Food Plot Language / Unbelievable

I'll ask. What is GMO and MON?

I reckon I should start adding another 1/2 acre to the plot and recoupe some "feed"
for next years planting. But how to protect against weavils etc? Last year I planted
milo I had left over, a couple of bags I stored in my garage. None of it came up.
The feed store said if you don't plant it quick weavils will destroy all of it within
a few months. Some countries have banned GMO. It seems MON has a monopoly on it.

Its illegal to 'save' seed from one planting to the next using GMO from Monsanto. I'm sure you could get away with it if you don't talk about it on a public forum. It's patented and Monsanto has plenty of $ to prosecute. They've done it in the past. Now, saving bags that weren't used would be fine. Taking seed from your crop for next year-not fine, or I should say, could be BIG fine.

I'll ask. What is GMO and MON?

I hate Monsanto, they are ruining our food source and killing off bees. So many farms have been shut down because GMO crops accidentally end up in their fields by spreading from other farms. Monsanto sues them and takes everything, bunch of scum bags.

The fact that they have patients on plants is absolutely ridiculous.

Got links on those the suits? How does a crop accidently end up in a feild?

Most the guys I know have no issues with Monsanto, even the higher seed costs the increased yeild and lower operation costs make up for it.

The crops end up in different farm fields from the seeds spreading, either by wind, animals, or any other way. Monsanto has sued 410 farmers either for having second generation seed (common farming practice) or illegal/unintentional use of Monsanto's seeds. Happened to my Uncles farm back in Maryland, they tried to take the whole farm over alfalfa grass.

I am as republican as it gets, but this Monsanto corporation can get the hell out as far as I'm concerned.

Link Here

That article talkes about hold over seed, that was then replanted. Everyone of those farmers know that is illegal per the supreme court ruling and the agreement they did when the bought the initial seed. There are lots of seed companies out there. Play with fire you get burned. Also that article is highly pointed.... Think about wind blown seed for a minute....the traceable gene is in the plant, that would take a lot of seed/plants to make the parts per million traceable

But now I'm really interested in the Alfafla suit. Was he selling seed or hay?

GTT, that's exactly what I was talking about. They're starting to see new strains of weeds that are immune to 'roundup'. Weeds are evolving and building up resistance. But yes, BOBO, it's true that farmers have been sued over cross-pollination even though they used NO Monsanto seed. Easy to check out on the internet.

Find ONE other company that regularly sues it's customer base. Weird Shiite. Monsanto has produced more toxic chemicals than any other company, including PCBs and 'Agent orange' to name two. It has an extremely bad track record for environmental contamination as well. There's a reason for stereotypes and they are the stereotypical corporation that puts profits above human health concerns...That's why people, especially farmers, their client base, loathe them.

I read many of the stories from farmers, and other folks who gave their own personal accounts of how Monsanto treated them and or sued them. Not the Monsanto press release from their lawyers. Many stories can be confirmed and not just the ones that fit Monsantos storyline.

They'll own the worlds food supply too one day. In thirty years we'll be eating Monsanto GMO 'Soylent green'... That's a scary thought.

I reckon I should start adding another 1/2 acre to the plot and recoupe some "feed"
for next years planting. But how to protect against weavils etc? Last year I planted
milo I had left over, a couple of bags I stored in my garage. None of it came up.
The feed store said if you don't plant it quick weavils will destroy all of it within
a few months. Some countries have banned GMO. It seems MON has a monopoly on it.

What??? They have 1% of the world seed market.

Man reality is slipping away from you

Then those farmers could sue them for destroying thier non-GMO crop. Infact many are begging for it to happen. Monsanto doesn't go after cross pollination for that reason, everyone of thier lawsuits are based off breech of contract. The contract you sign when you buy thier seed.

Out side of alfalfa(a perennial) its easily proven. If I have a second generation GMO seed which it would be via cross pollination , then the stalk it's self would be GMO gene free.

Internet is full of a lot of news stories that seldom revel the truth...

Those are your sources? Why those aren't biased at all

80% of the corn market isn't going to be monsanto. There's more than Dekalb out there you realize?

Once again though, go ahead and get rid of those companies. After all look how much proof there is they are harmful. Oh wait there isn't any other than propaganda from organic and natural websites. Sorry to tell you but without those companies we'd be screwed. You realize predictions show we need to double food production by 2050 to keep up with population growth? Do you realize how many people would die if we switched to all organic production.

Norman Borlaug himself said it was impossible.

Are you claiming a majority of food produced is GMO but your laughing saying that 80% of corn is GMO? I don't get it, 90 percent of corn in the country is grown for corn syrup use, look it up. Can you imagine if that changed to 90 percent was organic corn grown for human consumption??? The problem is not growing food, the problem is getting it to the people who are starving across the world. Can you provide any sources to what you are stating? There are several studies that show GMO foods are bad for human health, can you imagine if we double the food supply with known toxic food for the growing population?

No, I'm saying there other companies than Monsanto. Yall seem to think Monsanto is the only company that sells seed. I'm not saying there isn't a majority of GM corn grown, just that it's not all from one company.

it is absolutely and utterly impossible to produce the amount of food we do today by organic production.

You're the one that needs to produce studies showing they are toxic. Because there is none.

I'll wait while you go find all these peer reviewed studies that shows GM crops are toxic to humans. Peer reviewed too, not an opinion piece from organicnaturalgreenliving. Com or the rat study that was withdrawn for being a load of crap.

BTW, I make a living working in agricultural research so please teach me something I can share with the scientists at the research station tomorrow.

Farmers are trying to sue them, takes a lot of time and money.

Link Here

Did you read your link? It supports my viewpoint.

It discussed non peer reviewed and peer reviewed articles. It itself from what I can gather is not. Funny how every peer reviewed article it talks about, the authors try to discredit the actual peer reviewed article that said there was no issues with GM foods. Basically he tried to make an excuse for every legitimate study he put in the chapter.

at the end however they flat out admitted there were only opinions on the health risks.

I'm very aware of that suit, I'm also very aware of the out come. There is a reason I mentioned organic farmers earlier.

If you knew anything about the suit it would show you that the reason they lost is because Monsanto has never sued anyone for cross pollination. That and the science behind cross pollination shows the likely hood of less then 2% on the extreme end, most is less the a percentage point. The day Monsanto sues for cross pollination is the day they open themselves up for any little bit of cross pollination out there.

Again 2% of seed coming from a section of corn is very minimal. Every suit Monsanto has went after was breach of contract for hold over.

We farm a pretty big chunck of ground. I've used a plethora of seed companies. Some are 100% competors to Monsanto some have licensing agreements with Monsanto. If I toss in the other acreage some of my crop sharers farm acreage wise it becomes very substantial. None of us hate or have issue with Monsanto. We also use to own a grain elevator. It's a pretty simple concept. When you sign a contract not to reuse harvested seed, dont do it.

The science behind the harmfulness of GMO is fiction. You would of died a long time ago.

Uhhh... Did you read the conclusion in chapter 16?

"From the results, the conclusion seems inescapable that the present crude method of genetic modification has not delivered GM crops that are predictably safe and wholesome."

Ultimately, there have not been enough studies done, if you would like to be a guinea pig, by all means go for it.

Familiar with the case. He wasn't just a farmer, he was a seed seller/breeder also. Why I said earlier they go after the harvest and replant.

He could of sold the seed for oil, but he choose to keep it and replant it. He purposely keep his highest concentrations of cross pollinated patented seed. He then knowingly planted patented seed. End of story.

he wasn't sued for procession or cross pollination.. He was sued for knowningly planting patented seed and selling it. You don't get that high of concentrations from cross pollination alone, when all said and after two years of selected harvest of the patented plants he had planted 1000 acres in 98% patented seed he had keep over.

Please read about the suits before you post them. It's not helping your case.

If I did same thing with DuPont seed they would sue me as would any other company.

Yes, I read the whole chapter.

the author says there are opinions but little data to back up saying GM crops are bad and then says that? There's another one of his opinions lol. Crude method is a load of BS, it's been going on for years and works pretty good.

That book is a joke. I said to find a peer reviewed study which it is not. Every single legitimate study it talked about said that GM crops are fine lol. The only thing he could hold to were non peer reviewed studies. When someone talks about a topic and criticizes every legitimate study and then praises the unproven ones, it's clear to see they have an agenda.

You honestly can't tell me you think GM crops are toxic? If so not only would we all be dead, there would have been studies that shown that long ago and they would not be in production any more.

I believe your missing the point, your saying the farmers should sue for GMOs destroying their crops, they have tried. You have stated cross pollination has not happened with GMOs, it did. Any plant that cross pollinates with a Monsanto plant is now property of Monsanto regardless of how it happened. This is what the court ruled, therefore, any farmer who is unknowingly growing Roundup Ready plants is now in big, big trouble (which is what happened to my uncle).

Look at the sources provided in the book, the peer reviewed sources are pretty clear.

Why do you think "toxic" means you will die over night? Do you think cigarettes are toxic? Is lead based paint toxic? Is chewing tobacco toxic? All these things cause illnesses that will kill you over time. All I am saying is I would rather eat known healthier better tasting food rather than be a risk of ingesting carcinogens. Again, there are not many studies because these foods were released without testing which is crazy. Other countries have done tests and found them to be hazardous to health which is why the foods are labeled in stores and some countries outlaw GMOs all together.

Wrong.
First I'd didn't say cross pollination doesn't happen it does but not to a level that is significant again 2-3% on the extreme end. As far as suit you have to show damage. The organic case set precedent that you have to show loss. They could not show loss via the cross polilnation (pecentage wise and/or monetary loss, etc) or via Monsanto itself because they have never sued anyone for having or selling cross pollinated seed that wasn't intentionally planted.. They have only sued those that harvested seed, kept and replanted.

In the Canadian case canola harvest bushel rates are avg 1748lbs per acre. Planting is roughly 3lbs. He know which plants where cross pollinated and only keep over that seed to replant. He only need a rate .001% of cross polunation to do that.


Again you didn't read or understand the suit nor is that what was ruled. The ruling was based on the fact he purposely, knowingly and admittedly selected what he knew to by patented seed and replanted it.

His crop was found to be 98% pure patented seed, they ruled that he did infact infringe on the patent. Since he purposely sought after and keep the patent seed and thus why his crop was 98% patented plants.

Again he had a 1000 acres of it. All he needed to do(which he did) was keep 3000 pounds out of a field that produces 1,748,000lbs that's a .001 cross pollination rate. Not hard to do if you know what your looking for basically 2 acres. If he would of just sold the hybridized seed he would of been fine, but no he purposely planted it.
Infact he mostly would of been compensated by Monsanto if we would of brought it to thier attention.
I

Your agruing with the wrong guy I've paid seed bills for up to 250,000lbs of seed(corn, milo, wheat, Alfafla) in one year. I have first hand experience with all the major seed companies. Also have generations of farming experience.

Again you don't re-plant patented seed. Been that way for 20 plus years.

Wowza. I didn't intend to kick a fire ant bed with this post.
It is good to see feed back from folks whom are farmers.

Cheers

The biggest problem with GMO is the lack of genetic diversity, basically planting mono-cultures. The earth has had GD for eons. In one lifetime we are destroying genetic variability. Weeds and insects are becoming resistant which requires more pesticide/herbicide and could lead to soil contamination requiring more fertilizer and the possibility of one pathogen wiping out complete monocultures.

Not to mention, roundup is a known carcinogen and destroys good bacteria in the gut. Bacteria that is needed to maintain good health.

Care to show us these studies that say that? I can say my opinion. All day but it doesn't mean anything unless it can be backed up factually.

Out of all the herbicides I use roundup is probably the safest. You can about drink the stuff.

If you think roundup is the devil the I guess you don't know about enlist or extendflex cotton lol

30 grams will kill a human. It is a known endocrine disrupter. It kills living things, does it not? You guys must own stock in Monsanto.

30 grams will kill a human. It is a known endocrine disrupter. It kills living things, does it not? You guys must own stock in Monsanto.

Tell me where I have discredited a legitimate study? The link gonetotexas posted tried to do that because they all said GMOs were fine.

I'm waiting..

He isn't after GMO any more... He couldn't discredit them. He is after roundup now. I'm curious what his alternative would be for herbicide

Just like he skipped right by the cross pollination thing without responding.

Roundup has not been shown to cause actual harm to people as consumers. It is much safer than most herbicides.

I wonder what his take is on BT. After all I saw it an an ingredient the other day on a organic mosquito control.

He isn't after GMO any more... He couldn't discredit them. He is after roundup now. I'm curious what his alternative would be for herbicide

I'm not deflecting attention. I do believe the farmer that sued Monsanto for harassment and trespassing and charging him with patent infringement. Guess what HE WON! Proving (at least in this case) Monsanto DOES sue for cross-pollination. THEY LOST IN COURT! He won. See the documentary, 'David vs Monsanto' or another documentary, 'The world according to Monsanto'. The latter is very hard to find because, not surprisingly, Monsanto has tried to pull the film off shelves.

Wrong.
First I'd didn't say cross pollination doesn't happen it does but not to a level that is significant again 2-3% on the extreme end. As far as suit you have to show damage. The organic case set precedent that you have to show loss. They could not show loss via the cross polilnation (pecentage wise and/or monetary loss, etc) or via Monsanto itself because they have never sued anyone for having or selling cross pollinated seed that wasn't intentionally planted.. They have only sued those that harvested seed, kept and replanted.

In the Canadian case canola harvest bushel rates are avg 1748lbs per acre. Planting is roughly 3lbs. He know which plants where cross pollinated and only keep over that seed to replant. He only need a rate .001% of cross polunation to do that.


Again you didn't read or understand the suit nor is that what was ruled. The ruling was based on the fact he purposely, knowingly and admittedly selected what he knew to by patented seed and replanted it.

His crop was found to be 98% pure patented seed, they ruled that he did infact infringe on the patent. Since he purposely sought after and keep the patent seed and thus why his crop was 98% patented plants.

Again he had a 1000 acres of it. All he needed to do(which he did) was keep 3000 pounds out of a field that produces 1,748,000lbs that's a .001 cross pollination rate. Not hard to do if you know what your looking for basically 2 acres. If he would of just sold the hybridized seed he would of been fine, but no he purposely planted it.
Infact he most likely would of been compensated by Monsanto if we would of brought it to thier attention.
I

Your agruing with the wrong guy I've paid seed bills for up to 250,000lbs of seed(corn, milo, wheat, Alfafla) in one year. I have first hand experience with all the major seed companies. Also have generations of farming experience.

Again you don't re-plant patented seed. Been that way for 20 plus years.

You guys remind me of the CEO's of the tobacco industry that all said before congress,'We do not believe cigarettes are addictive". Laughable. And obviously you didn't care to even watch the trailer to 'David versus Monsanto'. Percy Schmeiser went all the way to the Canadian supreme court and beat Monsanto at their own lawsuit. I know, I know, Monsanto is only looking out for the little guy. Such an altruistic company would NEVER intentionally harm a flea...Humans, yes, fleas no. They've been sued for millions for pollution, and for false advertising about the safety of their products, stating that roundup is biodegradeable, when it is not. Anything more y'all would like to discuss? Watch the 7 second trailer on 'David versus Monsanto' then get back with me.

For the record, I believe chemicals as a whole are generally good. But when corporations and government collude to hide the truth from consumers about the safety of a product, that's bad. My Mother worked for 'Rohm and Haas' as a chemical salesperson for thirty years. I know the benefits usually outweigh the downsides. If you truly believe having roundup (poison) in our bodies is a good thing, well, I'm at a loss for words.

He won! What are you talking about. He walked out of the courtroom a winner. Monsanto sued him for $400,000 dollars, tried to take his farm, his families way of life. They lost and had to pay for cleanup, court costs, etc. Are y'all living in an alternate universe or something? Hard to believe anyone would side with Monsanto on this. I would expect a little, albeit small, compassion from a fellow farmer. SMH.

How can you ever remotely express this when round up is so much safer then the alternatives, thus the popularity. But you already know that or you would of provided an alternative when I asked you earlier.

BOBO, I don't drink cokes, eat many chips and only eat grass fed beef, and very little processed foods. Most of the corn produced today is used for ethanol or high fructose corn syrup anyway, not for human consumption.

On a small scale around the house use vinegar in a spray bottle. On a larger scale, dry molasses at a rate of 20lbs per 1000 sq ft. Both work well and don't cause problems.

I'm fruity huh...A nutcase maybe, fruity, uh, no.

You obviously have some comprehensive problems. He lost his entire crop.

He purposely tried to defraud, and pass it off as his own.

I don't know what kind of morals you have but that wrong on so many levels. Do you even understand what he ACTUALLY did? He tried to basically steal a GMO patent for his own use.

Like I said earlier I actually farm, and no farmer I know would do that. You apparently aren't a farm nor do you have any morals.

It got even better. Vinegar or molasses to farm with

Get ready to pay 140x more for everything you buy now.

Don't for get the increase amount of tilled ground to grow that much milo

I've finally figured it out. You guys have signed contracts with Monsanto. 'Nuff said. I don't blame you for taking sides. They're watching you.

I just watched a show on Netflix called Food Inc.

Talked about Monsanto seed patents etc.

It was very interesting and showed many examples of small farmers being put out of business by not following the "big" food company rules of how to raise their crop/livestock. Chicken, eggs, cows, grain etc. it also shows how large company's are changing the genetics of the animals we eat to be more profitable. Most of the changes are disgusting, especially chickens.

My wife will only eat meat that comes from the grocery store. After watching that movie, her perspective has changed and now is "trying" to eat wild game, local veggies, and beef from our friends ranches.

Shop more at farmers markets and stay away from commercialized chicken.