Not arguing that point, it is. I am saying that maybe the product is defective and they have not acknowledged it. I am not convinced Monsanto has anyone's interests but Monsanto's at heart, nor that if they do find it defective, anyone would be compensated but lawyers. The current system has no controls on it, nor restrictions, just hoops you load your own people into that hold them 1" above the ground.

I thought the whole point of growing things was to have something to sell at a profit...
:)
Farmers, Monsanto... etc.,...

Hey, don't dis the pot farms, I have my 20 acres and house for sale and already had them down from Seattle looking at it. I have a 48x60 a covered arena perfect for grow lamps.

Yep, been around a while too...

I think that is a pretty tall order, in that the whole point of growing things is to get more of the same. I think they are relying more on the patent/copyright model, and probably make farmers sign a non-retentive agreement or something.

Pot apparently has been said to have originated as far back as 3000BC in asia and India, with a shaman grave found that dates to 2700 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis

True, and that raises the entire Intellectual Property and Patent Rights issues about how much control Monsanto or any other company could/should have over stuff They Created, versus letting their own customers 'compete' with them using the same products Monsanto sold them.
Monsanto actually has several choices, I'd guess... do the contractual-limitation route, like a copyright kind of thing, or try to make enough profit off the initial sale of the GM seeds to cover losses to 'future competitors.'
Then again, if Monsanto's GM folks are REALLY up to the job, they would be looking at GM-ing seeds so that the seeds Of The Offspring Plants do NOT produce Roundup-resistant plants!
THAT would be a coup and a hard one to fight in court, eh?
Wonder if they're working on that. I'm not usually the first or only 'layman' to think of things like that...
:)

Good for you. I do not trust doctors either, so I just do not go to them unless something is broke. Health plans are a joke. My company went cheap so now I pay the first 3500, and I do not pay for repeat visits for the same issue and assembly line medicine with guesstimate conclusions.

One reason I am sold on zinc. I take about 500% more than recommended and have not had a cold or flu in 10 years, and my wife gets a horrible 2-3 weeks of coughing and gagging usually twice a year. Of course I may die of heavy metal poisoning or something.. that gets to the long term question, of which I have found nothing in regards to zinc. Si I guess I am a test subject....like the old man who drinks 2-3 shots of bourbon a day, smokes and is 95 years old. Who knows, there are outliers in every study..

evlwhtguy, you are correct, those issues do cover up a lot of others, and are primary reasons other issues develop. There are people on some Japanese Islands that eat a very limited diet, smoke and drink, and still live to their 100s. That has been a subject of research for years to find out what it is that lets them do it, and now they are finding a reduction in life span and increase in weight as they incorporate more mainstream foods into their diet. There are even some web sites promising to let you in opn their secrets for a low cost (yeah, right). I am sure there are real connections to all that, but the list of crap added to tobacco is very long and full of long syllable chemicals. The combustion of those chemicals is the primary cancer cause. Pure tobacco is probably not a health boon, but I am sure is a lot less hazardous. I think that was Carls point.

I have heard roughly similar points made by native Americans, however, the white guys always manage to mess it up by adding crap to keep you addicted. Pot was the same way.

Don't forget Soylent Green!

Thank you, good debate. I was referring to they have their own farms that just make the seed corn for them, not the farmer customers. I do know about that little rule, and it is specifically to force the farmer to not be self sufficient, my father in law did his own corn (about 100 acres of cow corn, and 20 of people corn he sold on a roadside stand) and he said screw them, he kept his own seed every year. A real large farm has a hard time keeping enough, but I will bet you some do, although I also bet they require you buy the same amount or more each year just to control that.

Plus, I do not dispute there is discrepancy in defining "long term". The issue is, numerous lawsuits go on constantly for issues with devices or pharma that later prove to have been bad, have bad side effects or develop issues after a year or two of use. Either their system is not good enough to detect the problems, the problems are covered up, or the FDA ignores them, but that is what keeps the herds of lawyers in work, as well as make costs skyrocket as companies pass on the costs of settlements to the consumers, rather than let their bottom line suffer. If a company says something is safe, and then it proves to not be, that is their problem, but the system neither penalizes them to force better study, nor provides for the compensation for the people who suffered the damage. So, the system is the issue, and there does need to be changes to address just that question. They take 3 years to get a drug approved, but they do 90-180 day studies and the other 2.5 years is spent on BS waiting, admin and associated crap. That is where the root cause is to be found. I do not think a 2 year study is too much to require for stuff you will put in your body. One reason I refuse to use any drugs at all, if I fall apart, then I fall apart, it's going to happen anyways.

And some folks don't seem to be willing to accept data that isn't based on "infinitely long term testing results."

Is there any 'time limit' ever expressed when looking at "long term risks"?
I never seem to hear any specification on that.

I heard an old joke about 'acetylsalycilic acid causing universal sterility after ten or twenty generations' use...'

But 'aspirin' hasn't been around, per se, long enough to meet that 'threshold of safety' or be proven to NOT cause universal sterility...

Monsanto contractually binds their farmer-customers to NOT save ANY seed-corn for replanting in the next season, as I understand it.

I do not know if the 'fruit' from the plants grown from GMO seeds retain the same genetic markers of the seeds planted to grow them.
Interesting question. That makes sense (what you said) but still leaves unanswered questions.

Good points!

That was how I took it, but those same seeds grow into the plants and they produce more seeds of the exact same chaarcateristics as the ones put in the ground. Therefore, when harvested, it is the same as eating what they sold. That is how they get their seed stock to sell for the next year. One corn seed produces maybe a thousand more, and Monsanto just has their own farms for seed production for the next year. So, my logic says you are eating the same thing that they are selling. How is that not true? (Not meant to be obstinate, just trying to clarify points of discussion).

That is true, and that is actually one label they seem to have not been able to screw up too bad. You actually have to have proof of your organicness, vice just making it up.

If it has the ORGANIC label, there's no GMO in it.

Nick, and Danno.... we don't eat the SEED Grain. Sorry if I wasn't explicit enough in my point.

We eat the seeds that the Seed Grain Plants Produce!

So if someone says GMO seeds are dangerous, I object to that illogical 'conclusion.'

If Roundup is sprayed onto crops before harvest, the problem is NOT the GMO SEEDS from which the crops grew, it's any residual Roundup that's absorbed By The Crops! You could call that a misuse of Roundup, not GMO technology.

THAT's Critical Thinking in operation.
Sorry.

Laughing...objective observation makes one think though...however, they are not smart enough to pick and choose...they just spread it around and the results are just collateral damage...no conscience...life is cheap to them and doesn't mean anything...your just a water filled germ on the earth. They think that the earth is alive...it is not...it's just a rock that for some reason supports life.