ipl-logo

Summary Of Pros And Cons This Morning Monsanto

1628 Words7 Pages

Monsanto's CEO Hugh Grant went on "CBS This Morning" earlier today to discuss all the concerns people have about the corporations practices and products. This article will discuss all the talking points of that interview and his responses.

The first talking point was the Safety of GMO crops, to which Grant used the standard Monsanto misinformation for is answer: GMOs are one of the most studied product in the world. The reason I categorize this as misinformation instead of disinformation is because it is not an outright lie; there are indeed a lot of studies on GMOs, the majority showing GMOs are safe. The only problem is most of these studies are what I call "corporate science", which is when a corporation either funds or directly …show more content…

When I decided to write about this practice it was because Monsanto and the pharmaceutical industry were using this practice to get products they knew had safety issues approved at the deterrent of our wellbeing. So, Grant is technically correct, there are studies showing that GMOs are safe for human consumption. Although, he is leaving out 90 day "long-term" studies conducted or funded by Monsanto are used to "prove" GMOs. However, 90 days is laughable for a long term study when you are using Sprague-Dawley mice, a type of mice traditionally used for long term studies that last 2 years. So, it is not surprising to find out that independent studies contradict the findings of the flawed 90 day studies. The most famous independent study was when …show more content…

I wish she would have brought up that they spent the same amount to fight similar ballets in other states, or asked how much they spent lobbying to get the dark act started. But, it was a pleasant surprise that she even brought up that they spent 10 million in two states to make sure consumers did not know when their GMO products were in the food they

Show More
Related
225 Words | 1 Pages

In the article entitled Monsanto's Harvest of Fear, Donald L. Barley and James B. Steele demonstrate that Monsanto already dominates the United States food chain with their genetically modified seeds. They are currently targeting milk production which is just as scary as the corporation's legal battles against the small farmers. This situation leads to a history of toxic infections or diseases. There were many disagreements between Gary Rinehart and a stranger about the innovative seeds. They were under surveillance and an investigator came in the picture.

Read More
1559 Words | 7 Pages

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to reveal that my family and all of my neighbors are row-crop farmers, and we raise both GMO corn and GMO soybeans. It is our attitude that we are stewards of the land and of our animals and we would not do anything to either one like Katherine Paul describes. So, I still agree with Caplan that we should be using GMOs to produce food such as Golden Rice that could save billions of people from going blind or

Read More
437 Words | 2 Pages

Most this article is filled with claims backed up by research and

Read More
1121 Words | 5 Pages

The Non-GMO talk passionately about the effects GMOs have on human bodies and the environment. They do have valid statements such as, “In the absence of credible independent long-term feeding studies, the safety of GMOs is unknown” (Non-GMO Project). This is completely true. There have been no long-term studies on what GMOs can do to humans which can be a caution people can take when deciding of they want to consume products that have been genetically modified. However, the other of this argument, the people against GMOs, have created such a panic within the rest of the country that many decide to get GMO free products just in case there are negative effects.

Read More
715 Words | 3 Pages

It is not a case of GMOs not accomplishing what they were designed for it is a dilemma where people are now consuming more, and on top of that ingesting more of the detrimental items since it is in such high demand for their inexpensiveness and “quality”. In addition, “very little testing has been done on GM foods since genetic engineering is a new field, and long-term results are unclear,”(UC Santa Cruz). When reading this people may not even ponder what this could indicate in terms of their

Read More
1053 Words | 5 Pages

The corporate giant, Monsanto has in the past years, had way too much effect on the food business across the world. Monsanto advertises clean, healthy and safe food, but they are secretly poisoning human food sources using different pesticides and fertilizers that include threatening chemicals. They are known to abuse the livestock they tell us are raised in a happy environment. “These farms are not like the ones you grew up dreaming of owning, they are dark, cramped and dirty areas that are full of disease and suffering. ”(Pollan)

Read More
902 Words | 4 Pages

According to the documentary, in reference to rBGH, lead veterinarian Richard Burroughs, in charge of reviewing the studies submitted to the FDA, was quoted as saying “…[a]gency officials suppressed and manipulated data….” If indeed these claims are true, there’s no denying that Monsanto has all the necessary weapons it needs to control what the world

Read More
598 Words | 3 Pages

A corporatist markets off what they know would put them in financial ruin if people found out the truth behind what they claim is bettering the world. Once gathering enough positive claims, they proceed anyway. This is the quintessence of GMO marketing. Now, as the newest generation, millennials are likely to have been fed these genetically modified foods growing up, but have the technology to research and make their own intelligent and informed decision on whether these foods should be continued to be produced and distributed throughout the world. It is not being overly suspicious to not believe a corporation such as Monsanto, the leading agrochemical company, when with minimal research they publicize that GMOs are safe to consume.

Read More
116 Words | 1 Pages

I believe Monsanto acted unethically when they went above and beyond to deceive their customers. The lied about the safety of their product. I know that marketing for a genetically modified seed is hard because a lot of people believe it’s harmful, but Monsanto shouldn’t have claimed that independent researchers support their product and believe it is safe, meanwhile they were editing the reviews and providing the data. They didn’t only cause harm to their customers (through their product), but they also lied and deceived to get more customers. Monsanto should have proved the safety of their product in a different way, or found a way to make the product less toxic and harmful to people.

Read More
1226 Words | 5 Pages

Consequently, farmers were forced to use GM seeds due to a lack of alternatives. As the global seed industry was a monopoly to Monsanto, they were able to charge higher prices and produce lesser quantities and alternatives. GM crops necessitate an increased demand for pesticides and herbicides and with the addition of higher costs; the outcome Monsanto created is an expensive crop that has the potential to be extremely harmful to animals and humans. In this way, Monsanto fails to meet the criteria of following the deontological ethical system. Their motives were, once again, unclean.

Read More
1124 Words | 5 Pages

In the 1980’s, the first genetically modified tobacco and tomato crops were introduced and sold in China and have been, controversially, around ever since. Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, according to the World Health Organization, are foods derived from organisms whose genetic material has been modified through genetic engineering. Since the first time genetically modified foods were introduced in the 1980's, there has been a debate on whether or not these alien foods are harmful to our health. According to Jeffrey Smith, author of the book Seeds of Deception, in Another Reason for Schools to Ban Genetically Engineered Foods, he states, “Gene insertion creates unpredicted, irreversible changes” (486). Clearly, the uncertainty for

Read More
1096 Words | 5 Pages

GMOs are considered to be the next agricultural “innovation” as some would say, but this is incorrect. They think that GMOs are a way to feed everyone on earth. Giving them the nutrients that they need to grow in conditions that most plants can’t live in, while not causing harm to physical and environmental health. They are wrong. GMOs do more harm than good.

Read More
450 Words | 2 Pages

In previous years, the company primarily focused on chemical products. Ferrell, L., Ferrell, O. and Throne (2011) note one example, which was a product that contained toxic ingredients. The ramification’s resulted in lawsuits for years to come (Ferrell, L., Ferrell, O. & Thorne, 2011). Conversely, the Monsanto Company switched its attention to genetically modified foods, although, criticisms were directed toward the lack of appropriate regulations such as consistency in testing the products. Additionally, the Monsanto Company was bashed by environmental organizations, which weakened the company, as well as, the farmer’s profits (Monsanto,

Read More
1471 Words | 6 Pages

This would be fine if the GMOs actually showed safe activities, like they claim to be, but they are scientifically proven otherwise. “GE crops can offer less nutrition, lead to antibiotic resistance, and often contain as many or even more toxic pesticides” (Cummins 1). The United States, is the only country to legalize the use of the rBGH hormone, in which no other nation agrees on the practice, responding with, “... a United Nations food standards body, has refused to verify that rBGH is safe” (Cummins

Read More
966 Words | 4 Pages

It’s a popular topic on the media that GMOs are bad for the human body. Well, little did the they know that ninety percent of corn grown in the US is genetically modified (Margie Kelly), and the body can 't even distinguish between GMOs and non-GMOs! There are people debating that GMOs are unhealthy, bad for the economy and even the environment. These people must be uneducated on this topic. Genetically modified crops improve our society because they allow farmers to yield a larger crop, improve the quality their crop, and lessen the negative environmental impacts of their crops.

Read More

More about Summary Of Pros And Cons This Morning Monsanto

Related Topics

Open Document