Is there any scientific basis for Proposition 37?

  • News
  • Thread starter moonman239
  • Start date
  • #76
67
166
I presume this thread isn't specifically about Monsanto GMO products. Bayer AG also has GMO products and their own herbicide "Ignite".

http://www.bayercropscience.us/products/herbicides/ignite/

Bayer AG uses the trade name Liberty Link on their GMO crops.

http://www.bayercropscience.us/products/herbicides/ignite/libertylink-crops


Bayer has a problem with farmers suing them.

A Bayer AG (BAYN) unit agreed to a $750 million settlement resolving claims with about 11,000 U.S. farmers who said a strain of the company’s genetically modified rice tainted crops and ruined their export value.



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-01/bayer-to-pay-750-million-to-end-lawsuits-over-genetically-modified-rice.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #77
282
0
So it turns out that Prop 37 was not created because we don't have a way to know if the food we eat is genetically engineered. We can know our food is safe by buying foods that are certified organic according to the USDA's organic standards - genetic modification = not organic. It does, however, serve those who can't afford organic foods.

Anyway, today's the day, California. Please do America a favor by voting "YES" on Prop 37! Let's help Monsanto become a pile of dust!
 
  • #79
Averagesupernova
Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,845
772

I think you missed my point. There are a very few instances where Roundup is purchased but not sprayed in places where Roundup ready seed was planted. They can give the stuff away with proof of purchase of the seed. When purchasing Roundup ready seed an agreement is already signed. That makes the customer fairly traceable. Monsanto can cry all they want but I am not too worried about their ability to stay in business.
 
  • #80
Evo
Mentor
23,192
2,996
Anyway, today's the day, California. Please do America a favor by voting "YES" on Prop 37! Let's help Monsanto become a pile of dust!
I hope sanity prevails and it's shot down. But it's California, not too much hope for sanity. And it only applies to California like all of the other nonsense passed there.
 
  • #81
18
9
edward said:
Monsanto Co. MON +1.77%cut its earnings forecast Thursday for the second time in seven weeks, as it slashed prices of its Roundup herbicide, largely putting to pasture the onetime cash cow that funded the company's push into crop biotechnology in the 1990s.

The St. Louis agribusiness giant, already struggling with a backlash by farmers against the premiums it charges for genetically modified seeds, is cutting prices for its once high-flying weed-killer franchise to near the levels of generic versions flooding into the U.S. from China.

Not too surprising. People often forget that Monsanto's high market share comes from the fact that most farmers like what they produce. No one forces them to do it, and if they find a better deal somewhere else then so be it.


So it turns out that Prop 37 was not created because we don't have a way to know if the food we eat is genetically engineered. We can know our food is safe by buying foods that are certified organic according to the USDA's organic standards - genetic modification = not organic.


So basically anything that's not "organic" isn't safe according to that statement. I'm really surprised no one has called you out for making a hysterical claim without any evidence, especially since the vast majority of our unmodified food isn't organic either.
 
  • #82
67
166
I think you missed my point. There are a very few instances where Roundup is purchased but not sprayed in places where Roundup ready seed was planted. They can give the stuff away with proof of purchase of the seed. When purchasing Roundup ready seed an agreement is already signed. That makes the customer fairly traceable. Monsanto can cry all they want but I am not too worried about their ability to stay in business.

I got your point perhaps you didn't read the link. If only the situation was that simple.

The resistant weeds could also be a problem for the Monsanto Company, which developed both Roundup and the Roundup Ready crops. Roundup is Monsanto's biggest product, accounting for about 40 percent of its estimated 2002 revenue of $4.6 billion, according to Bear, Stearns. The Roundup Ready crops, the linchpin of Monsanto's agricultural biotechnology business, had revenue of roughly $470 million last year, Bear, Stearns said.

Monsanto makes much more from it's sale of Roundup than it does from Roundup Ready crops.

Fields must now be sprayed with a pre -emergent after planting the GMO to try to stop weeds that have become resistant to glyphosate. This just ads another troublesome chemical to the soil.

But this is just for now.

http://www.geaps.com/alerts/archives/1178.html

Currently a number of companies are rushing to develop new GMO crops that are immune to other herbicides.

Dow is seeking USDA approval for corn engineered to be tolerant of 2,4-D, a widely used weedkiller that predates glyphosate (it was a key component of the Agent Orange); it hopes to start marketing the new variety next year. Monsanto hopes to follow in 2014 with soybeans resistant to the herbicide dicamba.

http://www.minnpost.com/earth-journ...inst-weeds-new-weapons-extend-losing-strategy

It seems to be a never ending cycle of trying to fight natural selection in weeds. In the end nature will win. And hopefully we will realise that before we totally ruin our topsoil.
 
  • #83
282
0
So basically anything that's not "organic" isn't safe according to that statement. I'm really surprised no one has called you out for making a hysterical claim without any evidence, especially since the vast majority of our unmodified food isn't organic either.

Actually, I do think organic foods are safest. Why buy non-organic stuff when you can buy stuff from people who actually care about the land?
 
  • #84
172
1
Actually, I do think organic foods are safest.

Safest how? Do you have any scientific studies to back that up?
 
  • #85
282
0
Safest how? Do you have any scientific studies to back that up?

Nope. It all just makes sense. Like I said, why don't people want to buy organic foods? If we got enough people to do so, the price would go down. And so would the companies who don't make organic foods. And I see that as a good thing.
 
  • #86
172
1
Nope. It all just makes sense.

Then I'm afraid your post does not meet the standards of PF.

I don't buy organic because it tastes worse and costs more. I live half a block away from Whole Foods, but I only buy a few select items from them.
 
  • #87
russ_watters
Mentor
20,560
7,209
Actually, I do think organic foods are safest. Why buy non-organic stuff when you can buy stuff from people who actually care about the land?
I purposely avoid "organic". I think normal food is higher quality, cheaper and more eco friendly.
If we got enough people to do so, the price would go down.
Probably not -- we'd start running out of food, which would cause prices to go up. The "organic" fad will end when people realize they are being scammed and the price drops on its own.
 
  • #88
Evo
Mentor
23,192
2,996
I purposely avoid "organic". I think normal food is higher quality, cheaper and more eco friendly.
So do I!! Recent studies show that organic is not any better and does not justify the higher cost. Any vegetable that can be peeled does not need to be organic if pesticides are your concern.

Early voting shows it's being shot down. Good.
 
Last edited:
  • #89
Ben Niehoff
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,879
162
It looks like Prop 37 has been voted No, by a decent margin.
 
  • #90
Averagesupernova
Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,845
772
edward, Roundup is about the simplest and safest chemical ever sprayed. 2,4-D was the first chemical used in corn which was shortly after it was available. I would estimate early 1950s, maybe earlier. Seems impossible by the link you posted but it was. Corn already is tolerant to 2,4-D but not to the extent that modifying it would be. I don't believe there are any chemicals to come out new in the last 15 to 20 years. About all the chemicals used today and that will be used in the near future have already been sprayed for many years. If you think changing chemicals to combat natural resistance is something new you are mistaken.
-
As I said before, I am not worried about Monsanto going under. Time will tell.
 
  • #91
Evo
Mentor
23,192
2,996
Since the proposition was shot down, it is no longer an issue.
 

Related Threads on Is there any scientific basis for Proposition 37?

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
631
  • Last Post
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
B
Replies
1
Views
892
Replies
23
Views
2K
Top