Biotech Giants Demand a High Price for Saving the Planet

Thank you. Go well.

Andrew Taynton,

Fair enough. You spoke your mind well. I'm not entirely comfortable with your position, but if we all thought the same, life would be boring. That is why we have discussions.
Have a good day. I hope we'll have another discussion soon.

imfedup

There should be no patenting on life forms. Patents are for human inventions, natural genes are not human inventions. Patenting genes should be made illegal.

Why can you not change patent laws if they are wrong? They must be changed to reflect our changing business, social and ethical environment.

Just because someone spends money on R&D does not mean they have the right to renumeration. It has to be within the correct social, legal, ethical context.

Besides being against GM crops I am against pateting life forms, which can also be used outside the context of GM crops. Pateting laws must be changed to keep up with changes in technology and social values.

Andrew Taynton,
Right. The genes are manipulated by humans. A patented gene (life form) is inserted into the genome altering the overall genetic structure of the organism. Thus entitling the developer to a patent.
If you are against patenting gm crops thats fine. No one will make the effort to develop them. It is not fair for someone to make the effort only to have it stolen by others waiting on the sidelines. That's why we have patent laws. They are their to protect the little guys to.
The ethical practices of these larger corporations, once they receive the patent, is questionable but the spirit of the Patent Laws should not be changed because of a few bad apples.

imfedup

Patenting genes can hinder research and development, see:
http://www.genewatch.org/uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483c1c3d49e4/Patent...

imfedup

Wrong. The genes are not manipulated by humans. A patented gene (life form) is inserted into the genome altering the overall genetic structure of the organism. The corporations are patenting unmanipulated natural genes and which gives them royalties over the gentically manipulated seed or life form after it has been genetically engineered.

There should be no patenting of life forms (genes are life forms), and if corporations still want to do expensive R&D on genetically engineered life forms they must run the risk of marketing the product without patent rights.

Patenting genes may not destroy the world although they will increase hunger and starvation, but genetic engineering certainly can. Try some genetically manipulated anthrax or other pathogen for which there is no anti-dote.

"My worry is that other advances in science may result in other means of mass destruction, maybe more readily available even than nuclear weapons. Genetic engineering is quite a possible area, because of these dreadful developments that are taking place there." - Joseph Rotblat, the British physicist who won the 1995 Nobel Prize after years of battling against nuclear weapons.

Andrew Taynton,
These genes are produced by the manipulation of humans, not nature. Yes they may be patented. No, corporations can not save the world by patenting genes nor can they destroy it.
If you read my initial response to George W. Bush you will understand why my question is reasonable.
I have been polite enough to answer your questions. Now for the second time please answer mine.

Good article: "International experts say "No patents on life" http://www.navdanya.org/news/05august01.htm

imfedup

This article is about patenting climate change genes.

Genes are natural, they are not an invention, and should not be patented.

My question is do you beleive GM crops should be patented?

Do you believe corporations can save the planet by pateting genes?

Andrew Taynton,
Why are you hammering me off point? I am not here to endorse or condemn GM crops or Large Corporations. My posts to this point have taken no sides. My point is that if someone comes up with a product that can be patented, that individual or company has the right to be protected for a certain period of time so that they may benefit from their labors. Answer the question!
As for the article you posted... you have my answer in the previous posting.

In addition, there is nothing wonderful about a technology if it increases hunger and starvation. Christian Aid predicted ten years ago patented GM crops would do just that, and look whats happened. There is absolutely nothing wonderful about patented GM crops. Patents on life forms must be abolished.

imfedup

The USDA put public funds into GM terminator techonolgy in a partnership with Delta & Pine Land and Monsanto then bought the company.

Quote: "Relations between Monsanto, Delta & Pine Land and the USDA, on closer scrutiny, show the deep and dark side of the much-heralded genetic revolution in agriculture."

Read full article at:

http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/engdahl/2006/0828.html

One more question 'imfedup', what is useful about patented GM crops that cannot be achieved by other breeding methods or farming techniques?

JBPM,

You are dancing around the issue. I am not interested in marketing. That only happens if a viable product is invented. No product has ever been invented/patented by a group of people throwing money to an ad agency and telling them "make me a wind generator". It is by the funding of scientists and engineers.
Now if you show me proof that Monsanto did most of there R&D through public funds; than yes, I agree that the developments should be open to the public domain. But if they did it on their own dime, it's their property.
So I will state my question again: Is it not fair for a company that has spent millions in R&D, in developing something useful, to profit from their labors?

imefedup asked, "What incentive is left to develop these wonderful new inventions? Is it not fair for a company to spend millions in R&D to develop something useful and then make a profit from their labors?"

Lots of assumptions are packed into these questions. One is that pharmaceutical companies spend a lot on R&D; this one got tackled above by Nietzsche, who recognizes that pharmaceutical companies spend more on advertising than on R&D. Another assumption is that these products are "wonderful" and "useful," when in many cases the "demand" for these "useful" products is manufactured (see note above regarding advertising dollars).

Yet another assumption is that the money these companies spend on R&D is THEIR money when, in fact, a large percentage of the money spent on scientific R&D comes from taxpayers, in the forms of grants, subsidies, endowments, etc. Big research institutions like the Universities of California and Illinois get a LOT of public money to do this research. My question for you is if the money spent on R&D comes from the public coffers, why should the pharmaceutical companies profit at the public's expense?

In other words, why is public subsidy of private profit acceptable, but private subsidy of the public sphere out of the question?

Won't work. They'd just borrow a page from Mickeysoft and licence the seeds for single use instead of selling them outright.

Stamping on the serial numbers and the "Genuine Monsanto" validation processes might get a bit tricky, but I'm sure they'd manage it somehow.

"Patents don't last forever"

Also, people who can't afford food don't last long.

The thing that needs to be challenged to the death is that once a new seed is sold to a consumer, it is that consumers right to save the new seeds and use them over and over.
The new seeds that come from the patented ones might even be better than the original and in that case the consumer deserves the right to even patent them but that would be impractical but beneficial for the whole world...

This would make a good court case and a good revolution too.

Monsantos head states...
"Together we must meet the needs for increased food, fibre and energy, while preserving the environment," said the company's head, Hugh Grant. "These commitments represent the beginning of a journey that we will expand on and deepen in the years ahead."

WOW, SO YOUR POSITION MUST BE FOR REINTRODUCING INDUSTRIAL HEMP FOR AMERICAN FARMERS?!!! I GET IT NOW! not likely, but that statement makes alot of sense if he was refering to hemp and not these frankenfoods.

ITS TIME FOR HEMP FOR VICTORY ROUND 2, only the perminate legalization this time around. Check out 'HEMP FOR VICTORY' ------the us gov is sooo hypocritical. end the illegal prohibition on this wonderful plant Sativa.

The outcome of this will be the same as with the patented HIV drugs. Countries like India and Brazil, technically advanced in many ways but still having large populations of people living in poverty, will ignore the patents in the name of saving human life. Companies attempting to patent all of agriculture will find their patents are worthless.

ezeflyer

The citizenary.

In Europe at least 174 regions, over 4500 municipalities and other local entities and tens of thousands of farmers and food producers have declared themselves "GMO-free" expressing their commitment not to allow the use of genetically modified organisms in the agriculture and food in their territories." See http://genet.iskra.net/

And in the USA: "Grassroots Consumer Action Could Halt Use of GM Crops in US"
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_10691.cfm

Whose going to save the planet from Biotech?

Grow food, grow soil, save (non GMO) seed! Share non GMO seeds with friends and neighbors. FK the biotech industry.

old jeffersonian- isn't that the video where they demonstrate 'fact' by referring to a wikipedia entry with a "citation needed" icon readily visible? i'm no fan of monsanto but i do like decent scholarly standards. careful how heartily you endorse shoddy journalism- there is plenty of well researched material out there.

4thefuture

The corporations have tried several times to introduce terminator technology (sterile seeds) They would be able to breed unsterile seeds and sell the terminator seeds to farmers so the farmers cannot replant them. Terminator technology has been put on hold, i.e. not used in the market place yet due to public pressure, however the dagger always hangs over out heads.

The way coporations control the GM seed market at the moment is through patents.

imfedup

For many years seed breeders (corporations, farmers, scientists) have improved seeds without the use of patents, why do they suddenly need patents to cover research and development (R&D)?

One of the main problems with genetically engineering seeds is the genome is scrambled, leading to unknown consequences that bring about health and enviromental hazards. Why should we pay patent fees for damaged products?

MiMiCcS said "Bacteria genes inserted into food DNA to make them resistant to pesticide, drought, etc, and to make the seeds terminate, so that seeds produced from the crops are sterile, and new seeds need to be purchased (oh sorry guys, we are sanctioning your country, so we can not export you the seeds unless you comply with our demands)."

But where/how are they going to get the unsterile seeds, some number of generations down the line? Sounds like an unsustainable practice even from agribusiness perspectives.

biotech giants? saving the planet?

I'm not holding my breath.

In fact, according to my sources, biotech corps are trying hard to destroy everything on the planet except that which they can control.

It's a war between Natural Abundance and Scarcity by Design... with Scarcity in an accelerated state and advancing rapidly...

Who will win? Now that most is lost?

Food will go the same way as oil which a few years ago was only $18 a barrel whereas it's now nearer $130. Imagine the profit the oil companies are making.

Same with food. As global warming bites its price will rise. You may end up paying $25 for an apple eventually and $50 for a pint of milk. What these corporate dolts don't realize is that their greed is destroying our world.

And you can't make profits if people can't afford to buy!

Is Israel a Proxy? check www.dangerouscreation.com

This is sad and pathetic, but there's still humor. Here's a story about corporations patenting life itself, including genes that occur naturally in plants to help them resist harsh conditions, and some slack-jawed fascist comes in and says, "but don't the corporations doing this important work deserve a profit for the important work that they do? Otherwise they won't keep doing so much important work, like breeding crops that are resistant to their own patented biocides..."

It's kind of like asking whether ticks deserve their share of your blood because they learn how to crawl up your leg and give you lyme disease.

Besides rummaging around in Pandora's Box how are the Bio-thefts going to patent compost and Terra Preta? Biologically active carbon holds at least four times its own weight in water. Between managed C and good farming practices what can the Bio-thefts do but screw the Planetary biome?

AlexLawyer: Don't blame "the law." Apart from certain inconvenient principles that are now "quaint and obsolete", it's merely the codification of USA Incorporated's wishes and desires. Blame the codifiers and interpreters.

@kelmer June 8th, 2008 2:04 pm
"Biotech is a greater danger than Islamic fundamentalism."

Damn right! In fact, it is almost as great a danger as Christian fundamentalism.

Maybe I should patent my own genes, then sue anyone with whom I have sex for the royalties due me. I can patent the weeds in my yard and sue anyone with the same species in theirs. What a wonderful thing the law is!

Careful what you are saying. Monsanto et al will have access to Blackwater. You don't have any choices, what do you think, this is a democracy. Personally, I think we should nationalize them all (especially the big energy companys), put an end to their greed and selfishness. Teach them about "we, the people".

Here is a link to a horror film that makes Frankenstein look like a kiddy playground. When the film started getting a lot of attention, it was yanked off almost every site. I think this still works. It is feature length and gets into the history of Monsanto and gets deeply into its GMF program. You will see farmers in India who have killed themselves because they were talked into, or forced by the suppliers, to use Monsanto GM Cotton. The yield is lower and Monsanto apparently takes all of the profit in royalties, leaving the farmer nothing. In essence, those who use Monsanto GM products become sharecroppers on their own land! Until they lose it, of course.

Monsanto apparently controls about 60% of the arable land and they want it all. Watch this before it gets yanked here, also. Keep a barf bag close to hand though, some of it is pretty unpleasant. Especially when they interview officials.

http://www.celsias.com/2008/04/09/the-world-according-to-monsanto/

The critical issue with these genetically modified seeds which give us GM foods, is that on the one hand they are called new technology whose intellectual property needs to be protected due to the millions needed to test and develop it. But on the other hand, FDA which regulates the safety of foods, say that "The agency is not aware of any information showing that foods derived from these new methods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform away." They claimed no safety studies are necessary and that the food producer is responsible for assuring safety. The industiries testing does not include long-term safety testing, and other countries who resist GM seeds are forced to accept them based on WTO agreements.

Here is what this technology is about.

Bacteria genes inserted into food DNA to make them resistant to pesticide, drought, etc, and to make the seeds terminate, so that seeds produced from the crops are sterile, and new seeds need to be purchased (oh sorry guys, we are sanctioning your country, so we can not export you the seeds unless you comply with our demands).

Other interesting things

Spider genes inserted into goat DNA so that goat milk could help produce a spider web protein for use in bullet proof vests.

Cow genes to turn pig skin into cowhide.

Jelly fish genes to light pigs noses in the dark

Fish genes to give tomatoes and strawberries frost tolerance

Human genes inserted into corn to produce spermicide

Genes inserted into bacteria to make bacteria living drug factories

Unregulated recipe for a global disaster. And we worry about CO2.

It was a company in Texas, not Monsanto, that tried to "patent " Basmati rice, a crop bred in infinite variety for thousands of years by Indian farmers. But it sure got their attention. They stopped that ridiculous scam, and were also ready when Monsanto tried to patent their wheat. Which the Indian farmers had also been growing and breeding in endless varieties for thousands of years. That attempt at biopiracy was revoked in 2004.
One thing that tends to get lost in these discussions is that small farmers have been quietly, patiently, steadfastly, refining their own seeds so they have strains of any major crop that resist drought or floods or bugs or any conceivable condition they and their ancestors have had to deal with through the millennia. Also they have made special varieties to suit very specific local conditions, conditions which no u.s. agribusiness could possibly know about. This is a reality which basically refutes any claims u.s. agribusiness giants may make. Seeds and agriculture are to the Global South what capital and patents are to the u.s.

we do need some kind of planetary agreement about what belongs to Mother Nature, and all her children- water, air, food. and seeds. and genes, and what belongs to capital- nothing.

"Biopiracy" by the way is a term I learned from Vandana Shiva, who has written a whole book about it.

see also

http://www.navdanya.org/earthdcracy/seed/index.htm

Just the latest wave of capitalism---as the Native leader said, "Why not sell the air?" They take away or destroy things and then sell them back to you in a form you need to keep buying over and over: till they have so much money you are a captive consumer and captive worker too. There is no bottom to a businessman---we are going to have to remove him and start history over, or die of him.

OK imfedup, corporations have a right to a reasonable profit, but that is not what they are asking for.

Could this be the real reason that we are being fed this climate change crap? More corporate control and more taxes... just what we need.

It could be interesting though when the climate actually starts cooling, which looks more likely than warming now...

what worrys me is the the next wave of gene fiddling...
the so called enhancements for human beings...which sounds great for approximaitely 15 seconds....then you realise that your kids won't get into schools if they are not enhanced (schools won't accept them for fear of lowering their performance ratings)...you won't be able to get a decent job if you are not enhanced..because you quite literaly won't be the best man/woman for the job...it won't be a matter for argument..they be able to prove your not the best man/woman for the job...extrapolate out from there...
heck even perfectly day to day sporting events will suddenly turn into a nightmare of lunacy..who's going to want the normal althlete or sportmans when they can get an enhanced sportmans..sport is big buisness..figure it out...

what about universitys..un enhanced surgeons doing operations as opposed to enhanced surgeons doing operations...law suits against doctors with no enhancements for taking the position of an enhanced doctor thereby deliberately endangering the public...and this time it won't be prejudice..there will be no racist sexist or phobic agenda involved...they will be able to PROVE it....in a court of Law

they may as well take a hammer to society and smash it into a billion tiny fragments and watch it burn....only this time there will be no way back...there will be no dream of equality..no dream of unity..no dream of equity or socail justice...because they will have a pink slip to prove you ARE inferior...

they start doing that and you can kiss the whole dang thing good-bye pernamently...it won't be a science-fiction film..it won't be fun...it will just destroy us all....not one tiny fragment of what we call society will be left intact or not completly broken beyond repair by this...there will be nothing even remotely recognisable as human society left...

it's this that makes dooms day scenarios regarding climate change seem credible to me...they could pull this off as a response to massive ecological disaster or a response to nuclear winter...other wise it will be exactly what it says on the tin..the complete eradication of the human race...

you can't even trust them to enhance wheat without turning it into a way to oppress the poor and control/exploit the worlds economic situation to their own ends....when they start enhancing people...those self same poor people may as well line up for execution..because any hope of justice fairness freedom and even democracy ...just left the building

we are now at the the point when science and politics are one and the same thing...there is no excuse anymore

Why all the stink about bird flu? They will one day ban the family chicken coop.

Control the oil you control the country, control the food your control the people.

This is just another weapon to use against countries America and her good buddy don't like

What comes next - cloning for body parts for the "Haves" while the "Have Nots" continue aging and dying?

I'd be so glad my time here is nearly gone, if I wasn't so certain I'll be returning as someone else - who'll be faced with having to deal with the carnage of this time.

wdmax3, I just read an article, Vitamin-less Vegetables By Terri Mitchell, which listed a lot of the differences between commercial and natural fruits/veggies and it seems that the cultivar and the ripeness when picking together are most important for nutrition with natural fertilizer and other growing strategies important but to a lesser degree. This would mean that commercial growers for long-haul supermarket distribution claiming organic methods are still very likely to grow inferior varieties and pick them way too early for optimum nutrition. The best way to get optimum nutrition is to grow your own heirloom cultivars in your own yard, let them get truly ripe and eat them immediately after picking. The organic growing methods add to that.

Nietzsche,
I agree safety must be proven... but you haven't answered my original question.

Welcome to the new and improved international slavery! Nothing less.

Corporations must be profitable in everything that they do, that's just the nature of the beast. We must beware of any corporations that state that it's actions are for the good of the people, that would contradict its own corporate directive to its shareholders.

Food production has never been enhanced by technology in the long run. Fertilizer and its overuse has left us with large fruits and vegetables with less than half of the nutrition of their organic counterparts and barren depleted soils that are incapable of producing food without more fertilizer.

Seems like the only way is a natural way. Biodiversity was the norm until the corporations stepped in and messed with Mother Nature. There was once a problem with the production of U.S. corn (low yeilds, bordering sterility), the problem was solved when they went to Mexico for one of the many varieties they cultivate to reintroduce diversity into the U.S. corn.

Stupid corporate farmers trying to make ends meet by tilling the soil and listening to Monsanto and the like, not to mention being sued if they try anything different...

Time to go lo-tech if we are going to survive the coming correction.

It's predictable that elites are exploiting for profit the climate chaos induced by their peers because we expect them to replicate the highly successful collusion between tobacco and medical industrialists and more recent instances. Such lucrative collusions are featured in the Harvard Business School curriculum today. Of course we still have laws against collusion, as part of the anti-trust reforms, the centerpiece of the early 20th century progressive reforms but these laws are zombies now. The feds' failure to enforce them today is yet another suppressed story in a broken down society.

The elites will argue that biotech exploiting climate chaos for profit is not collusion because the biotech monsters did not conspire at all with the energy monsters to open this new frontier of opportunities. Instead, the biotech monsters worked hard to discover that new frontier and just look at all the crumbs falling on the floor for the peasants. But this is the same old grand-daddy of all lies.

The elites know well that climate chaos was created by and for the elites with their primal agenda of power concentration/abuse, camouflaged by the economic growth at all cost agenda, which fools most of the coordinator class. These runaway freight train agendas raise the price of everything by creating layer upon layer of destruction and exploitation. The anti-trust laws should be generalized to directly target the elites' power concentration/abuse agenda. And they should be enforced with a railroad tie swung upside the elites' skulls. The layers of destruction and exploitation are piling up and strangling the society.

Oh come on now imfedup, some years drug companies spend more on marketing than R&D. And I don't care how much Monsanto spends on developing frakenfoods, they should have to prove the safety of their produce before they are allowed to turn it loose on the planet. Nobody can un-modify this pollen that will be with us forever.

What if, down the road, we find out the stuff is poisionous? Will Monsanto contritely take responsibility? Not bloody likely.

Dear George, you would have a lot sick buzzards flapping around loose.

The corporations can take a hike back to reality. If a farmer has heirloom seed on hand; he has every right to plant or not to plant it. No pack of overpaid neckties can tell him what to do with what is his property.

Most of the GM crops are modified to suit Agribiz. The small farmer in remote areas will continue as he always has. When the gene modifiers are dead and gone the smallholder will continue to farm as he or she wishes.

Hell, the same companies - who once so loved humanity they gave us Agent Orange and Zyklon B - already "own" the "patents" on the transgenic mutant organisms (aka GMOs) they still call soy and corn, which now account for over 80% of total US production of said crops.

The next step, already in progress, is, basically, food extortion per country - either use the drought/disease/whatever TMOs or watch your people die.

Instead of running to bandaid every new wound the elites inflict on people/planet, let's embrace independence, worldwide individual and local independence, land, water, and food independence. This deprives the elites of a demand for their destruction so they won't be so inclined to destroy.

George W. Bush writes:
"take the patents away from the multinationals by fiat and disperse them worldwide. the only legal issue is what to do with the carcasses of the corporate executives after they are forced to starve. Would it be more humane to grind their carcases up to use for plant fertilizer or to feed their remains to endangered vultures?"

Cute. What incentive is left to develop these wonderful new inventions? Is it not fair for a company to spend millions in R&D to develop something useful and then make a profit from their labors? Patents don't last forever and then the technologies are available to everyone.

We'd better patent ourselves.

Just as you can't own sunlight or air, you can't "own" the right to grow crops. And if the mega corps want it that way, they should be sued for contaminating our non-frankenfood with the genetic materials from their crops that blow in the wind and cross breed with real corn, oats, etc, etc.

There was a movie "Rollerball" with James Caan about the struggle of a superjock to assert his individuality in a future world where everything is owned by one corporation.

It's a prophetic tale from 1975 that is already becoming a reality.
As with global warming, all the draconian developments are being realized much sooner than anyone predicted.

@kloro:

What makes you think local law enforcement would side with small farmers?

especially after your local gendarmerie has been outsourced to Blackwater.

wait until farmers in the midwest AND local law enforcement get together and dare the federal government to stop them from saving their seeds. ha! this country's becoming a powderkeg as the multinationals drift further and further from reality. ha!

fpal June 8th, 2008 3:05 pm -- 'Also, when do employees of these corporations accept responsibility for action of the corporations?'

From a legal standpoint, exactly the opposite is true in a so-called "master and servant relationship." Where tasks are performed by an employee (servant) under the direction and control of the employer (master) and are subject to the employer's knowledge and consent, the employer can be held accoutable for the consequences of such actions by its employees.

take the patents away from the multinationals by fiat and disperse them worldwide. the only legal issue is what to do with the carcasses of the corporate executives after they are forced to starve. Would it be more humane to grind their carcases up to use for plant fertilizer or to feed their remains to endangered vultures?

Gorsegrower,

As I understand it, the genes are modified by man (and do not exist in nature) and thus eligible for patents.

Also, when do employees of these corporations accept responsibility for action of the corporations? And, by actively maintaining employment with this corporation do the employees explicitly accept any consequences of the company's action and strategy?

@Gorsegrower: The legal issues surrounding so-called "intellectual property" are somewhat complex, but if you really want to get into them in some detail, Northwestern University's Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property provides some reasonably good background. The 1980 Supreme Court decision Diamond v. Chakrabarty set in motion the trend towards the "legal acceptance of the commodification ... of germplasm."

now we know the real reason the media buffs have been ramming that phrase LIFESTYLE down our thoats for twenty years..to set us up to unconciuosly accept the concept that life it self is just another product...

it's a waste of time...

I'm puzzled. Patents are for inventions, and a gene is not an invention, per se. It is found, not manufactured or devised by a human. We need a couple of good court cases, and soon.

One day i suspect you will start to see organizations targeting Monsanto and other GMOS.
Not ELF or ALF type things, but Al Queda inspired actions.

Biotech is a greater danger than Islamic fundamentalism.

Any day now our governments will grant these corporations the patents on human life - then everyman will be owned by the corporations - any day now.

Sepultura had it right when they wrote the song "Biotech is Godzilla."

These patented technologies will ultimately concentrate corporate power, drive up costs, inhibit independent research and further undermine the rights of farmers to save and exchange seeds.
Those are only the most obvious and immediate impacts.

By now, it should be obvious to the meanest intelligence that making something (anything) profitable to USA Incorporated is the surest way to guarantee its infinite and unending exacerbation. It has been so for military adventurism and it will be no different for climate change. Once the mechanisms and groundwork for its profitability have been fully established you can be damn sure that you'll never see reversal.