10 ms·

I really think there'd be less opposition to GMOs were it not for the fact that this one company -- a firm with a history of somewhat scummy and antagonistic be

by api 13y ago

I really think there'd be less opposition to GMOs were it not for the fact that this one company -- a firm with a history of somewhat scummy and antagonistic behavior -- didn't control the entire industry.

pod4369 13y ago
They don't control the entire industry. Way to give in to blatant propaganda.
- nas 13y ago
  No kidding. How about Bayer, BASF, Syngenta, Pioneer, Dow Agro? There are many players in agriculture, it's a huge industry.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- arkades 13y ago
  http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01103.pdf http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifprid... The data suggests that it is hyperbole to say that Monsanto owns the market, but judging by the CR4 and HHI - standard economics measures for concentration of market power - it's fair to say that the GMO market is very concentrated, and that Monsanto leads the pack by a significant margin.
jrkelly 13y ago
More big players than the mobile OS industry: http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/625294/revealed_how_seed_market_is_controlled_by_monsanto_syngenta_bayer_dow_dupont.html http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/625294/reveal...
pvnick 13y ago
>didn't control the entire industry While this is obvious hyperbole, I agree with your general sentiment. In fact, GMOs, perhaps more-so than any other modern technology, have an unprecedented potential to save billions of lives. Golden Rice alone could save the lives of one million children every year. As a biochem major, GMOs are something I'm passionate about, and it really aggravates me when I see armchair scientists (read: people who watched a youtube video) decrying them as dangerous and calling for their banning. I would say these people are partially to blame for the regulatory nightmare that Golden Rice advocates are facing, meanwhile one million children go blind and die terrible deaths each year from vitamin A deficiency.
- manmal 13y ago
  >unprecedented potential to save billions of lives Potential, yes; but not with massive financial interests behind it. In a world where shiploads of wheat are held back in order to game the wheat market, things need to change before GMOs can cure 3rd world hunger. I've read that GMOs have to be bought anew for every season because the harvested crops can't be used as seeds. Is that actually true?
  - qwertzlcoatl 13y ago
    > Potential, yes; but not with massive financial interests behind it. This is not necessarily true in every case. pvnick mentioned Golden Rice. The Co-inventor of the genetically engineered, vitamin-A-rich strain of rice Potrykus has spearheaded an effort to have golden rice distributed for free to poor farmers. This required several companies which had intellectual property rights to the results of Beyer's research to license it for free. In fact, Monsanto was one of the first companies to grant free licenses. If the substinence farmer doesn't make more than $10,000 per year, he is freed from paying any royalities. The farmers are even permitted to keep and replant the seeds. This is in the specific case of Golden Rice. Maybe somebody can jump in and tell a horrific Monsanto story.
  - CapitalistCartr 13y ago
    Yes, they're patented and copying them is a violation of the "user agreement". http://grist.org/news/supreme-court-hands-a-big-win-to-monsanto-on-gmo-seeds/ http://grist.org/news/supreme-court-hands-a-big-win-to-monsa...
  - samolang 13y ago
    Yes [1]. But for good reason. It is similar to pharmaceutical companies. They invest millions into inventing products. They should be entitled to a monopoly on the product for some period of time in order to re-coup their investment. [1] http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/why-does-monsanto-sue-farmers-who-save-seeds.aspx http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/why-does-monsanto-su...
  - genwin 13y ago
tptacek 13y ago
That antagonistic behavior being what? I ask because there's a commonly-held belief about Monsanto that they, in effect, wait for the wind to blow IP-encumbered seeds onto fields and then sue the farmers who manage those fields for royalties. The reality is that Monsanto sues farmers when they take Roundup-Ready crops, plant them, and then use Roundup on those crops. You can't do that innocently; if you spray Roundup on non-Monsanto crops, you kill the crop. If there's a case where Monsanto sued a farmer simply for having Roundup-Ready seeds or plants on their farms, I haven't seen it, and I've (a) looked and (b) asked around a lot. If you just mean that patent enforcement is inherently scummy and antagonistic, well, I have no snappy response for that. Although again note that the problem with software patents is that you can implement some obvious piece of functionality and get sued by someone with a ridiculous patent. Like I said, nobody accidentally uses the whole Roundup system on a farm.
- sigzero 13y ago
  I thought there was pretty much a whole movie (Food Inc) documenting that very thing (i.e. cross contamination). Please don't try and say that the hatred going towards Monsanto isn't deserved because it most assuredly is. http://www.damemagazine.com/2013/04/03/monsanto-six-truths-and-lie http://www.damemagazine.com/2013/04/03/monsanto-six-truths-a...
  - blhack 13y ago
    Link to it. There are lots of movies saying lots of things. I'll make you a documentary implying how ASU eats babies if you want me to. That doesn't make it correct. (ASU because it's across the street from my house)
    - cantos 13y ago
      Here's a transcript http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/f/food-inc-script-transcript.html http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/f/food-inc-script... Several people in the farm industry are interviewed. Their statements are not questioned or further investigated by the filmmakers.

by api 13y ago

pod4369 13y ago

They don't control the entire industry. Way to give in to blatant propaganda.

nas 13y ago
No kidding. How about Bayer, BASF, Syngenta, Pioneer, Dow Agro? There are many players in agriculture, it's a huge industry.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
arkades 13y ago
http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01103.pdf http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifprid... The data suggests that it is hyperbole to say that Monsanto owns the market, but judging by the CR4 and HHI - standard economics measures for concentration of market power - it's fair to say that the GMO market is very concentrated, and that Monsanto leads the pack by a significant margin.

jrkelly 13y ago

More big players than the mobile OS industry: http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/625294/revealed_how_seed_market_is_controlled_by_monsanto_syngenta_bayer_dow_dupont.html http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/625294/reveal...

pvnick 13y ago

>didn't control the entire industry While this is obvious hyperbole, I agree with your general sentiment. In fact, GMOs, perhaps more-so than any other modern technology, have an unprecedented potential to save billions of lives. Golden Rice alone could save the lives of one million children every year. As a biochem major, GMOs are something I'm passionate about, and it really aggravates me when I see armchair scientists (read: people who watched a youtube video) decrying them as dangerous and calling for their banning. I would say these people are partially to blame for the regulatory nightmare that Golden Rice advocates are facing, meanwhile one million children go blind and die terrible deaths each year from vitamin A deficiency.

manmal 13y ago
>unprecedented potential to save billions of lives Potential, yes; but not with massive financial interests behind it. In a world where shiploads of wheat are held back in order to game the wheat market, things need to change before GMOs can cure 3rd world hunger. I've read that GMOs have to be bought anew for every season because the harvested crops can't be used as seeds. Is that actually true?
- qwertzlcoatl 13y ago
  > Potential, yes; but not with massive financial interests behind it. This is not necessarily true in every case. pvnick mentioned Golden Rice. The Co-inventor of the genetically engineered, vitamin-A-rich strain of rice Potrykus has spearheaded an effort to have golden rice distributed for free to poor farmers. This required several companies which had intellectual property rights to the results of Beyer's research to license it for free. In fact, Monsanto was one of the first companies to grant free licenses. If the substinence farmer doesn't make more than $10,000 per year, he is freed from paying any royalities. The farmers are even permitted to keep and replant the seeds. This is in the specific case of Golden Rice. Maybe somebody can jump in and tell a horrific Monsanto story.
- CapitalistCartr 13y ago
  Yes, they're patented and copying them is a violation of the "user agreement". http://grist.org/news/supreme-court-hands-a-big-win-to-monsanto-on-gmo-seeds/ http://grist.org/news/supreme-court-hands-a-big-win-to-monsa...
- samolang 13y ago
  Yes [1]. But for good reason. It is similar to pharmaceutical companies. They invest millions into inventing products. They should be entitled to a monopoly on the product for some period of time in order to re-coup their investment. [1] http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/why-does-monsanto-sue-farmers-who-save-seeds.aspx http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/why-does-monsanto-su...
- genwin 13y ago

tptacek 13y ago

That antagonistic behavior being what? I ask because there's a commonly-held belief about Monsanto that they, in effect, wait for the wind to blow IP-encumbered seeds onto fields and then sue the farmers who manage those fields for royalties. The reality is that Monsanto sues farmers when they take Roundup-Ready crops, plant them, and then use Roundup on those crops. You can't do that innocently; if you spray Roundup on non-Monsanto crops, you kill the crop. If there's a case where Monsanto sued a farmer simply for having Roundup-Ready seeds or plants on their farms, I haven't seen it, and I've (a) looked and (b) asked around a lot. If you just mean that patent enforcement is inherently scummy and antagonistic, well, I have no snappy response for that. Although again note that the problem with software patents is that you can implement some obvious piece of functionality and get sued by someone with a ridiculous patent. Like I said, nobody accidentally uses the whole Roundup system on a farm.

sigzero 13y ago
I thought there was pretty much a whole movie (Food Inc) documenting that very thing (i.e. cross contamination). Please don't try and say that the hatred going towards Monsanto isn't deserved because it most assuredly is. http://www.damemagazine.com/2013/04/03/monsanto-six-truths-and-lie http://www.damemagazine.com/2013/04/03/monsanto-six-truths-a...
- blhack 13y ago
  Link to it. There are lots of movies saying lots of things. I'll make you a documentary implying how ASU eats babies if you want me to. That doesn't make it correct. (ASU because it's across the street from my house)
  - cantos 13y ago
    Here's a transcript http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/f/food-inc-script-transcript.html http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/f/food-inc-script... Several people in the farm industry are interviewed. Their statements are not questioned or further investigated by the filmmakers.