29 comments on “Visit to Monsanto Piilani Farm on Maui

  1. What a great summary of the development of a GMO strain! I knew they tested the modified seeds to determine if and where the desired genetic sequence ended up but i couldn’t figure out how they did it without destroying the seed or organism. Now i know they just take a bit of the seed without disturbing the germ. As you described, they then test the chip and, if good, allow the associated seed to grow.

    Thanks ! (P.S. Though evil scientists are required to take coursework in evil laughter, we engineers are allowed to get by on a lecture in snide snickering 🙂 Glad you had fun!)

    – FO

    • People aren’t angry because they are uninformed. They are angry because they are informed about all the negative consequences that GMO’s have. Even if GMO crops didn’t require boatloads of pesticides and herbicides people would still be angry because of the affects of the GMO’s themselves. Maybe you should do a little more research before you decide to advocate for such a horrific corporation.

      • Yeah that’s right. All those negative consequences that never seem to be able to be proved. Even when those claiming those consequences are offered help to prove them.

        http://www.biofortified.org/2013/11/dr-huber-turns-down-my-generous-offer/

        Perhaps you’ll sign the petition to have Dr. Huber release his findings to the CDC and the FDA to help stop his found killer:

        https://www.change.org/petitions/those-concerned-about-food-safety-and-gmos-motivate-dr-don-huber-to-release-his-gmo-and-glyphosate-enriched-pathogen-to-the-scientific-community-so-it-may-be-sequenced-and-studied-before-it-harms-others

      • Gonzo, one of the things that bothers me most as an independent, public scientist is monitoring the absolute ignorance of those on the internet. Particularly, someone like you that is grossly uninformed telling someone that is well informed, that they are uninformed. Negative consequences? Sure, nothing is perfect. However, GM use has cut insecticide use in a big way and the herbicides used work well and are quite reasonable in terms of safety and environmental impact. The benefits vastly outweigh the down-sides (like herbicide resistance, water pollution, neither specific to GMO). I’d recommend reading Julie’s work carefully and learning from it. Of course, reach out to any scientist and they can help you too.

      • Really try looking at the spraying AND their product roundup, the ingreedients individually are fine…but incombination, the chemical and the surfacant together, this where the problem lies. And mutations are not consistent. when the new genes are inserted into the DNA the ‘switches’ to turn on the genes may turn on other genes that are not intended to be turned on. This is why even tho the missing gene of the boys in the bubble was isolated and given to the boys they got cancer. the wrong genes where turned on too. Invitro fertilization, some of these babies are born with a defect that only invitro babies have. it t doesnt’ happen to everyone but it does happen to some. there are no guarantees…that is the point

      • Dawn, do you mean this?

        http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/12/07/249335960/gene-therapy-keeps-bubble-boy-disease-at-bay-in-8-children

        Well, please reread Julie’s writeup above on her visit to the Monsanto Plant in Hawaii to see why this is not a problem with GMO’s. Every GMO seed that is first created is tested for sequencing, seeing exactly where the inserted genes end up. Those seeds having the wrong repalcement are destroyed. Only those that have the correct placement and only the correct placement are used for making the seeds that are sold. Geneticists have magnitudes greater knowledge than back in 1980 about gene activation, what the switches are and what flips them.

  2. Did they show you where they keep the kidnapped children for feeding studies? Did their powerpoint show you about their plan to kill everyone on the planet?

    Nice stuff, well done. Glad you got to see the place. I’m always blown away by corporate science and what they can do. I think my lab is pretty good, but we’d be lucky to do things 1% the speed of industry. Must be nice to have deep pockets!

    • Actually Kevin, now that you mention it, after I signed away my first born son, they did make us take little green pills before we even went in for the PP. Oh my god I’m a Monsanto replicant. Nooooooooo…

    • GMOs go against EVERYTHING positive; nature, God, love ect

      if its not natural its not right. i can assure you beings envolved in manufacturing artificial ANYTHING know exactly what they are doing…
      the planet earth ( where we all reside) is a living breathing being, and is connected to every thing on its self, and as she raises vibration and energy and light as will all her inhabitants….
      EXCEPT if you have been pumping yourself with genetically modified food, negative thoughts (brought on by dissconect from LOVE truth god earth..

      the day we lost our connection with ourselves, the planet and god, we allowed negative beings to confuse us.. hence this article..

      the negative beings who are causing and have caused all this separation from real are DESPERATE to keep us mind controlled to keep us separated from god earth love so we dont evolve with the planet, and we stay artificial robotic and obediant consumers forever ( which wont exist soon cause the balance is wayyyyy out)
      open your heart and mind and see where love takes you.
      peace
      god x

  3. In response to: https://sleuth4health.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/visit-to-monsanto-piilani-farm-on-maui/

    It is interesting that because they, Monsanto, conducts such intense testing the review is that GMO corn is good. Realistically is there proof that crops that contain the engineered genes of insecticide-producing and/or herbicide-resistant bacteria actually cause no-harm to the creatures, human or otherwise that ingest it? Pesticide and insecticides kill insects, exposure to these products produce neurological damage, also, some of the nicotine-based insecticides called neonicotinoids is linked to Colony Collapse Disorder. the colonies exposed produce 85% fewer queens. i’m not saying all gmo is bad (as used for medical purposes) BUT, just because there is not an instaneous reaction does not mean there is no harm to humans or animals. Realistically many things are harmful overtime, evidence shows increasing intake of sugar and HFC are linked to increase in disease, diabetes, high blood pressure and the like. I don’t think organized, clean scientific facilities prove safety. Last, is it true GMO cannot reproduce itself, sort of a mule, if you will. Or is it just that farmers that purchase corn are bound by agreements they cannot save and plant seed from their crops, they are bound to re-purchase. Monsanto’s reasoning is they use the funds for more research. This hardly seems wholistic when propogation is essential. Not to mention, the cornering of the market rather enslaves the farmers to use these products or lose there place in the market due to lower yield. Yield obviously is a goal yet, losing choices to multimillion dollar companies forces small business out and gives the entire pie and control to these giant conglomerate companies… there is more to the picture than the appearance of safety of GMO. there is a controlling factor whereby use of products that negatively affect the environment produced by business giants who control goverment and farmers by their sheer size control the market this forces out diversity which we know is dangerous. Gene pools require diversity to thrive. Inbreeding is dangerous on many levels. I’m just curious if your views take in these considerations? Arsenic is tolerable in small doses, this does not mean it is not a poison. If the GMO are good for us then labeling should not be an issue on any level. If it is so good for us wouldn’t companies be proud to label the products? This seems just a little on the confusing side to me.

    • “nicotine-based insecticides called neonicotinoids is linked to Colony Collapse Disorder.”
      -the neonics are not GMOs… at all.

      “Or is it just that farmers that purchase corn are bound by agreements they cannot save and plant seed from their crops, they are bound to re-purchase.”
      -Yes. And farmers do this willingly. Monsanto does not force farmers to buy their seed. Farmers buy the seed because they see it as a good value. Terminator seeds do not exist. Please read this blogpost: http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2013/08/this-is-copy-of-what-was-written-for.html

      I don’t consider GMOs all good OR all bad. They are a tool as any other. They are right sometimes. Sometimes they are not the right choice. The record is clear however on their safety and the fact that FEWER pesticides are used with GMOs, not more. There are untold potential environmental benefits from GMOs, that, as far as I have learned, outweigh the potential risks. In other words, the risks are not to the degree that the technology should be scrapped, not even close. I invite you to check out this website: http://www.biofortified.org/

      There is a lot of misinformation out there, misinformation that is circulated by frightened people, all of whom at one time I believed. Then I went about researching and forming my own opinions based on evidence. I nolonger fear GMOs. Rather, I am excited about their potential.

      • correct, neonicotinoids are not GMO’s, no argument there nor did i say that. the point is there is not thorough testing of GMO’s or insecticides. It is part and parcel of a host of other issues about what is being done to our food supply and it is hard to digest. Simpifying, these ingredients are being inserted into seed to repel pests and resist weed killers. What i am saying is there is no proof these genes are not harmful to humans or other living things over time. And i find it ironic, if they are believed to be so good for us, the foods produced with GMO plants should be labeled. Aside from the good and bad of GMO, Why fight labeling? If it is so good, logically, i would think they would be proud to label, not fight labeling. I believe i should have a choice about what i eat. I believe the FDA is being influenced by big money/big corporations. I want our country to encourage being forthcoming about what is in our food, not support hiding it. I spend my hard earned dollars to buy my food and support my country. I pay for the FDA yet they employee people from Monsanto, this is a flagrant conflict of interest and it seems they can’t quite hear that people want labeling. The important point really is, tell us what is in our food and allow us to choose whether we want to ingest it. Plain and simple. This is my argument about GMO’s, we have no idea what the affect will be generationally. No one can seem to link the high rates of diabetes and skyrocketing high blood pressure to sugar and HFC, yet it is being proven…the most public article on this is in the August National Geographic. Our national dieticians insist fat is the problem, wrong. Most of our food issues are linked with politics. It’s really all about the almighty dollar. The big corporations making more dollars, not little ol you and me, sad to say. There is no reason to believe the fight FOR GMO is any different, the bottom line sadly is about money, not health or safety.
        Just my opinion of course.

  4. Well said Dawn M. I think the GMO companies are the ones who are spreading disinformation and it`s sad. Monsanto is a horrible company that puts organic farmers and seed shakers out of business! They are spraying the fields 7 out of 10 days with poison that is being washed into our beautiful ocean affecting sea life. Not to mention the workers who are exposed to this poison,( haz mat suit or not). I pray for them that they will do as they promised and make hunger a thing of the past, but that is NOT what they are doing and I vote them of the island!
    Aloha!

    • Seed shakers? I didn’t know there was such a thing to be in business in the first place. What do they do?

      Just how does Monsanto put organic farmers out of business other than provide cheaper and better ways to grow crops?

  5. I don’t think it is your place to advocate the use of GMO’s in a place you don’t even live. Even if you are pro-GMO, respect the wishes of the majority of native Hawaiians who do not want GMO’s on their land. Who are you to come in and tell people how their land ought to be treated on your vacation? If GMO seeds spread throughout the island, the place may no longer look like the paradise you wanted to visit in the first place.

      • Let’s get one thing straight! I’m not “advocating” for GMOs or Monsanto here. I’m simply reporting on a visit to a plant breeding farm and what I observed. Am I slamming Monsanto and saying they are destroying Hawaii? No, because I don’t believe that to be the case. There are far worse threats to Hawaii than Monsanto or any of the big biotech companies. I am a scuba diver and care very deeply about marine life, the health of oceans and coral reefs. I am a card, carrying environmentalist in every sense of the word. I live in Oregon! Portlandia? That’s me.

        I am also in search of the truth when it comes to best farming practices. I HAVE done my research and I can’t ignore the evidence. Many people have the wrong idea about GMOs and have been grossly and convincingly mislead. GMOs have been villified to the point of hysteria.

        Hawaii is a special place beyond description. I understand why residents are concerned but I think its important to have the facts. That is my only objective with this website… to get to the TRUTH.

      • With all due respect, this is a hot topic in the islands. WE are defensive too. The truth encompasses more than visiting Monsanto, a great site to view is the Shaka Movement to understand why. The soil is poisoned and sterilized to grow GE crops. According to the American Chemistry Council the “Precautionary Principle” to be applied until there is not enough data available to ‘prove’ the safety of GMO’s we want to be asked for consent to be exposed to these foods. Another person of interest in this exploration is Lorrin Pang, MD. He has an excellent background and understanding of the GMO’s. it may be interesting to you.

    • Are you saying that the GM corn, papaya etc is going to make the non GM corn, papaya, etc look different? How so?

  6. correction, i removed the word not …“Precautionary Principle” to be applied until THERE IS ENOUGH data available to ‘prove’ the safety of GMO’s… thanks

    • The Precautionary Conjecture, as i’d like to call it is not a real principle of science. It’s main thrust seems to be to forstall any new technique until all risks are known, however obtuse, even when it is already clear that the sum of the known and the maximum that the unknown could be is less than the risks the new tech would replace. The case in point is the new GE vs the old mutagenesis. Both produce genetic changes. But GE produces far less changes and all changes are known. While it is theoretically true that there is still unknown risk that something might go awry with GE, it is clearly a much lesser unknown than that from mutagenesis, and, even from conventional breeding. But, according the the Precautionary Principle, the present tech is OK but not GE even though GE’s risk is a small subset of that of the older tech. The Precautionary Principle also ignores that wholly new genes are introduced into the world, randomly, all the time, through radiation and cosmic rays.

      The Precautionary Principle also ignores benefits. Hence, millions of children have died, waiting for Golden Rice to jump through the Precautionary Principle’s hoops. The Precautionary Principle is also a game of ever higher goal posts. No sooner than anti-gmo’s concerns are answered, than new ones are imagiined. Tests?, Ok, well, long term tests?, OK, Well now we want multigenerational tests. Oh, many generations of livestock have eaten them? Well, now we want human multigenerational tests. I’m sure, if somehow that was met, they’ll then want human evolutionary tests.

  7. It is impossible to prove that something is safe. There are just too many darn variables. All you can do is weigh collected evidence against your objectives. Can you prove that driving to the grocery store is safe? No, you can’t. The most you can do is take reasonable precautions. You wear your seatbelt and drive responsibly. You stay on the lookout. But you can’t guarantee ahead of time that a mishap will not occur. The benefits of getting groceries outweigh the risk of a possible accident.

    And to be clear: I’m NOT trying to tell anyone what do do or how to think. I am reporting on my own experience. My point of view comes from a place of having once been a staunch anti-GMO blogger turned pro-science observer. Never in my writing of this Piilani piece am I telling Hawaiians what they ought to do, think or feel. I do state my own opinion, yes, but I’m not telling anyone they should agree with me.

    • in a sense you are saying if we are against it we don’t have a significant basis for our opinion. there is not an open mindeness. But this is people. different people, different opinions. Safe equals being able to reproduce outcomes, GMO creations are not necessarily required to be recreated consistantly before being approved. This is an area where issues lie. this is not my opinion it is a Dr’s opinion. AND we have people like Michael Taylor who bounces between Monsanto and FDA. This gives rise to questions to his objectiveness. Generationally, know one knows the long reaching affects of instanteously changing DNA with no adaptation period.
      I don’t understand why there are so many roadblocks to labeling. If it is believed to be so safe why did Monsanto support NO on 522 in WA State to the tune of $4,834,411 on labeling GMO’s. Wow, if it is so damn good, be proud, LABEL IT! why would they fight something that they as a company would not even be paying for? Everything is labeled supplement labeling is highly regulated. Labels, photos, logos & ingredient lists, etc are changed constantly to address content, markets and style. Why shouldn’t foods with GMO ingredients be labeled? Why shouldn’t all people be given a choice to know what they are eating and exposed to?

  8. Pingback: Another One Bites The Dust (Of Reason) | SLEUTH 4 HEALTH

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s