More on wheat-the GMO kind

You are assuming that all RR corn planted is automatically sprayed with Roundup and that is incorrect. Farmers only use Roundup where and when it is needed. I did not see any mention that Roundup was used on NK603 according to the article as quoted by you. The only mention was that it was an RR variety as versus Monsanto's which were only Bt varieties.

Martin

I have a farmer friend, farms around 3000 acres.
He plants both, GMO, non-GMO, corn.....but, mostly and increasingly non-GMO.....because he is receiving a premium, per bushel, for the non-GMO. This year, that premium has been 80-90 cents per bushel. Incidentally, there is very little yield difference, for him, between the two generalities.

If it's all about the money, why is the market willing to pay those premiums ?
If it's all about the money, why aren't the GMO defenders in this thread planting corn on which they could receive almost a dollar per bushel premium ?
If it's all about the money, why are a purported 49 countries willing to pay higher per bushel costs on non-GMO and banning the GMO grains, altogether ?

Don't tell me it's political. In a world wide several year run of less than average crops, America is about the last country that can afford politics.

I haven't done any studies, nor would I trust most of what I've read......but I do trust 49 countries and a premium paid here at home.
I also trust my instincts in that, air born GMO pollen can cross with and therefore potentially damage the genetics of non-GMO crops several hundred yards away, and, therefore "we" are potentially setting ourselves up for a world of hurt.

When the pollen settles, I'd personally rather err on the side of not having a hand in compromising the crop of my neighbor, or, on a larger scale, the world's food supply, with Monsantos experiments, especially if market prices encouraged me in that direction.

It's not about the money.

It's about a fantastic job of marketing.

__________________
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater.
III

Forerunner-perhaps it's about the ego. The HUGE ego of man. Man working to out smart Mother Nature.

No-I still think it's about money.

Monsanto figures it can get a patent on food, sue a small farmer and put him out of business because the wind cross pollinated his crop with their patented seed-and win the case.

They are looking to own the right to grow food-all food-before this is over. Before people wake up and demand they stop their highjinks.

Are you talking about Percy Schmeiser?

It IS this kind of stuff that leaves such a bad tatste in peopleis mouth when talking about GMO hyped up stuff, and it isn;t from esating foods that have been altered either.

This kind of stuff hurts more then it helps the cause~!!!!

Malpractice On Dr. Oz: Pop Health Expert Hosts Anti-GM Food Rant; Scientists Push Back - Forbes

The expense comes in having to TEST the ingredients to INSURE the "ink" is correct.
The expense is the RISK that a FEW GRAINS of GMO crop could cause you to lose your business, through no fault of your own.

That's why they will take the easy way out and label EVERYTHING "MAY contain"

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Ummm, perhaps you misspoke. Monsato makes both RR *and* Bt. Monsato OWNS Round Up, which is why the very first corn varieties they made were ones that could withstand their herbicides. By selling RR seed, they both sell seed and more Round Up.

Why have a RR crop and NOT use RR? If you were going to use another herbicide besides RR, it would kill your crop. The crop is modified to withstand RR, not the competitor's herbicides.

If you were not going to use an herbicide at all, it would be cheaper to go with a non-GMO, high production variety. UNLESS you are using herbicides and/or pesticides, GMO's make no sense. Without Monsato's chemicals, they are outperformed by traditional, non-GMO hybrid varieties.

__________________
Peace,
Caliann

"First, Show me in the Bible where it says you can save someone's soul by annoying the hell out of them." -- Chuck

No, perhaps you misread. The topic at the moment was the test report using one Northrup-King product and two Monsanto products. Only the NK603 was a stacked one while the MON810 and MON863 were only Bt.

Martin

The rats used in the French study are the same strain of rats used by Monsanto. The only difference is Monsanto studies end at 3 months, the French study went to end of life (2 years).

Monsanto is heavily involved in lobbying for GM foods, to the point of requesting the US Government pressure other countries to allow GM crops.

Lobbying

In 2008, Monsanto spent $8.8 million for lobbying. $1.5 million was to outside lobbying firms with the remainder used by in-house lobbyists.[214] In 2011, total money spent on lobbying was about $6.3 million, more than any other agribusiness firm except the tobacco company Altria.[215]

In 2009 Monsanto asked the US government to maintain its strong pressure on the European Union legislation for the introduction of GMO foods.[216] After moves in France to ban a Monsanto GM corn variety, Wikileaks revealed a recommendation by the US ambassador to France to 'calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU'.[217]

The U.S. state of California is scheduled to vote in November 2012 on the labeling of genetically modified food. The argument is that consumers have a right to know the content of their food and to choose to avoid it if they wish, while advocates such as Monsanto and the Council for Biotechnology Information, which represents companies such as Monsanto, call this an attempt to scare consumers and make them feel that the food is unsafe. Biotechnology labeling is not required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but it has been adopted by over 40 countries. According to public disclosures, the Council for Biotechnology Information and The Grocery Manufacturers Association, which also opposes this initiative, have each made matching donations of $375,000 to fight the initiative.[218]

Monsanto is a member of EuropaBio, the leading biotechnology trade group in Europe, and of Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO).

Monsanto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seems to me that if GM crops were all that and a bag of chips, Monsanto would not have to lobby and convince/extort countries to allow the seed to be sold.

However, there are several instances of researchers being silenced:

GMO Researchers Attacked, Evidence Denied, and a Population at Risk | Global Research

iologist Arpad Pusztai had more than 300 articles and 12 books to his credit and was the world’s top expert in his field. But when he accidentally discovered that genetically modified (GM) foods are dangerous, he became the biotech industry’s bad-boy poster child, setting an example for other scientists thinking about blowing the whistle.
In the early 1990s, Dr. Pusztai was awarded a $3 million grant by the UK government to design the system for safety-testing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). His team included more than 20 scientists working at three facilities, including the Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland, the top nutritional research lab in the UK, and his employer for the previous 35 years. The results of Pusztai’s work were supposed to become the required testing protocols for all of Europe. But when he fed supposedly harmless GM potatoes to rats, things didn’t go as planned.

Within just 10 days, the animals developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers and testicles, partially atrophied livers, and damaged immune systems. Moreover, the cause was almost certainly side effects from the process of genetic engineering itself. In other words, the GM foods on the market, which are created from the same process, might have similar affects on humans.

With permission from his director, Pusztai was interviewed on TV and expressed his concerns about GM foods. He became a hero at his institute – for two days. Then came the phone calls from the pro-GMO prime minister’s office to the institute’s director. The next morning, Pusztai was fired. He was silenced with threats of a lawsuit, his team was dismantled, and the protocols never implemented. His institute, the biotech industry, and the UK government, together launched a smear campaign to destroy Pusztai’s reputation.

Arpad Pusztai, saw his career runied by big government and big agri-business because he told the truth about GM food
Eventually, an invitation to speak before Parliament lifted his gag order and his research was published in the prestigious Lancet. No similar in-depth studies have yet tested the GM foods eaten every day by Americans.

n September 2, 2009, the prestigious journal Nature acknowledged that the regular attacks on biotech researchers are orchestrated by a “large block of scientists who denigrate research by other legitimate scientists in a knee-jerk, partisan, emotional way that is not helpful in advancing knowledge and is outside the ideals of scientific inquiry.”

These attacks have all but stopped independent research into the health and environmental side-effects of GMOs. According to University of California at Berkeley professor Ignacio Chapela, there is a de facto ban on scientists “asking certain questions and finding certain results.” He says, “It’s very hard for us to publish in this field. People are scared.”

Scientists involved in research on the effects of GMOs are being threatened and fired from their jobs.Dr. Charles Benbrook, former Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, said he has personally spoken with dozens of scientists who “had to contend with this backlash and these counter attacks that the industry unleashes on scientists that they view as a threat. The majority of them get out of the field. The majority of them will not put themselves, or their families, or their career at that kind of risk again.” he said.

So in a sense, yes research can be stifled, stopped and denigrated.

As always, follow the money.

__________________
Be yourself - no one can tell you that you're doing it wrong!

I will have some of my own remarks posted here tomorrow.

The design of the French study is significantly criticized by other scientists...

New study of GM maize is controversial in scientific circles - News - gmo-safety.eu

Quoted from this link:

"The animals used in the experiment (Sprague Dawley rats) are naturally very prone to cancer. More than 70% develop cancer within two years anyway."


.... Read the link which reveals why other scientists criticize the design of the experiment.

You have a point.

After contributing to the thread, I realized that I might have added that it is about Monsanto's money.... but more so, it is about power.

Power corrupts, so they tell me.

__________________
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater.
III

Actually, there was a big difference between the control groups, and those fed the particular strains of GM corn studied.

Even if this stat was accurate it is the difference from the control group that gives us the results.

__________________
I have a high desert arid mountainous climate. Working towards self sufficiency. The potentials of plant breeding and building micro climates amaze me. We must learn to ride the wave.

Isn't he the plant breeder folk hero that sprayed his seed crop with round up to select for his own RR ready variety?

That tells you nothing about what it COST the farmer for extra tillage, time and fuel.

If he harvests the NON GMO with the same equipment, he would have to absolutely certain not ONE GRAIN of GMO remained, or it can't HONESTLY be labled "NO GMO"

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

You should look at how often that argument is used vs how often it's REALLY happened

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

And you know that how?
Which strain?

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

BFF, I swear, do you have to submit to a severe beating somewhere any time you don't get in the last word ?

There is no difference in tillage, time or fuel for GMO corn......but I was made aware today of the fact that GMO does yield slightly better. The farmer I am referring to claims that he is still financially ahead to plant and market the non-GMO.

As for your last comment, let me refer you to my first line in this post.

__________________
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater.
III

Yes you are correct but read all of the link. The control group consisted of only 10 rats !!!!! ... which means there is a significant probability that the lower incidence of cancers in the control could be attributed to random variation.

The control should have been 90-180 rats

Also there is a poor correlation of dosage of GMO to incidence of cancer