monsanto roundup

Anti-GMO advocates shocked to learn organic food industry is “for-profit”

in Food Science by

ST. LOUIS, MI – In a breaking story making headlines across the globe, anti-GMO advocates have reportedly only just now found out that their beloved organic food industry is comprised of for-profit companies.

“I’m devastated to be honest,” said Marsha Belanger of March Against Monsanto. “Next thing you’re going to tell me that the alternative medicine industry is in it for the money too.”

While it is well known that Monsanto is pure evil and hopes to one day kill us all, the organic industry has somewhat flown under the proverbial radar when it comes to their image.

“The organic industry is one of the best marketed industries in the world,” said marketing expert Fred Jones. “They have convinced the world that their products are healthier, pesticide free, and worth the extra money. They have successfully portrayed themselves as the “little guy” fighting against big bad business. Whole Foods for example has higher revenues than Monsanto, but no one seems to care.”

Even with the shocking news that organic companies are in it to make money, every anti-GMO advocate The Science Post spoke with said they will continue to be anti-GMO and buy only organic.

“I don’t care, organic is healthy and GMOs are bad,” said anti-GMO hipster Blaze Houston. “I don’t care what stupid facts or science says.”

 

  • mrhuh

    Sadly, this isn’t that far off as many people such as those at the Organic Consumers Association are starting to cry foul at Wole Foods and others for “selling out.”

  • Vaalea D

    “Since the 1900s, some 75 percent of plant genetic diversity has been lost as farmers worldwide have left their multiple local varieties and landraces for genetically uniform, high-yielding varieties.”
    This loss of biodiversity is not a good thing. http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5609e/y5609e02.htm

    • mrhuh

      Actually, much plant genetic diversity is preserved in seed banks such as the one the Russian scientist Vavilov helped establish and defended in the Battle of Stalingrad at the cost of his own life even.

      • Vaalea D

        actually, you should know that the Svalbard Global Seed Vault is nowhere near exhaustive. “It’s standard practice for gene banks to backup their stores by depositing duplicates elsewhere. “The problem,” Hawtin says, “is that backing up samples is not always easy or possible.” It can be costly, and some nations don’t make it easy to export their seeds. ” https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/food-thought/afghanistan%E2%80%99s-seed-banks-destroyed ” “Seed banks in Iraq and Afghanistan were destroyed or severely damaged over the course of the wars there.” http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/09/rescuing-ancient-seeds-from-a-war-torn-city/406978/ “large seed bank in the Philippines was damaged during the 2004 tsunami” …before it was backed up at the Svalbard vault I understand. https://books.google.ca/books?id=6fqmBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA176&lpg=PA176&dq=large+seed+bank+in+the+Philippines+was+damaged+during+the+2004+tsunami&source=bl&ots=BQYw22fl6B&sig=uZPYhkgt1go3ol7TlJ9mnt7QH9Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQnOuhldrQAhUK_mMKHTtbAooQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&q=large%20seed%20bank%20in%20the%20Philippines%20was%20damaged%20during%20the%202004%20tsunami&f=false

        The Seed Hunter was a good minidoc on the difficulties of hunting down these rare disappearing seeds due to the push of highly commercialized seed to more and more remote areas.

        As soon as patented GMOs contaminate other crops, They’re gone.

        • Chris

          I am curious how well you read this page, because your comments have very little to do with content of the article. Please look at the blog title at the top of this page, the one that says “The Science Post”, and tell us what the three smaller words are under it. Explain the meaning the the third word.

          • Vaalea D

            always an opportunity for some serious facts (which indeed are related to the content of the article).
            Did any of my comments give you the impression that I thought this article was for real?
            but after all satire is supposed to poke at some “truth”, and what would that “truth” be in this case?

          • Chris

            Uh, huh. Actually you are providing more content to poke fun at:
            http://thesciencepost.com/study-70-of-facebook-commenters-only-read-the-headline/

          • Vaalea D

            again where did I ever give you the impression that I didn’t read it and jumped straight to the comments? You are making assumptions.
            But honestly, real satire is supposed to be witty/funny and intelligent, not dully stupid.

          • Chris

            Like I said before, it had nothing to do with the article. It it about those who are surprised that organic food is a for profit industry, it was not specifically about GMO crops. Apparently there are folks who think farmers grow food and give it away.

            Though it looks like someone who also thinks there are is a dire reduction in food plant varieties (which is doubtful, considering all the work of plant breeders is proof that GMO crops are bad. That is Sen. Inhofe level logic, and therefore hilarious: http://wonkette.com/577719/sen-inhofe-if-global-warming-is-real-where-did-i-get-this-snowball

            And you must have missed reading Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” in high school, or you think eating babies is funny.

          • Vaalea D

            “Apparently there are folks who think farmers grow food and give it away.” based on ?

          • Chris

            Probably Facebook comments. Then there are right wing actions of the chairman of Whole Foods (a business mentioned in the article, you must have missed it by not reading past the title, you may have heard it called “Whole Paycheck”):
            http://www.salon.com/2013/01/16/whole_foods_ceo_obamacare_more_like_fascism_than_socialism/

            It is satire, there is no bibliography. But keeping going, you are just hilarious. Just like this short lived Whole Foods product:
            http://www.eater.com/2015/8/3/9090797/whole-foods-asparagus-water-wtf

          • Vaalea D

            I know, taking the opportunity to present some critical facts here is going over your head.

          • Chris

            Ha ha ha ha ha ha! You are totally hilarious, and what makes it funnier is that you have absolutely no clue how your “food seed diversity is down therefore GMO crops are bad” is so incredibly silly. Even after it was explained to you.

            Keep going, it has been a very bad month when the state of this country is being rowed to Hades in a bad hair basket boat: http://s3.amazonaws.com/theoatmeal-img/comics/donmojis/trump_just_hair.png

            We need some good laughs.

          • Vaalea D

            conventional farming promotes monoculture, GMO exacerbates the monoculture problem which has an impact on seed diversity, as has been explained by dedicated seed savers. Not a time to ridicule those who are against Monsanto’s GMOs, but rather ask what it is we REALLY NEED on this planet. If you think this is a joke and opportunity to ridicule me as well, then that’s just sad.

            but while I’m at it, I may as well add.. livestock crops (which have been monsantos focus) are the worst promoting monoculture and “The Earth stands on the brink of its sixth mass extinction and the fault is ours.. The scientist Vaclav Smil, of the University of Manitoba, has calculated that simply measured by mass, humans now make up a third of land vertebrates, and the animals that we keep to eat – cows, pigs, sheep and so on – make up most of the other two thirds. All the wild animals – elephants, giraffes, tigers and so on – are now less than 5% by mass. It’s a measure of how they have been pushed to the fringes by humans.”

          • Chris

            “conventional farming promotes monoculture, GMO exacerbates the monoculture problem which has an impact on seed diversity,”

            Logic fail. This is an argument against conventional farming, in other words, the large scale farming that produces enough food to a growing population. Yes, there are problems with that… but it has nothing to do with genetically engineered crops. Or did you just miss the contributions of Norman Borlaug:
            http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/topics/borlaug/special.html

            And it totally fails when it ignores the efforts to preserve papaya production in Hawaii, protecting bananas, creating rice with the precursor to Vitamin A… which are not by Monsanto.

            “It’s a measure of how they have been pushed to the fringes by humans.”

            One reason I am planning a contribution to Planned Parenthood. Also, when people are not on the edge of survival they tend to have smaller families. This is why we need all the tools necessary from vaccines to sustainable crops that (gasp!) use modern breeding techniques. See: https://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-lead-to-overpopulation/

            “Of the scenarios that included everyone in the world eating a diet consisting entirely of plants, 100% were feasible.”

            So what? That has nothing to do with genetically engineered crops, it has nothing to do with the fact organic veggies are profit driven. And they are not actually any better for you.

          • Vaalea D

            “researchers ran hundreds of food production simulations under different conditions—like organic versus high-yield farming, and plant-based versus meat-based diets. .. Of the scenarios that included everyone in the world eating a diet consisting entirely of plants, 100% were feasible.” http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/veganism-could-save-world-new-study-argues

  • James Bentley

    The bit at the end kinda screws up the joke. If they were stupid for believing that making a profit makes something evil, then they can’t also be stupid for NOT believing making a profit makes something evil. Something can be for-profit and still be healthy, which seemed to be the whole point of the joke for the first half of the story.