If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Big Story)   Since welcoming Monsanto into the country in 1996, Argentina's crop yields have soared to record heights. They've also had skyrocketing rates of cancer and birth defects, but hey gotta break a few eggs for an omelette right?   (bigstory.ap.org) divider line 218
    More: Scary, Monsanto, crop yields, birth defects, cancers  
•       •       •

9392 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Oct 2013 at 1:37 PM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



218 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-22 11:30:55 AM
I like a good Monsanto hate as much as the next guy but is it really their fault if people are bathing in and drinking the stuff?
 
2013-10-22 11:49:23 AM

Voiceofreason01: I like a good Monsanto hate as much as the next guy but is it really their fault if people are bathing in and drinking the stuff?


This. It doesn't sound like the chemicals so much as ignoring how to use them properly.

I mean, they are using pesticide bottles for their drinking water. Why would they think that's a good idea?
 
2013-10-22 11:54:58 AM
FTA:

So while glyphosate is one of the world's safest herbicides, farmers now use it in higher concentrates and mix in much more toxic poisons, such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in "Agent Orange" to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War.

I'm all for holding Monsanto accountable to the evil crap they do pull, but this is kind of like blaming the mafia for the Tea Party.
 
2013-10-22 12:09:50 PM

toraque: FTA:

So while glyphosate is one of the world's safest herbicides, farmers now use it in higher concentrates and mix in much more toxic poisons, such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in "Agent Orange" to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War.

I'm all for holding Monsanto accountable to the evil crap they do pull, but this is kind of like blaming the mafia for the Tea Party.


Yes and no, I remeber back in the 70's Nestle went into many parts of Africa and used sales reps dressed as Doctors and nurses to try to convince many African women to switch from beastfeeeding to the more "modern and Healthy" method of buying thier infant formula.  What those reps failed to take into account was that many of these women couldn;t afford thier formula so would often dilute it to try to make it stretch farther, and many of them also lacked access to clean drinking water to make the formula with so they fed their babies from the same parasite laden water sources they drank from.    Asa a result infant mortality rates in Africa soared, and in my catholic grade school the nuns asked us all to particpate n a boycott of Nestle products as a result.

Now you can say Nestle's product was safe and it was only the misuse of it that caused the harm; but it's equally fair to argue that Nestle replaces a safe, time-tested method of doing things (breast-feeding) with a new one, without adequately considering whether the area they were introducing it to had adequate infrastructure to use the product safely.

I'd argue something similar is happening in Argentina now,  Monsanto intoduced it's round-up resistant  seeds and replaced tradtional farming methods with the "drench the Feild in Round-up " style of farming  without considering wether the area's sanitation systems were up to that and whether the expense of round up might lead farmers to mix it with cheaper less safe alterantives
 
2013-10-22 12:31:31 PM

Magorn: toraque: FTA:

So while glyphosate is one of the world's safest herbicides, farmers now use it in higher concentrates and mix in much more toxic poisons, such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in "Agent Orange" to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War.

I'm all for holding Monsanto accountable to the evil crap they do pull, but this is kind of like blaming the mafia for the Tea Party.

Yes and no, I remeber back in the 70's Nestle went into many parts of Africa and used sales reps dressed as Doctors and nurses to try to convince many African women to switch from beastfeeeding to the more "modern and Healthy" method of buying thier infant formula.  What those reps failed to take into account was that many of these women couldn;t afford thier formula so would often dilute it to try to make it stretch farther, and many of them also lacked access to clean drinking water to make the formula with so they fed their babies from the same parasite laden water sources they drank from.    Asa a result infant mortality rates in Africa soared, and in my catholic grade school the nuns asked us all to particpate n a boycott of Nestle products as a result.

Now you can say Nestle's product was safe and it was only the misuse of it that caused the harm; but it's equally fair to argue that Nestle replaces a safe, time-tested method of doing things (breast-feeding) with a new one, without adequately considering whether the area they were introducing it to had adequate infrastructure to use the product safely.

I'd argue something similar is happening in Argentina now,  Monsanto intoduced it's round-up resistant  seeds and replaced tradtional farming methods with the "drench the Feild in Round-up " style of farming  without considering wether the area's sanitation systems were up to that and whether the expense of round up might lead farmers to mix it with cheaper less safe alterantives


I'm just going to throw it out there that "traditional" farming methods are typically terrible and that a much more likely theory than "Monsanto is tricking people into using their products" is that the increased yields that have resulted from using GM seed and roundup mean there's more money to be made from farming and that has resulted in the greater use of pesticides.
 
2013-10-22 12:58:40 PM
Poor Farmer; Hey, we sprayed out kids with pesticide and now they are sick.  What can we do?
Asshole American: Blame all GMO's and ban their usage!
 
2013-10-22 01:00:21 PM
Yes, Monsanto is responsible for creating crops that yield much greater food for people and for livestock.
Yes, these chemicals have some potentially nasty side effects if people are exposed to them in high enough concentrations.

So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.
 
2013-10-22 01:18:14 PM

Lando Lincoln: So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.


There is exactly zero evidence this is true.
 
2013-10-22 01:24:28 PM

mediablitz: Lando Lincoln: So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.

There is exactly zero evidence this is true.


There's just no farking way you're going to get the same yields without GMO's and pesticides / weed-killers. Sorry, man. It's not gonna happen.
 
2013-10-22 01:29:00 PM

Lando Lincoln: So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.


I might be crazy, I might be a socialist, but I think there could be an avenue here to use what I like to call "government regulation".

Just throwing that out there.
 
2013-10-22 01:30:49 PM

Lando Lincoln: mediablitz: Lando Lincoln: So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.

There is exactly zero evidence this is true.

There's just no farking way you're going to get the same yields without GMO's and pesticides / weed-killers. Sorry, man. It's not gonna happen.


You don't need the same yields.

Both of the world's leading authorities on food distribution (the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO] and the World Food Programme [WFP]) are very clear: there is more than enough food for everyone on the planet. The FAO neatly summarizes the problem of starvation, saying that "the world currently produces enough food for everybody, but many people do not have access to it." Food is a lot like money: just because some people have none doesn't mean that there isn't enough of it--it's just spread unevenly.

It's not the amount. It's access to the food.
 
2013-10-22 01:35:10 PM

mediablitz: "the world currently produces enough food for everybody, but many people do not have access to it."


Currently. With Monsanto's help. Now take away those yields. Is there still enough food?
 
2013-10-22 01:37:04 PM
first, it's hard to sympathize with people who are still pulling their food out of the ground instead of driving to a restaurant or grocery store.

second, when it comes to keeping my kid's sandbox free of weeds, nothing beats Roundup.
 
2013-10-22 01:38:03 PM
Ever since the number of pirates have gone down, the temperature of the planet has gone up. Clearly something needs to be done.
 
2013-10-22 01:38:34 PM

Lando Lincoln: mediablitz: "the world currently produces enough food for everybody, but many people do not have access to it."

Currently. With Monsanto's help. Now take away those yields. Is there still enough food?


Yes, there is. We are using less land now than we did in the 1970's and not because of overpopulation (another myth). MORE land is available (Guinea Savannah Zone, for example). The Monsanto "we HAVE to have these yields or people will starve" argument is a myth, simple as that. It only takes about 5 minutes on google to realize this.
 
2013-10-22 01:41:22 PM
This thread should be good for lulz.
 
2013-10-22 01:41:33 PM
imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-10-22 01:42:23 PM
www.robwillreview.com
 
2013-10-22 01:44:21 PM
"Use as directed" is a good idea when it comes to pesticides.
farm4.staticflickr.com
 
2013-10-22 01:44:28 PM

mediablitz: Yes, there is. We are using less land now than we did in the 1970's and not because of overpopulation (another myth). MORE land is available (Guinea Savannah Zone, for example). The Monsanto "we HAVE to have these yields or people will starve" argument is a myth, simple as that. It only takes about 5 minutes on google to realize this.


So all we have to do is reverse urban sprawl, turn our suburbs back into farmer's fields, and then we'll be fine. And we need to do this to get away from using GMO's.

Hmm. I think a likelier outcome is going the way we're going until we can't go that way anymore.
 
2013-10-22 01:44:33 PM

mediablitz: Lando Lincoln: mediablitz: "the world currently produces enough food for everybody, but many people do not have access to it."

Currently. With Monsanto's help. Now take away those yields. Is there still enough food?

Yes, there is. We are using less land now than we did in the 1970's and not because of overpopulation (another myth). MORE land is available (Guinea Savannah Zone, for example). The Monsanto "we HAVE to have these yields or people will starve" argument is a myth, simple as that. It only takes about 5 minutes on google to realize this.


I would say that the ideal solution is providing more calories per acre and using as few acres of land as possible.   There is absolutely zero evidence that ties GM crops and properly used pesticides with any negative health impacts.  These crops and chemicals routinely pass regulatory checks in all modern nations without issue.
 
2013-10-22 01:44:37 PM
Another in the Monsanto is evil stories. Expect more as there are a number of groups putting out this sort of thing. Facts mean nothing and they are continuing to dig to find anything that can be used.
 
2013-10-22 01:44:37 PM

toraque: FTA:

So while glyphosate is one of the world's safest herbicides, farmers now use it in higher concentrates and mix in much more toxic poisons, such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in "Agent Orange" to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War.

I'm all for holding Monsanto accountable to the evil crap they do pull, but this is kind of like blaming the mafia for the Tea Party.


Funny you should say that - I blame Monsanto for the brain damage and low IQ birth defects that gave rise to the tea party. The pesticides in those rural areas have created a generation of Ted Cruzes and Sarah Palins.
 
2013-10-22 01:45:55 PM
Yeah, we know this is a problem, which is why most countries, including the US regulates this stuff (and we do regulate the shiat out of it).

Doesn't matter when the farmer doesn't pay attention and sprays his chemicals in a 29mph wind.

I've told this story before, but the above situation destroyed a good portion of my dad's garlic crop, when a farmer decided it was ok to spray Roundup with a strong wind.  It defoliated trees 1/4-1/2 mile away.

It also doesn't matter when you have a neighbor that brags about getting some organophosphate linked to multiple health problems and banned in residential uses (Diazinon), but it's ok, he's got crane flies in his lawn.

I've also heard of people attempting to control emerald ash borers with spray approved for indoor termite control only.
 
2013-10-22 01:48:57 PM

JohnAnnArbor: "Use as directed" is a good idea when it comes to pesticides.
[farm4.staticflickr.com image 200x150]


Instruction manuals are just the manufacturer's opinion of how they think they would do it if they were the ones doing it. Only chumps read those. Like this guy:

blog.sparefoot.com

What a chump.
 
2013-10-22 01:49:08 PM
Argentine statistics are so reliable.

This is the same country where it is illegal to make an independent estimate of inflation.

ISO15693: The pesticides in those rural areas have created a generation of Ted Cruzes and Sarah Palins.


Ted Cruz grew up in Houston and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. He's an asshole, but he's not suffering from a low IQ due to growing up in the country.
 
2013-10-22 01:50:18 PM

mediablitz: Lando Lincoln: mediablitz: Lando Lincoln: So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.

There is exactly zero evidence this is true.

There's just no farking way you're going to get the same yields without GMO's and pesticides / weed-killers. Sorry, man. It's not gonna happen.

You don't need the same yields.

Both of the world's leading authorities on food distribution (the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO] and the World Food Programme [WFP]) are very clear: there is more than enough food for everyone on the planet. The FAO neatly summarizes the problem of starvation, saying that "the world currently produces enough food for everybody, but many people do not have access to it." Food is a lot like money: just because some people have none doesn't mean that there isn't enough of it--it's just spread unevenly.

It's not the amount. It's access to the food.


That is direct result of farming practices developed since the 50s, which include GMOs.

His point stands.
 
2013-10-22 01:50:18 PM

YixilTesiphon: Argentine statistics are so reliable.

This is the same country where it is illegal to make an independent estimate of inflation.

ISO15693: The pesticides in those rural areas have created a generation of Ted Cruzes and Sarah Palins.

Ted Cruz grew up in Houston and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. He's an asshole, but he's not suffering from a low IQ due to growing up in the country.


Cancer is more likely than low IQ.

If anything, blame leaded gasoline for the Tea Party.
 
2013-10-22 01:50:39 PM

Magorn: Yes and no, I remeber back in the 70's Nestle went into many parts of Africa and used sales reps dressed as Doctors and nurses to try to convince many African women to switch from beastfeeeding to the more "modern and Healthy" method of buying thier infant formula. What those reps failed to take into account was that many of these women couldn;t afford thier formula so would often dilute it to try to make it stretch farther, and many of them also lacked access to clean drinking water to make the formula with so they fed their babies from the same parasite laden water sources they drank from. Asa a result infant mortality rates in Africa soared, and in my catholic grade school the nuns asked us all to particpate n a boycott of Nestle products as a result.

Now you can say Nestle's product was safe and it was only the misuse of it that caused the harm; but it's equally fair to argue that Nestle replaces a safe, time-tested method of doing things (breast-feeding) with a new one, without adequately considering whether the area they were introducing it to had adequate infrastructure to use the product safely.


You know how i know you have read Nancy Scheper-Hughes?

/if anyone can get through death without weeping without bawling, i dont think they are human
 
2013-10-22 01:50:45 PM
 
2013-10-22 01:51:11 PM

mediablitz: We are using less land now than we did in the 1970's and not because of overpopulation (another myth).


Overpopulation isn't a "myth", it's a concept.  The word means different things to different people so there may not be a correct definition, but that sure doesn't mean most people get it completely wrong.  No, we are not running out of room.  No, we are not running out of food.  But certain constrained resources are being rapidly depleted, and while our shameless waste of the stuff (whether it's oil or fresh water) is certainly a factor, more people wasting is going to burn through a limited resource faster than less.  There's very much a thing as regional overpopulation; global population is a far more nebulous concept.

You're spot-on about how starvation is a matter of wealth inequality and not yields, but in that case do please be a good messenger and not conflate the message with personal derp.
 
2013-10-22 01:51:16 PM
If only there was some way to modify, or "genetically engineer" crops to be resistant to pests, removing the need for toxic chemical pesticides.
 
2013-10-22 01:53:23 PM

meat0918: It also doesn't matter when you have a neighbor that brags about getting some organophosphate linked to multiple health problems and banned in residential uses (Diazinon), but it's ok, he's got crane flies in his lawn.


Pfft. For insects, go heptachlor or go home.
 
2013-10-22 01:54:36 PM
Pesticides are killing farmers and these sciency assholes want to selectively engineer plants to use less .  Farmers know the best way is to grow a bunch of shiatty crops until the most mutagenic one stands alone.
 
2013-10-22 01:55:51 PM
More food, less people. Where's the problem?
 
2013-10-22 01:56:31 PM

GoldSpider: If only there was some way to modify, or "genetically engineer" crops to be resistant to pests, removing the need for toxic chemical pesticides.


Thank you. The fact that Monsanto crops require fewer pesticides than other crops is one of many that escape the anti-GMO crowd.
 
2013-10-22 01:57:56 PM

Lando Lincoln: mediablitz: Lando Lincoln: So what's the answer? Take away Monsanto's chemicals and GMO's, and lots more people will starve. Choose carefully.

There is exactly zero evidence this is true.

There's just no farking way you're going to get the same yields without GMO's and pesticides / weed-killers. Sorry, man. It's not gonna happen.


in the 1900's this was a real problem even in Western Europe, that available farmland simply could not produce enough food to keep pace with a burgeoning population  until a genius named Fritz Haber figured out how to turn atomospheric Nitrogen into a liquid concentrate (synthetic ammonia) and thereby created artificial fertilizer.   (and won a Nobel prize in the process, at the same time he was wanted by the US as a war criminal for having pioneered chemical warfare in WWI)
  In the 1960's Norman Borlaug's "green revolution" made it possible for the Third World to feed itself as well.

Monsantogenetic engineering research should have been a continuation of Borlaug's revolution,  but somewhere along the way they lost the plot and began genetically engineering crops whose goall was more to boost sales of Monsanto products like presticides and herbicides than it was to boost crop yeilds.  Drenching a feild in round-up and then planting Round-up resistant seeds is an easier way to weed your feild than doing so manually, but it doesn;t appreciably increase the amount of food you raise, just reduces some of the effort needed to raise it.
 
2013-10-22 01:58:04 PM

mediablitz: Yes, there is. We are using less land now than we did in the 1970's and not because of overpopulation (another myth). MORE land is available (Guinea Savannah Zone, for example). The Monsanto "we HAVE to have these yields or people will starve" argument is a myth, simple as that. It only takes about 5 minutes on google to realize this.


You know we are using less agricultural land now than in the 1970's because of technological revolutions that increased yields massively right? And yes, food distribution is more of a problem causing starvation than food yields generally, but many of the places suffering shortage aren't the places producing more than enough food either.

meat0918: Yeah, we know this is a problem, which is why most countries, including the US regulates this stuff (and we do regulate the shiat out of it).

Doesn't matter when the farmer doesn't pay attention and sprays his chemicals in a 29mph wind.

I've told this story before, but the above situation destroyed a good portion of my dad's garlic crop, when a farmer decided it was ok to spray Roundup with a strong wind.  It defoliated trees 1/4-1/2 mile away.

It also doesn't matter when you have a neighbor that brags about getting some organophosphate linked to multiple health problems and banned in residential uses (Diazinon), but it's ok, he's got crane flies in his lawn.

I've also heard of people attempting to control emerald ash borers with spray approved for indoor termite control only.


Yeah this isn't a "OMG Monsanto causes cancer" problem it's that the regulations are apparently shiatty in Argentina and the regulations they do have aren't enforced. Of course shiat gets by here in North America all of the time too, and it causes huge problems.
 
2013-10-22 01:58:25 PM

GoldSpider: If only there was some way to modify, or "genetically engineer" crops to be resistant to pests, removing the need for toxic chemical pesticides.


You can breed them that way to.

Difficulty: The pesticides plants produce naturally are sometimes toxic to humans (potatoes produce the pesticides solanine and chaconine), and breeding a plant to be more pest resistant can increase their toxicity to humans.

People did this with a celery or a spinach (can't remember which) and the product was very pest resistant, but also made you ill.
 
2013-10-22 01:58:31 PM
This guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Taylor

..is probably responsible for more deaths than Hitler - and this isn't hyperbole.

How we ever allowed a Monsanto VP to become deputy commissioner of the FDA is beyond me. As much as I am grateful that we elected Obama, this is one of the very few things that he has done that has upset me (appointed Taylor to deputy commissioner)

Everything he has done has been to boost Monsanto's profits, even though he "officially" doesn't work for them anymore. He would sell his own mother to the mafia if it would increase Monsanto's bottom line.
 
2013-10-22 01:59:03 PM

labman: Voiceofreason01: I like a good Monsanto hate as much as the next guy but is it really their fault if people are bathing in and drinking the stuff?

This. It doesn't sound like the chemicals so much as ignoring how to use them properly.

I mean, they are using pesticide bottles for their drinking water. Why would they think that's a good idea?


If this is the case, then it's Darwin in action and subby is a retard.
 
2013-10-22 01:59:39 PM

GoldSpider: If only there was some way to modify, or "genetically engineer" crops to be resistant to pests, removing the need for toxic chemical pesticides.


First off, by "Round-up" they mean a weed killer, not a bug killer.

Snark aside this is like asking what sort of internal combustion engine you should use to heat your house.  You can certainly heat your house with an internal combustion engine, and if that's all you care about you can probably get the efficiency up pretty high.  But it's only one approach.  I'm not on the anti-GMO, anti-pesticide bandwagon per se, so while chemicals and genetics can be immensely useful the real question is what pest management approach gives you the best combination of safety, cost and effectiveness.  You're not going to get an honest answer from a company that makes its money selling GMO crops and chemical pesticides.
 
2013-10-22 01:59:39 PM

volodya: Another in the Monsanto is evil stories. Expect more as there are a number of groups putting out this sort of thing. Facts mean nothing and they are continuing to dig to find anything that can be used.


I'll bet you're a big fan of the FW:FW:FW:FW:FW Libs are responsible for children dying of Malaria so we shouldn't ban DDT emails, aren't you?
 
2013-10-22 01:59:56 PM

GoldSpider: If only there was some way to modify, or "genetically engineer" crops to be resistant to pests, removing the need for toxic chemical pesticides.


I think you misunderstand how GM crops are being used. It's more like "engineer corn so that roundup doesn't kill it, soak corn field in roundup, repeat". Pest species will slowly develop resistance to the herbicide or pesticide in use, and the amounts needed will slowly increase.

Just like in farming, these types of fixes should be targeted and specific. Blasting an entire field with a poison because that is the easy way to do things is probably not the best long run plan.
 
2013-10-22 02:00:09 PM

mediablitz: Yes, there is. We are using less land now than we did in the 1970's and not because of overpopulation (another myth). MORE land is available (Guinea Savannah Zone, for example). The Monsanto "we HAVE to have these yields or people will starve" argument is a myth, simple as that. It only takes about 5 minutes on google to realize this.


Meaning we'd need to expand cultivation to unused land which will require additional inputs of capital as well as non-renewable resources to maintain the equipment (fuel) and service the land (irrigation, plowing, harvesting, etc).  Which is going to be a severe problem because of one small issue you blithely ignored, access.

Access to food is less of a problem under your strategy than is access to arable land.  Like food, arable land is unevenly distributed but unlike food arable land is not transferable.  Many nations aren't in a position to take the "less efficient" lower yield approach to agricultural policy because their access to arable land is far to limited given the population it must support.  Low yield non-GMO/sans-chemicals approach is feasible for nations with an abundance of arable land (United States, Western Europe) that is more than capable of supporting it's resident population but it is not feasible for nations whose arable land is limited (Sub-Saharan Africa) or barely capable of supporting the current population (India, China, etc).
 
2013-10-22 02:01:10 PM

Lando Lincoln: So all we have to do is reverse urban sprawl, turn our suburbs back into farmer's fields, and then we'll be fine. And we need to do this to get away from using GMO's.


Reverse urban sprawl? Are you clinically retarded? Urban sprawl is what makes possible that more land is available for farming since it concentrates the population in a single area. Also helps with distribution.
 
2013-10-22 02:01:33 PM
Apparently, by reading this thread, I have learnded that many Farkers work for Monsanto.
 
2013-10-22 02:01:45 PM
Make genetic crops that Roundup won't kill. Weeds get immune to Roundup.
Make genetic crops more resistant to Roundup. Use stronger Roundup to kill weeds.
Repeat, often.
 
2013-10-22 02:03:22 PM

dragonchild: First off, by "Round-up" they can hypothetically mean a weed killer, not a bug killer.


FTFM.  Point is that "pest resistance" typically only works for bugs.  If you're fighting weeds, there isn't any "resistance" applicable to the equation.
 
2013-10-22 02:03:37 PM

Magorn: toraque: FTA:

So while glyphosate is one of the world's safest herbicides, farmers now use it in higher concentrates and mix in much more toxic poisons, such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in "Agent Orange" to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War.

I'm all for holding Monsanto accountable to the evil crap they do pull, but this is kind of like blaming the mafia for the Tea Party.

Yes and no, I remeber back in the 70's Nestle went into many parts of Africa and used sales reps dressed as Doctors and nurses to try to convince many African women to switch from beastfeeeding to the more "modern and Healthy" method of buying thier infant formula.  What those reps failed to take into account was that many of these women couldn;t afford thier formula so would often dilute it to try to make it stretch farther, and many of them also lacked access to clean drinking water to make the formula with so they fed their babies from the same parasite laden water sources they drank from.    Asa a result infant mortality rates in Africa soared, and in my catholic grade school the nuns asked us all to particpate n a boycott of Nestle products as a result.

Now you can say Nestle's product was safe and it was only the misuse of it that caused the harm; but it's equally fair to argue that Nestle replaces a safe, time-tested method of doing things (breast-feeding) with a new one, without adequately considering whether the area they were introducing it to had adequate infrastructure to use the product safely.

I'd argue something similar is happening in Argentina now,  Monsanto intoduced it's round-up resistant  seeds and replaced tradtional farming methods with the "drench the Feild in Round-up " style of farming  without considering wether the area's sanitation systems were up to that and whether the expense of round up might lead farmers to mix it with cheaper less safe alterantives


Hey I thought I was the only one that hated Nestle! And considering that the nuns, doctors, etc. pointed out to Nestle what was happening and they didn't care, you would be incredibly generous to say they didn't "adequately consider..."

/if their baby formula is as bad as their chocolate, no wonder kids were dying.
 
Displayed 50 of 218 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report