GM Canola Found in the WILD

Heritagefarm · #21 08/08/10, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneokie

Do you have a link to the source of that quote?

JMHO, if those who are strongly opposed to GMO's would do some research for incidents of this happening (from University research) and post links to said incidents of this happening, It would go a long way in helping everyone who is concerned have a better understanding.

Well, I wrote this somewhere else, so it may be hodgepodged...
http://www.chemicalindustryarchives....anniston/1.asp
http://www.chemicalindustryarchives....h/toxicity.asp
[Tell me you don't trust Chemical Archives. They have nothing to gain, nothing to lose.]
That statement was written previously, and does not apply to anyone here. Just thought I'd leave it in...
More:
"Monsanto Hides Decades of Pollution"<br>
http://www.chemicalindustryarchives....h/toxicity.asp
http://www.chemicalindustryarchives....h/toxicity.asp
This site has found inside confidential documents and exposed them.
"Monsanto's defense of its actions surrounding PCBs can best be summarized this way: the company claims it didn't know that PCBs were harmful to human health or persistent in the environment until the late 1960s, and as soon as the company learned of these threats, it acted quickly and responsibly to address the problem in a cooperative, forthright manner with the government.

"And the truth is that in 1966 when we found out that PCBs were in the environment, we started an investigation journey and we tried to gather information and we acted responsibly." [trial Transcript, Owens v. Monsanto CV-96-J-440-E, (N.D. Alabama April 4, 2001), pg. 454, line 6]

"when Monsanto learned that PCBs could possibly be in the environment, it acted promptly and responsibly and continues to do so." [trial Transcript, Owens v. Monsanto CV-96-J-440-E, (N.D. Alabama April 4, 2001), pg. 455, line 14]

"But as the company's own documents show, Monsanto went to extraordinary efforts to keep the public in the dark about PCBs, and even manipulated scientific studies by urging scientists to change their conclusions to downplay the risks of PCB exposure. Monsanto's conduct, throughout the entire period that the company made PCBs, was less than commendable. Their attempts today to backpedal on the science and shirk responsibility for the global saturation of PCBs is equally discouraging, as are their repeated attempts to "green" their image with flashy, expensive PR campaigns."

Confidential report:
http://www.chemicalindustryarchives.com/search/pdfs/anniston/19691002_141.pdf" http://www.chemicalindustryarchives....691002_141.pdf

"Monsanto sued twice for false advertising of their product being 'biodegradable' and 'environmentally friendly'.<br>
SEcond time (France):

http://www.organicconsumers.org/arti...ticle_4114.cfm
http://www.holisticmed.com/ge/roundup.html
Glyphosate: http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/good_wood/tox_herb.htm

GMOs increase toxin use, are not good for the environment, and do not always work as promised:<br>
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=5225
Rather PETAish article...
Bt cotton fails:
http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/i-news-items/12016-bt-cotton-has-failed-admits-monsanto"
GM corn fails:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/270101
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...santo_in_India

Dioxin/agent orange:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/mons...ange032102.cfm
Other: http://www.organicconsumers.org/pate...osed091702.cfm

Gene police:
http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/news/10040.htm
http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Percy-Sc...ene-Police.htm

Small farmers sued:
http://www.savethepinebush.org/News/...Schmeiser.html
http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto_tod...d_lawsuits.asp
http://nelsonfarm.net
Other: http://www.keepmainefree.org/suesuesue.html

Monsanto has made Agent Orange, PCBs, apartame, rBST, rBGH, DDT.

Who do you trust? The biotech industry, whose only goal is their bottom line? They don't care, Driver. They don't care if they give you cancer. They don't care if they make your liver fail. They want more money, and Monsanto likes playing God.

"Food, is more powerful than guns, bombs, etc. Control the food, control the people. Control the seeds, control the food."

Sorry, this is a bit hodge-podge...

oneokie · #22 08/08/10, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heritagefarm

Monsanto has made Agent Orange, PCBs, apartame, rBST, rBGH, DDT.

What do those things have to do with GMO's? Other than they were manufactured by the same company?

Quote:

"Food, is more powerful than guns, bombs, etc. Control the food, control the people. Control the seeds, control the food."

Exactly, so why aren't you railing to your elected representatives to put a stop to all of it?

Wow! Talk about cherry picking facts. Two plants from 3,000 miles of roadside. As was mentioned by a previous poster, road sides are a good place to find all kinds of feral crops growing.

Something that was posted in another thread, to paraphrase: "You can't use those facts when talking to a scientist". And, I did not post that. Let's don't let facts get in the way of an agenda.

Or, everybody go back in time and live like we were in 1900. Problem solved.

Windy in Kansas · #23 08/08/10, 05:33 PM

Two companies selling transgenic canola and only one gets bashed though proteins for both kinds were found by the researchers.

Two main companies producing herbicide for the aforementioned canola and only one gets bashed.

Hard for me to believe this simply isn't a thread used to bash Monsanto though the OP did say companies like Monsanto.

Did anyone note what the scientists said that have been studying canola for year?

In part; "I wouldn't lose any sleep over it," and (seedlings) "they don't fare well in the wild.", "a researcher at the University of Alberta in Canada, agrees", "haven't spread far beyond the roads.", "It's pretty spoiled — it's used to growing in well-fertilized, clean seedbeds without competition, so it does not do well if it is having to compete with other plants,".

No mention of the GM tobacco that is also in the news as a good crop that is helping clean up contamination?

arabian knight · #24 08/08/10, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Windy in Kansas

Two companies selling transgenic canola and only one gets bashed though proteins for both kinds were found by the researchers.

Two main companies producing herbicide for the aforementioned canola and only one gets bashed.

Hard for me to believe this simply isn't a thread used to bash Monsanto though the OP did say companies like Monsanto.

Did anyone note what the scientists said that have been studying canola for year?

In part; "I wouldn't lose any sleep over it," and (seedlings) "they don't fare well in the wild.", "a researcher at the University of Alberta in Canada, agrees", "haven't spread far beyond the roads.", "It's pretty spoiled — it's used to growing in well-fertilized, clean seedbeds without competition, so it does not do well if it is having to compete with other plants,".

No mention of the GM tobacco that is also in the news as a good crop that is helping clean up contamination?

True that is why so many of these things are just that quoted from biased places, and not from accredited sources other then to bash Monsanto. And then when some disagree get bashed for doing so.

tinknal · #25 08/08/10, 05:40 PM

I'm happy for all the feral seed. Now I can cross woods and fields and find bounteous amounts of tomatoes, sweet corn, pumpkins, beans, eggplant, apples, tropical fruits, figs, cabbage, etc all because as we all know, human grown crops always spread to the wild.

Don't even need a garden anymore........

Heritagefarm · #26 08/08/10, 05:48 PM

Well, I like feral plants, too. I love going to walks and chowing on blackberries... But, I don't want GM strains going into nature. Since Monsanto has patented their genes, I suppose they will start suing Mother Nature next, or the Forest Service...
Windy: We bash Monsanto because they own 90% of GM seeds. We could also bash DuPont, although DuPont and Monsanto are hand in hand.

PrettyPaisley · #27 08/08/10, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneokie

What do those things have to do with GMO's? Other than they were manufactured by the same company?

I think it shows pretty strong evidence that Monsanto had a long history of developing dangerous, toxic, deadly products instead of being good stewards of the earth and the people and animals living on it??

Patt · #28 08/08/10, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneokie

Do you have a link to the source of that quote?

JMHO, if those who are strongly opposed to GMO's would do some research for incidents of this happening (from University research) and post links to said incidents of this happening, It would go a long way in helping everyone who is concerned have a better understanding.

It's from the article in the OP.

And the University of Arkansas is a very highly regarded agricultural researcher.

chickenista · #29 08/08/10, 08:26 PM

It is a big deal.
But over the past few months I have begun to think that it is not individual comapnies that bad, but rather the atmosphere that allows companies to hold too much power with no stops in place.
It is the insurance/medical industries that have driven up the price of medical and dental care, making most of it out of the realm of possibility for many (such as me)
The food/ag conglomerates that drive political movements that are not the best for the nation/world as a whole.
It is oil companies that can decide what they do, when and where with no care for right and wrong.
I could go on and on.
Yes, Monsantos practices are absolutely wrong and destructive, no doubt about it.
But they have been allowed to grow and conquer....
That is the true root of the problems.

oneokie · #30 08/08/10, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrettyPaisley

I think it shows pretty strong evidence that Monsanto had a long history of developing dangerous, toxic, deadly products instead of being good stewards of the earth and the people and animals living on it??

So, why not tell your elected officials you aren't happy with the way the regulatory agencies are handling things? And remind them about all the problems with drug makers and their products.

Patt · #31 08/08/10, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneokie

So, why not tell your elected officials you aren't happy with the way the regulatory agencies are handling things? And remind them about all the problems with drug makers and their products.

Cause they only listen to the people buying them steak dinners and trips to Hawaii?

Heritagefarm · #32 08/08/10, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chickenista

It is a big deal.
But over the past few months I have begun to think that it is not individual comapnies that bad, but rather the atmosphere that allows companies to hold too much power with no stops in place.

That general consensus that big companies are respectable and law-abiding?

Emmy D · #33 08/08/10, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneokie

So, why not tell your elected officials you aren't happy with the way the regulatory agencies are handling things? And remind them about all the problems with drug makers and their products.

I would wager a good amount with you that many many many on this forum do just that on a daily basis, I know I do!

Right now, along with Monstanto/Dupont/BP and the like there is the war upon HFCS, which should be given as much (if not more) attention than this country has given the war on drugs!!

Emmy

oneokie · #34 08/08/10, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patt

It's from the article in the OP.

And the University of Arkansas is a very highly regarded agricultural researcher.

Yes it is highly regarded. However, the article clearly states that the research was done with volunteer plants that were found and sampled along the sides of roads. Any research can return the desired results if the testing criteria is very limited in scope. Only sampling plants along the side of the roads used to transport the crop to market could skew the results.

Anyone who has a simple understanding of conventioal hybridization would know that if one grows enough plants in a small area in a somewhat normal environment it would result in some natural crossing of traits.

From the article referenced here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...r---=129010499 Emphasis mine.

Quote:

Moreover, two samples contained multiple genes from different species of genetically modified plants. "It indicates that these things are probably self-perpetuating outside of cultivation and have been there for a couple of generations at least," Sagers says.

Heritagefarm · #35 08/08/10, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneokie

Yes it is highly regarded. However, the article clearly states that the research was done with volunteer plants that were found and sampled along the sides of roads. Any research can return the desired results if the testing criteria is very limited in scope. Only sampling plants along the side of the roads used to transport the crop to market could skew the results.

Anyone who has a simple understanding of conventioal hybridization would know that if one grows enough plants in a small area in a somewhat normal environment it would result in some natural crossing of traits.

Biotech also likes very limiting studies, perhaps even ones that skew, or outright lie.

oneokie · #36 08/08/10, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heritagefarm

Biotech also likes very limiting studies, perhaps even ones that skew, or outright lie.

So take your elected representaives to task for failing to make sure the public safety is guranteed.

wogglebug · #37 08/08/10, 09:09 PM

Head for the Hills!
The Cherokees is escaped from Fort Mudge!

... am I dating myself just a tad there?

Heritagefarm · #38 08/08/10, 09:10 PM

I've sent letters. Letters and emails only do so much. Most of the time, the Rep's personel read them, not the Rep. But, yeah... Perhaps I'll start bombarding the white house and Congress persons. Make it known that the Food Bill could do with a little work.

oneokie · #39 08/08/10, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emmy D

there is the war upon HFCS, which should be given as much (if not more) attention than this country has given the war on drugs!!

Emmy

That should be the topic of a new thread.

Which begs the question: Why do products that have no HFCS cost more that ones that do?

oneokie · #40 08/08/10, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heritagefarm

I've sent letters. Letters and emails only do so much. Most of the time, the Rep's personel read them, not the Rep. But, yeah... Perhaps I'll start bombarding the white house and Congress persons. Make it known that the Food Bill could do with a little work.

Have your friends and acquantiences do the same. AND have them remind the congress critters that it is an election year.