Monsanto

Biotechnology and genetically modified foods are becoming more and more a part of our society every day that goes by. Most of our potatoes, tomatoes and corn not to mention a lot of other fruits and vegetables that are a main part of our American food consumption are genetically modified. Most American's are not fully aware of this fact, and both the negative and positive effects is has on our way of life. Monsanto is the world leader in Genetically Modified grains. As a company it is at the forefront of the American biotechnical industry. Since Monsanto is such an intricate part of this business where exactly does it stand on the controversial issue of genetically modified foods?

There are numerous ways in which American society can benefit from biotechnology. Farmers who can afford genetically modified seeds can potentially protect their crops in once unimaginable ways. In this specific article the farmer's name is Bart Ruth and he is just one of the many American farmers who has benefited greatly from this new technology. ""The seed costs a bit more to buy," he explains." But I have been able to cut way back on spraying insecticides and weed control-and I don't have to till the land so often or so much. I use less water for irrigation, my costs are lower and the crop yield per acre is higher." To some, Ruth and his family epitomize the promise of 21st-century agriculture, a high-tech future in which bioengineered plants may indeed be very friendly to the environment and to man: They should require fewer herbicides and pesticides, and allow for huge reductions in water irrigation. At the same time, these new plants can be nutritionally enhanced with extra proteins and vitamins to help combat malnutrition worldwide.""(Eat up) Bart Ruth is a perfect example of why genetically modified foods should be at the forefront of Americana farming industry today. He uses fewer natural resources to gain higher profits, not to mention less pesticide on crops. Pesticides are a whole different controversial problem all together, but to use less of them is an immense advantage.

There seems to be a dark side to genetically modified foods, not just the negative connotation of things in nature that Mother Nature never intended. Aside from that people who have come out to speak against biotechnology have been put under intensive fire by Monsanto and other large corporations. If everything is as acceptable as these large corporations would like you to believe why so much attack on skeptics? "" Ignacio Chapela, a Mexican biologist who rose to fame in 2001 when he discovered that native Mexican maize had been contaminated by transgenic corn varieties, announced in a Tierramerica interview that he is going on the offensive in a personal war that he says biotechnology transnational corporations have been waging against him.""(Ignacio Chapela) Ignacio Chapela was only trying to speak his professional opinion on what he thought was happening to the maze in Mexico, there were a lot of people livid at him for what he did. "My job has been on tenterhooks for at least three years, during which I have suffered many attacks on my reputation. Normally the evaluation that I requested in order to be granted a tenured professorship would take six months, but in my case it has taken years, and it is possible that they'll fire me." (Ignacio Chapela) Why are people taking things to such a sinister level when this biologist was just doing his civic duty to alert the public of his scientific findings? There is a lot of money involved with biotechnology. Companies contribute large amounts of money in addition to that money the scientists who are involved with biotechnology are looking to further their careers. Money and power are two of the most influential and dangerous variables out in the world today. The company and the scientist's creditability are on the line with the whole idea of genetically modified foods. With all these things at stake anyone who is involved directly with biotechnology not only wants it to work, but they need it to work.

The constructive potential that biotechnology yields towards the future of this country is colossal. Not just on the farms of America will we see vast positive impacts, but on our society as a whole it has great potential to make lots of things more efficient. "Within the next decade or two, we might reap the benefits of cheap, farm-grown pharmaceuticals; lawns that need to be cut only twice a year; flowers with different scents and new colors; non-addictive and zero-nicotine tobacco; quick-growing trees that produce cheap, high-quality paper; and vegetables that are bigger, taste better and are more healthful."(eat up) In the eyes of Monsanto and other big firms that are on the front line of this technology this is the future. To them the positive impacts greatly outweigh the negative impacts. A representative from a lobby in favor of modified foods has a strong point in saying, "To a large degree, the effort to stigmatize genetically modified foods has become a social movement aimed at protecting us from vague, unproven and still theoretical dangers....Proponents point out that 10 years after the first plantings, all the dangers remain theoretical. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not found "a single adverse reaction to any biotech food."(eat up)

Monsanto wasn't always a biotechnical corporation, they actually started as chemical plant that produced saccharin back in 1901. Since then they took on an array of business ventures to ultimately become the Monsanto we know of today. In that time of business ventures Monsanto got itself into trouble by producing Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) which at the time was known as harmless, but ultimately PCB'S were found to be unsafe. "From the 1930s to 1970s Monsanto produced PCBs at its plant in western Anniston. The chemicals, now banned, have been linked to a range of health effects, from learning disorders to cancer." (Monsanto fined) At the time when Monsanto was developing and using this technology it was known to be completely harmless. It was used as a lubricant for transformers and other big machines and was quite profitable at the time because it was a good insulator and it didn't burn easily. I find this mistake by Monsanto a big damaging to its point of genetically modified foods never having a single adverse reaction. The fact is they used a dangerous chemical because to their knowledge it was safe. We don't know the long term effects of genetically modified foods; we don't know what they could potentially do to our bodies years and years down the road. Should we take the world of a company who has a history of using dangerous chemicals?

Monsanto is a large corporation with a