Monsanto
Here’s a little quiz.
| 1. | I read recently in my Guardian Weekly that the cerials devision of Uniliver had applied for a patent on Nap Hal wheat which is used for making chapatis. The patent was awarded to them shortly after they were acquired by another company that happens to have a patent that gives them rights over the use of Nap Hal to make chapatis. This company that now owns both these patents is: |
| 2. | My friend Mr Ngumi told me proudly that the seeds he bought from Nairobi to grow maize in his shamba would grow better than that in is neighbours fields but that he would have to buy more seed next season because the maize that his plants produced would be infertile. The seeds were costly, he said, but the expense is worth it for the certified seed because of the higher yield. The seeds were made by |
| 3. | Another Guardian Weekly article tells of how Soya bean plants modified to be immune to glyphosate herbicide grow really well in Argentina. Farmers there just spray the fields with Roundup; the soya carries on growing and everything else dies. The Sorya plants grow so well that when they are spilt during harvest they grow out of place, like weeds, and cannot be controlled using Roundup so many other powerful herbicides are used with the result that the bacteria in the soil is killed and the soil becomes infertile. The Soya plants were genetically modified by: |
| 4. | Bonus question:
Roundup, the best selling agricultural product ever, was developed and is sold by: |
Of course I don’t actually know enough about this to justify being outraged, but I do think it’s interesting.
- Monsanto.com
- Monsanto in Africa
- Given the “McDonalds” treatment
- Roundup ready!
- Monsanto and Agent Orange
- Guardian Argentina Story
- Guardian Chapati Story
- Printers pulp Monsanto edition of Ecologist
Please leave a commnt and tell me what you think …
Drew Says:
I like you little mayday anti-capitalist exploitation protest.
Shine on
May 2nd, 2004 at 2:21 amDrew
tyg Says:
hah … strangely i knew the answers to all the questions … I did my PhD on an enzyme on the same pathway as the enzyme that is blocked by glyphosate. One of the Thai PhD students was working on it … can’t say any of us were big fans of monsanto … (we were investigating those enzymes on the basis of being good antibiotic targets though, not agricultural stuff …)
May 5th, 2004 at 8:32 pmzorka Says:
one of the bigshots in monsanto came to imperial during our environmental lectures, and we really gave it to him. All the while, he steadfastly maintained that they were trying to increase yields, trying to do well by society, and wondering why those weirdo folds on the other side of the ocean don’t take to it as readily as those ruled by Stupid white men.
May 5th, 2004 at 8:57 pmLydia Says:
If the seeds have been made infertile deliberately for profit because the farmers will want to buy them because the yield is much higher then that is iniquitous. If the seeds have been made infertile because they have been genetically engineered and this is the only way to get them on the market - so that they can’t pollinate other wheat - then there ought to be fresh debate about regulations around genetically modified organisms, preferably not led by tabloid journalism.
May 6th, 2004 at 3:03 pmMark Says:
That’s a good point about making the seed so it won’t cross-pollinate with other, non-modified crops. I’d not thought of that.
Perhaps the reson I didn’t think of it is because one of the pages (linked above, I think) about wheat in Argentina says that those farmers will be fined by the company if they keep their seeds back to plant next year.
Not sure if that’s true, and if so, how it’s policed.
May 6th, 2004 at 4:27 pm