Monsanto : An American Leading Biotechnology Company

GMOs, (genetically modified organisms) have been a topic of interest in the social eyes for years. Since they’ve been created, many people have voiced and written about their opinions on GMOs, and whether they are dangerous or not. Created to expand the genetic diversity of crops and animals, many don’t know whether GMOs are good or bad, and neither do researchers. Though there hasn’t been any evidence claiming whether GMOs are good or bad, it has certainly not stopped the public from creating their own opinions. Since no one knows the truth behind GMO, it has opened a window of opportunities for companies including Monsanto to voice their support of GMO, while other companies like the Non-GMO Project voice their

“Should We Care About Genetically Modified Foods?” by John N. Shaw appeared in Food Safety News issue of February 1, 2010, as a feature under the health section on the controversy between the pros and cons of genetically modified foods (Also known as GMO, genetically modified organisms). The main idea of this article is to inform people of the benefits of GMOs . The author, John Shaw received his Bachelor of Science degree in Finance with a minor in Marketing from the University of Arkansas in 2007, where he was a “leadership scholar.” In addition to his studies, he has worked as a research assistant with Food Law LL.M. Director Susan Schneider, interned with Wal-Mart Government and Corporate Affairs division, the Arkansas Attorney General Public Protection Division, and with United States Senator Blanche Lincoln. John has a passion for Food Law, sports, and outdoors. In the article, he states, “ I submit that I am no scientist; merely an interested student.” According to the article, he is passionate and has done sufficient research about the topic to support his argument.

GM foods are in the middle of many controversial issues; primarily these are addressed by conflicts over the relative pros and cons of GM foods. Major biotech companies like ‘Monsanto ' and ‘Cargill ' are promoting GM foods by focusing only on their beneficial aspects, giving least importance to their negative effects on safety, environment and biodiversity. On the other hand, governmental regulators and nongovernmental organizations, along with some scientists, are strictly opposing this type of blind promotion of GM food by enlightening the people on their negative effects The controversies associated with GM foods include issues such as safety, environmental benefits and risks, biodiversity, and ethical and social considerations.GM foods are implicated for adverse human health risks like people being allergic to it, environmental hazards such as development of super weeds, and pesticide and antibiotic resistance in disease causing organisms. On the other

In 2009 a movie by the name of Food Inc. was released that challenged the production of food we eat. The movie examines everything from the science of seeds all the way through the consumption of the food, the food’s often negative effects on the body. The movie ends with the line “You can change the world with every bite”. This quote embodies the heart behind movie that change starts with the individual, and how they make food choices. This sort of change that Food Inc. invokes implies that top down change that the consumer can bring about change to the seed level. Food Inc. challenges the processes that allow companies like Monsanto to feed the world. We must understand how media like Food Inc. effects this mission to feed the world by examining the movie, the history of Monsanto as a company, and looking at the response from both sides to these challenges made in the public square to better combat and address issues brought forth.

Genetically Modified Organisms, or GMO’s, are organisms that have had genes from a different organism implanted into their own genetic code in order to produce a new result (“Genetically engineered foods”). This practice has elicited polar responses across the globe, for a multitude of reasons. Besides the obvious reason, being the morality of changing an organism's DNA for human benefit, one frequently noted problem is the monopolization of GMO’s by the company Monsanto, whose name is nearly synonymous with GMO’s due to their involvement with these crops. Monsanto has been at the center of many controversies regarding GMO’s, and is even considered to be ranked third to last for reputation among all major American companies (Bennett). Most

The world may be in danger of what Monsanto puts on families dinner tables. According to Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele’s article: Monsanto’s harvest of fear “Monsanto’s is the world leader in genetic modification of seeds and has 674 biotechnology patents”. 90% of the GMO’s in the world belong to Monsanto. The world has inherited Monsanto’s GMO’s in North and South America, Asia and Australia. Monsanto will eventually own food if consumers continue purchasing his GM products this reason being that Monsanto modifies its crops in order to make harvesting faster and easier making it more convenient to arrive on your dinner tables faster.

Biotechnology has been lauded as the future of agriculture. However, the business leaders and scientists involved in biotech did not predict how controversial genetically modified foods would be. Despite all the promises and merits proclaimed by research by different biotech companies and the governments like reduced pesticide usage, higher crop yields, the controversy surrounding its application to food production persists in many nations. One of the key issues that have surrounded the GM debate is the labeling of GM products. While some countries require the labeling of such products, others do not. This paper examines how labeling of genetically modified foods affects consumer willingness to purchase such products. By reviewing past

The public believes that Monsanto’s genetically modified organism (GMO) products is harmful not solitary to the environment and our food system but also to the consumers itself. Joe Mohr’s visual argument of Monsanto’s Reasons for Fighting GMO Labeling? It Loves You is a poor argument in an attempt to change the public’s view. Mohr claims that GMO labeling will cause the earth and its citizens to more stress, global warming, and cellular radiation. Mohr’s hope in transforming the unknowing public’s opinion by using Logos in defending Monsanto through a sound and logical visual explanation that was unfounded is nothing but a disappointment. Monsanto is all about corporate control and profit. Images and graphics that was used could potentially give depth and change public understanding to Mohr’s one-sided argument in procuring

Monsanto is involved in a variety of ways,“The company produces the herbicide RoundUp, and also seeds whose genes have been engineered to survive RoundUp's active plant-killing ingredient. Now the vast majority of this country's soybeans, corn, sugar beets and canola possess those engineered genes,”(Boyle). Initially, this seems quite innocent, however, there’s no telling what kind of chemicals are being introduced into the food supply in order to allow these plants to survive. Also, sugar and corn are contained within almost every non organic product Americans consume, which means virtually everyone is ingesting these potentially harmful chemicals. Monsanto’s RoundUp resistant seeds should seem to be a farmer’s best friend, but it’s not always so simple, “As Rinehart would recall, the man began verbally attacking him, saying he had proof that Rinehart had planted Monsanto’s genetically modified (G.M.) soybeans in violation of the company’s patent. Better come clean and settle with Monsanto, Rinehart says the man told him—or face the consequences,”(Barlett). Simply dogmatic in his manner, the mysterious Monsanto man would not take no for an answer, even though later in the article Mr. Rinehart states that he isn’t a farmer and they have the wrong guy. Commonly referred to as seed police, even gestapo or mafia, this elite force of Monsanto maniacs are lifeless and drone-like in the sense that they will stop at nothing in order to obtain a profit, and if it’s the wrong person they’ll still use scare tactics to weasel cash out of innocent civilians. Saying that Monsanto is heavily involved in the production and distribution of genetically modified crops and seeds is a massive understatement, to demonstrate this,“In 1996 when Monsanto introduced RoundUp Ready Soybeans, the company controlled only 2% of the U.S. soybean market. Now, over 90% of

Monsanto is notoriously known for partaking in the industrial production of herbicides and chemical warfare for militant use. Specifically, Monsanto is infamously known for the production of Agent Orange, a defoliant/herbicide used during the Vietnam War. Since its use, one of the many chemically adverse effects Agent Orange has been responsible for to this day are birth defects specifically among children related to veterans who have serviced in the Vietnamese and Korean military. Although Monsanto has moved away from the production of chemical warfare to the production of GMOs for human consumption, it is ethically debatable for Monsanto to be the leading industry to specialize in GMO production. The ethicality of Monsanto's contribution and influence in GMO production is also questionable due to Monsanto's economic position in domineering the seed market and GMO market, raising the possible risk of Monsanto's monopoly in both markets. Due to the intersectionality of GMO technology in socio-political private and public spheres, it is important to further research the credibility and ethicality of GM produces before its consumption and technology begin to raise problematic economic, environmental, and medical

Monsanto is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, manufacturers of genetically modified products, with the majority of their products being crop seed. Due to their area of business, the company has come under much scrutiny in the past as far as ethical responsibility. Their blemished track record has put them in the position of critical evaluation on the topic of overall public and stakeholder interest, relating again to their ethical practices and perceived benefits to the human population. Their focus and direction as a company will be evaluated based upon current and historic examples, as well as overall scientific findings on the topic of genetically modified, or ‘GMO’ seed.

“Monsanto Company started off its chemical business in 1997, Monsanto traces its roots to John Francisco Queeny, a purchaser for a wholesale drug house, who formed the Monsanto Chemical Works in St. Louis, Missouri”(Barboza). In the mid-1990s, it became the first to widely market genetically engineered

Like many other companies that manufacture chemicals, Monsanto has been under strict public scrutiny on its effect on the environment. The processes involved in the manufacture of some of its products pose potential harm to the world’s natural resources (Hocking, 2016). This has triggered demonstrations by environmental activists in various locations that Monsanto operates in. Such controversy is not favorable for the company’s public image. Since the manufacturer concentrates on agricultural products that directly affect human life, the company faces various moral challenges on the effects of its products on the society. There have been incidents in the past whereby toxic chemical traces have been found in genetically modified food that was

Monsanto’s introduction of GM foods in Europe faced serious challenges. As a fundamentally new type of food product, GM’s had no historical experience that people could rely on. Many at Monsanto just

Monsanto is a company that some people may not be explicitly familiar with on a first name basis. However, the work that the company has done over the last century, with a larger emphasis on its most recent ventures, have been deeply engrained in our lives, our food, and our economy. Monsanto has those who advocate on their behalf in addition to their naysayers. While Monsanto has made huge strides in terms of biotechnology over the last couple of decades, their accomplishments, and the relevant methods, have not been free of criticism and controversy. In order to analyze Monsanto’s corporate environment, it is important to first explore their Strengths, Weaknesses,