Monsanto Argumentative Essay

Primarily, GMOs can accidentally contaminate crops near them and affect production for independent or local farmers and the companies themselves. As chemicals were scientifically introduced to these crops, their properties may affect production for others as invasive crops, causing the companies to pay additional fees. It is a controversial issue within the discussion due to how, “…independent farmers’ crops can be damaged by neighboring GM crops. When this happens, they must pay fees or risk being sued.” (Brassard 1). As it is demonstrated by the author GMOs may be a liability for production and it may cause more issues than necessary. On the other hand, genetically modified foods can resist weather patterns

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 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

You may not have heard about Monsanto but you’ve probably eaten genetically modified foods. What do the two have in common and how are they killing us? Here are some hard facts. Monsanto is an international agriculture company whose history dates back to the early 20th century. They began by creating the artificial sweetener saccharin. Later they moved on to carcinogenic chemicals like Agent Orange, used by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War. After receiving numerous environmental violations and lawsuits, today Monsanto is involved in biotechnology and the agriculture business. Monsanto suggests that they help farmers grow bigger crops, faster, while using fewer resources. But what they leave out is how they

The human population is quickly rising. With the rise in the human population, the demand for food is also raising at an unprecedented rate. Our simple mom and pop farms are unable to naturally provide the worlds population the food needed. This may seem like a big issue, but humans came up with an ingenious solution; genetically modified organisms, commonly known as GMO’s. Genetically modified food as been able to offset the worlds steadily rising demand for food, and the food problem has been solved, or has it? I will use information from: Wendell Berry’s, Jon Entine and JoAnna Wendel’s, 2000+ reasons Why GMO’s Are Safe to Eat, and Robin Mather’s, The Threats from Genetically Modified Foods, along with references from Food Inc., to explain

The issue of genetically modified foods, is Farmers can't harvest seeds. Fundamentally, farming is a simple process: plant seeds, grow crops, harvest crops, and gather seeds from the plants for the next season. Sadly, GMO companies like Monsanto take this last step away from farmers and raise expenses even futher by forcing the farmers to continually buy the premium-priced GM eeds every growing season. In fact, as was shiwn in the Bowman v. Monsanto court case, it is illegal in the US for someone growing a Monsanto crop to harvest the seeds and use them later. The Nowman case went all the way to the unanimously found guilty of patent infringement after he purchased and used second generation Monsanto seeds.

Monsanto is an American agrochemical corporation which manufactures pesticides and GMO crops. One of the most well recognized herbicides is Monsanto’s Roundup, which contains the carcinogen glyphosate. To prevent from killing the crops when farmers apply Roundup to their fields, Monsanto invented GMO versions of many staple crops such as corn, soybeans, and cotton which resist Roundup. Like the weeds, these GMO crops still absorb glyphosate, however the crops are able to stay alive through changes in their genetic makeup which make them herbicide resistant. The herbicide tolerance of certain crops has been adopted because it, “simplifies weed control to the use of a single herbicide and a flexible and easy management strategy” (Labrada, 2003), as well as decreasing the cost of weed control programs. As a result, Monsanto bought out most small farms and now owns 80% of the U.S. market share of corn and 93% of the U.S. market share of soy, which are then sold to modern food processing. Upwards of 75% of the processed food on American supermarket shelves contain genetically engineered ingredients. Not only are Americans consuming massive amounts of GMOs, which pose a huge health risk themselves, they are also consuming massive amounts of glyphosate, a chemical known to cause cancer and birth defects (Kruger, 2014). If society stopped consuming carcinogens, the cancer epidemic will be

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

Genetically engineered crops in the United States cover almost one quarter of all the cropland. Soybeans, cotton, and corn are the products that tend to be the most modified. GMOs do not only have the purpose of solving world hunger, but also to cure diseases and create vaccines. John and Cheryl talk about Monsanto and DuPont, another big company involved in the production of GMOs. These two companies claim that their products have the purpose of feed the world and at the same time reduce the use of pesticides and stop the production of erosion. Nonetheless, researches have shown that the claims of these companies have no support, since biotechnology has been improving quickly and the current study to prevent bigger mistakes in the future is

n regard to exposure to glyphosate and chemicals used in GMO products, the World Health Organization conducted a study to analyze crops treated with this particular chemical. The Organization concluded that glyphosate cannot be washed out of crops. Glyphosate cannot be removed from a crop even through cooking and cleaning methods. (Organic Consumer’s Association) In addition, the Organization found a correlation that the more GMO RoundUp herbicide is sprayed on crop fields, the more residue that builds up over time. This leads to increased exposure to “operators” handling the herbicide, especially when they neglect to wear protective gear while spraying crops. (Organic Consumer’s Association) This is why opponents want Non-GMO products. Since the organization has claimed that glyphosate cannot be washed or cooked out of the crop, this is a good reason why the public is demanding Non-GMO foods. Therefore, the consumer believes that it can be dangerous to consume these foods.

Agriculture is a booming business. Farmers make a living planting, harvesting, and selling vegetables and milk to consumers. On the surface, it appears as if farmers have it made, yet deep down they live in fear. Many companies who sell different products to farmers will try to blackmail the farmers who refuse their product. These products are useful, but if some farmers completely refute the product it may cause an uproar in the agricultural business.

Monsanto has often been criticized because of its aggressive recourses to patent infringement lawsuits against farmers. Since it has begun commercializing genetically modified crops in the mid-nineties, the company reveals that it has filed lawsuits against more than 150 individual farmers in the US for patent

Monsanto has quite a few stakeholders group in the company. Among those groups there is a primary and secondary stakeholder. The primary stakeholders are the ones that continuous engagement is absolute necessary for the survival of the company. These include employees, customers, shareholders, investors, government and community. The government and the community maintain infrastructure for the company. Secondary stakeholders are not involved in the day to day operations of the company. These include media, trade associations and special interest groups.

It doesn’t help that Monsanto also has power in politics, one of the Monsanto chiefs for food safety, Michael Taylor was actually appointed by Barrack Obama himself. Barrack Obama also appointed his Supreme Court judge: Elena Kagan, who happens to be the chief defender of Monsanto and GMO’s. Whether Republican or Democratic, Monsanto wields a strong power within politics that helps give them an edge in keeping their company going. (Obama). There are good aspects of Monsanto, like the efficiency of cheap seeds, and crops that can withstand the harsh behaviors of weathers, and the ability the crops have to survive a longer time. But not even the cheapest crops can cover up Monsanto’s long history of evil, from polluting the environment with PCB’s, the chemical Agent Orange, and the weed killer “Round-Up Ready”, to Monopolizing itself to being the owner of 90% of the seed industry and shutting down small

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,