Monsanto's creation, promotion and distribution of GM agricultural enhancements (fancy seeds, hormones, whatever) might just possibly be philosophically and scientifically defensible, as a bona fide effort to do something good for humanity.

Everyone who reads Gristmill surely must know that that claim is not at all beyond controversy, and that most of us (I assume) have grave reservations about it.  Still, it is defensible, so far as it goes.

That defensibility is shattered, however, by Monsanto's underhanded attempts to suppress the free speech of its competitors, and to keep consumers in the dark.  It should be obvious that all Monsanto cares about is short-term profit, and catering to short-sighted people who similarly care about nothing but short-term profit.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

Is it really the organic food movement, specifically organic milk, that is behind this Canis?  Organic dairy farmers are really in trouble because of this recession, BTW.

Once the organic label was legalized, the bovine growth hormone label became somewhat inconsequential.  What would really be devestating to this technology would be the labeling of hormone based products as unfit for pregnant women or children in their growth years.

The reasoning being that these hormones will interfere woh natural growth of offspring, before and for at least a few years after birth.

That would spell the death of hormone contaminated food.  Now maybe antibiotic contamination could be fought in a similar way?  I don't know.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

The important pint is that Monsanto tried to hide the hormone's usage from milk drinkers. If I want to drink milk with it or without it, that should be my decision. If Monsanto wanted the public to accept rGBH, they should have launched an educational program, complete with the opinions of those who disagreed, then we could have made up our own minds.

The entire genetic engineering industry has shown its complete illegitimacy by getting its lackeys in the U.S. government to forgo labeling of genetically engineered foods.  Their claims about public ignorance are totally specious.  If this industry was at all legitimate, it would have no problem labeling its foods as genetically engineered.  Instead, it has fought very hard to hide that fact because it knows that no one wants that Frankenfood.

And BTW Canis, your charity is grossly misplaced on these environmental criminals who would pervert the basic building blocks of life for profit and/or ego.  This stuff was not done in order to do something good for humanity, but instead in order to corner certain food markets.  But even if your charitable idea were correct, it's the same thinking as the Nazi scientists who wanted to create a master race of humans: these psychos think they're fixing nature's "mistakes."  I think they should look in the mirror to see the real mistakes.

Don't worry, Wolverine; in fact I feel exactly as you and Boondockbob do.  It is precisely because I cannot conceive of how anybody could work for Monsanto, or gladly buy a Monsanto product, that I tried to imagine what might be said in Monsanto's defense.  And it did not take me long before I could defend Monsanto no longer.

Amazing,
that is a great idea: meat from animals who were regularly fed anti-biotics should be labeled as such.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.