Ross 1 Jordan Ross English IC Professor Ramos 17 March 2013 Under the Reign of Monsanto Monsanto is a corporation that

uses chicanery and unscrupulous principles to obtain materialistic wealth. Monsanto remains hidden behind an iron curtain that allows Monsanto to release information to the public only if they feel it is in the best interest for the company. One of societies greatest illusions are corporations, like Monsanto. Corporations are a ubiquitous powerful force in society, yet they can remain hidden from the public eye. Monsanto has extreme power and shows corporate greed, but they can also give the illusion of themselves as a legitimate humanitarian corporation. Monsanto advertises and projects an ideological image that they are improving agriculture and improving the lives of farmers. But, by looking closer into the details of Monsanto it is not difficult to scrutinize where Monsantos true intentions are. Monsanto is an avaricious corporation that has been corrupted to capitalize on patented genes, political ties, and more. Monsantos involvement in genetically modified foods is astounding and paved the way for more corporate greed. Monsanto began to develop a genetically modified soybean, in 1996, which can withstand the herbicide Roundup Ready. Roundup Ready is a herbicide, developed in 1974, that prevents the green growing plants from manufacturing certain amino acids. According to the documentary Food, Inc. directed by Robert Kenner, In 1996 [. . .] only 2% of the soybeans in the U.S. contained their patented gene. By 2008, over 90% of the soybeans in the U.S. contained Monsantos patented gene. Monsantos genetically modified crop is omnipresent and expanding. Monsanto has major involvement in genetically modified organisms (GMO) which is, according to Pandoras Picnic Basket: The Potential and Hazards of Gentically Modified Foods by Alan McHughen, a [p]lant, animal, or microbe resulting from a genetic modification (269). The negative

Ross 2 effect of this is that, when you modify a crop, you own it (Food, Inc.), which allows Monsanto to create restrictions and own life. According to Monsanto, The benefits of Monsanto products offer: High-yielding conventional and biotech seeds, [. . .] more nutritious and durable crops, safe and effective crop protection solutions (Monsanto.com). Canadian Canola Farmer Percy Schmeiser, from the documentary David vs. Monsanto, discusses these ideologies that Monsanto offers. Schmeiser, when discussing Monsantos GMO benefits, states, [w]e are now using more chemicals than ever before and more powerful and more toxic chemicals because it has become a super weed. The other issue is that the quality is much poorer (David vs. Monsanto). Monsantos claims of biotech seeds being beneficial and efficient is challenged by Schmeiser as he also states, The corporations want total control of seed supply which will then give them total control of the food supply, thats what GMOs are all about; not more food, feed a hungry world, but control of the seed supply (David vs. Monsanto). Monsantos true intentions are involved with increase of power and money. Monsanto has created the Monsanto Technology/Stewardship Agreement which, according to Alan McHughen, [o]bilges farmers to give up farmers traditional rights to re -grow saved seeds from one season to the next (172). They also added a new clause in 2003, according to Percy Schmeiser, in which a farmer can no longer sue, take Monsanto to court, and/or lay a lawsuit on Monsanto (David vs. Monsanto). Monsanto shows their power and control of farmers as they suppress farmers from freedom of expression through their patent laws and contracts. Now that Monsanto products aggrandized, the corporation can now focus on the percentage of farmers that do not use or refuse to use Monsanto products. Monsanto, in an expression of ascendancy and greed, has begun targeting farmers who have not switched over to Monsanto GMO crops. According to the report Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers by the Center of Food Safety, Monsanto has [b]uilt a department of 75 employees and set aside an annual budget of $10 million for the sole purpose of investigating and prosecuting farmers for patent infringement. Anyone who is suspected to have unauthorized use of the seed or saving the seed can

Ross 3 be investigated for patent infringement. According to the Center of Food Safety, Monsanto investigates at least 500 farmers each year for possible patent infringement. After the investigation Monsanto will use its powerful image to coerce some farmers into settling out of court; if they go to court with Monsanto then a tiresome expensive battle begins. The Center of Food Safety compiled lawsuits and final judgments and found that, The median settlement is $75,000.00 with a low of $5,595.00 and a high of $3,052,800.00. Percy Schmeiser, the Canadian canola farmer, was targeted by Monsanto in 1998. Schmeiser had not planted any of Monsantos GMOs, but Schmeiser states that the genetically modified canola infected his crop from cross pollination. Schmeiser states that, It does not matter how much a farmer is contaminated; if its 1/2 percent, 1 percent, 2 percent it does not matter, you no longer own your plant (David vs. Monsanto). Monsanto filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Percy Schmeiser because his crop contained Monsantos GMOs. Schmeiser describes his experience when Monsanto investigated him and said that he felt unsafe; in the fall of 1999 Percy would carry a rifle and take alternative back roads because he felt threatened. Schmeisers wife said, I felt like I was a prisoner in my own home (David vs. Monsanto), the amount of intimidation Monsanto places on farmers is overwhelming. Schmeiser took his court case to the Canadian Supreme Court and, in 2004, was found guilty but not liable to pay Monsanto any damages. In an interview with Amy Goodman, Schmeiser discusses a story in which he and his wife had just got out of an assembly and a Monsanto representative from Johannesburg ran up to them and [s]hook his fist in [their] face and said, Nobody stands up to Monsanto. We are going to get both of you, somehow, someday, and destroy you both. Monsanto is using their patent products as weapons against farmers to create a monopoly, in which Monsanto controls the food supply. This corporation is a threatening part of farmers lives; Monsanto told a U.S. farmer, We own you we own anybody that buys our Roundup Ready products (U.S. farmer qtd. in Center of Food Safety). Monsanto has begun the war against non-Monsanto farmers, and is in the attempt to suppress and destroy them, to create the Monsanto monopoly.

Ross 4 In an attempt to capitalize on the production of PCB, Monsanto secretly withheld negative effects of PCB. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published a report named Toxicological Profile for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) which discusses a lengthy report involving PCBs. Polychlorinated Biphenyls, also known as PCBs, is an industrial coolant that was produced commercially in the United States from 1929 until 1977 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Approximately 99% of the PCBs used by U.S. industry were produced by the Monsanto Chemical Company in Sauget, Illinois, until production was stopped in August 1977. In Aniston, Alabama the corporate giant poisoned the town and kept it secret to monopolize on their lucrative business. In the article Monsanto Hid Decades of Pollution, Washington Post Staff Writer Michael Grunwald stated that, Monsanto Co. routinely discharged toxic waste into a west Anniston creek and dumped millions of pounds of PCBs into oozing open-pit landfills. Not only did they dump waste into the environment, but they knowingly dumped toxic waste that was harmful to the environment. In fall of 1966 Monsanto hired Biologist Denzel Ferguson to conduct studies around the Anniston plant. According to Grunwald, Ferguson found that healthy fish placed in the water around the plant would lose equilibrium turn on their side in 10 seconds and die in 3 minutes. Ferguson warned Monsanto to stop dumping toxic waste in the streams and stated, "Since this is a surface stream that passes through residential areas, it may represent a potential source of danger to children" (Ferguson qtd. in Grunwald). But, Monsanto did not listen and continued their production and pollution. In 1969 the corporation Monsanto, [f]ound fish in another creek with 7,500 times the legal PCB levels (Grunwald). And again the unscrupulous corporation deliberately concealed what they knew. In the article Public Health Implication of Exposure to Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), By Johnson and numerous other authors in the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, they state that [f]ish consumption remains the major route of exposure to PCBs (Johnson et al.). So the discharged waste in the Anniston creek that poisoned the fish in turn poisoned the food chain. In

Ross 5 1967, a group of Swedish scientist publicly demonstrated how PCB threatened the environment, and showed that traces of PCB were found in birds, plants, and childrens hair (Grunwald). The Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry mentioned that, Exposure to PCBs in fish places adult men, women beyond their reproductive years, and the elderly at increased risk for cancer; they might also be at increased risk for immune and endocrine system effects (Johnson et al.). They also state that PCBs exposure might increase the risk of [n]on-Hodgkin's lymphoma, diabetes, and liver disease (Johnson et al.). PCB was banned in 1977, but Monsanto put the town of Anniston into a persisting deleterious lifestyle for the sake of money. In the 1970s Monsanto had succeeded in creating a bovine growth hormone, known as recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST or rBGH), which would cause deleterious effects today. In the book The World According to Monsanto: Pollution, Corruption, and the Control of our Food Supply by author Marie-Monique Robin, Robin discusses various amounts of corporate scandals Monsanto produces. Burroughs, a veterinarian, began to work for the FDAs Center for Veterinary Medicine and was assigned to review the bovine hormone which was [d]esigne d to be injected in cows twice a month to increase their milk production by at least 15 percent (Robin 90). Burroughs began to notice that the submitted reports lacked data and claims they were scientifically poor quality, but he did notice that cows would develop higher rates of mastitis, an inflammation of the utters (Burroughs summarized in Robin 91-92). Mastitis may [r]esult in an increase of white blood cells, which means theres pus in the milk! The cows have to be treated with antibiotics, which ca n leave residues in the milk (Burrough qtd. Robin 91-92). Burroughs informed his superiors at the FDA and in November of 1989 the FDA fired Burrough for incompetence. Burrough states, [t]he agency closed it eyes to disturbing date, because they wanted to protect the companys interest by encouraging the marketing of the transgenic hormone as quickly as possible (Burrough qtd. in Robin 92). Samuel Epstein, a scientist, began to research rBGH and [d]iscovered that milk and meat from the American experimental herds had been placed in the food chain even though the hormone

Ross 6 was not yet officially approved (Robin 94). Currently the FDA and Monsanto both share a view that rBGH is safe, according to the fda.gov in the FDAs report Report on the Food and Drug Administration's Review of the Safety of Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin, they state that [f]ood products from cows treated with rBGH are safe for consumption by humans. FDA argues that rBGH is biologically and orally inactive in humans. . . [because it] cannot be absorbed in the blood (FDA qtd. in Robin 99). But Epstein states, Several studies have confirmed that IGF-1 is not destroyed in digestion, because it is protected by caseine (Epstein qtd. in Robin 99), IGF-1 is a hormone that is produced by the liver under stimulus of a growth hormone. According to cancer specialist Pete Hardin: [t]he rate of breast cancer among American women older than fifty five has increased by 55.3 percent between 1994, the year rBGH was put on the market, and 2002. Similarly, a study conducted by Dr. Gary Steinmann of Albert Einstein Medical College in New York showed that American women who consume dairy products every day are five times more likely to give birth to twins than those who dont, and that the rate of twin pregnancies increased by 31.9 percent between 1992 and 2002. All of that is the work of IGF-1. (Hardin qtd. in Robin 101) So a raised level of IGF-1 in milk can be seen to have serious deleterious health effects on a person. And knowing that [t]he level of IGF-1 is distinctively higher in the milk of cows treated with transgenic growth hormone than that in natural milk (Robin 99), it becomes obvious that rBGH milk can produce dire consequences. Monsanto avariciously defends rBGH and continues to inject cows with the hormone in the U.S., while the FDA turns a blind eye and allows the corporation to jeopardize the safety of society. The corporation Monsanto has also took its greed to India where they first took advantage of unaware farmers and now capitalize on child labor. Paul Kingsnorth in the article India Cheers

Ross 7 While Monsanto Burns discusses how Monsanto deceptively used farmers as research. In July 1998 officials from Mahyco-Monsanto offered Basanna Hunsole to grow their new cotton, free of charge. But, according to Kingsnorth, They omitted to tell him that the cotton was genetically modified, or that it had not been approved for testing by the government. In effect, Monsanto tricked Basanna Hunsole into unknowingly growing illegal crops on his land. Monsanto used their chicanery in an unethical crop test. In a couple of months word got out about Monsantos test sites; and in November 1998, members of the Karnataka State Farmers Association went to Basanna's farm and tore out all the genetically modified cotton plants and burned them (Kingsnorth). Another scandal that is occurring currently in India is child labor that occurs in Monsanto fields. Gova Rathod carried out the study Child Labour in Production of Cotton Seeds on Monsanto Plots in District Sabarkantha in which Rathod observed 50 Monsanto cottonseed farms. Rathod states that, If we consider children between the age group of 6 to 18 years, then child labour comprises of 52 percent of the total labour force, he goes on to conclude that children between 6-14 years old were found in 74 percent of the farms. Rathod also noted that these children would miss their school because, The working hours at seed farms overlap the school hours. In the Forbes article Child Labor by Megha Bahree, Bahree mentions a 15 year old woman Jyothi Ramulla. Jyothi makes 20 cents an hour and as stated from Bahree, Jyothi says she has been working in these fields for the past five years, since her father, a cotton farmer, committed suicide after incurring huge debt. committing suicide is not a unusual occurrence for cotton farmers in huge debts. According to Marie-Monique Robin, The price of Monsantos Bollgard cotton seed is four times more than the regular conventional seed, and they produce a nearly nonexistent harvest; the dealers [l]end money at usurious rates. Farmers are chained by debts to Monsanto dealers (Robin 292). Monsanto gives an illusion of not using child labor and gives a $360 bonus to farmers not using child labor, but it doesn't make up for the higher wages that adults command (Bahree). Because of the debts that accumulate, farmers will use child labor and/or may commit suicide. Monsanto has licentiously disregarded any and all ethics to

Ross 8 capitalize off of child labor, and unsuspecting farmers. Through greed, corruption, deception, pollution, and unethical standards the zealous corporation obtained large amounts of power. Monsanto exercises their power continuously to obtain control. Political power is one of Monsanto key weapons; one of Monsantos att orneys left and became Justice Clarence Thomas who [w]rote the majority opinion in a case that allowed these companies to prevent farmers from saving their own seed (Food, Inc.). Michael Taylor King advised Monsanto on genetically modified food labeling and later became vice president for public policy, and he [o]versaw FDAs decision not to label genetically modified foods (Food, Inc.). The connection of Monsanto employees among the government branches is extensive and intimidating. The FDA had authorized that no company can label their milk no rBST, relating to the bovine growth hormone. The FDA said if they label their product as rBST-free then they must include a contextual statement stating, No significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rBST-treated and non-rBST treated cows (Robin 109). Margaret Miller is FDAs deputy director of Center of Veterinary Medicine, a former Monsanto employee; she drafted the document about labeling rBST/rBGH milk (Robin 109). And the Michael Taylor signed the guidance; Michael Taylor [s]erved for several years as counsel for Monsanto working, says his CV, on food labeling, particularly of transgenic origin (Robin 110). By looking at the documents approved to help Monsanto, it becomes clear that there are very prominent conflicts of interest. Monsanto is able to manipulate outcomes through the use of former employees and power to get what they want. They show extreme power in the lawsuit against Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser. While Schmeiser fought Monsanto, his bank account closed and he discovered that, Monsanto went to the head office and said to the head office of the Canadian Imperial Bank, if you dont cancel Percy Schmeiser legal trust fund out, we will cancel all our accounts with the Canadian Imperial Bank across Canada (David vs. Monsanto). This time Monsanto uses their money as power, which is seen again through the documentary The Corporation. Fox hired private investigators for the rBGH issue and when the

Ross 9 reporters had gathered negative information on rBGH Monsanto called and threatened Fox News. The Corporation discussed Fox News response to Monsanto, They were afraid of being sued and they were afraid of losing advertising dollars and so Fox News offered the investigators [a] years salary if [they] agreed not to talk about what Monsanto had done. One of the investigators said that the information Fox wanted to run about Monsanto was not true and people needed to know the truth. Fox News general manager argued back to the investigator and responded, We just paid three billion dollars for these television stations. Well tell you what the news is. The news is what we say it is (The Corporation). Monsanto had scared and intimidated Fox into rewriting the story 83 times until the story was rephrased in a way that pleased Monsanto (The Corporation). Monsanto is a domineering avaricious corporation that asserts power and control onto society. They use their resources to obtain contracts and laws that benefit Monsanto, and they suppress investigators and individuals to advertise to society that they are essential and humanitarian. Monsanto is willing to put money over ethics, and in an attempt to maintain power they will use resources to suppress individuals and/or corporations opposing Monsanto. The greatest illusion is Monsanto, by looking at Monsantos homepage and advertisements they look like a humanitarian corporation. But, if one thing is for certain it is that Monsanto lies; they are a deceptive and unethical corporation that is fueled by insatiable greed. The gluttonous corporation is as secretive as it is corrupt. From genetically modified foods to unethical practices, Monsanto is a force that must not elude the public eye. Knowledge is the greatest weapon, discovering the truth and publicly sharing the truth about Monsanto is the first step to regulating Corporations. Control in this day and age is not by a tyrannical dictator or a power hungry militia, but it is by corporations that can deceptively shape society to the way they want. It is by a corporation like Monsanto.

Ross 10 Works Cited Bahree, Megha. Child Labor. Forbes 25 Feb. 2008: 72-79. Google Scholar. Web. 17 Mar. 2013 David vs. Monsanto. Dir. Bertram Verhaag. Denkmal Film Munich, 2009. Film Food, Inc. Dir. Robert Kenner. Magnolia Pictures, 2008. Film. Grunwald, Michael. Monsanto Hid Decades Of Pollution. The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 1 Jan. 2002. Web. 17 mar. 2013. Johnson, Barry L., et al. "Division of Toxicology and Environmental Medicine." ATSDR. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. Kingsnorth, Paul. "India Cheers While Monsanto Burns." Ecologist 29.1 (1999): 9. Academic Search Premier. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. McHughen, Alan. Pandoras Picnic Basket: The Potential and Hazard of Genetically Modified Foods. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 2000. Print. Monsanto: Products. Monsanto.com. Monsanto, n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmer. centerforfoodsafety.org. Center for Food Safety, 2004. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. Rathod, Gova. "Child Labour in Production of Cotton Seeds on Monsanto Plots in District Sabarkantha of Gujarat." Http://www.indianet.nl. Prayas Centre for Labour Research & Action, Dec. 2010. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. Report on the Food and Drug Administration's Review of the Safety of Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin. http://www.fda.gov. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 23 April 2009. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. Robin, Marie-Monique. The World According to Monsanto: Pollution, Corruption, and Control of our Food Supply. Trans. George Holoch. New York: The New Press, 2010. Print. Schmeiser, Percy. Interview by Amy Goodman. democracynow.org. N.p. 17 Sep. 2010. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.

Ross 11 Works Cited (Cont.) The Corporation. Dir. Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott. Big Picture Media Corporation, 2003. Film. Toxicological Profile for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). atsdr.cdc.gov. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Nov. 2000. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.