This Idea We Have to Spend Billions of Dollars

Post Reply New Topic

Should Monsanto be outlawed?

When you are in an Anarcho-Capitalist System : They who has the most money controls the rules & regulations.

For those who do not know, Society is currently Anarchist, and Rogue-Anarchists control The Government.

Anarchists running a government? Amazing.

No, that's Plutocracy - Rulership by the wealthy.

Anarchy is the lack of a formalized government.

Thanks. What we seem to have here is apparently semantics-issue with definition-sets.

Anarchy by the definition-set you are using is certainly correct in the capacity used by you.

How-ever, many people equate Anarchy with chaos & terrorism & lawlessness, and it can be seen by many that significants amount of police-forces have acted in very lawless & terroristic-manners, like they are above the law. Within that particular definition-set, then yes, many people are terrified of the domestic-terrorism carried out by governmental-agencies (and there have been numerous occasions where I've been given the excuse by Americans that they will pay up any extortionist-demands, when they do not even know the definition of a Jurisdiction nor what it means to Operate Under Colour of Law [i.e.: this is a false pretense where you put on uniforms in order to make yourself look like a legitimate government-agency when your department is really just another corporation], simply because they're afraid of losing any of their possessions to such extortionist-thievery). I have personally tested Legalese in the Legal-System for myself so I do not speak from ignorance.

Legalese sure over-powered, please nerf, Double-Speak, man, and I should apologise for for not clarifying this Double-Speak thing before, something I should have definitely seen coming from miles away before this confusion happened.

He's a member of the board. I expect that most major seed producers have board memberships in the association. If you look at the member list, monsanto is just one member.

And by the way, demonizing monsanto is a mistake. They stink at PR, but they aren't the monsters they are made out to be.

It is best to know your enemy, rather than to imagine what you fear them to be. Just sayin.

They're not anarcho-capitalist food terrorists who have hjijacked the government? Now that's a relief.

They're a for-profit corporation, just like Whole Foods and everyone who is invested in "organic" foodstuffs.

And while we're on the subject, in 2014, Whole Foods was by far the largest recipient of mandatory regulatory action by the FDA. More recalls than anyone, by a lot. Not voluntary recalls - recalls ordered by the FDA. Mostly for undeclared allergens, contamination, etc.

You are more likely to be poisoned by Whole Foods than by any other grocer.

But they're just fighting the good fight, right? Gotta break some eggs to make an omelet, right?

No, they're a for-profit corporation, and occasionally their lust for profit overtakes their better nature. Just like any other for-profit corporation, to one degree or other.

In the 90's, Monsanto's approach to introducing GM crops was essentially "This is legal, and if people don't like it, we will shove it down their throats".

The people who had that attitude don't even work there anymore, and haven't for a long time, but the damage is done.

Like any other producer of patented seed, they do protect their intellectual property when people willfully seek to violate it.

Like i pointed out earlier, there are thousands of patented plants, and only a few hundred of them are GM crops. There are also license-free and even open-source GM crops.

Most of the time when Monsanto has to remind a farmer of their IP rights, the issue is resolved without legal action.

When they do have to sue someone, and win, they put the money into a leadership scholarship that they sponsor.

That guy in canada who "accidentally" grew some seeds that "blew over" from a neighboring field? There is ample evidence that although the seed may have been accidentally spread onto his land, he had bred several generations of it, selected for the glyphosate tolerant trait, and planted entire fields with the resulting seed. There is some evidence of plans to produce and sell seed as well.

He was not some innocent bystander. He was actively working to violate intellectual property rights on a grand scale.

You've made a whole bunch of wild claims w/o backing them up or substantiating with independent-evidence.

For all we know all of these claims that you have made were Monsanto-sourced rather than independent-sourced.

Let me begin by dissecting a few things that are easily found on a Wiki...

This here is also the ONLY reference to the FDA in regards to Whole-Foods from the entry on the Wiki...

The ONE instance of a mention of Monsanto here...

This portion here is clearly from a « materialist/rationalist » perspective despite the ironic fact that materialism/rationalism is actually a philosophy that operates under the guise of being scientific even though it is not an actual science.

...clearly also the reason why there's a quality of information issue as labeled at the top of the page with...

Regarding whether Whole-Foods is factually responsible or irresponsible let's look at their recognition...

I am also going to interject that I have NEVER gotten sick EVER from ANY of the products from Whole-Foods, and when I used to live near one, I frequently went to the store for my groceries, although I do admit that their prices were certainly pricier than a lot of other grocery stores, but then again they were in an up-town location where lots of the « rich people » resided.

Last edited by Ban-Dodger on 15 Aug 2015, 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

https://www.yahoo.com/health/whole-food ... 10767.html

Perfectly safe according to pretty much every government agriculture and/or food agency in the world.

Roundup-ready soy is the most studied crop in the world.

For the record, Roundup is an herbicide, not a pesticide.

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is essentially non-toxic to humans, particularly in the doses that most humans are ever exposed to it.

What it does is interfere with the shikimic acid pathway, which is a 7-step metabolic route used by plants and some fungi, bacteria, algae, and some other microbes to synthesize tyrosine, tryptophan, and phenylalanine. In plants, tyrosine is required for photosynthesis.

Animals, as a family, do not use this metabolic route.

If you're an animal, and you are, the surfactant (soap) that is mixed into roundup to allow it to better coat leaf surfaces is actually more toxic than the glyphosate. By a lot. And the surfactant isn't very toxic. No more toxic than Dawn(tm).

Some plants and microorganisms that use the shikimic acid pathway are already somewhat resistant to glyphosate. Most of those plants aren't what most would consider to be weeds. At any rate, they all share a common trait: they have an additional pathway for enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate 3-phosphate (EPSP) synthase.

So to develop roundup ready crops, they isolated a gene from a bacterium that has a very good EPSP synthase, and inserted that gene into the genetic makeup of the crop.

About 1 gallon of glyphosate is used in the production of something around 20 tons of soy beans. There's actually more soap than glyphosate in roundup, and it's almost all water. And again, the soap is worse for you than the glyphosate, and is no worse for you than what you're hand-washing dishes with.

There is no nutritional difference between a roundup-ready soybean and a similar non-gmo soybean cultivar.

There is no difference at all between soy sauce made with roundup-ready soybeans and the same soy sauce made with non-gmo soybeans. Though my preference right now is Pearl River Bridge, which is much better than Kikoman, and far better than most of what you get at less-than-expensive asian restaurants.

There are non-GMO crops that are tolerant of herbicides other than glyphosate. Sunflowers are a good example. The majority of commercially grown sunflower is non-gmo and tolerant of sulfonylurea or imidazolinone or other ALS inhibitors. These are actually far more toxic for animals than glyphosate, and sunflower seeds and sunflower oil produced with at least the sulfonylurea herbicides are legally marketed as "organic".

fwiw, the sulfonylurea tolerant sunflower seeds (and corresponding herbicide) are marketed by DuPont.

What I'm trying to get at here is that "what's good to eat" and "what's good to grow" are questions that are more complex than "organic" "gmo" etc.[/quote]

I love Science

Thanks for responding to my request. Upon reviewing the article, and as someone with actual experience in business myself, I cannot help but to notice that the number of recalls is actually a very small number of 26 total products.

Last time I visited a typical retail-store, yanking out the numbers from the cob-webs in my mind, I would say that a typical store has at least a total of 5000 different products altogether, and having worked before in jobs where we were responsible for inventory control & tracking, the data-bases in the computers often showed over 30K products, and therefore, a mere 26 products really isn't article-worthy, not to mention that within the article itself stipulates...

Looking up the author of said article, his name is Joshua A. Krisch, and he's written for source-publications that I simply do not & cannot put much stock into for unbiased & accurate information presented in neutral format.

The governments say it so therefore it must be true due to being a government-statement ?

What kind of « Science » are we talking about & is this Double-Speak for government-science or other Double-Speak ?

I think there's a central fallacy here where all of this revolves around an idea that monsanto and other GMO producers actually want to poison everyone, or don't care that they are poisoning everyone including themselves.

it's like the idea where the "real" cures for chronic diseases exist but have been suppressed because scientists and their bosses don't care that their own families are at the same risk as everyone else, don't want the eternal fame of having cured cancer, etc.

I have gone down « rabbit-holes » that have basically « demonstrated » before my very own eyes various phenomenon that can account for a « massive conspiracy » for which absolutely everybody is oblivious and cannot remember even their very own actions & words & statements.

Perhaps they no longer air these kinds of shows on television, but back when I used to watch the tube, certain scenes included « hypnotised » individuals, who would act strange upon being triggered by certain triggers (such as certain key-words or which-ever), and even though it was obvious comedy on the part of the show, the person doing the hypnosis playing around with pranks on these individuals, even in well-documented actual hypnosis cases & examples, the hypnotised person has absolutely NO recollection of their recent actions/statements.

It's not that people wouldn't notice s**t going on but rather a lot of s**t is hidden via double-speak & other deceptions.

I also do not particularly trust in this so-called thing called so-called reality, for all I know, even the very laws of physics may have changed five seconds ago, and none of us would even know, for our very own memories & events & even the whole of the entire history of the entire universe itself may have been written over (and could possibly happen again in another five seconds from now). Take the « dream-state » when you are experiencing a different reality, for example, and consider that you are NOT thinking to yourself : « Holy s**t, what just happened, the last thing I remember was going into my room & hopping into bed then falling asleep, and now I'm here, how the hell did I get here, what happened to my physical-body, etc.!? » Nope, even if you're floating, hovering or flying around in the air, NONE of that even seems unusual, but is simply perceived like a normal existence, nothing out of the ordinary.

Now here is some homework for everybody : Perform the Double-Slit Experiment for yourselves in-person.

There are less fraught ways to suggest that people may be wrong when they believe they are doing good.



the many-worlds interpretation is horseapples.

I think Philip K Dick - a man who struggled more with the question of reality than most famous people ever do (almost certainly schizophrenic) - put it best.

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, does not go away.