• Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Finally. FINALLY. My ulcer grows every time I hear someone quote that list of evil things Monsanto does. Even though yes, they are evil.

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yea, they’re evil enough with the pesticides, and the hostile takeover of farms. We don’t need to make the genetic engineering they’re doing, which is actually good work, to also be thrown under the bus

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I would agree if they didn’t use their non-sterile plants to take over small farms around their huge ones by suing for theft when farmers used part of the previous crop that had been pollinated with the Monsanto GM pollen. They didn’t buy that genome so it was stolen… Fucking wankers.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Monsanto doesn’t even exist anymore. It was bought out by the totally not evil company Bayer a while back.

      Of course Bayer has suffered quite a bit of indigestion over gobling up that morsel over the years.

  • Juice@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 month ago

    GMO skepticism or not, Monsanto is one of the most evil companies in the world and a perfect example of what makes the profit motive such an inefficient organizer of production and distribution

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 month ago

    Isn’t one argument against GMO that they could spread and outcompete other crops? In that case a terminator gene would even be a good thing?

  • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    They make more money suing farmers for accidentally growing patented crops from natural seed dispersal mechanisms.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      They make their money from royalty payments for GMO traits. It’s up to 3x more profit than they get off the seed alone.

  • kerrigan778@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    Source that research was banned since the 90s? All I’m aware of is that they aren’t available commercially and sale and field testing of terminator seeds has been banned since the 00s.

  • P00ptart@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah, except the vast majority of seeds are infertile, meaning they can’t be replanted, means the “good ol boys” can’t survive.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Where the fuck do people come up with this shit?

      No the “vast majority” of crops are not infertile. They are hybrids. Farmers buy the seeds because of a genetic phenomenon called heterosis AKA hybrid vigor. It takes expertise and a shit ton of money to make hybrid seed. If growers could get the same performance from saving their own seeds only an absolute dumbfuck would buy seeds from a seed company.

      Now there are a few species that hybrids can only be made by taking advantage of mutants that have male sterility genes. The resulting hybrids are still fertile (produce viable female gametes) but need an outside source of pollen. Examples: onions, sunflowers and carrots.

      The only “sterile” seed sold is seedless watermelon aka triploid seed. Seedless watermelons are only sold because the market demands it thanks to a push by the USDA after being created in Japan pre-WW2. The margins on seedless watermelon seed are often 40-50% less than hybrid diploid seed. And don’t get me started on the research cost - 14-15 generations for a new female line versus 7-8 for seeded types.

      • P00ptart@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Most hybrids do not produce fertile seeds. You can test it out if you want but it doesn’t work. I used to work for a seed company. Beyond that, without fertilizer the soil itself is dead in the vast majority of farming land.

        • The_v@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Stop your bullshit.

          Not only are they fertile, it is standard protocol to purchase competitors hybrid F1 seed and produce F2 seed in most species (except corn). Eventually plant breeders create inbreds (self-pollinating for 6+ generation’s). These inbreds are the used to make new F1 hybrids. In Europe this is referred to as “plant breeders rights”.

          In corn they have to get a little bit more creative. Corn breeders have to keep distinct genetically distant breeding pools to maintain heterosis in their the resulting hybrids. They pull traits from a competitors hybrid utilizing backcross breeding into their breeding pools.