Monsanto Executive Summary

Monsanto positions itself as a relatively new agricultural company having formed in 2002, and focused on supporting local farmers around the world. They also promote themselves as a guardian of the environment with a mission “to produce more food while conserving more” (Monsanto.com). Today’s Monsanto conglomerate also promotes itself as the “New Merchants,” a leading research company in the field of agriculture-crop production, as well as a strong supporter of public and private research through its grant, donations and University scholarship programs.

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

If any parts of the farm are not following their guidelines, then Monsanto will sue the farmer. This has resulted in many farmers fighting until they are out of money like Moe Parr, a farmer from the segment known as From Seed to Supermarket. These large companies will not stop until their opponents run out of money, and this evokes fear from the audience. Fear is felt because it is now becoming more apparent that no matter how many people fight, the monopolizing companies will win because no one else has the funds to oppose them, and their businesses will continue to run unchallenged. The most appalling part of this entire industry is the chemicals necessary to keep it running.

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 controlling the farmers and manipulating organic farmers to use their patented seeds and artificial growth hormone to increase production. As, Troy Roush, VP of American Corn Growers Association explains “In the case of Monsanto their control is so dominant, if you want to be in production agriculture, you’re going to be in bed with Monsanto (Food Inc 1:15:40-1:15-48). Monsanto should not have the right to control what the farmers can and cannot do. Monsanto has induced politician and the government to abdicate their responsibility to protect consumers through funding their campaign and heavy lobbying. As Michael Pollan clarifies “For the last 25 years, our government has been dominated by the industries that it was meant to be regulating” (1:17:07-1:17:13). The consumers and farmers should be the ones deciding and voting on the farming practices, not congress or large seed industries. I believe the farmers should reject to use Monsanto’s seeds and have the right to save, clean and reuse the seeds from their harvests. It should be unacceptable and illegal for the government to change ancient agricultural farming; hence we would have a healthy food chain. Government and congress should focus on the interest of consumers and farmers and not be conquered by large companies. The government needs to revisit the seed patenting law and sign an agreement of the

The film discusses Monsanto, a large multinational agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation, at length. The film mentions Roundup, a product produced by Monsanto, but doesn’t go into detail about the effect Roundup has on human health. “We started to hear rumblings about genetically engineered soybeans that could resist the application of Roundup, and when Roundup is sprayed over the top of it, it killed every weed out there except for this ‘Roundup ready’ soybean.” says a farmer that was interviewed for the film. The film continues to go in depth regarding how Roundup contaminates other farmer’s seeds and how Monsanto then sues the farmers for “stealing”, but the film never discusses the truly terrifying health problem GMO’s (Genetically Modified Organisms) can produce. Alexis Baden-Mayer, a woman who is a part of the Organic Consumers Association, said in an article for ecowatch.com that Roundup can create dozens of serious health problems. The health problems include ADHD, Alzheimer’s disease, Anencephaly, Autism, birth defects, brain cancer, breast cancer, celiac disease, chronic kidney disease, Colitis, depression, diabetes, heart disease, and many more. Focused too much on the politics of Monsanto, the film failed to explain the true concern involved with Monsanto’s

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

According to Natural Society, people like Hugh Grant, and Bill Gates who own millions of shares in Monsanto stock are not the real owners of Monsanto. The main owners of Monsanto are institutions. The leading institution for Monsanto is a company is called the Vanguard group. Vanguard owns 3 trillion dollars in investments in different companies like Monsanto. Additionally, they own such companies as Bank of America, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, and others. Employees of Monsanto seem to be interested in agriculture. Most of the employees are scientist, and agricultural experts. Employees enjoy working with farmers, and enjoy generating new ideas. Every project that is worked on inspires innovation allowing Monsanto, to stay on the cutting edge,

Monsanto’s was founded by John F. Queeny in 1901in St. Louis, MO. The first product for the company was artificial sweetener. This open the door for many years of success for the company. The most controversial product that the company produced was called Agent Orange. This product was used doing the Vietnam War. The purpose of the product was to clear some of the foliage in the jungles of Vietnam. The product contained dioxin which was harmful to the U.S. Military Personnel fighting the Vietnam War. Monsanto made a large class action settlement for harm done to the soldiers. That has been the ethical dilemma for Monsanto’s for a long time.

While I agree it is important to find a sustainable food source and way to produce such foods, people in this generation tend to be more concerned with organically and naturally grown foods. There are several companies that now offer 100% certified organic foods in which a number of people are now learning towards after hearing all of the derogatory statements involving Monsanto's genetically modified products. Many Monsanto stakeholders should already growing concerned of the safety implications of genetically modified foods. Biotech crops are completely unnatural and many are stating that Monsanto is "playing God" by creating these genetically modified seeds. Stakeholders are also concerned about destructive effects on those who ingest their products that are modified with the Roundup. It is a very valid and growing concern and because of this, Monsanto's stocks have continuously plummeted over the last few years; which is also where the stakeholder concerns lie. At this time there is no substantial evidence that has been produces to indicate that Monsanto's GM seeds will or can cause human harm, and it could very well be a long time until we can know for sure they won't. But in the meantime, as long as farmers are able to produce massive crops and save billions by using Monsanto's products, Monsanto will continue to produce these goods and service those willing to use them. I feel that there will come a day when they do discover that these GM products lead to harmful or fatal diseases and when they do, there will be a major shortage of food worldwide. It was stated back in September 2012 that French researchers had found a direct link between Monsanto corn and numerous cancers in lab rats. The two year study

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

The objective of this report is to analyze the differences in Monsanto’s experiences in the United States and Europe and the reasons of opposition in Europe, despite that, why Monsanto pushed ahead so hard.

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,

Monsanto is a sustainable agriculture company, they deliver their agricultural products that support farmers all over the world. They also produce leading technologies that help farmers to protect their yield and increase the efficiency. They tried to make their products available to all farmers all around the world and give their seed and technologies in leasing to the companies. The company couldn’t develop and even live without the farmers, because they are the only customers of the company. They also maintain the world economy as they provide to every people and animal food, clothes and energy. Company and their fund provide many activities that contribute to the development of our society and ecology. However, company has their own CSR activities, Fund different one. Let’s analyze the