Skip to comments.Hungary Destroys All Monsanto GMO Corn Fields
Posted on 02/13/2012 10:30:41 AM PST by Twotone
Hungary has taken a bold stand against biotech giant Monsanto and genetic modification by destroying 1000 acres of maize found to have been grown with genetically modified seeds, according to Hungary deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar. Unlike many European Union countries, Hungary is a nation where genetically modified (GM) seeds are banned. In a similar stance against GM ingredients, Peru has also passed a 10 year ban on GM foods.
(Excerpt) Read more at trueactivist.com ...
>> Hungary has taken a bold stand against biotech giant Monsanto and genetic modification by destroying 1000 acres of maize found to have been grown with genetically modified seeds
“STUCK ON STUPID”. Oh well, can’t fix stupid.
Every single agricultural crop is genetically modified. It’s just the traditional method is a little slower.
Good for them! I wish we’d at least pass a law in the US that requires companies to designate GMO ingredients.
But can you let it die of starvation when the stupid policies result in famine? Chances are good that American taxpayers will be providing food aid in the not too distant future.
If they keep this up they’re going to be Hungary.
Apparently, they’re not that Hungary!
I just knew the jokes would come sooner or later. ;-)
Opponents of modified foods should check their pantry for Canola oil.
They can always eat Turkey, although I wouldn’t cook it in a lot of Greece.
I would draw a distinction between "selectively bred" and "genetically modified." In any event, I have no argument with either one provided I have the freedom to grow whatever variety of vegetables I like in my own garden.
I am modestly accepting of GMO food.
But a legitimate objection to GMO food, IMO, is *not* that they are modified, but that their cultivation permits the use of much more toxic pesticides....which remain as residues on the consumed food and also find their way into waterways. And, I believe that many who are indifferent to GMO are not aware of this additional aspect.
I bring this up not to advocate one thing or another, but as an “unintended consequence” type of deal that I think people should consider. I doubt we can or necessarily should go back to non-GMO strains of various grains, and without question, the use of GMO crops can dramatically raise productivity = important in a world facing widespread food shortages.
Not that I know everything about the subject but from what I can tell having Monsanto in charge of so much food supply - and able to sue farmers who don’t plant their product - is not a good thing.
A co-worker told me about the movie Food Inc. and I need to watch it.
100% of all soybeans used today are modified.
America is the world leader in Agriculture.
GM crops is one of the reasons why.
More and more advances will come with GM foods.
There is now talk of having GM bananas that would serve as a vaccine for many diseases that would not need refrigeration.
Believe it or not, one of the primary costs that preclude world-wide vaccinations is the cost (and logistical trouble) of regridgeration.
Not much land, really. Less than 1/10th of 1 percent of total corn acreage in Hungary. More symbolic significance than anything else.
Not right now, there's a major Greece fire.
Monsanto doesn't sue farmers who don't plant their product - only those that illegally re-use their seed. While there has been some clamor about pollination (i.e. the farmer's crop got ‘infected’ with GM pollen), IIRC that is the frequent busted farmer's excuse - which genetic testing shows to not be the case in successful litigation against farmers.
Watching “Food Inc.” for reliable information about agriculture is like watching “Fahrenheit 9-11” for information about the war on terror.
I work in IT. I build computers and use Arch Linux. I’m part of an Android development team. Trust me, there’s no anti-technological mysticism here.
I won’t bother trying to have a serious conversation with someone who doesn’t bother to read what I’ve written and resorts to such crude descriptions. I didn’t call for a US ban on GMO crops; I simply said it’d be nice if the ingredients were labeled so that people could exercise good old-fashioned choice.
“Good for them! I wish wed at least pass a law in the US that requires companies to designate GMO ingredients.”
I agree. There are also a lot of concerns around how the big-agribusinesses are handling seed and such. More and more countries are rejecting genetically modified products or demanding to be told if such is the case.
1000 acres is a medium farm. Its the cross pollination that monsanto will charge you for.
1000 acres is a medium farm. Its the cross pollination that monsanto will charge you for.
Interesting coincidence to read this thread while at the same time reading a book from John Ringo call The Last Centurion. The book chronicles from the perspective of an Army officer the events of a near future killer outbreak of H5N1 that coincides with an emerging mini ice age. One of the subjects talks about a ban a liberal U.S. POTUS puts in on genmod seeds and the resulting chaos that ensues.
No, really? The next thing you know, they’ll be using GMO corn.
Please don’t lump me in with the foolish hippies who are too stoned to know what’s going on.
I was wondering what you thought was “good” about a ban, in Hungary, or possibly elsewhere.
You did call for labeling in America - but that wasn't the issue I addressed - I addressed you saying it was “good for them” to have a ban on GM crops.
I work as a Molecular Biologist. If you think working with advanced technology in developing cutting edge therapeutics would inoculate one from anti-technological mysticism - you haven't talked to some of the sillier people I work with.
Anti-technological mysticism is the idea that a beaver dam built for a beaver's purposes is a wonderful part of nature - while a human dam built for human purposes is an attack on pristine nature and certainly not a part of it.
Anti-technological mysticism posits that a ‘natural’ crop is going to be better than a GM crop - because ‘natural’ in and of itself is good and wonderful and anything that would detract from that is bad.
I see anti-technological mysticism as a major reflexive thought pattern. Once you know what it is you will start to notice it in more and more places.
Just remember - humans dying of cholera is perfectly “natural”. Humans being treated for cholera using advanced technology is not “natural”.
I know which I prefer.
I FOUND CANOLA! I'M GONNA DIE!!!!
Monsanto and the other biggees like ADM (Archer, Daniels, Midland) etc., are genetically engineering farm foods with all sorts of claims about increased yield, resistance to drought, and so on, but their only real goal is to engineer hybrids the seeds of which will not germinate.
The net effect is that we can no longer grow our own seed stock, we have to go back and buy more germinatable seeds from them. It is an effort to exert more control over the general populace: control the food supply, and you control the people.
Screw these tyrant sphincters where they breathe, they should all be hung for treason. IMHO.
Hogwash, we were the leader long before artificial GM came along.
The main problem with GM crops is the way courts and the law have dealt with them as intellectual property to date. If a farmer plants non-GM crops in a field across the road from GM crops owned by Monsanto, and there is cross-pollinisation, then Monsanto can sue to confiscate or destroy the non-GM planting farmer’s crops.
GM itself isn’t the problem - Monsanto is.
Don't eat soybeans. Fermented soy products are OK, but just avoid everything with soy. You'll live longer.
Oh, we can't to that. It might lead to evidence of problems related to GM foods.
What is genetically modified about such products Monsanto puts out is that the corn cannot go to seed.
That is to say, the farmers have to buy a new batch every year.
That is not a good thing.
There are people who are seriesly attempting to reduce the world's population. There's no better way to accomplish this goal than to control the production of food.
Especially something as vital as corn.
We better wake up. If you haven't already bought seeds that produce vegetables that can be propagated by its own seeds, you better get on the stick.
“What is genetically modified about such products Monsanto puts out is that the corn cannot go to seed.”
I was reading a book last night where the author was talking about how corn could no longer propagate naturally because the husk would not permit it. In other words, without a human or animal to strip away the husk, it would just rot where it lay.
Who’s right in all of this? I have no idea.
Hungary is not the one STUCK ON STUPID.
They are trying right now.
seed holdback prevention clauses (where seed is not allowed to be used more than one year) should be void as a matter of law.
sorry i was just doing fyi.
“without question, the use of GMO crops can dramatically raise productivity = important in a world facing widespread food shortages”
This is a myth. The “shortage” is:
(1) not exactly in food/grain-crop production, as much as it is in distribution (getting, and paying to get, enough of the food [grains mostly] that is produced in surplus, to the places some of the excess of that surplus is needed, most;
(2) and not entirely a lack of aeriable land and sufficient water/and/or/precipitation for growing crops as much as it is the world’s food surpluses are cheaper than the prices that wpuld support local farmers in some places, because the abundance of cheap international, subsidized, surpluses depresses many local markets (in Ethiopia, trucks delivering U.S., European and South American highly subsidized food “aid” drive from their pick-up points to “aid centers”, passing on the highways warehouses of unsold local farm produce that cannot get contracts for that “aid” because they cannot compete with the “developed” world’s tax-payer subsidized farm surpluses, which discourages, not encourages, local farming - a fact that happens all over Africa).
GM foods have nothing to do with the world “growing enough” food; the earlier “green revolution” that used selective cross-breading and also brought many local and “wild” versions of crops (hardier crops) into that process, pretty much ended the idea that “enough” food could not be grown in the world, if issues involving other factors - economics, land, water - could end the hurdles that those issues alone provide.
GM food is not about the world growing enough food, it is ALL about making crops that create financial incentives for the use of other agricultural products - pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and fertilizers, by producing genes that make crops that work better with those things or that incorporate elements of those things into the genes themselves.
One result may be more production per acre, but that result alone stimulates demand for more fertilzer, as you can’t keep getting more out of the same plot of land if you don’t give it more fertilizers.
As the world now produces tons of surpluses it must subsidize in order to sell, producing “more” is simply, by itself, NOT the issue, and therefore NOT something GM-crops are in need of, or being put to, solving.
Those Bastards! Norman Borlaug did the same thing. It was called the "Green Revolution." In the process, the bastard and his GM foods saved anywhere from hundreds of millions to billions of people - a large percentage of them children - from starving to death. Damn him and his genetically engineered farm foods!
but their only real goal is to engineer hybrids the seeds of which will not germinate.
From what I understand, commercially planted corn is not open pollinated. If so, farmers wont save the kernels from their current crop to plant in the future. Farmers, at least the ones I know, have paperwork and receipts regarding the seed for every crop planted. These anti-Monsanto threads always bring charges of Monsanto suing all sorts of small farmers into bankruptcy simply because their crops unintentionally cross polinated with a patented hybrid. I've yet to see a case of this actually happening, but we hear about it all the time.
The net effect is that we can no longer grow our own seed stock, we have to go back and buy more germinatable seeds from them.
What seed are you talking about? It's been a long time since serious farmers kept the best seeds from their crops to use as seed in the future. The reason is that seed companies produce different varieties of corn seed for farmers to buy and use as their seed stock that is far superior to the seed they used to save. These hybrid seeds, produced by evil companies like Monsanto, have resulted in a significant increase in yields. And yes, you can't save seed from this corn to be used later. Even so, serious farmers haven't kept corn seed for as long as I've been alive....which is long before all this nonsense about GMO seeds and Monsanto ruling the world ever became popular.
The same thing is now happening with soybeans. You can make the claim that we'd all be better off without these hybrid seeds, but the fact that farmers are rushing to use them tells us you're wrong. The fact that Monsanto is so successful with selling their products tells you the people who really matter know what's in their best interest. They'll continue using the seeds that allow them to generate the yields that make farming a profitable business. That fact will, no doubt, sadden Luddites everywhere.
Actually, most genetic modifications are made with the purpose of making the plant more resistant to drought, mold and/or pests, which leads to LESS use of pesticides, not more. This is especially important in Europe, where they restrict the use of pesticides and even fertilizers much more than we do in the U.S.
The survival of seed diversity and availability may depend on the actions of these European countries.
Boulder Residents, County Officials Say “No” to GMOs
see the chart on this website.
Scroll about 1/2 down and youll see the chart. When it opens in a new window
put the cursor over the chart and youll see that you have a magnifying glass.
The chart lists those gov. representatives who hold positions in Monsanto and in the government.
Yes, farmers were so much better off before they had access to all those pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and so on.
This from the farmer perspective. Hybrid corn has been around for 60 to 70 years. The seeds will germinate and grow but are not very productive. Corn is now ‘stacked’ with 3 or 4 traits such as, Roundup Resistant, and resistance for cutworms or rootworms. Soybeans in use in the USA are almost all RR and the produce cannot be replanted because of the patent on the seed. Some do and get away with it and some get caught and sued. It is nice to spray Roundup only and rid the fields of weeds, and you can see the difference in corn without built in pest resistance and corn that is in yield and quality. I do not have problems using the products but am leery sometimes of where it all might lead. Some studies show resistance by weeds to roundup, so like always in history, all is not in control, just managed. As far as consumption of GMos I do not know.
“Yes, farmers were so much better off before they had access to all those pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and so on.”
The point is not about the use of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides or even fertilizers in general. There are legitimate users for them without GM seeds. So that’s not the issue.
But, GM modified crops are tied to - designed to work with - specific pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and/or fertilizers, and the patent owner of the GM seend is usually the manufacturer of the specific pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and/or fertilizers the GM seed was designed for.
That business and agro-industrial financial model, tying the farmer’s use of a certain seed to the need for the farmer to also be using specific additional agro-industrial products - not a real-world food shortage, is what GM seeds are all about.
The world has food surpluses, with food distribution issues, issues of disruption of local food production, issues of massive taxpayer subsidized food production, issues of domestic crop protectionism and other food issues, but not a world food shortage issue for which GM seeds are the solution.
For example - wheat.
A wheat stalk that grows in nature had better drop its seeds.
A wheat stalk that grows under human cultivation had better hold onto its seeds.
Thus domesticated wheat has lost the ability to propagate “naturally”.
OMG! Anti-technological mysticism says that the loss of the ability to procreate “naturally” means bigbadawful humans are messing with nature again in bad ways!
There is a reason Bulldogs are delivered by C-section.
Bulldogs have “lost” the ability to propagate naturally.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.