Europeans were able to do it. Can America take the hint?

[MikeK]

You mean like buying cars, homes, appliances, electronics, etc.? Debt is debt, no matter what you buy.

Cars, homes, appliances, etc., are things we need and want. No one needs or wants what Monsanto is imposing on us. Monsanto is perpetrating an extortion by compromising Nature.

And don't ignore the fact that lab studies have shown foods grown with Monsanto's GMO seeds have produced malignant tumors in rats.

Is there a single benefit or advantage to humanity to justify what Monsanto is doing? The reason the E/U has rejected Monsanto is Monsanto's clear objective is that of controlling the world's food supply, which will include our food supply -- yours and mine. Do you want that kind of power in the hands of one corporation?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I know someone whose husband died of stomach cancer and in my opinion - his diet? Alot of GMO foods other than that he didn't smoke, nothing. I'm hearing more cases of strange cancers - in children - alot of things I believe are coming from this new diet we are being put on here.

You are right. They are going for a monopoly on the world food supply. They really don't care if we know it or not either. IMO. - Jeri

 

[WethePeopleUS]

You mean like buying cars, homes, appliances, electronics, etc.? Debt is debt, no matter what you buy.

Cars, homes, appliances, etc., are things we need and want. No one needs or wants what Monsanto is imposing on us. Monsanto is perpetrating an extortion by compromising Nature.

And don't ignore the fact that lab studies have shown foods grown with Monsanto's GMO seeds have produced malignant tumors in rats.

Is there a single benefit or advantage to humanity to justify what Monsanto is doing? The reason the E/U has rejected Monsanto is Monsanto's clear objective is that of controlling the world's food supply, which will include our food supply -- yours and mine. Do you want that kind of power in the hands of one corporation?

Not to mention the fact that this company is now above the law. From the Monsanto Protection Act, the Supreme Court cannot intervene in their affairs until a multi-year investigation and research has been concluded. Whenever that will be. Until then, Monsanto is above the rule of law in this country. Kind of scary if you ask me. No corporation, or person should be above the law. Unbelievable the way this country is headed.

 

[martybegan]

You mean like buying cars, homes, appliances, electronics, etc.? Debt is debt, no matter what you buy.

Cars, homes, appliances, etc., are things we need and want. No one needs or wants what Monsanto is imposing on us. Monsanto is perpetrating an extortion by compromising Nature.

And don't ignore the fact that lab studies have shown foods grown with Monsanto's GMO seeds have produced malignant tumors in rats.

Is there a single benefit or advantage to humanity to justify what Monsanto is doing? The reason the E/U has rejected Monsanto is Monsanto's clear objective is that of controlling the world's food supply, which will include our food supply -- yours and mine. Do you want that kind of power in the hands of one corporation?

Link?

 

[Old Rocks]

Yes, Monsanto's reputation concerning asbestos show that company cares nothing about what it's products do to people.

 

[WethePeopleUS]

Monsanto | Do GM Crops Increase Yield?

Are you really going to use a Monsanto source lol? Of course they are going to say their crops yield a bigger harvest..

You have proof that they are lying?

Maybe not "lying" but misrepresenting facts. In a new paper funded by the US Department of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin researchers have essentially negated the "more food" argument as well. The researchers looked at data from UW test plots that compared crop yields from various varieties of hybrid corn, some genetically modified and some not, between 1990 and 2010. While some GM varieties delivered small yield gains, others did not. Several even showed lower yields than non-GM counterparts. With the exception of one commonly used trait—a Bt type designed to kill the European corn borer—the authors conclude, "we were surprised not to find strongly positive transgenic yield effects." Both the glyphosate-tolerant (Roundup Ready) and the Bt trait for corn rootworm caused yields to drop. Overall, the report uncovers evidence of what is known as "yield drag"—the idea that manipulating the genome of a plant variety causes unintended changes in the way it grows, causing it to be less productive.

Do GMO Crops Really Have Higher Yields? |

This of course is not the only information that is out there that negates what Monsanto claims. One simply has to do the research, and NOT use Monsanto as a source.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Yes, Monsanto's reputation concerning asbestos show that company cares nothing about what it's products do to people.

Don't forget round up either. Monsanto has been killing innocent Americans long enough. Anyone defending these people should be ashamed of themselves.

-Jeremiah

 

[MikeK]

Not to mention the fact that this company is now above the law. From the Monsanto Protection Act, the Supreme Court cannot intervene in their affairs until a multi-year investigation and research has been concluded. Whenever that will be. Until then, Monsanto is above the rule of law in this country. Kind of scary if you ask me. No corporation, or person should be above the law. Unbelievable the way this country is headed.

I wonder how much that cost Monsanto and who got the payoff. But things have gotten so bad there is no way to find out.

As I've often said, nothing short of a radical political revolution can save America. But the American People are divided into so many varying political and ethnic factions, most of which are hopelessly hostile to each other, that the kind of solidarity needed to wipe the government clean is impossible to achieve. Basic evidence of that is clearly seen right here in this forum.

 

[MikeK]

You mean like buying cars, homes, appliances, electronics, etc.? Debt is debt, no matter what you buy.

Cars, homes, appliances, etc., are things we need and want. No one needs or wants what Monsanto is imposing on us. Monsanto is perpetrating an extortion by compromising Nature.

And don't ignore the fact that lab studies have shown foods grown with Monsanto's GMO seeds have produced malignant tumors in rats.

Is there a single benefit or advantage to humanity to justify what Monsanto is doing? The reason the E/U has rejected Monsanto is Monsanto's clear objective is that of controlling the world's food supply, which will include our food supply -- yours and mine. Do you want that kind of power in the hands of one corporation?

Link?

Shock findings in new GMO study: Rats fed lifetime of GM corn grow horrifying tumors, 70% of females die early

 

[bripat9643]

Are you really going to use a Monsanto source lol? Of course they are going to say their crops yield a bigger harvest..

You have proof that they are lying?

Maybe not "lying" but misrepresenting facts. In a new paper funded by the US Department of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin researchers have essentially negated the "more food" argument as well. The researchers looked at data from UW test plots that compared crop yields from various varieties of hybrid corn, some genetically modified and some not, between 1990 and 2010. While some GM varieties delivered small yield gains, others did not. Several even showed lower yields than non-GM counterparts. With the exception of one commonly used trait—a Bt type designed to kill the European corn borer—the authors conclude, "we were surprised not to find strongly positive transgenic yield effects." Both the glyphosate-tolerant (Roundup Ready) and the Bt trait for corn rootworm caused yields to drop. Overall, the report uncovers evidence of what is known as "yield drag"—the idea that manipulating the genome of a plant variety causes unintended changes in the way it grows, causing it to be less productive.

Do GMO Crops Really Have Higher Yields? |

This of course is not the only information that is out there that negates what Monsanto claims. One simply has to do the research, and NOT use Monsanto as a source.

Right, we should use an "unbiased" source like American Restoration

Your other site is entirely devoted to attacking GMO crops.

Why would farmers buy these seeds if they didn't get some kind of financial benefit? The luddites simply can't explain that.

 

[bripat9643]

Cars, homes, appliances, etc., are things we need and want. No one needs or wants what Monsanto is imposing on us. Monsanto is perpetrating an extortion by compromising Nature.

And don't ignore the fact that lab studies have shown foods grown with Monsanto's GMO seeds have produced malignant tumors in rats.

Is there a single benefit or advantage to humanity to justify what Monsanto is doing? The reason the E/U has rejected Monsanto is Monsanto's clear objective is that of controlling the world's food supply, which will include our food supply -- yours and mine. Do you want that kind of power in the hands of one corporation?

Link?

Shock findings in new GMO study: Rats fed lifetime of GM corn grow horrifying tumors, 70% of females die early

Another kook website chimes in. People who are obsessed with "natural foods" all tend to be on the kook side of the intellectual spectrum.

 

[WethePeopleUS]

You have proof that they are lying?

Maybe not "lying" but misrepresenting facts. In a new paper funded by the US Department of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin researchers have essentially negated the "more food" argument as well. The researchers looked at data from UW test plots that compared crop yields from various varieties of hybrid corn, some genetically modified and some not, between 1990 and 2010. While some GM varieties delivered small yield gains, others did not. Several even showed lower yields than non-GM counterparts. With the exception of one commonly used trait—a Bt type designed to kill the European corn borer—the authors conclude, "we were surprised not to find strongly positive transgenic yield effects." Both the glyphosate-tolerant (Roundup Ready) and the Bt trait for corn rootworm caused yields to drop. Overall, the report uncovers evidence of what is known as "yield drag"—the idea that manipulating the genome of a plant variety causes unintended changes in the way it grows, causing it to be less productive.

Do GMO Crops Really Have Higher Yields? |

This of course is not the only information that is out there that negates what Monsanto claims. One simply has to do the research, and NOT use Monsanto as a source.

Right, we should use an "unbiased" source like American Restoration

Your other site is entirely devoted to attacking GMO crops.

Why would farmers buy these seeds if they didn't get some kind of financial benefit? The luddites simply can't explain that.

I never referenced American Restoration for anything in this thread, so nice try on that. Furthermore, I provide evidence of a paper conducted by researchers at the University of Wisconsin, and you provide evidence from Monsanto. All-around I would say nice fail!

 

[WethePeopleUS]

And here is a small victory for us in the fight against Monsanto:

Connecticut close to becoming first State to require GMO labeling - Underground Health

Connecticut will be the first state in the nation to have a law to require labeling of foods containing genetically modified organisms, but the legislation assures the state won’t stand alone.