Monsanto Pros And Cons

Monsanto has neglected to do their due diligence to protect the American people. Currently, they supply a weed killer called Roundup, that is poisoning both the environment and the American people. Monsanto is not required to disclose what ingredients are in Roundup, but one of the known ingredients is glyphosate, a possible carcinogen. While plants may be ready for this chemical introduction, humans are not. This chemical is potentially dangerous to people as it often ends up in our water sources, poisoning the fish in our food chain. While the potential dangers of Roundup are not known, that of previous Monsanto products are known. Monsanto helped to create the Atomic bomb that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There are no other words to describe the outcome of that bomb but devastating.

Monsanto’s is an agricultural biotechnology corporation. They are the producers of Roundup ready seeds, which are seeds that are not affected or killed by weed killer. Not only do they produce the seeds but they produce the herbicide Roundup as well that kills unwanted weeds and grass. These things seem like something every gardener would want. What could be better? Well Roundup is not all is thought to be. The herbicide Roundup has been linked to damaging liver and kidneys.

Monsanto makes money by selling their genetically altered seeds to farmers. The farmers sign an contract that says they are not allowed to save and replant those seeds sold to them next year. Sometimes, a farmer might save some seeds for next year, in which case Monsanto finds out, and sues them (Why Does Monsanto Sue Farmers?). Sometimes, genetically modified material from Monsanto accidentally ends up in a farmers field. Regardless of intention, Monsanto will still sue. This is because of a law that allows companies to patent genetic alterations. With its patents, Monsanto and companies like it basically own these small business farmers. If there were no genetic modifications, the farmers would be free to farm normal seeds, without having to sell their soul for debatably better

Monsanto is one of the most hated companies worldwide. You know they are hated when you type in the words “Monsanto is the” and Google finishes your sentence with “Antichrist.” Monsanto takes the blame for many agricultural problems. There are many sources against Monsanto, but very few who support Monsanto or even GMO’s in general. As most people know, almost all of America’s food and produce is genetically modified. Is Monsanto the only one to blame? Many GMO companies are at fault for their products, but Monsanto goes to the extreme by suing farmers. GMO’s are supposed to help farmers produce more for less, but Monsanto is completely defeating that point by making farmers pay for the seeds again. Also, genetically modified plants should not have to use herbicides and pesticides, but if the plants are truly “doing their jobs,” would Monsanto need to sell Roundup? It seems as if Monsanto were making truly pest-resistant, they would not have to sell Roundup to farmers. It just does not add up. Monsanto’s products just seem to be a vicious cycle. As you buy one, you continuously have to buy more and more. The cycle never ends and will continue unless you don’t buy their products in the first place. As in the short story, “The Charger,” the salesman states that after

Monsanto has dominated the seed market, controlling the price. For economic reasons, farmers have no choice but to continue to buy Monsanto seeds because if they don’t, they will be forced to pay extremely high prices for non-GMO seeds. Farmers are also dependent on Monsanto because the company is influential in the subsidized food market as they have enabled farmers to save more money when buying Monsanto brand

Monsanto was founded in 1901 by John Francis Queeny. In 1996, Monsanto introduced it’s first genetically modified organism seeds to the United States. This caused the farmers to lose a lot of the seeds that they had been saving through a process known as seed saving. Seed saving is when the farmer keeps the reproductive material from the seeds to use in the upcoming years. When Monsanto put out their GMO seeds this caused the farmers to lose all ownership of their seeds and the power went from the farmers to the huge corporations who now owned 93 percent of the soy market and 80 percent of the corn market. Monsanto has sued many farmers across the United States because the company believes that the farmers are seed saving and refusing to buy the GMO seeds from them. Each farmer who uses Monsanto is under a contract with very strict rules and regulations which are designed to put the farmer at a juridicial disadvantage. “The estimated total of settlements paid to Monsanto by farmers ($85.7 to $160.6

Finally, to meet the threshold of ethical standards, an organization should comply with all laws and regulations that govern ethical standards (O 'Toole, 2009). Such laws include giving reports on the conduct of the business or on new products scheduled for introduction into the market. Monsanto’s products were unfamiliar to the stakeholders. Monsanto had not made it clear whether their genetically modified seeds were harmful to the environment or not. This therefore meant that Monsanto did not subject the stakeholders to the best ethical standards.

In the United States and Canada, Monsanto is spending millions of dollars for companies to remove the genetically modified organisms label and requested them to put ‘Natural’ on their products instead. One example of this is a big company, Kellogg’s. One of Kellogg’s brands, Kashi, was sued for falsely advertising their products as ‘all natural’ or with ‘nothing artificial’. Kashi paid five million to resolve what they had done. With more investigation, it was found that Kellogg’s paid the Grocery Manufacturers Association’s (GMA) $221,852 to oppose the genetically modified organisms labeling bill. The GMA was later sued for taking the money from the donors who funded them and found, “The GMA has contributed $7,222,500 to the campaign opposing

Companies that operate under a moral obligation, have a duty to their stakeholders and society to operate in a morally acceptable manner that is not enforced by laws. Monsanto’s early years saw the development of food chemicals such as saccharine, to industrial commodities such as plastic and synthetic rubber to the dangerous agent orange. As of 1981, Monsanto has transitioned their business from a chemical industry to a biotechnology company focused on modified plant seeds. Monsanto can fulfill their moral obligation by providing a better life for the farmers that use their products while also providing a better-quality food product to the consumer. The seeds have been altered to ensure that the farmers are not taking any crop losses to

Monsanto may request government assistance and fight against superbugs by counting farmers to use Monsanto's transgenic products and create a shelter where they can plant some of their fields with the nongenetically modified culture. In addition, farmers can vary to practice herbicide use and crop rotation to prevent resistance to Roundup herbicide. The company may also cooperate with international conservation organizations to conserve biodiversity. In this case, interested parties should make their own decisions on genetically modified crops.

First, Monsanto would need to make sure their products are efficiently branded. For example, Monsanto could invest in product identification from an ingredients standpoint. If products are clearly labeled, customers would be aware of the environmental impact of utilizing the products. According to Ferrell and Hartline (2016), “Many skeptics see biotech crops as unnatural, with Monsanto scientists

Monsanto is an American Transnational Corporation which supplies agrochemical and agriculture. In 1901, John Francis Queeny, a 30‑year old veteran of the pharmaceutical industry, established Monsanto with his own money. John named the Company after his wife’s maiden name.

As Monsanto is fighting to gain seed control of the whole world of agriculture by spreading genetically-modified crops across the world (with the support of the U.S. government according to Wikileaks), there is far greater opposition from the rest of the world, where many countries are not only labeling GMOs but also banning their cultivation altogether.

Natural food production is becoming less common as new ways to improve plant development are being discovered. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are showing up more often in the agricultural industry. Scientists are creating ideal plant genes in order to maximize production and ultimately, profit. Companies are placing patents on their genes in order to keep other farmers from planting and selling them. If cross-pollination were to occur from a GMO farm to an organic farm, the latter would be sued for possession of the patented genes. It does not matter how the genes got there; if organic farmers have seeds containing the patented genes, they can and will be sued. Companies like Monsanto are winning court cases against small farmers every day. Organic farmers are losing business as they become susceptible to large companies. They should not have to pay for what nature does. GMO farmers and patent owners should be held legally responsible for the cross-pollination of crops because of the negative effect it has on organic farmers.

The Monsanto Corporation is an agricultural company that is split into four different categories: agricultural seed, vegetable seeds, weed control, and traits, technologies and partnering. They are a fortune 500 company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri and has 21,183 employees at over 400 facilities in 66 countries around the world. I will be focusing on the agricultural seed market of Monsanto.