- Welcome Guest |
- Publish Article |
- Blog |
- Login
Monsanto a company pledge.
A view of the company's pledge on their Internet site, says a lot for this company. The first thing I noticed was a picture stating “By the year 2050, 9 billion people will need food, fuel and clothing.” I'm not sure that statement is right, maybe 9 billion people will be suffering from cancer, could be closer to the truth.
When they set out to destroy a country by manipulating the genetics of the seeds of the plants that feed the country; and by injecting milk cows with synthetic hormones reputed to increase the chances of breast, colon, prostrate and lung cancer; why are they referring to food, fuel and clothing?
Like all big companies they write pledges of the companies intentions and operations, and this one is but a laugh. Their opening statement of how they will follow the pledge in all their business undertakings, to listen, consider their undertakings and the resultant impact and to lead responsibly. The words of a good PRO team that will write what they think the public would want to hear. It further states that it will aid them to convert their values into actions and to make clear who they are and what they champion. Well can't disagree with the last bit, they are after all clearly converting their values into actions and what they champion, destruction of the smaller farmer and the dairy herds of America.
Integrity; their opening point, honesty, decency,consistency and courage, what absolute nonsense.
Honesty; it cannot be considered honest when you contest in court, the right of others to place on their own milk product, a fact that theirs is rBGH free. To fight in court the right of choice, for their users of the hormone to have anonymity, yet deny the consumer the right of choice of deciding between organic and hormone free milk. I would have thought it more honest to have your hormone injected cows milk advertised as such if integrity and honesty was a fact of the company?
Decency; down playing independent results and restricting these results being made public, by using their patent on the seeds to stop independent studies. This isn't being decent, this is deceitful, by saying others proof is incorrect merely because they own the patent. Financially assisting a university to test their product and when conflicting results found, squashing the public announcements as they own the results, decency?
Consistency; well here you cannot fault them, they are consistently trying to bully the smaller farmer off their land so that their customer conglomerate corporate owned farmers can buy up the ashes after they have pulverized the farmer with long litigation over false claims of patent violations, totally ruining them financially. By claiming these farmers have reused patent products they did not plant. Corn is pollinated from flowers on top of the plant, wind has a big influence on this, wind can blow this pollen over a fence and pollinate a neighbours corn. Patent theft, cry the company, you stole our product and used it on your farm.
Courage; to do what ever they want and most of the time with the governments backing. Courage to sell products they know are not safe, that could affect millions by increasing cancer. Here we are collecting for cancer research to find a cure, shut down the company's manipulating natures products and cancer's cured. They're blessed with the courage to take on countries in court, to enforce their products use. They have the courage to state their company is not responsible for their products safety, it is the FDA's responsibility they say, when they know it'll be passed, as they own the FDA.
Their pledge goes on to cover Dialogue, transparency, sharing , benefits, respect, act as owners to meet results, and create a great place to work. This article has already reached its length and I didn't get a chance to cover these, but if paying your workers, as a settlement, millions of dollars because you poisoned them, known as, “creating a great place to work”? then I've treated my work force far too well.
A simple request to aid an Author, if you like an article or agree with what's been said, hit the like button if you don't want to leave a comment, at least that way they'll know you've enjoyed their article. An article read 100 times with only one comment and one “like”, might just discourage an author from pursuing the subject because they think no one is enjoy it.
Drink organic milk, stay away from rBGH injected cows milk, for your own safety, they're out to destroy the country.
Great discussion. I'm glad to see that your objection to the way certain GM's are utilized is based on science and not just conspiracy theories. I am ignorant when it comes to chemistry and clearly you have a good bit of expertise in this area. You've provided me with some solid information that I can actually use to research further. Rather than just relying on websites who use data mining to confirm what they and their readers already believe, I can learn how certain organisms respond or react to certain chemicals from sources who have no stake in the outcome either way. Thanks Rob, Steve
Saying that a company has set out to destroy a country by genetically modifying food is a pretty bold statement. Do you have any credible sources to back up your assertions that genetically modified foods are dangerous? I am not trying to be argumentative here, but genetic modifications are a natural consequence of evolution by natural or artificial selection. The fact is, we humans have been genetically modifying food for several millennium. The only difference is now instead of taking hundreds of years to isolate more favorable crops, scientists can shift genes in a beneficial way in a much shorter time. I understand that you have a bone to pick with Monsanto and I certainly can't defend them. I just don't get this sudden hysteria over GMO's when almost EVERYTHING we eat has been genetically modified in one way or another.
A search on the internet is full of proof of the dangers of GMO... with a wife that has suffered 3 different cancers, non related to each other, my research has been detailed... having been on a farm and used chemical controls I started my searches there... it was actually horrifying what I began to discover. Testing that had been done by independent companies for Monsanto, the adverse results of which were hushed by the company. Why would they do this? Because certain conditions had been found and they did not want these being made public... There is so much now being tested independently proving cancerous growths in rats and mice.. these cannot be ignored... and I'm by far not the only advocate of banning GMO products... I agree we have been modifying crops for years but by natural means (cross pollination, etc) but by introducing the DNA of a fish into a crop is not natural... and the higher use of "Roundup" in weed control is not good for human consumption, as well as the now super weeds that are developing... Yes on Google there is much to be found to back up my bold statement... Monsanto that is throwing money around to get laws passed that suit them and not the smaller farmer that wants merely to place on his product that it is not a GM product is not allowed to...Why? Monsanto says to protect their customers... protect them against personal choice of the consumer? Sorry also not wanting to fight just putting a few things on the table... research by many have found so much that is being washed under the table... I cannot understand in the USA that the Monopoly's board have not stepped in to stop the big companies from destroying the smaller ones... modification by natural means is acceptable, this would happen in the wild... but the crossing into the DNA field with mixing un natural DNA's together, I'm sorry I'm against it... and have voiced my opinion here...
Thanks for taking the time to reply rather than just insulting me and I'm very sorry to hear that about your wife. I agree that something should be done to prevent one company from attaining so much power that it wipes out all competition. A certain giant retailer comes to mind too (I'm sure you know who I mean) And if Monsanto is funding any of the research, the results obviously cannot be trusted. Every time I read an article warning of the dangers of GMO's, the name Monsanto appears and I was beginning to sense a sort of "guilt by association" ...... Monsanto uses GMO's, we think Monsanto is bad, therefore GMO's are bad. I can tell you are much smarter than that, this was an assumption on my part and we all what assumptions get you. Unfortunately, any peer reviewed articles seem to be sadly lacking on this subject. While I have no doubt that Monsanto may try to suppress any unfavorable findings, they cannot suppress it ALL. There is just as much power, influence and money trying to fight global warming yet they haven't stopped thousands of peer reviewed papers from being published. Papers that are overwhelmingly unfavorable to companies who would most like to see them suppressed. I may not fully understand your position at this time, but my mind can be changed as it has been in the past when sufficient evidence is presented. Thank you again for sending me a well thought out reply. These kind of discussions are important if we are going to attempt to solve global problems without creating larger long-term problems down the road just so some conglomerate can maximize their short-term profits today.
I would like to add something I might not have got across clearly... some of the GM products have proven to have higher yields, better production time etc etc what I'm against is that these attain their production due to a largely reduced weed compitition due to spraying with glyphosate products... now although this has beneficial results to plants sprayed by working through the leaves down to the root system, they could not be used with corn in the past as any drift of the spray will kill the corn... now the corn's DNA has been modified to withstand this so large amounts of glyphosate is sprayed on the crops to ensure that there is no competition for fertilisers or moisture from any other plant... it is not so much the corn or soya or potatoes etc that are sprayed that I'm against... but now the large amount of chemical that still penetrates the plant is or can be stored in the fruit or seed of the plant... this we eat... and chemicals are the demise of many... glyphosate is associated with many types of tests that have proven to form cancerous growths in test animals... Now Monsanto creates the GM seed for production, but they are the biggest suppliers world wide of Glyphosate products... as a retired Golf Course Green Keeper, my knowledge of chemicals and the damage they can do to the environment I can assure you is fairly good, and before retiring I turned the course I was working on entirely to organic fertilisers and organic chemicals to fight the diseases that grass suffers from... using microbes substitutions etc I got a far healthier grass that suffered less from disease,,, now this must also equate over to the human body, .. but then not many, specially retired Green Keepers can afford to only buy organic foods... so all I want is the choice, I want to know which products have received the highest levels of chemicals due to GM and which have been raised in the normal manner where weed killers are not used.... I do not have enough knowledge to pick to pieces the manner in which DNA modification is under taken,,, but I do have enough to know how bad the chemical use is for a person... Interesting discussing this with you... and I do enjoy putting my thoughts across to others... we can only learn from discussion, there is no better teacher than others meanings...
THis battle is dacades long but we get stronger as more people see it true .Thank you for writing about.
I've been following Nation of Change for many months now, and find its insight to so many different subject outstanding...Johnny well worth committing to receive their notifications save a lot of researching for good information...
__1410811268_cropped_thumb1.jpg)
I'm now actually involved in a few discussion groups on this subject, there is already a world wide uproar and I think we might just start to see something happen....
Another good article Rob! Keep spreading the word! As I can see we are all with you!
I liked this article Rob. It's a damn shame when the consumer can't even buy what he wants because the big farm conglomerates are controlling it all. At the rate they are going organic foods will be a thing of the past
Correct they are doing their best to eradicate the small man who wont tow the line... and at present they are succeeding... time to put a stop in place...
Mission statements are rarely worth the paper they're written on - usually made up of false promises. A company with this amount of power can seem untouchable, but politicians will soon withdraw their support if public opinion is strong enough against them. Most politicians are fickle creatures.
In this case looking at who owns the shares of this company I'm beginning to understand why they are getting away with what they are... the politicians will have to start taking some kind of notice soon I think... Mission statements are actually worthless, they are just window dressing...
This IS an interesting article. Thank you so much Rob.
Article Views: 2859 Report this Article