Reply by a friend of ours, who is also in our notes under gm-free seed suppliers, Willem Visser, on January 26, 2014 at 9:58
Hi ya all,
My first post on your site. I’ve been working in the agricultural sector for +30yrs. It’s all about money, nothing to do with food. Fact is, they even call it commodities, not food! I call it “hollow food”. In an earlier post I readthat Monsanto only had an earning of 12% profit, yeah right, how many companies did they buy out during that year? how many mil $$$ did they fork out to compensations? What stuns me is the fact that their profit margin is low and yet investors keep on investing? Am I the only to see this flaw in logic? Did they disclose how many of the lawmakers, senators, congressmen, researchers received fund to keep them in business? The ones that shuttle in jobs between Monsanto and the US gov.
Another point to ponder, why is that Monsanto research is always accurate and trustworthy, and all the other scientists, even the highly qualified, are not. The “others” work is always flawed, inaccurate, dubious, unqualified…….is it not fantastic that there is ONE company(DDT, rBst, 2.4D, CFC, Alachlor, Aspartame etc) whom we can trust with our food?? BUT!! They can not claim all the glory for themselves as there are BASF, Syngenta, DuPont, Bayer, DOW, all driven to ensure your health and safety when it comes to food. Also don’t forget the fertilizer companies, because that is where it all started(go figure this one – I would love to see with what grace and awe these companies will be treated by some readers)
Now for some fun, I own a small NON GMO seed company, and don’t I just love to walk in the fields, comparing my product to the GM traits, to see a farmers face when he realises that his very expensive Bt containing crop has more damage than the conventional type. When he sprays the all fantastic RoudUp or generic, just to see how weeds have built up resistance, or that he had to come in with another double dose, and then have a reduced yield because of herbicide damage.How the conventional farmer harvests more than double to the farmer next door who uses all the goodies available from the Chemical tech companies. I refuse to call them bio tech, because they haven’t the faintest idea on bio diversity, Sustainability is a word they picked up somewhere but haven’t a clue to its meaning.
This season. DuPont’s seed business – Pioneer, have ruled that if any of their Bt containing products get infested with more than 5% of stalkborer, they will pay for the chemicals to be used. Now is that NOT the way it was supposed to be? Were we not supposed to use no more chemicals? Monsanto I didn’t even mention, as they have been at this practise for years. BUT, true to their nature, they always have an explanation for why the traits didn’t work. And normally it is the farmer who is at fault. And to answer your question, YES, they have been supplying thousands of litres of insecticides to disgruntled farmers this season alone.
Fact, a GM trait can not increase yield, only conventional breeding can. The latest scam from the big two, DROUGHT TOLERANCE!! And I say BS!! The truth, they buy out small companies who work at breeding for drought tolerance, slap Bt or RR on to it, and then call it a GM drought tolerant maize. Its all in the words, like, 100% pure juice, chicken-fortified with water??!! Bread fortified with Selenium, go see the toxicity of selenium to humans. Or like the Woolies bread which contains NO GM, so what about the soya they use in the bread? To mothers I would like to pose a question, would you spread waste from the sewage works on your lawn where your child plays, or is it okay if farmers use it as manure to grow their crops with, which you in turn will feed to your child?
It has become time that consumers stop ass-u-me-ing and start asking questions.
W Visser

Genetic modification
gautengsmallholder.ning.com
Can somebody please explain, in words of one syllable, what all the fuss is about genetic modification? When I was at school I recall being taught about a blok… …read more