland corn. That is a scary issue when you start to think about world food supply. The demand for food and grains keeps growing, while farmland is dissapearing or becoming unusable in some places. World food surplus is at a scary low level, which could become a problem if theres continued droughts and large natural disasters around the world. Food prices are also skyrocketing worldwide, putting a squeeze on undeveloped countries. 300 bushel yield seeds could make a huge dent in the world food shortage

[strigori]

Just to point out what this big mean evil corporation that doesn't care if they kill all of us is doing, two goals that I know of that they are working hard on are:

 

a) Doubling yield on the same number of plants.

b) Drastically increasing the drought tolerance of corn.

 

Just think of what those to goals (if reached) can mean to society. With the same number of acres planted and same amount of plants, our corn production could double. Farmers averaging over 300 bushels per acre? That could be fun.

 

Now, what if that same corn only needs half the water the corn now days needs. What would that mean to the Ogallala Aquifer and feeding people in extremely dry areas of the world.

 

But...hey.....they are horrible people.

And if the modification to the corn that made it more drought resistant, and higher yield also had a flaw that when eaten long term it let to cancer, or other health problems? If history is any indicator, they cover it up to protect earnings and research investments. No business than is running a borderline monopoly is above that kind of behavior.

 

We have a right to have it regulated, and tested like anything else. And a right to have it labeled, so the consumer can make a choice. Both things that become nest to impossible when the politicians who are supposed to be looking out for their constituents are instead protecting big donors at the expense of the people.

[Junior]

Just to point out what this big mean evil corporation that doesn't care if they kill all of us is doing, two goals that I know of that they are working hard on are:

 

a) Doubling yield on the same number of plants.

b) Drastically increasing the drought tolerance of corn.

 

Just think of what those to goals (if reached) can mean to society. With the same number of acres planted and same amount of plants, our corn production could double. Farmers averaging over 300 bushels per acre? That could be fun.

 

Now, what if that same corn only needs half the water the corn now days needs. What would that mean to the Ogallala Aquifer and feeding people in extremely dry areas of the world.

 

But...hey.....they are horrible people.

I should have made it clear that my original post was supposed to be hypothetical. I have nothing against Monsanto, but the President did make an interesting, and somewhat troubling, precedent. My dad has told me about the new "super seeds" that they believe can be produced. This would do wonders for the world. Nebraska has the benefit of being on a part of the Ogallala Aquifer that can replenish some of the water used in irrigation. States like Texas do not have that luxury and many areas are being forced back into dryland corn. That is a scary issue when you start to think about world food supply. The demand for food and grains keeps growing, while farmland is dissapearing or becoming unusable in some places. World food surplus is at a scary low level, which could become a problem if theres continued droughts and large natural disasters around the world. Food prices are also skyrocketing worldwide, putting a squeeze on undeveloped countries. 300 bushel yield seeds could make a huge dent in the world food shortage

 

Let's be clear, this is not all on the President. Nor is this quite as bad as people are making it out to sound. From my (admittedly limited) understanding, the new provisions were meant to protect the product in the market when a lawsuit is filed. Meaning, that a judge can't simply block the sale of a product, it has to go through FDA review.