• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Monsanto

Might I suggest an avatar? It does make one more memorable.

(Visual memory is better than verbal, if you want support material for that comment... reading sort of still falls under the category of verbal, pictures don't)
 
Last edited:
:confused: What are you talking about?
Aw, I didn't mean nothin by it. It's just... the way Susheel does this whole bit about "proper research" and all that and then you come along immediately after with "Wiki states..." Just stuck me as funny.

I'm not sure why your link didn't hyper, but when I pasted it, I ended up inside a Google book authored by a guy who, when I Googled him, turned out to be this wicked respectable-looking Yale Law professor, Peter H. Schuck. Looking at his photo on the Yale faculty page, the thought tickled me that the expression on that face might be just what a student would see upon having just uttered the phrase, "Wiki states" within earshot of the professor.
 
The thing about Agent Orange was that it was supposed to be used as a herbicide in dilutions. The US Government used it in high concentrations through saturation spraying to destroy the green cover. Why is there not the same amount of vitriol against arms manufacturers who supplied the US army during the Vietnam war and then when the weapons were used to kill innocent civilians?

Good point.
 
The thing about Agent Orange was that it was supposed to be used as a herbicide in dilutions. The US Government used it in high concentrations through saturation spraying to destroy the green cover. Why is there not the same amount of vitriol against arms manufacturers who supplied the US army during the Vietnam war and then when the weapons were used to kill innocent civilians?

I'm not so sure that there hasn't been at one time or another. Pretty much the entire war and any willing or unwilling participants has been the target of vitriol at one time or another.

I'll have to admit to not knowing all the details.
 
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/monsanto-rogue-wheat-may-be-result-of-accident-or-sabotage/article_0c018bf3-3305-5b35-90e5-a7b8e11eb85c.html

“It seems likely to be a random, isolated occurrence more consistent with the accidental or purposeful mixing of a small amount of seed during the planting, harvesting or during the fallow cycle in an individual field,” Fraley said on the call.

Asked today whether the company is suggesting the incident could be an act of sabotage, Fraley said, “That is certainly one of the options we are looking at.”

Fraley said he doesn’t mean to suggest the farmer who made the discovery is responsible.

Like I said folks, don't be surprised....
 
Like I said folks, don't be surprised....
Indeed. I think I made some comment on the naivete of expecting to be able to maintain 100% containment of GE organisms 100% of the time. So... don't be surprised if, due to some accidental or purposeful cause, you find spider silk in you goat milk sometime in the near future. Right?
 
Sorry for being so abrupt. The reason I did so was because I have been reiterating that if at any point GM living organisms like the goat with the silk-milk trait is commercialised sufficient regulatory procedures to ensure its isolation from the general populace would be made. This is common sense, and I doubt any government with the foreknowledge currently possessed would not ensure these precautionary measures.
And please don't bring up the argument that the FDA does not have the resources to ensure this, if they dont now, they will when the time comes.
 
Forgive me if you have covered this, but it was all I could stomach to read pages 1 and 7 of this thread.

Have you discussed the report that Monsanto now owns the mercenary army, Blackwater (AKA WE Services)? It is variously described as "owns" here and here, but others are reporting "Hired".....here and here.

None of these sources appear authoritative. If Monsanto is listed on a stock exchange, it would have to report acquisitions such as this, so it should be easy to check. If someone feels inclined, please let us know what you find.

Mike
 
Is this the same way they "own" the Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company (mahyco) in India. Turns out they have a 20 percent stake in an entity called Mahyco-Mosanto created specifically for the production and distribution of Bt Cotton seeds in India.
 
Sorry, I will correct myself, the MMB (Mahyco Monsanto Biotech) emnntity if 50-50. This amounts to a 20% overall stake in Mahyco itself. Atleast that is my understanding.
 
Forgive me if you have covered this, but it was all I could stomach to read pages 1 and 7 of this thread.

Have you discussed the report that Monsanto now owns the mercenary army, Blackwater (AKA WE Services)? It is variously described as "owns" here and here, but others are reporting "Hired".....here and here.

None of these sources appear authoritative. If Monsanto is listed on a stock exchange, it would have to report acquisitions such as this, so it should be easy to check. If someone feels inclined, please let us know what you find.

Mike

They didn't buy Blackwater. Period.
 
Sorry for being so abrupt.
No prob. Abrupt works for me.

The reason I did so was because I have been reiterating that if at any point GM living organisms like the goat with the silk-milk trait is commercialised sufficient regulatory procedures to ensure its isolation from the general populace would be made. This is common sense, and I doubt any government with the foreknowledge currently possessed would not ensure these precautionary measures.
The incident involving the rouge wheat strain in Oregon involves an experimental strain of wheat that was never approved for commercial use -- circumstances under which, presumably, regulatory procedures would be at their most stringent. For reasons yet unknown, those prodedures proved inadequate. This would seem to raise questions about the sufficiency of those procedures (or, perhaps, of any procedures) for maintaining isolation of a GE organism that has been taken to the next level, commercialization.

And please don't bring up the argument that the FDA does not have the resources to ensure this, if they dont now, they will when the time comes.
Should you decide to bring it up yourself for the purpose of dismissing those concerns, please provide your supporting arguments.
 
Forgive me if you have covered this, but it was all I could stomach to read pages 1 and 7 of this thread.

Have you discussed the report that Monsanto now owns the mercenary army, Blackwater (AKA WE Services)? It is variously described as "owns" here and here, but others are reporting "Hired".....here and here.

None of these sources appear authoritative. If Monsanto is listed on a stock exchange, it would have to report acquisitions such as this, so it should be easy to check. If someone feels inclined, please let us know what you find.

Mike
It has been covered:
The original source is a story in The Nation by investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill, and is purported to be based on internal company documents from two companies (Total Intelligence Solutions and the Terrorism Research Center) owned by Blackwater's owner and founder, Erik Prince. As far as I can see, The Claim is that "Total Intelligence sought to become the 'intel arm' of Monsanto, offering to provide operatives to infiltrate activist groups organizing against the multinational biotech firm." Whether or not that offer was accepted is not clear.
 
Sorry for being so abrupt. The reason I did so was because I have been reiterating that if at any point GM living organisms like the goat with the silk-milk trait is commercialised sufficient regulatory procedures to ensure its isolation from the general populace would be made. This is common sense, and I doubt any government with the foreknowledge currently possessed would not ensure these precautionary measures.
And please don't bring up the argument that the FDA does not have the resources to ensure this, if they dont now, they will when the time comes.

Why would something like the spider silk goats or other transgenic organisms need to to be treated like "biohazards"? Is there evidence that some silk protein in goat milk is harmful to human health or can cause ecological disaster?
 
Why would something like the spider silk goats or other transgenic organisms need to to be treated like "biohazards"? Is there evidence that some silk protein in goat milk is harmful to human health or can cause ecological disaster?

I think it is a little more than silk proteins in the milk. The idea is to ultimately develop goats that can produce milk from which silk can be drawn through some process or other.

You wouldn't want clumps of silk fibre clogging up your system would you.
 
I think it is a little more than silk proteins in the milk. The idea is to ultimately develop goats that can produce milk from which silk can be drawn through some process or other.

You wouldn't want clumps of silk fibre clogging up your system would you.

I'm unaware of evidence that it's harmful or "clogs up your system" if consumed.

There's also economic international deregulation factors to consider. If the US "over-regulates" development or production of commercial biotech products, an economic advantage can develop for a country/economic union with more laisser-faire regulations (or lack thereof.) A biotech company will want to operate where they can do what they do as cheaply as possible.

Regulations also slow the development of scientific progress and knowledge acquisition.
 
Why would something like the spider silk goats or other transgenic organisms need to to be treated like "biohazards"? Is there evidence that some silk protein in goat milk is harmful to human health or can cause ecological disaster?
Was there evidence that importation of Kudzu would cause ecological disaster?
 

Back
Top Bottom