GM Foods and what they are doing to us...

[mom'sfolly]

I haven't read the whole thread, but there is naturally occuring perennial corn found in Mexico. It is not very productive and not widely used, but it is a naturally occurring corn gene. Again the first GMO product on the market was not any "beneficial" change in the broadest terms, but to make the corn resistent to the manufacturer's own chemical herbicide.

edited for spelling

 

[banter]

I have not gone through and read all of the posts, but Seed Savers exchange is a great resource for heirloom and pure seed.

 

[seedcorn]

They do it through the price they are willing to pay and the day to day buying choices that they make. In the end that will determine the face of agriculture

With this I agree whole heartedly.

Again, it's illegal to feed antibiotics to animals before slaughter. There are more horses and other farm animals tromping in mud on "hobby farms" than in any commercial lot.

What made the videos so horrifing was the fact that it is so Unusual. Are there abuses in Ag, you bet. Name me an industry or town where there aren't abuses. Why we have police, judges, and jails.........

Side note, I did get a response from John Ikerd. Think less of him from email response than from his article. Pity his family.

 

[seedcorn]

mom'sfolly :

I haven't read the whole thread, but there is naturally occuring perennial corn found in Mexico. It is not very productive and not widely used, but it is a naturally occurring corn gene. Again the first GMO product on the market was not any "beneficial" change in the broadest terms, but to make the corn resistent to the manufacturer's own chemical herbicide.

edited for spelling

You do know corn as we know it, is not natural? It use to set it's seeds on the tassel. Man has bred it to develop ears as we know it.

The first GMO product was Bt released by Mycogen. RR gene was and is used as a marker gene so that they know the RW or Bt gene is pure. Since the RW or Bt is "connected" to the RR, you spray the inbreds with glysophates all inbreds that survive will have the gene you want.

RR beans were developed because conventional chemicals weren't working and becoming very expensive. Plus when you had to "rescue" the field when the first application didn't work, you burnt the beans and had a huge yield drop. Another side to RR beans was we were getting a HUGE build-up of residual chemical in the soils. Ag is very conscience of chemical residues contaminating soils and eventually our water supply.​

 

[tiki244]

Quote:

 

[kstaven]

I just hope our society makes decisions based on safer sustainable systems rather than attempting dangerous and unproven quick fixes that could propel us into something worse.

 

[Beekissed]

Quote:
I would have to weigh in by saying that anyone who puts their faith in the FDA, USDA, college research departments (who often get research grants from certain large corporation, hint), the South American Gov't, etc. as being truthful and upstanding icons of American Agriculture is more naive than the so-called "uninformed public". There are none so blind as those who choose not to see.
Yes, to survive in the Ag world a farmer has little choice than to conform to the current agricultural practices. My question is this....if you make such a poor living farming and can barely get by, even while using GM seed, then what's the point? Why put you and your family through this poverty level standard of living? Because someone's got to produce America's food supply? Why you? Are you a missionary of some sort who chooses to sacrifice your standard of living for the good of the people?

Not really trying to step on toes, here, but I am rather curious about the thought processes behind "profit at any cost" thinking. I don't think it is "highminded" to expect the food supply to not cause new and terrible diseases. Do you? I mean, we got by for generations without this type of seed. Now, all the sudden, now, we can't raise corn without it?

Monsanto does indeed have the power, not to fool anyone, I don't think anyone involved, except the consumer, is fooled.....they do, however, have the financial power to buy cooperation from said agencies.

 

[seedcorn]

1) Monsanto is not the only one w/this technology. So does Dow, Dupont, Syngenta, and Mycogen so in fairness you need to understand it's all 5. They are all chem companies as well. Are you ready to condemn all chem companies--including the pharmacie companies that make the drugs that keep us alive? Mycogen started the GMO craze (as some of you see it) and Dupont showed the Ag companies that the farmer would pay for it. Dupont (Pioneer) is the one who broke the $100/bag price. That's why I laugh so hard at people who call Monsanto names and leave 4 of 5 alone..........

2) Why do it? I'd love to hear responses from all the Ag people on this board. For me, it was a lot things, with $$ being the last thing considered. As I get older I see friends, classmates who went for the $$ and they are a lot better off $$$$$. they understood that you work for $$$$.

Why: wanted to have a job that mattered--feeding the world, I look back and does that sound hokey!!!! The work environment (again, farmers as a whole are an excellent group of people to work with) and the chance to work w/animals all day long. (Started out in animal industry until I understood what that meant for me as far as where and how I had to live, switched to agronomy side).

 

[Lazy J Farms Feed & Hay]

Quote:
Why is it that using the latest technology is acceptable in all industries and hobbies EXCEPT in Agriculture where it is seen as cowtowing to "Monsanto", enslavement, "the easy way out".......?

Jim

 

[tiki244]

Quote: