Monsanto controls your diet

[firehawk1]

Multiple people, including myself, have explained this to you...Did you not read the thread?

No what I've seen is cherry picked information that happens to fit the individual's personal beliefs. One is sourced from Green Peace for God's sake????

Now, from around 20 years working in the food industry I can say, food manufactures take food safety VERY SERIOUSLY. I have been in PepsiCo facilities in Pulaski, TN, Kellogg facilities in Kansas City, MO, Seelyville, IN, and Cary, NC. Lance Foods in Columbus, GA, and Burlington IA. Also several smaller private label/copacking facilities. As I stated they all take food safety seriously and Kelloggs is especially anal about it. They will NOT and I repeat NOT include in their ingredients ANYTHING that is PROVEN to be harmful for human consumption, PERIOD end of discussion. Please note I said PROVEN as that is the key here.

But if it helps one sleep at night thinking and fretting that the food industry is out to poison you, make you infertile, and only in it for the money, yadda, yadda, yadda, have at it. Thing is, you don't really know what you are talking about.

 

[HenryWallace]

Source the reasoning for a large production of crops, instead of having room to grow your own garden in the first place...

When if everyone in the US took half an acre we could all live in Texas....

City life is a good reason to have huge crop productions, tear down forestry, displace indigenous species, vaccines, and gun control.... But no one ever told me a good reason that we all live so freakin' close to one another in the first place... Oh Control... AKA Herding!

I know it's hard to understand that we've been doing things the wrong way for such a long time, when were such a headstrong and prideful of our completely insane version of life we lead... So complex and unfulfilled.

 

[ghuns]

No what I've seen is cherry picked information that happens to fit the individual's personal beliefs. One is sourced from Green Peace for God's sake????

Now, from around 20 years working in the food industry I can say, food manufactures take food safety VERY SERIOUSLY. I have been in PepsiCo facilities in Pulaski, TN, Kellogg facilities in Kansas City, MO, Seelyville, IN, and Cary, NC. Lance Foods in Columbus, GA, and Burlington IA. Also several smaller private label/copacking facilities. As I stated they all take food safety seriously and Kelloggs is especially anal about it. They will NOT and I repeat NOT include in their ingredients ANYTHING that is PROVEN to be harmful for human consumption, PERIOD end of discussion. Please note I said PROVEN as that is the key here.

But if it helps one sleep at night thinking and fretting that the food industry is out to poison you, make you infertile, and only in it for the money, yadda, yadda, yadda, have at it. Thing is, you don't really know what you are talking about.

So high fructose corn syrup is good for you? Please, tell me of the health benefits of 'corn sugar'. How about the list of artificial sweeteners? Do you really believe that they have a positive effect on your health?

The bottom line is if your Grandma couldn't have made it in her kitchen 50 years ago, it ain't good for you. Everything today is just varying degrees of bad. I'm as guilty as anybody for eating and drinking all this crap, I am just under no illusions about the fact that it is bad for me.

 

[firehawk1]

Hey Firehawk... Source the reasoning for a large production of crops, instead of having room to grow your own garden in the first place...

When if everyone in the US took half an acre we could all live in Texas....

City life is a good reason to have huge crop productions, tear down forestry, displace indigenous species, vaccines, and gun control.... But no one ever told me a good reason that we all live so freakin' close to one another in the first place... Oh Control... AKA Herding!

I know it's hard to understand that we've been doing things the wrong way for such a long time, when were such a headstrong and prideful of our completely insane version of life we lead... So complex and unfulfilled.

Urbanization is a totally different topic, and I can't say I disagree with you on it. I know I can feed my family either thru hunting it or growing it and I'm sure as a family we would be better off if we did plant a garden every year.

So high fructose corn syrup is good for you? Please, tell me of the health benefits of 'corn sugar'. How about the list of artificial sweeteners? Do you really believe that they have a positive effect on your health?



The bottom line is if your Grandma couldn't have made it in her kitchen 50 years ago, it ain't good for you. Everything today is just varying degrees of bad. I'm as guilty as anybody for eating and drinking all this crap, I am just under no illusions about the fact that it is bad for me.

No I don't think HFCS is especially "good" for you. Other artificial sweetners, don't really know as I have read information that goes both ways.

Grandma used lard, cream, whole milk, butter etc... all taste good but are not really all that good for you. Remember Kayro Syrup, everybody used it including grandma.

I guess my main point is this, while I can agree that some foods we ingest today are probably not all that good for us, I just can't buy into the idea that there is a secret scheme/plot to poison us simply for a company's bottom line.

 

[Stickfight]

Source the reasoning for a large production of crops, instead of having room to grow your own garden in the first place

History is replete with examples of localized famine killing people.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm glad someone is. I'm apparently horrible at controlling it myself.

 

[steveh_131]

I guess my main point is this, while I can agree that some foods we ingest today are probably not all that good for us, I just can't buy into the idea that there is a secret scheme/plot to poison us simply for a company's bottom line.

Meanwhile, here in the real world, corporations have done all sorts of unethical and dangerous things for the sake of the bottom line.

 

[88GT]

Meanwhile, here in the real world, corporations have done all sorts of unethical and dangerous things for the sake of the bottom line.

I think there's a difference between the deliberate choice to cause harm for the sake of causing harm and the deliberate choice to allow harm because that's the consequence of the real motive (in this case profit).

Is Monsanto allowing harmful products to enter the market? No doubt about that. Does Monsanto put harmful products into the market so that they can hurt people? Do we even have to entertain this question?

 

[firehawk1]

Meanwhile, here in the real world, corporations have done all sorts of unethical and dangerous things for the sake of the bottom line.

I never said some corporations haven't, DON'T try to put words in my mouth.

In the "real" world not everything is some grand conspiracy, anyone with a computer, a website, etc... can post up any kind of crap they desire without any facts to back up their claims. Anyone who happens to be like minded then runs with it.

In the '70's we were all doing to die in an ice age, whoops. Eggs are bad for you, whoops. Coffee's bad for you, whoops. Butter is bad for you, whoops. I've read that smokers have a lower risk of Parkinson disease, seems that nasty nicotine provides a health benefit. And the grandaddy of them all.... man made global warming, WHOOPS. I could go on and on.

George Carlin provides a perfect example, "This just in, saliva causes stomach cancer, but only when swallowed in small amounts over long periods of time".

 

[indyjack]

I think there's a difference between the deliberate choice to cause harm for the sake of causing harm and the deliberate choice to allow harm because that's the consequence of the real motive (in this case profit).

if a company is "making a profit" and in the process is causing harm, and the company knowingly continues to "profit" despite the harm being caused, would that not be deliberate?

[/QUOTE]Is Monsanto allowing harmful products to enter the market? No doubt about that. Does Monsanto put harmful products into the market so that they can hurt people? Do we even have to entertain this question?[/QUOTE]

i have better questions. is it possible the big agro. companies and the big pharmaceutical companies might work together to take advantage of the rest of us? or that they might actually, over time, gain control of select gov. agencies in order to maximize profits? how many CEOs of major corporations have been appointed seats of power in gov.? how many have gone the other way? what's the definition of fascism?

 

[88GT]

if a company is "making a profit" and in the process is causing harm, and the company knowingly continues to "profit" despite the harm being caused, would that not be deliberate?

Reading comprehension fail on INGO. Again. Imagine that.

 

[Expat]

This is one of those areas that leave me confused. I admit to being uncomfortable with the idea of genes of bacteria being spliced into my food supply. It just doesn't sound right. I don't trust Monsanto. I don't trust the government since our ruling class get a ton of money from agri-biz. But I also don't trust most of the people on the other side for obvious reasons. So that leaves me where I am.... oh look something shiny.

 

[steveh_131]

I think there's a difference between the deliberate choice to cause harm for the sake of causing harm and the deliberate choice to allow harm because that's the consequence of the real motive (in this case profit).

Is Monsanto allowing harmful products to enter the market? No doubt about that. Does Monsanto put harmful products into the market so that they can hurt people? Do we even have to entertain this question?

I think this is an important distinction. That is what separates this from a grand conspiracy theory. No, I don't think their executives are bent on world domination or destroying the population. I think their motive is as simple as could be: Profit. Their goal is not to harm anyone. Their goal is to make money. If a product has a higher profit margin but is less healthy, their bottom line is protected by covering up the fact that the product is less healthy so that they can continue earning the higher profits.

Very simple, very common and very human. And still very wrong.

 

[indyjack]

Reading comprehension fail on INGO. Again. Imagine that.

then explain yourself better professor. there's nothing wrong with my comprehension.

 

[steveh_131]

then explain yourself better <unnecessary> there's nothing wrong with my comprehension.

I think it is more a matter of word choice than an actual disagreement.

Monsanto is certainly deliberate in what they do. To me, this means that it goes beyond negligence or accident.

But the implication in this thread is that we believe it is some sort of conspiracy where Monsanto's goal is to actually hurt people, and I don't think anyone here believes that. 88GT was trying to point out that this was a straw-man representation of our argument. Monsanto wants to make a profit. People may be hurt in the process, but that is not the goal.

Make sense?

 

[indyjack]

I think it is more a matter of word choice than an actual disagreement.

Monsanto is certainly deliberate in what they do. To me, this means that it goes beyond negligence or accident.

But the implication in this thread is that we believe it is some sort of conspiracy where Monsanto's goal is to actually hurt people, and I don't think anyone here believes that. 88GT was trying to point out that this was a straw-man representation of our argument. Monsanto wants to make a profit. People may be hurt in the process, but that is not the goal.

Make sense?

that's just it though... i feel that hurting people IS their goal, and the profit is merely a side affect. how many years and how much money was sunk into trying to approve aspartame? the FDA has always known its harmful. the same goes for all these patented pesticides and herbicides. this is old science. the FDA approves what they get payed by companies to approve. multinational corporations are run by sociopaths... and so is your government.

 

[steveh_131]

that's just it though... i feel. hat hurting people IS their goal, and the profit is merely a side affect. how many years and how much money was sunk into trying to approve aspartame? the FDA has always known its harmful. the same goes for all these patented pesticides and herbicides. this is old science. the FDA approves what they get payed by companies to approve. multinational corporations are run by sociopaths... and so is your government.

Then you and I may have to just disagree on that point. Power and money are the primary motivators, in my opinion.

 

[firehawk1]

that's just it though... i feel that hurting people IS their goal, and the profit is merely a side affect..

You REALLY believe that? What would their end goal be by purposely harming people?

 

[indyjack]

You REALLY believe that? What would their end goal be by purposely harming people?

depopulation...

 

[firehawk1]

depopulation...

So they have less people to sell their product to? Are you saying Monsanto is concerned about over population?