Monsanto's Herbicide Linked to Fatal Kidney Disease Epidemic: Could It Topple Monsanto?

[jeff47]

11. GMO != RoundUp

GMO is a much broader term than "RoundUp Ready".

For example, these guys: http://www.wired.com/2014/07/kraig-spider-silk-production/
They're silkworms that have been genetically engineered to spin spider silk instead of "regular" silk. They're GMOs. And it should be abundantly clear that RoundUp isn't involved.

Is that what pro-GMO defenders are advocating?

I can't speak for all "pro-GMO defenders", but I'm advocating people understanding the extremely basic science involved, instead of conflating "GMO" and "RoundUp".

For example, your error here:

But that doesn't happen, because GMOs are not as drought resistant or as high yield as the company touts.

Some aren't. Some are. Because GMO is not the same thing as "RoundUp Ready".

Eaten any sweet corn in the last 5 years? It's most likely a GMO - they turned up two genes that causes the corn to make more sugar. But RoundUp will slaughter most strains of that corn.

Similarly, there are GMOs that are drought tolerant. Or that are higher yield. Or that are resistant to RoundUp. Or any combination of the three.

Also, this:

The farmer finds that even for his low crop, he cannot reuse the seed because has been modified to be one-use only.

isn't actually true. Monsanto and a few other manufacturers tried to do this. The farmers refused to buy the seed. So the companies stopped making it.

Now, there is the problem in that a GMO that "breeds naturally" won't necessarily pass on the GMO genes to the offspring. So some farmers will go back and buy new seed every so often to ensure they've still got the genes they want.

For example, the corn mentioned above. Those genes tend to fade out as the generations move on. But it's not that the farmer is required to buy new seed, he's buying new seed in order to guarantee he gets that specific crop. Just like he had to do back when he was growing a particular hybrid.