Asian farmers flocking to Monsanto and Chinese GM crops. Total acreage of biotech has trebled since - Polidicks

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Green_Beds%2C_farmlands_India.jpg/800px-Green_Beds%2C_farmlands_India.jpg[/img] [quote]MANILA: After scientists, farmers in India, China and the Philippines have given the thumbs up to Bt cotton and Bt corn. A study by Templeton Foundation of USA has shown that 93% cotton in India and China is of the Bt variety, while 59% of the corn in Philippines is also of Bt variety, despite opposition from anti-GM activists and NGOs. These results were presented at a two-day international conference on 'Adoption of biotech crops in developing world: case studies of farmers from China, India and Philippines'. The conference was organized by International Service for the Adoption of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA) at Manila.[/quote] [url]http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-05-16/nagpur/39309148_1_gm-bt-bt-variety-cotton-improvement[/url] To get an idea of the general improvement: [quote]100 fold increase in area under GM cultivation from 1.7 million ha in 1996 to 170.3 million ha in 2012[/quote] [quote]Double digit growth in past 12 years, growth rate of 6% from 2011 to 2102[/quote] [quote]17.3 million farmers in 28 countries cultivated 170.3 million hectares (420 million acres) biotech crops in 2012[/quote] [quote]Steady rise in accumulated global area of biotech crop from 500 Mha to 1.5 billion ha from 2005 to 2012[/quote] [quote]Growth rate of developing countries much higher than developed (11% or 8.7 Mha versus 3% or 1.6 Mha of industrial or developed countries)[/quote] [quote]Gain in productivity by 49% (328 million tonnes) from 1996-2011, and gain of 78% (50.2 million tonnes) in just 2011 from cotton, soyabean, maize and corn crops.[/quote] [quote]51% reduction in cost of production (from 1996-2011) and 22% in just 2011, in the form of ploughing cost, fewer pesticides and less labour[/quote] [quote]Economic benefits of $98.2 billion (1996-2011) and $19.75 billion in 2011[/quote]

Isn't there a story about them killing a load of bees immune to their pesticides?

Ask the farmers how much more money they are making when they have to rebuy seeds from Monsanto every year for the rest of their lives or lose their farm. Its alot of communal farming over there so entire villages are at risk of losing their source of income.

[QUOTE=FacepunchZen;40788674]Ask the farmers how much more money they are making when they have to rebuy seeds from Monsanto every year for the rest of their lives or lose their farm. Its alot of communal farming over there so entire villages are at risk of losing their source of income.[/QUOTE] If they are going to Monsanto instead of using their own seeds, does this not suggest they are generating a larger profit? I would like explanation to to why this is considered "wrong". Can't you clearly use non-Monsanto seeds? Or is it that, despite their shortcoming, somehow are more productive?

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;40788768]I'd rather them use Chinese GM crops than Monshito crops. They don't need more economic control.[/QUOTE] yes china, the regime world-renowned for it's anti-authoritarian attitude

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;40788869]Better than the alternative.[/QUOTE] Ah yes, the country which pulls down houses when they get in the way of motorways.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40788716]If they are going to Monsanto instead of using their own seeds, does this not suggest they are generating a larger profit? I would like explanation to to why this is considered "wrong". Can't you clearly use non-Monsanto seeds? Or is it that, despite their shortcoming, somehow are more productive?[/QUOTE] Nah they're going for Monsanto because they have to produce a massive amount of goods from their land. If they don't, they go bankrupt. This is a vicious circle with no winner but Monsanto. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;40788886]Ah yes, the country which pulls down houses when they get in the way of motorways.[/QUOTE] So do we.

[QUOTE=bubbagamer;40788963]Nah they're going for Monsanto because they have to produce a massive amount of goods from their land. If they don't, they go bankrupt.[/quote] Then clearly that is the reason why. Farms must become more productive if they wish to survive in a globalizing market. [quote]So do we.[/QUOTE] Usually not like this: [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Chongqing_yangjiaping_2007.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40788716]If they are going to Monsanto instead of using their own seeds, does this not suggest they are generating a larger profit? I would like explanation to to why this is considered "wrong". Can't you clearly use non-Monsanto seeds? Or is it that, despite their shortcoming, somehow are more productive?[/QUOTE] you can't use non-monsanto seeds because monsanto seeds are the only seeds that can resist monsanto pesticide, which is the only pesticide that's effective because they have a lock on the technology don't quote me on this but that's my understanding of the situation

Sad.

[QUOTE]Double digit growth in past 12 years, growth rate of 6% from 2011 to 2102[/QUOTE] Welcome to the future Also, aren't there laws against monopoly?

[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;40789003]you can't use non-monsanto seeds because monsanto seeds are the only seeds that can resist monsanto pesticide, which is the only pesticide that's effective because they have a lock on the technology don't quote me on this but that's my understanding of the situation[/QUOTE] Aren't Monsanto seeds more productive however? If they weren't, nobody would bother to use them. I'm also pretty sure Monsanto isn't the sole pesticide manufacturer.

The growth rate and productivity isn't the issue, it's Monsanto's business practices.

Jesus Christ, people. If we had to take into account everyone's business practices, then the 3rd world would be starving by now. No Nike, no cheap ass toy factories, no Apple, no everything.

I don't think you've read anything about Monsantos business practices. If they commit such treachery in the united states I can only imagine the hardball they'd be playing with china.

[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;40789591]Jesus Christ, people. If we had to take into account everyone's business practices, then the 3rd world would be starving by now. No Nike, no cheap ass toy factories, no Apple, no everything.[/QUOTE] Are you implying we're helping the 3rd world by exploiting cheap labor (and child labor)? Cut the crap already.

[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;40789591]Jesus Christ, people. If we had to take into account everyone's business practices, then the 3rd world would be starving by now. No Nike, no cheap ass toy factories, no Apple, no everything.[/QUOTE] Are you one of those idiots who think each and every single one 3rd world country is a shithole that should get nuked? The 3rd countries are the ones in the nonaligned movement

[QUOTE=bubbagamer;40789955]Are you implying we're helping the 3rd world by exploiting cheap labor (and child labor)? Cut the crap already.[/QUOTE] Well, we did this with China, which has become so wealthy that half a billion people were lifted from poverty and a consumer base rapidly grew in the space of 3 decades. [editline]26th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=IPK;40790261]Are you one of those idiots who think each and every single one 3rd world country is a shithole that should get nuked? The 3rd countries are the ones in the nonaligned movement[/QUOTE] -snip- i get what you mean

[QUOTE=bubbagamer;40789955]Are you implying we're helping the 3rd world by exploiting cheap labor (and child labor)? Cut the crap already.[/QUOTE] For those people, working in a "sweatshop" is better than all of the alternative options.

Bloody hell Noble, you have been gone a long time. I was starting to miss you.

[QUOTE=bubbagamer;40789955]Are you implying we're helping the 3rd world by exploiting cheap labor (and child labor)? Cut the crap already.[/QUOTE] yes we are helping them actually

The chinese GM rice is pretty incredible, especially Minghui 63.

[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;40789003]you can't use non-monsanto seeds because monsanto seeds are the only seeds that can resist monsanto pesticide, which is the only pesticide that's effective because they have a lock on the technology don't quote me on this but that's my understanding of the situation[/QUOTE] In some cases, but a lot of monsanto patents are going to expire soon. Their pesticide patents on roundup have expired already for instance.

Trebled? My god, the midrange is in even more danger than I thought. We have to act now and send hip hop records to China to counteract this deadly threat.

Reminder that in the united states it is currently not possible to sue Monsanto or any other company for any ill-effects caused by eating genetically modified food because of a rider that was anonymously attached to the recent budget. If a genetically modified crop that was rushed to market caused some sort of negative health effect you would have literally no legal recourse.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;40791795]Reminder that in the united states it is currently not possible to sue Monsanto or any other company for any ill-effects caused by eating genetically modified food because of a rider that was anonymously attached to the recent budget. If a genetically modified crop that was rushed to market caused some sort of negative health effect you would have literally no legal recourse.[/QUOTE] Except if this did happen, Monsanto would be in as much trouble as BP was when the rig blew, even with the influence of large corporations.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40791831]Except if this did happen, Monsanto would be in as much trouble as BP was when the rig blew, even with the influence of large corporations.[/QUOTE] except it did happen

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;40791795]Reminder that in the united states it is currently not possible to sue Monsanto or any other company for any ill-effects caused by eating genetically modified food because of a rider that was anonymously attached to the recent budget. If a genetically modified crop that was rushed to market caused some sort of negative health effect you would have literally no legal recourse.[/QUOTE] i am reasonably sure that the bad effects of bringing a dangerous product to market would still cripple the company regardless of that bit of legislation. they operate in many countries, for one thing, and they would very rapidly lose market share to competitors.

the "monsanto protection act" controversy [editline]26th May 2013[/editline] my automerge

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40791871]the "monsanto protection act" controversy [editline]26th May 2013[/editline] my automerge[/QUOTE] no sobotnik is talking about monsanto fucking up and letting a dangerous product go to market