Bens Oratory

Monsanto and GMOs

When I was little, my grandpa used to put me on his knee and play a game.
First, he would set me on his right knee, bounce me slowly, and say in a low slow
voice, This is the way the farmers ride. Hobbledy hoy. Hobbledy hoy. And then he
would put me on the other knee and bounce me up and down really fast while
saying, This is the way the gentlemen ride. Gallop-a-trot. Gallop-a-trot. That little
game colors my perception of farmers to this day, as plodding and slow. But the
farmers of today cannot afford to lag behind. They have to gallop and trot to keep
up with the Gentlemen at Monsanto. If they dont they will be left behind, without
crops, without farms, without hope because farming in the last 30 years has
changed rapidly, ever since the first genetically-manipulated crop was introduced
by Monsanto in 1983. Farmers can no longer plod complacently along, ignoring its
entry into their world. Oh, some farmers have tried but this technology is not one to
be ignored, by farmers, by consumers, or by industries big and small. So what is
genetic engineering and what does it mean for each of us? Why do we need to know
about it? Why do we need to care?
Lets start with the beginning of the field of genetic engineering and look at
the phenomenon in three areas. First, why was genetic engineering begun in the
first place- what did scientists hope to accomplish? Secondly, what good things
have come out of this process? And finally, what problem has this new technology
introduced into our world?
We have been breeding positive traits for centuries. Farmers would breed
their best in order to encourage the occurrence of these positive traits in the future
generations of crop or livestock. While this is a good practice, it comes with flaws.
Breeding good stock together doesnt necessarily lead to offspring with the desired
traits, and resultant inbreeding can lead to defects and vulnerability to disease.
The art of breeding has continually improved with amazing results. For
instance, Norman Borlaug won the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize for his work
manipulating dwarf wheat that increased durability and yield so much that it saved
millions of people from starvation in India and Pakistan. The subsequent Green
Revolution was begun. Borlaug explained over a decade ago that genetic
engineering was the inevitable next step, because of the value it has in increasing
yield and alleviating starvation. In the process of genetic manipulation, a gene is
removed from DNA and cloned until it can be successfully spliced into another
species genome. With the induction of this amazing technology, scientists at
Monsanto have made enormous strides towards genetically modifying better foods
that could be used to help people around the world.
While today there is a fair amount of animosity towards genetically modified
foods, not all of it has merit. There is a general perception that genetically modified

foods could harm those that eat them. This fear is understandable weve all seen
those cheesy late night sci-fi flicks- but any real issues with genetically modified
foods lie elsewhere. In fact, the scientific community generally agrees that
genetically modified food is no more harmful than traditional foods and often give
us an outstanding way to help those in need.
In many developing countries around the world there is the issue of
nutritional deficiencies; mainly in Vitamin A, that can lead to higher mortality rates,
especially among children. Another result of Vitamin A Deficiency is Xerophtlalmia, a
leading cause of blindness in children, that is easily cured with Vitamin A. A child
without a sufficient source of Vitamin A must deal with an impaired immunity
system, slowed development, disease and even death.
Currently under development by the Monsanto Corporation is a possible
solution to this issue called golden rice. Golden rice has been genetically modified
to contain Vitamin A in order to create a source of this vital nutrient that is critical in
countries where there is no adequate way to acquire it. In a study by J.H. Humphrey,
K.P. West Jr, and A. Sommer, the best estimate of the introduction of Vitamin A into
areas where it is needed predicts that approximately 1.09 to 1.93 million childrens
lives could be saved per year- an enormous recommendation on the potential value
of genetically modified foods. With their ability to take the most positive traits from
some foods and reproduce them in others, the possibilities for benefitting humanity
are practically unlimited.
But for many, the apprehension still remains. Actually, in the Philippines,
protestors violently opposed Monsantos efforts with golden rice. A group of over
400 protestors broke through security and proceeded to uproot and trample the
entire golden rice crop in a testing field. The crop was weeks away from being
tested for safety by the government and subsequently being approved to help fight
malnutrition in the Philippines. The destruction of this potentially life-saving
innovation condemned countless men, women, and children to the continued
painful existence and possible death from a lack of Vitamin A. While the objections
from Monsantos opponents definitely bear close consideration, the greater good is
served by the creation of sufficient foods to feed the worlds malnourished
populations. Monsanto is trying to accomplish that.
The main objection to genetically modifying foods appears to lie outside of
whether or not they are healthy for us, and centers more on how corporations use
them. The Monsanto Corporation has carved out a unique niche in the agricultural
market using its genetically modified seeds. These seeds are significantly cheaper
than their competitors brands but they have drawbacks. Many strains of these
seeds are modified to be sterile, meaning that they wont reproduce and return the
following year. This forces farmers to return to Monsanto with their annual earnings
to buy another batch. However, this is merely an inconvenience compared to the

results of Monsanto forcing its product on agriculture, and in making unilateral

decisions that may have a huge negative impact on our world.
In a truly diabolical development, Monsanto has released differing strains of
crops that are resistant to a special Monsanto pesticide named Roundup that is
meant to be used with these crops. The impact of this on the environment is scary.
These pesticides are strong, but the bugs they fight have a drive to survive that is
creating a growing issue. With each successive strain of crops comes a bug that has
grown more resistant to the attempts to control it. Not only does this keep Monsanto
in a constant fight against the strengthening insects, but it leaves farmers who
dont stay up to date with pesticides at the mercy of the insects who have adapted
to survive their now -useless deterrents. If we are not careful, we may soon reach a
day where there is little to no food in the produce section because our pesticides
have proven to be too weak to stop a super bug that we, or more properly,
Monsanto, inadvertently or intentionally created.
The biggest issue with genetically modified foods is that they are often used
more for profits than for more altruistic purposes and its still unclear if the
gentlemen-and ladies- at Monsanto are angels or devils. Some of their practices
lead us to wonder. For instance, Its now possible for a genetic marker to be placed
inside the DNA of a plant, marking it as intellectual property of its producers. Whiles
this may seem harmless, it can cause severe issues when one takes into account
the fact that these strains can spread by blowing wind or birds passing through,
entirely without the farmers consent. From 1998 to 2005 Monsanto field tested
strains of wheat that were resistant to their pesticide Roundup. The project was
subsequently dropped and Monsanto never went to the U.S. for rights to plant their
product. However, in May of 2013, the U.S. announced that the genetically modified
traits had been discovered in the wheat from a farm in Oregon. This sudden
reoccurrence shocked some countries when they learned that the genetically
modified wheat had not been contained and this had an enormous impact on our
economy. Japan ended imports of Western wheat entirely, South Korea refused to
buy U.S. white wheat, and the Taiwan Flour Mills Association demanded that the U.S.
label wheat by its state of origin before they would consider buying it.
However, despite the many issues with controlling genetically modified foods,
the idea is still a sound one. The main problem is dealing with the companies that
abuse power. Many farmers have already begun to fight back, with the prime
example being Percy Schmeiser. After Monsanto discovered their strain of canola on
his farm, Schmeiser found himself being sued for damages of about $400,000 for
patent infringement. Rather than to plod complacently along, Hobbledy Hoy like
so many other farmers had done, allowing the Gentlemen at Monsanto to trample
them in the courts, Schmeiser fought back- and won. The company agreed to pay
for the clean-up of his fields, and a major victory was won for farmers everywhere. It
showed that while genetically modified foods definitely will be needed to continue
to feed the growing world population, the sometimes ungentlemanly-gentlemen at

Monsanto will not be able to use them to Gallop and Trot over the top of the
working farmers. It proved that, with hard work and exercised control over
genetically modified foods, the farmers, the gentlemen, and those in need of food,
may all ride at the same pace.

Bibliography

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/bulletin/1992/Vol70-No2/bulletin_1992_70(2)_225-232.pdf
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241598019_eng.pdf

http://agbiosafety.unl.edu/basic_genetics.shtml
http://www.goldenrice.org/
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/12/25/percy-schmeiser-farmer-who-beatmonsanto.aspx
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-07/monsanto-sued-on-behalf-of-farmers-overmodified-wheat.html
Brand, William. Lab Altered Crops Inevitable: Nobel Winning Scientist Predicts Wide
Use of Genetically Engineered Foods. Tri-Valley Tribune. July 14, 2003.
"TheNobelPeacePrize1970".Nobelprize.org.NobelMediaAB2013.Web.1Feb2014.
<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1970/>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23632042