Monsanto’s broccoli (and other business endeavors)


Some broccoli has iron, some has irony…

More on Monsanto’s Broccoli, etc…

From Grist: Busting Monsanto’s ‘better’ broccoli
From EatDrinkBetter: October Unprocessed and Non-GMO Month
From me: My collection of Monsanto (GMO) cartoons

Joe’s cartoon archive, twitter ramblings and StumbleUpon page

 

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Monsanto’s broccoli (and other business endeavors)

    1. Regardless of Beneforte’s broccoli (I did not yet read your article) the major irony is that Monsanto, a company with 50-90 (depending on your source) Superfund sites, and a company that is now over-herbiciding our environment due to the new bio-resistance to RoundUp, is selling broccoli that will “maintain our body’s defense against environmental pollutants..” when they are responsible for large amounts of said pollutants. That is what the cartoon illustrates.
      Every time an anti-Monsanto article comes out there are always very intelligent people, like yourself who look to refute it. Regardless of your facts and Andy’s facts, the basic issue is, given Monsanto’s past (and present) there is absolutely no reason to trust them with our food.
      Thanks Karl.
      Joe

      1. Hi Joe, thanks for responding. But you fall into the same trap that Andy does, as I indicate in my post – you are interpreting it in terms of your opinion of the company involved and not the broccoli itself. I also address the herbicide claim briefly, because the source he uses obscures what is actually going on.
        But hey, at least you didn’t call me a corporate shill… although you imply that I responded because it was an anti-Monsanto article. Perhaps you should read what I wrote?

      2. I’m not concerned with the broccoli. I am concerned with the company making it. If they made pen caps I’d avoid their pens.
        If an armor-piercing bullet company came out with cute little bulletproof vests, you’d find that ironic, wouldn’t you?
        There’s no doubt we can fortify food with technology, but I prefer my veggies natural. I’ll deal with the consequences of consuming regular broccoli :)

        Thanks again, Karl.
        Joe

      3. “There’s no doubt we can fortify food with technology, but I prefer my veggies natural. I’ll deal with the consequences of consuming regular broccoli :)”
        So this is what you would eat? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brassica_oleracea0.jpg
        Because that is “natural” broccoli. The broccoli you find in the store has ceased to be completely natural, and is a combination of the natural materials it started with, and the artificially-selected genetic modifications that humans have bred into it.
        The really odd thing about your statement is that this broccoli was bred by crossing with a wild broccoli, so it might even be considered more ‘natural’ on a genetic level than what is in the store. And it was produced through conventional breeding, so I’m having trouble understanding what is unnatural about it as you interpret the term?

      4. Again, very simply–I’d eat anything before I eat something Monsanto made. I do not trust them. Their past is scary (look back a few at my Monsanto infographic) and their present is not much better.
        I choose to not trust them and to let others know what I know.
        That’s how I roll.
        Best of luck to your broccoli.

      5. It’s not my broccoli, ya know.
        I understand your position on Monsanto, I just want to point out that when you use the company reputation as a shortcut for forming an opinion, you may end up forming an opinion that is not grounded in science, but in [food] politics.
        With regard to irony, Home Depot sells both paints and paint thinner, and weapon manufacturers for police and military do just that – produce armor and armor-piercing rounds. Yeah it’s kind of funny to make both – but somehow I find it much more amusing that you think the broccoli in the store is the way nature made it. (And in all likelihood, the seeds of which may be sold by Monsanto, Syngenta, etc, so you really aren’t avoiding what you think you are!) The broccoli compounds in question also protect against the carcinogenic compounds produced by our [natural] food itself, which I explain in the post, which we are exposed to at levels that are magnitudes greater than pesticide residues on food or in drinking water.
        Finally, I would like to point out that while discussing the merits of the arguments and potential ironies involved, you are making this about whether or not you would want to eat it. That’s totally fine that you wouldn’t want to buy it, and I have not advocated that people eat it either. I just want to highlight that I’m talking about a scientific issue, and you are talking about a personal issue.
        I choose not to confuse my political and scientific opinions. That’s how I roll.

  1. I feel like you keep missing the point. My personal opinion is based on fact. I did not just decide to dislike Monsanto. I dislike what they’ve done for the last 100 years, as well as what they are doing now. 100 years of facts formed this opinion–I will not eat anything made by Monsanto.
    Now I am aware of the toxins etc in our environment and am aware that it is almost impossible to avoid GMO’s–but I am very happy to try, and happy to point out bs when I see it. If the broccoli is the healthiest greatest thing in the world and does all it says, it is still made by a company that has 90 superfund sites to its name. A company that helped with the atom bomb, Agent Orange, DDT, PCBs (and PCB pollution cover up that could’ve prevented countless deaths), plastics, etc… Hence the IRONY! The broccoli could be great–the company making it is not.
    And the armor-piercing/bulletproof vest thing is funny because the vests wouldn’t stop the bullets. Much like the broccoli will not undo all Monsanto has done…

    I’m done.

    1. Yes, Joe, I understand why you do not like Monsanto. Where have I indicated that I do not understand that, or implied that you just decided to dislike Monsanto? You’re putting words in my mouth. I have simply been pointing out that you are basing your opinion of the broccoli (as Andy has) on your opinion on Monsanto, not the actual characteristics of the broccoli. You agree with this. I think where you and I disagree is whether this is the right or rational thing to do – I contend that it is not.
      Sorry to have broken your funny bone on hashing out this point. Hey, maybe some subsidiary of Monsanto makes splints that could help you mend it. :) I kidd I kidd…

    2. Mr Mohr, you are very funny!

      Up above you say: “Regardless of your facts and Andy’s facts…” (Like Prez Bush the First: “I don’t care what the facts are.”)

      Now you say: “My personal opinion is based on fact.”

      This is the problem with adhering to dogma: Ya get tied up in illogicality.

      1. Mike B,
        You do a good job of picking quotes in an attempt to make me look illogical. I don’t know why I’m wasting time on this but…
        Your … leaves out that my “I do not care about the facts…” was referring to the broccoli, because the details/facts of the broccoli is not relevant to the joke. My cartoon was based solely on the statement by a major polluting company that their veggie defends against environmental pollutants. THAT IS HILARIOUS (and sad) to me! Therefore, my cartoon does not care about the facts of the broccoli, but that 1 claim by Monsanto about the broccoli.
        And, “my opinion is based on fact” is referring to Monsanto, not the broccoli. All of this is quite clear. If you can’t understand the irony of the cartoon, that’s one thing. But if you can’t (or purposely choose no to) understand the conversation below the cartoon, that’s a larger problem.
        Factually and ironically yours,
        MJG

  2. Right? First of all it was never about the broccoli. It’s about the claim of maintaining defenses against env. pollution by a company responsible for so much env pollution. That’s all.
    I sometimes think you technical types can’t apply your knowledge and or think creatively.
    Simply put, if a company made cars for a hundred years and many of their cars just exploded, and then (while still making exploding cars) they started making bikes–even if they were the best bikes in the world–I would buy a different bike.
    Plus, I don’t like that the broccoli is named after my favorite RB, Matt Forte. Who is this Ben E. Forte? Matt’s brother?
    Karl, I don’t really need another response from you. I feel like every time I reply I am restating the same thing. We can go our separate ways knowing that I will always question biotech and you will always support it…

    Best to you,
    Joe
    PS funny bone is in tact (though sometimes ineffective, apparently)

    1. “I sometimes think you technical types can’t apply your knowledge and or think creatively.”
      and
      “We can go our separate ways knowing that I will always question biotech and you will always support it…”
      Ah, more stereotypes about scientists. You are quite creative with inventing inaccurate descriptions of me. I suppose that’s why you are a cartoonist – life is easier when you think in caricatures. I don’t always support biotech, in fact if you read our blog you’ll find critical comments as well as supportive ones. It is all about what the application is, and its characteristics and accompanying regulations. I should introduce you to Frank N. Foode and you might shed your preconception that I’m uncreative.
      http://www.biofortified.org/community/photos/
      But this broccoli variety does not fall under the “biotech” umbrella as you are talking about it. Earlier you said this was food being fortified with technology. You do understand that this was produced with nothing more complicated than rubbing flowers together, and evaluating the results, right? It is plainly obvious that you’re dragging your dislike for genetic engineering into a discussion of a trait that was derived using regular old plant breeding.
      “First of all it was never about the broccoli.”
      Exactly my point! I don’t know why you need to keep repeating yourself on this – we both agree for the third time that it’s not about the broccoli at all. I’m not defending Monsanto nor its claims nor especially its history – I’m defending the relevance of plant breeding for improving our lives. That’s why I wrote my takedown of the “broccoli busting” article, because it didn’t even address the broccoli trait but made it about Monsatan.
      Personally, I think they were trying to imitate the name of our blog, Biofortified… Beneforte… hmmmmm… Maybe I should sue them?

  3. I wouldn’t buy anything that Monsanto produced (or Syngenta). I’d like to see their agri-mafia collapse. I’m heartened to see third-world countries refusing to use their terminator seeds, and more people questioning their practices, as well as trying to get gmos labeled.
    Thanks for another great graphic, Joe!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s