Click here to see Vandana Shiva describe what patents mean to Monsanto. Monsanto responded with a pledge never to commercialize Terminator. However Monsanto never pledged to stop research. Vegetables Though fruits and vegetables remain, for the most part, free of genetic engineering some GE squash and papaya varieties have been commercialized , Monsanto now owns a large part of the fruit and vegetable seed market. In Monsanto formed the International Seed Group, a holding company to invest in vegetable and fruit seed businesses.
Cliquez ici pour vous inscrire. Share this:. Search Search for:. Monsanto Monsanto is now owned by Bayer. These studies associate exposure to glyphosate with a number of negative effects on human and animal health, including long term or chronic effects: Birth defects in the Argentinean state of Chaco, where GM soya and rice crops are heavily sprayed with glyphosate, increased nearly fourfold over the years to Similar defects were also found in woman from Paraguay exposed to glyphosate-based herbicides during pregnancy.
These defects were compatible with those induced in laboratory experiments at much lower concentrations than normal commercial glyphosate concentrations. Glyphosate is a suspected endocrine disruptor. This means it could disrupt production of vital reproductive hormones, such as progesterone and oestrogen.
Published studies demonstrate various endocrine effects in animals and human cells associated with glyphosate. Together, these studies suggest that glyphosate may contribute to cancer. The report shows: Industry including Monsanto has known from its own studies since the s that glyphosate causes malformations in experimental animals at high doses.
Industry has known since that these effects also occur at lower and mid doses. The German government has known since at least that glyphosate causes malformations.
Fear quickly arose from this announcement, and later became a governmental concern once giant agricultural biotechnology corporation, Monsanto acquired Delta and Land Pine Company — mastermind behind the feared terminator seed [3]. Although Monsanto pledged to not commercialize the seed, tensions grew between chemical, seed and biotechnological companies; meanwhile movements against the terminator seed were led by consumers, environmentalist and sustainable development activists [4].
Monsanto claims the terminator seed would solve the problem they created of genetically modified crops contaminating neighbouring crops [5]. These genetically modified seeds have little benefits to the farmers. Those who are in advantage are the seed companies. The seed prevents farmers from re-planting seeds throughout the seasons by producing a sterile seed, which is unable to reproduce [6].
Another advantage would be the improvements for monopoly seed pricing decreasing price discrimination between farmers. But this again benefits the seed corporations as well, by paying farmers equally, with no risk of paying a farmer who reuses their seeds less expensive for the farmer the same as a farmer who does not [9]. Aggressive marketing schemes target uneducated farmers, unable to see through the scientific claims being promoted by the major agrochemical corporations [10]. The introduction of the terminator seed means the traditional method of saving seeds for certain environmental conditions is obsolete [11].
This isolates farmers from the corporations, harming their much-needed relationship. The terminator seed has the ability to decrease crop diversity, pollinate nearby crops with the sterile gene, as well as wipe out agricultural populations [16] , leading the debate to a question of ethics.
Although the seeds are intended for the use of already genetically modified [17] , if disease strikes within the crop, it can wipe out the entire field [18]. With the reduction of feasible crops because of terminator seed complications within developing countries means the dependency on developed countries [19]. Monsanto reaps many profits from its terminator seed product. Monsanto vowed not to commercialize terminator seeds in , but may choose to in the future as the increased use of this technology would create a stronger monopoly for the company than patents.
Terminator technology makes it impossible for farmers to use their traditional right to save the seed of their harvest for planting in the next crop season. This increases spending as farmers now have to buy seeds yearly from suppliers, and also inhibits farmers from breeding newer, stronger and more locally adapted varieties of seeds. Environmental non-government organizations NGOs are impacted by terminator seeds due to the immense risk they pose to the environment.
This causes NGOs such as Greenpeace to go to court with Monsanto in order to protect the planet and also, in this case, the ethical rights of farmers.
After glyphosate - the herbicide chemical in Roundup and other GMOs - was classified as a probable human carcinogen in March , six NGOs in Europe filed formal legal complaints against Monsanto for denying the cancer-causing effects.
Biodiversity is damaged when the sterilization of genes occur because it is then impossible for those exact genes to be reproduced. Once PCB is absorbed into human tissue, there it forever remains. In recent years, residents near the village of Groesfaen, in southern Wales, have noticed vile odors emanating from an old quarry outside the village. As it turns out, Monsanto had dumped thousands of tons of waste from its nearby PCB plant into the quarry.
British authorities are struggling to decide what to do with what they have now identified as among the most contaminated places in Britain. What had Monsanto known—or what should it have known—about the potential dangers of the chemicals it was manufacturing?
The evidence that Monsanto refused to face questions about their toxicity is quite clear. In the company tried to sell the navy a hydraulic fluid for its submarines called Pydraul , which contained PCBs. Monsanto supplied the navy with test results for the product. But the navy decided to run its own tests. Ten years later, a biologist conducting studies for Monsanto in streams near the Anniston plant got quick results when he submerged his test fish.
Jeff Kleinpeter, of Baton Rouge, was accused by Monsanto of making misleading claims just for telling customers his cows are free of artificial bovine growth hormone. When the Food and Drug Administration F. Hodges reviewed steps under way to limit disclosure of the information. In truth, there was enormous cause for public alarm. Jeff Kleinpeter takes very good care of his dairy cows. In the winter he turns on heaters to warm their barns.
Monsanto would like to change the way Jeff Kleinpeter and his family do business. No one knows what effect, if any, the hormone has on milk or the people who drink it.
Studies have not detected any difference in the quality of milk produced by cows that receive rBGH, or rBST, a term by which it is also known. For Kleinpeter, it was simply a matter of giving consumers more information about their product. But giving consumers that information has stirred the ire of Monsanto.
After years of scientific debate and public controversy, the F. That decision allowed the company to market the artificial hormone. The effect of the hormone is to increase milk production, not exactly something the nation needed then—or needs now. The U. Monsanto began selling the supplement in under the name Posilac. Monsanto acknowledges that the possible side effects of rBST for cows include lameness, disorders of the uterus, increased body temperature, digestive problems, and birthing difficulties.
The F. Canada and the European Union have never approved the commercial sale of the artificial hormone. Today, nearly 15 years after the F. Not only have there been no studies, he adds, but the data that does exist all comes from Monsanto. However F. Michael R. Taylor was a staff attorney and executive assistant to the F. Michael A. Friedman, formerly the F. Linda J.
Fisher was an assistant administrator at the E. She became a vice president of Monsanto, from to , only to return to the E. William D. Ruckelshaus, former E. He wrote the Supreme Court opinion in a crucial G. Donald Rumsfeld never served on the board or held any office at Monsanto, but Monsanto must occupy a soft spot in the heart of the former defense secretary. Rumsfeld was chairman and C. From the beginning some consumers have consistently been hesitant to drink milk from cows treated with artificial hormones.
This is one reason Monsanto has waged so many battles with dairies and regulators over the wording of labels on milk cartons. It has sued at least two dairies and one co-op over labeling. Critics of the artificial hormone have pushed for mandatory labeling on all milk products, but the F.
Its attempt to force the F. And the F. Blocked at the federal level, Monsanto is pushing for action by the states. The ban was to take effect February 1, On this issue, the tide may be shifting against Monsanto.
Supermarket chains such as Kroger, Publix, and Safeway are embracing them. Some other companies have turned away from rBGH products, including Starbucks, which has banned all milk products from cows treated with rBGH. Plenty of other cases are ping-ponging through the courts — last fall, a California judge ordered the destruction of transgenic sugar beet plantings , but that ruling was later reversed, allowing the crops to stay in the ground for now.
Future steps: Using nature as a guide to feed the world. Beyond broad-spectrum herbicide resistance, the future of transgenic seeds lies in loftier and more difficult goals like increased crop yields, drought tolerance, improved nitrogen uptake and even value-added traits to make mass-produced food more nutritious.
Monsanto is working with the African Agricultural Technology Foundation to license the technology it used to make drought-tolerant corn, which it hopes will debut in this country by Buffett Foundation, will help African companies develop their own strains, which theoretically can thrive in dry areas of western Africa.
Ursin is no longer in the lab, now prospecting for other biotech companies Monsanto might like to partner with or buy someday. But she said she looks forward to standing in a field full of omega-3 soybeans next year, which for her will be a dream come true.
Monsanto is far from the only biotech company marching down this path. Archrival DuPont, which produces transgenic seeds under its Pioneer brand, and Swiss firm Syngenta are also working toward value-added crops. Syngenta is producing golden rice with higher concentrations of vitamin A, for instance. Studies have shown the added trait could combat vitamin A deficiency in developing countries. And DuPont is making its own soybeans capable of producing healthier oils.
Monsanto executives hope their omega-3 soybeans will be available worldwide by , too. Though it has met with resistance — especially in Europe and, to a growing extent, in countries like India and China — this new wave of value-added traits is the next step for genetic engineering.
For one thing, modifying food to provide better nutrition and greater yield seems much more honorable than simply selling more herbicide. And as patents expire, seed companies will seek to profit from characteristics that could help farmers market their wares to health-conscious consumers. Even the Vatican has weighed in , saying developed nations have a moral responsibility to guarantee food security.
Vatican science advisers released a page document last fall that said GM crops are no more dangerous than natural evolution, and that opponents in developed countries are unjustified in opposing them. Such policy debates will continue, but transgenic crops, like those frail little soybeans struggling forth in the Monsanto machine shop, are very likely the food of the future.
Republicans and Democrats have both made appearances in Glasgow for the giant climate conference. The quasar J is 13 billion light-years away from Earth.
0コメント