...

[CoffeeCat]

[MarianJack]

1. My son is also in 7th grade.

he's in a good school and we live in a very blue area of this very blue state. However, my wife and I are always on the lookout for any potential BS being presented s an actual lesson. Thank you for sharing.

PEACE!

[Samantha]

2. No, I can't believe it and I would be totally ticked off

I would be contacting the school and participants of the PTA. I would also want to know who exactly authorized this "homework." If it is an elected school board member, as opposed to someone directly connected to the school, that school board member would be in the hot seat, and anyone connected to the school who knowingly condoned and authorized this, would have a lot of questions to answer to parents.

Sam

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. Oh, I believe it, all right.

It would not surprise me one little bit if that company is providing funds to the school, funds that they need for supplies etc.

They've bought their way in.

[CoffeeCat]

7. That's what my husband said Peggy...

He said, "What do you want to bet that they also receive kickbacks from our government--for providing these
"educational materials" to the schools. So, in addition to buying their way into our schools--it's possible that they
are being reimbursed for doing so.

[iemitsu]

52. Yep, the corporatization of the public schools.

And, I'd also bet that the materials are structured to "help" the students prepare for the state mandated, standardized, high-stakes, tests, that determine whether or not teachers and schools are deemed failures.
I thought when we elected Obama that the misguided and destructive NCLB legislation of W Bush would be ended, but instead, Obama has made things even worse for public education.
You will have insure your child understands the importance of skepticism and that she/he finds answers for her/himself.

[Skittles]

4. I.......er.......

I am betting this is sponsored by a big corporation somewhere

[Marie Marie]

23. Yup - as always, Follow The Money.

[elleng]

5. No, you're not overreacting, it IS inappropriate.

Maybe you should 'home school' your daughter's teacher/school.

[Warpy]

6. Easily, especially if you live in an agricultural state.

If your kid is as bright as you say she is, she's able to recognize the propaganda and knows she's just jumping through hoops to keep her grades up. She might even want to do the science in the future that leads to banning the worst of these seeds and the restriction of the ones that produce sterile plants to the first world. If there.

I know I'd be using this garbage as a teaching moment with her. 13 is plenty old enough to understand the concept of unintended consequences.

[gateley]

9. A LARGE part of America doesn't realize it's propaganda --

and maybe Obama doesn't either, since he just signed the Monsanto Get Out Of Jail Free card.

[laundry_queen]

34. Most people don't even know

that half of your news stories - especially 'special interest' stories in health and the like - are manufactured stories placed into the news, prepackaged, pre-filmed mini-ads. Those stories about 'eating X reduces your risk of Y' or "A isn't as bad for the environment as previously though - B is actually worse" are usually the culprits. New organizations love these stories because they fill time cheaply and masquerade as news. The corporations love this style of advertising because air time is essentially free for them.

I thought of myself as pretty savvy and well informed (heck, I've been at DU since 2003-4 ) when it came to advertising but even I didn't know this until I went into business school and took some marketing courses. There are ALL kinds of ways big corporations are able to spread their 'advertising' (euphemism for blatant propaganda) for what is considered 'low' or 'no' cost to them - pamphlets in your local pharmacy, and yes, message board trolls were mentioned, and I wouldn't doubt it if they've now infiltrated schools. It's sickening.

[Tab]

100. You're talking about VNRs

(Video News Releases)

And yes, they are pretty insidious. The stations like them because they provide pre-produced content for an "insight series" or "technology corner" but they're always promoting an agenda, and never identified as such.

[siligut]

142. The Engineering of Consent, Edward Bernays

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Engineering_of_Consent

The idea of "Engineering of Consent" was motivated by Freud's idea that humans are irrational beings and are motivated primarily by inner desires hidden in their unconscious. If one understood what those unconscious desires were, then one could use this to one's advantage to sell products and increase sales.

So much of the news seems like a manipulation. And now the use of propaganda on US citizens is legal.

[burrowowl]

47. Yes! I wonder

about Obama!

God Damn MONSANTO!
and Bayer etc. where have all the bees gone, etc.

[paleotn]

107. Here's where they've gone.. ..

nicotinoids....he most widely used pesticides on earth, currently. They also are a major factor in colony collapse. Unintended consequences....or where they ignored consequences, since there's billions to be made in pesticides? Who knows, but once again, those Europeans are way out in front of us Amurikans on this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jan/31/eu-proposes-ban-insecticides-bee?CMP=twt_gu

[CoffeeCat]

11. ...

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:56 PM - Edit history (1)

[Warpy]

14. That's why parents need to keep an eye on what their kids are being taught

I can remember my mother handing me non propaganda history books from time to time as an antidote to the Eurocentric, jingoistic crap in school textbooks.

I was also lucky that "The Hidden Persuaders" was required reading at the time. It's a bit dated now, but admen are using the same old tricks to sell soap and politicians and it's a good introduction to deconstructing propaganda.

[CoffeeCat]

17. Kudos to your amazing mother...

...who was smart enough and plugged into your life--so much so, that she provided you with alternative materials and books.

That's very cool!

[KT2000]

8. overreacting? NO!!!

Corporations have been working to get their propaganda into the schools. Years ago there was going to be a Chemicapalooza to educate the children about the wonders of chemicals.

If I were you, I would complain about this. It is nothing but propaganda cooked up by a consulting company to brainwash the kids. It is disgusting.

[gateley]

10. Where do you live?

[CoffeeCat]

13. (nt)

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:57 PM - Edit history (1)

[gateley]

18. Is Monsanto viewed favorably there?

Isn't most of the corn GMO?

I think most people tend to convince themselves something isn't that bad when their livelihood depends on it. Like oil drilling in the Gulf, for example.

Not a criticism of the people by any means -- totally understandable.

[CoffeeCat]

20. I would say that anything associated with Big Ag...

...is not only viewed favorably but protected and leveraged aggressively. I'm just outside of Des Moines, in central Iowa. The city and area is surrounded by cornfields.

Pioneer, Monsanto, and other agriculture companies are very big here.

[gateley]

32. So people there may really agree with what was in your

daughter's "education".

Again, understandable. Thank God she's got the Mom and Dad she does!

[truedelphi]

78. It is truly great that she has

The parents she has.

And sad that the Empire of Evil has hold over our educational processes. (I heard recently that Monsanto acquired the firm that used to be called BlackWater, and the Xe. I haven't checked to see if it is rumor or fact.)

[southerncrone]

54. Isn't Vilsak a big advocate of GMOs?

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15573.cfm

[The Straight Story]

12. Sadly, to some folks here, home schooling is just plain wrong and evil

Since we are not forcing all kids to learn the same things.

our politicians are bought and paid for by lobbyists. Our schools are more and more a product of that. Our kids are becoming pawns in a game and those that don't want their kids in that game are suspect.

We want all kids to have the same standards - and then we sit by while such standards are not set by people in education but are dictated to them by industry.

Thinking for yourself, outside of the box, is wrong - we need the government and those funding it to control it all (because, well, they know better than us citizens what is best for our kids to learn).

From the time I was a kid until now I think every single politician I have heard has said they were 'fixing education' - I am 47 now, how has that whole fixing things worked out?

Just like with everything else - guns, terrorism, sodas, etc and so on - we get told there is a problem and others can fix it if we just supply more money and less freedoms.

Funny how so many in America have had good educations, innovated, etc through all these years where we were told things were broken and others would fix them for us.

Now we have stupid standardized testing (which both republicans and democrats hated back in the 90's and early 2000's depending who was in office), schools they say are worse than ever and need even more fixing, and so on.

Stop trusting the politicians and corporations and start trusting your local teachers. And just because some home school does not mean they are rw nuts, it might just mean they are tired of their kids being used by others for political purposes and for an experiment.

[CoffeeCat]

15. You are so right, and well said...

Home schooling is not a bad thing. Thinking outside the box, as you said--should be rewarded.

I can only imagine how much worse this kind of situation would get--if the schools were privatized. Can you imagine? Every corporation that wanted to enhance their image or engage in thought leadership--would have their materials in the schools and their CEOs speaking during school assemblies.

[The Straight Story]

19. And the reason we have that and will have it more in the future

is that we have been told time and time again our schools suck.

They don't. Well they didn't. We used to have more local control.

Your city, your schools, etc - now we have the feds running things. And who are those in power beholden to? Not the people.

I don't hate our government - I hate what it has become and what it is wanting small communities across the US to become.

One giant company. All under the idea that a small group sitting in one small town can tell us all what education is when none (or few) of them are educators.

They serve big business, and we need to get control back to our communities and teachers.

[mountain grammy]

103. I don't think we have the feds running things as much as the corporate interests

who, of course, influence government at every level. Until the idiotic NCLB, Feds didn't get involved so much except for civil rights issues (and there were many) which is appropriate.
This GMO curriculum is strictly local. No federal mandate there.

[MADem]

16. Letter to school committee? Copy to local paper?

That's not education--that's propaganda.

[CoffeeCat]

25. I believe that ultimately...

...it is the parent's responsibility to teach their children. Yes, I am not a teacher or the one instructing her on math or science. However, I believe that it is my job and my husband's job to look over her homework, help her study and discuss what she's learning and help her process the information.

That's why I look at her homework and am very involved with their education. We're a pretty tight-knit little family. We discuss EVERYTHING, so it just seems natural to take the reigns on this one and handle it as a family.

I see it as an opportunity to speak to her critical-thinking skills, questioning information that is presented to you--and doing your own research.

We have taught our kids, even when they were in elementary school--that sometimes teachers, principals and adults make mistakes. I think this is a situation where we can present the information positively--and use it as a lesson to learn that ultimately--the schools sometimes can get off track and that it is good to research and seek out additional information.

[NYC_SKP]

22. Propaganda in schools. Always been there, always will be there. Fight the power.

K/R

[Buzz Clik]

24. How about you make a scan of the homework and post it here?

It would be nice to see this first hand.

My husband and I are in the process of doing a bit of "home schooling" on this issue. We are finding information online, and we will be providing a "lesson" to provide the other side. We plan to give her the "other side" and more importantly, we want to use this experience as an opportunity to teach her about propaganda and the importance of research and critical-thinking skills when faced with information and the opinions of others.

You might consider having her look up some of those awesome, scientifically sound websites on the horrors of teaching about evolution and climate change.

[antigone382]

113. The science on the cost-to-benefit ratio of GMOs is not nearly as sound as that on CC or evolution.

GMO's may not cause cancer (though they've only been around since the mid eighties, not a lot of time for potential problems to occur at a rate that can really be scientifically studied). But they are expensive, and through patenting they fundamentally change the economics of agriculture--to the advantage of corporations and the disadvantage of farmers around the world. They are also developed to depend on resource and fossil fuel intensive methods that are both expensive for farmers and environmentally destructive.

GMO's are NOT synonymous with the Green Revolution, which did prevent massive global die-offs, although not without significant economic and environmental tradeoffs that are coming home to roost at present. GMO's have not delivered nearly as much on their promises to bring about a "second" green revolution to save us from the consequences of the first.

And my data comes from a variety of UN documents and articles published in peer-reviewed journals that I have read and studied on my own, not fringe websites.

[Buzz Clik]

118. Other than no proof of cancer-causing, I don't agree with anything you posted.

Does that mean that you are brainwashing/propagandizing your kids?

Teaching them to challenge everything is something I endorse heartily, but I think you are doing more than that.

[antigone382]

119. I am not the OP. I am also not presenting one-sided information as truth to middle schoolers.

Your disagreement is noted. Lack of factual information or reference to authoritative sources is noted as well.

[Buzz Clik]

125. You are demanding something from me you didn't deliver? Noted.

[antigone382]

139. I think the relative merit of our two discussion styles speaks for itself.

I did discuss specifics in a manner that you did not, and I made reference to the types of sources from which I got my information. I don't have time to dig them all up at the moment, but here is a link to one, a chapter in a publication of the United Nations Environmental Programme:

http://www.unep.org/dewa/africa/docs/en/aeo-2/chapters/aeo-2_ch09_GENETICALLY_MODIFIED_CROPS.pdf

Again, my core reservations with regard to GMO's are not about health. They are about economics and ecology, particularly in the context of Africa and other parts of the global South. I do not pretend that it is a black and white issue, but there are valid reasons for concern. The reality is that you are dealing with very powerful corporations, with very powerful governments behind them, as opposed to less powerful governments and farmers that do not necessarily have the strength of a thriving scientific community to evaluate the costs and benefits of GM crops for their own peoples' livelihoods.

To be honest, I'm not interested in who can sling the most cute and snappy one-liners with strangers. If that's your MO, then I formally forfeit, granting you unquestioned victory and ownership of this internet subthread (with congratulations in advance).

What I am interested in is a mature dialog that fully addresses the concerns of all stakeholders as well as the potential flaws and limitations in their arguments. That seems to be what the OP wants as well. I don't know what you want, but as yet it seems that you see fit to reduce any questioning of the benefits of GMOs to anti-scientific woo perpetuated by the nasty anti-vaxxer-911-truther-echinacea-eating-numerology-gremlins. That is quite simply a misrepresentation of the reality.

[Buzz Clik]

140. A link? It's a start.

Let's go back to your original response to me:

Last edited Sun Apr 28, 2013, 07:58 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

GMO's may not cause cancer ... but they are expensive

Roundup Ready soybean seed is about 40% more expensive than conventional soybean seed. But, if you want to truly talk about economics, you need to do the entire analysis. When you add in the costs of the other treatments, Roundup Ready soybean system is 15-20% less expensive than conventional.
http://www.uwex.edu/CES/crops/RRsoybn.htm

through patenting they fundamentally change the economics of agriculture--to the advantage of corporations and the disadvantage of farmers around the world.

Farmers are under no obligation to buy GMO seeds. The conventional seeds that existed before are still available.

They are also developed to depend on resource and fossil fuel intensive methods that are both expensive for farmers and environmentally destructive.

No more so than conventional seeds. I cannot envision one scenario where a GMO crop would require more resources and more fossil fuels than conventional crops. In the case of Bt corn, the need for insecticide sprays is essentially eliminated.

GMO's have not delivered nearly as much on their promises to bring about a "second" green revolution to save us from the consequences of the first.

That's a highly subjective comment. Arguments exist on both sides, but the "first green revolution" saved millions of lives. No credible argument against that fact exists.


Your second attempt at discussion, immediately above, repeated the arguments of the first with the exception of adding a link, plus this:

but as yet it seems that you see fit to reduce any questioning of the benefits of GMOs to anti-scientific woo perpetuated by the nasty anti-vaxxer-911-truther-echinacea-eating-numerology-gremlins.

Yes, that's right. Just as you have shown here, nearly every anti-GMO argument is founded on unconfirmed fears of the unknown or outright misrepresentation of the facts. I've lost patience with the endless repetition of the same mistaken concepts.

[socialsecurityisAAA]

123. theres proof thats gmo food causes cancer, infertility

But since the studies weren't funded and carried out by Monsanto the media labels them as biased. Quite hypocritical.

[Buzz Clik]

124. Ok. Whatever you say.

[socialsecurityisAAA]

129. Well actually it's what scientists have concluded

I'm just spreadin the news

[Buzz Clik]

134. Unfunded, unpublished, unverified. Science in the raw!

My favorite kind of science.

[socialsecurityisAAA]

141. From the mouth of a monsanto representative

Last time I checked the study was published and verified multiple times In the E.U.
Ya know, the E.U. where they realize that hormones aren't meant to be added to food, only to be produced by our endocrine glands. Study after study shows environmental toxins(pesticides, hormones in milk and beef, estrogenic drugs in the water supply) are causing puberty as early as 9yo in a significant percentage of the population, and this was even printed in the U.S.. Of course it got less coverage than the winner of the Miss America pageant I'd say the media needs to check their priorities, errrr, or change their priorities from raising shareholders profits back to reporting the facts!

But heh, your motto is......................If the study isn't done by big pharam/big agriculture, it's not science its mumbo jumbo!

Its shameful that you wish to mislead people, very shameful. We deserve better than that from our fellow humans!

[Buzz Clik]

143. You've got the proof?

You have studies the prove that GMOs cause cancer and infertility?

Put the link in your next post.

[Robyn66]

26. I would be angry

You are going to have to do some teaching yourself about organic gardening and I would talk to the teacher. Maybe the teacher will be open to more discussion about organic gardening or heirloom veggies. I would also talk to the other parents of children in the class. It may be necessary to go to the school committee but hopefully you will be able to make inroads without having to do that.

[We People]

75. I suggest parents can teach the child, but don't expect teachers to go against prescribed curriculum

Teachers today are in a precarious position and can now be fired for the flimsiest of reasons. More and more they are required to teach a pre-fab, prescribed curriculum that suits the agenda of the corporate takeover of school systems nationwide. "Product placement" (i.e., product advertising) is already showing up in the standardized tests, the student scores on which can make or break a teacher's entire career.

Teachers today don't really have the autonomy in the classroom that they used to. They are entirely at the whim of those evaluating them because those earning decent, liveable salaries are scheduled by many districts to be replaced by compliant, younger, part-time, and/or lower-salaried counterparts. A teacher who deviates from prescribed curriculum could even be terminated for insubordination. If this isn't happening in your school district as yet, it will be.

[Robyn66]

76. That is too bad

It should be a coperative relationship

[We People]

81. I agree, and that may still be possible in some pockets of some schools

Also, sadly, public school teachers are no longer allotted the freedom or time to teach about anything that isn't expected to be on The Big Test. And if their students don't cut the mustard on this test, those teachers will be shown the door. That is the criteria on which teachers are judged these days.

[ohheckyeah]

27. If you want to get the school a lot of negative attention for this

make a copy of the papers and post to Facebook. Post the name of the school as well. Send the information to some blogs as well. It'll go viral and the will have some explaining to do.

[BrotherIvan]

41. I totally agree with this

Many parents may not know and this will be a wakeup to check everything coming from school. I am totally shocked by this and disgusted. They don't think they can sell it to adults, so they'll just breed a new generation of customers. I fervently hope there is some way to stop them. But parents deserve to know when their children are being brainwashed. (And her teacher would hear an earful from me.)

[reformist2]

28. Extra Credit: Who owns any seeds your daughter's GM plants make???

Yep. You guessed right - the seed company!

I bet THAT isn't in the curriculum!

[timdog44]

95. And who owns the seeds

that are pollinated by GMO plants that are not GMO to start with?

Again you guessed right - the seed company.

Here is corn country Illinois the GMO seed company knows the yields and can check on how much you sell. If there is a noticeable discrepancy, they will sue you for misappropriation and illegal use, if you plant the seeds you harvest. Which is what the standard practice years ago. That is the crime of patenting life.

[appal_jack]

29. Check out this link for a start:

http://www.rodale.com/vandana-shiva

Best of luck countering the propaganda!

-app

[freshwest]

49. Thanks for the link. Rodale's Organic Gardening and Farming magazine was my most useful subscription

and taught me a lot.

Love organic gardening, farming and food - I hadn't seen them online at all.

[glowing]

30. Wow.. They r running scared now.

Back in the 90's it was called the "green revolution" or some such nonsense. About modern farming practices. Too many people r paying attention now. I would def raise some hell about that!

[KittyWampus]

31. I am so proud of you Coffeecat! We name school playing fields after corporations & now we let them

provide our 'science' lessons. No questions asked.

[SciFiRK]

33. Anyone remember requred reading

Animal Farm. US propaganda against Communism.

Kudos to any parent that pays attention to all their kids are taught and identifies whitewashed, indoctrination etc.

[KitSileya]

57. In a thread about education, let's not have any misinformation.

George Orwell, the author of Animal Farm, was most decidedly British. He was a democratic socialist, so would be called communist in the skewered view of most Americans. Animal Farm was a criticism of Stalin and the development of communism, written while Stalin was considered acceptable as an Allt during WWII.

[Cha]

35. I would have properly flipped out too.. with my face burning

red! I think kids are lucky who have parents like you who can teach them about both sides of an issue.. especially one like GMO

That's how it's written on the products sold in the co-op I worked at in NY for 11 years. GMO

[ReRe]

36. Corporations are "educating" our children. :-(

Seriously! We would probably all be shocked if we knew what they are teaching our kids. Also, do they still have that TV1 channel they show in the classroom? If it's not bad enough with NCLB dumbing the kids down, we get Arne Duncan and The Corporation to finish them off. What do we need to do? Demand a parent council to read our children's text books a year in advance to be sure they aren't teaching them Monsanto junk science and Creationism? I say get the Corporation and Religion out of our kids text books.

[Sand Wind]

37. Holly shit!!!?!

Unbelievable !
Scan the paper please.

[eqfan592]

38. I guess we should just do away with the dwarf wheat then.

And the billion or so people who were saved because of it can just go and die in a corner somewhere....

[pediatricmedic]

43. No, dwarf wheat was a good research product that helped many people

The work was done in the mid 40's before a lot of the current gene modification. His (Norman Borlaug) methods were a highly refined process farmers have been using for thousands of years to obtain the desirable traits and genes.

There are some GMO foods that are good and this is one of them. Some of the newer stuff that builds in insecticides and hormones are another issue.

[druidity33]

99. as to that...

selective breeding is VERY DIFFERENT from physically inserting the genes from another ORGANISM (ie Octopus, pig, monkey, etc) or PHARMACEUTICAL in to the gene of a food crop. We are growing drugs inside our plants. Plants that look very much like their neighbor plants. AS for your hyperbolic billion or so people saved, i roll my eyes...

[subterranean]

39. It's great that you're using this as a teaching opportunity.

Especially about the broader issues of corporate propaganda and whether it's appropriate for schools to use such biased materials. I don't think you're overreacting at all.

[blkmusclmachine]

40. Corporate education -> Corporate citizenry

For better or worse (or much worse)

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. Did you hear about the ads inserted into the state tests in New York?

The New York State Department of Education’s new standardized tests were administered last week. The tests for grades 3-8 were developed by the educational testing company Pearson and contained new “authentic” passages aligned to the new Common Core State Standards. State tests might have been routine news had not several teachers also noticed that the English Language Arts “authentic” passages mentioned products and trademark names including Mug ©Root Beer and Lego ©.

http://usedbooksinclass.com/2013/04/22/pearsons-test-dilemma-is-a-text-authentic-because-of-product-placement/

[ejpoeta]

63. really? i had no idea. I live in NY and my 8th grade daughter took those tests. I will have to

ask her about this.

[ohheckyeah]

44. I would love to do a blog post on this.

If you decide to scan and post the papers I'll be glad to help in getting it "out there".

[boomer55]

45. Dang. N/t

[roody]

46. I doubt if that is a 7th grade science standard.

[Fumesucker]

48. I would prepare for some backlash if you decide to complain to the school about this

I read the thread and see you're in a big ag state, what your daughter was taught is close to holy writ in the ag states and some people are not going to appreciate you questioning it.

I'm a parent too although my daughter is grown and a couple of times when I complained to the school about things they tried to take revenge on my daughter. If your daughter suddenly become a "discipline problem" or her grades drop sharply with no rational explanation I would suspect someone is not happy with you speaking up and they are taking it out on your daughter.

[emsimon33]

50. Run for the school board!

[Zoeisright]

51. That is appalling.

I'd definitely set up a meeting with the principal and the school board. That shit certainly is propaganda.

[southerncrone]

53. Who do you think funds much of the university research these days.

"Research" must come up w/the "correct" conclusions so funding can continue.
Then the "research" gets published in "textbooks" for our youth. Tidy little brain-washing/marketing package cycle.

[MellowYellow]

55. I'm a long time lurker but this thread finally promted me to join. THANK YOU for the heads up.

I'll be looking for this and when I see it I'll be making a trip down to the school. This really burns my butt.

[hrmjustin]

69. Welcome to DU my friend!

[hootinholler]

91. That's right slick!

Welcome.

[mick063]

56. Hell

If you can teach kids that Jesus rode a dinosaur, you can teach them just about anything.

Just think of the access ALEC will have with private schools partially funded by your taxes. Of course you need to "dumb down" the faculty a bit to have complete control. Regardless, they can shape the next generation to their will.

[AverageJoe90]

58. Yep.

If you can teach them that climate change is a big, nasty mean old hoax, or, conversely, that it has the power to cause humanity's extinction and that civilization is at risk for total collapse(in the near term, mind you!); that all Communist states were nasty dictatorships while all Capitalist ones were safehavens for freedom & democracy; that America's Founders had a whites-only state in mind when building this nation; and that racism is natural, or that humans are nothing more than glorified apes(when evolution is really so much more complicated and amazing than that! Also, I believe you already covered the opposite extreme).....then yes, they can indeed be taught just about anything.

And it's definitely a little worrisome to read about all the revisionistic hogwash that's been proliferating around in recent years, TBH(pro-slavery Jefferson, most abolitionists even more racist than the average planter, Lincoln and FDR bashing, etc.).....and scary how many people are starting to believe such!

[Berlum]

59. "All your young minds are belong to us." - UberCorp, Inc. (R)

[enjoyingyourpeasyet]

60. I am glad that I will be pushing up daises when the youth of today

through years of corporate brain washing in the corporate run public schools come into power and lead this country.

Idiocracy my friends was a chilling and truthful look at Americas Future.

[elias7]

61. Are there benefits of GMO?

You seem to be pretty much against them, but it's not self explanatory to me.

[alarimer]

96. Yes there are.

Some forms of rice have been engineered to provide extra vitamins to prevent blindness, in places where not a lot of other vegetables are grown or available. What's most disturbing about this thread to me is the blanket condemnation of all GMO foods.

There is simply no scientific evidence that they are harmful to human health. In fact, one could argue that all foods we eat or genetically modified. There is also the blanket assumption that all organic foods are better, when in fact most studies have shown no nutritional difference between so-called "organic" foods and others. I use scare quotes there because the organic label is abused and misunderstood. Organic does not mean pesticide-free, for example. They simply use organic pesticides (pyrethrins and so forth). But mostly the label had been stripped of almost all meaning.

Now, I am not saying this homework assignment is good or bad. I don't agree with corporations being allowed to have any input into the curriculum. That goes for ALL corporations, even "good" ones, like Apple. Monsanto is definitely not one of the good ones.

Having said that we should not dismiss GMO crops or lump them all in the same basket. There are certainly issues with GMO crops, but from a human health perspective, there are no issues there. There is too much fear-mongering by anti-science liberals and crunchy granola types that has crowded the issues. I follow the science and pay no attention to what activists (who are anti-science to begin with) say.

But this homework assignment in problematic for sure.

[eridani]

114. Golden rice is an utterly useless product

It has no extra vitamin A--just more beta-carotene, its precursor. And you'd have to eat serveral pounds of it to get the daily vitamin A MDR, and even that presumes you are getting enough fat in your diet to aid its absorption, which most starving kids aren't. Want to prevent blindness in kids? Spend a quarter to give them a supplement every six months.

http://www.one.org/us/2012/10/11/preventing-blindness-and-saving-lives-with-vitamin-a/

A simple, affordable and proven solution exists: supplementing children with vitamin A. While many health and development challenges are complex to tackle—they can be expensive and require multiple interventions—preventing vitamin A deficiency can be accomplished by reaching children 6 to 59 months with just one dose of vitamin A every six months. Vitamin Angels’ cost to reach one child for one year is just 25 cents.

[antigone382]

116. Those rice varieties are not the great revolution they were made out to be.

Often the issue with vitamin-A deficiency is not lack of the vitamin-A itself, but other nutritional deficiencies which limit the body's ability to *uptake* available vitamin-A. There are plenty of other crops indigenous to many of these areas that are rich in beta-carotene, such as sweet potatoes, which are not the patented property of a single corporation thus far. In addition, I believe I have read that the particular form of vitamin-A present in "golden rice" is not a very bioavailable form, but I'll have to double check on that.

To be honest, I think you're reading more into this post than what's there. I don't see "the blanket assumption that all organic foods are better" anywhere in the post, nor even a blanket condemnation of GMO food. I see a parent pissed that their child has been instructed on one side of an issue that is indeed quite fraught, with the other side dismissed and reduced to a paragraph.

There are indeed legitimate reasons for condemning what GMO's represent from an economic and ecological standpoint. The problem with GMO's is *not* just that they may or may not be harmful to human health. The problem is that they fundamentally change the economics of farming in ways that put farmers at huge risks and make them dependent on very expensive chemical and mechanical inputs. Moreover, these crops have not really delivered what they have claimed; "golden" rice is the exception as far as nutritional enhancements or other "miracle improvements" go.

Most GMO's such as Bt corn and "Round-up Ready" crops are intended to complement or facilitate pesticide use. I won't go into the potential ecological harm of such technologies. However, pests are inevitably going to develop resistance to such mechanisms, but now the solutions will have to come, not from individual farmers developing varieties over time based on what performs the best in their unique ecology, but from very expensive and potentially risky technological enhancements under the exclusive control of some of the wealthiest corporations in the world. That is a problem.

[Texano78704]

122. Some paint with a broad brush

"Having said that we should not dismiss GMO crops or lump them all in the same basket."

Indeed. The term "GMO" is broad. I'd be willing to bet that every single piece of fruit and vegetable in the "organic" section of every supermarket has been genetically modified in some way. "Genetically Engineered Organisms," however, are required to be tested and must get government approval.

[Ty Templeton]

97. Yup, tons of benefits.

You'll notice no one answered you.
The main point of GMO crops is that they are resistant to pests and diseases, which means you get more of them per season. They thrive where regular versions of the same crop die out in large percentages. They are, essentially, a modern tech pin-point accurate version of crop mixing, something farmers have been doing since farming began. There is no data on GMO crops being in any way harmful to humans, and the resistance to them is built mostly around suspicion of corporate ownership of organic patents, and suspicion that corporate sources are lying about the "harmless to humans" data. There is much evidence that corporations are vigorously defending their patents with these GMO crops, and have behaved reprehensibly with farmers attempting to grow these crops without licences.

GMO crops yield two or three times their counterparts, making fields in which they are grown more profitable, and making a larger food base in third world countries with starvation problems, which is a net good if focusing solely on those elements of the issue.

While corporate control of your kid's school curriculum is concerning, certainly, GMO foods are less alarming as a food source than some people believe.

The corporations that control these organic patents are no doubt as scurrilous as any corporation is. But the food itself is fine.

[paleotn]

109. maybe yes, maybe no...

... GMOs still have many potentially negative aspects and research into long term affects is ongoing.

What I have the most problem with, are unintended consequences of rapidly marketed GMOs. My worry is the difficulty in predicting potentially negative outcomes once one inserts a foreign piece of genetic material into a plant cell's genome. The fact of the matter is, we're still learning to crawl when it comes to really and fully understanding how specific and combinations of alleles express certain traits in any genome, much less food crops. That said, until we know far better what in the hell we're doing in corn's genome, other than the fact that "gee whiz! OUR corn can now withstand glyphosate! Lets sell this puppy and make billions!", maybe we shouldn't have people eating it just yet.

Now, as to those corporations who patent and sell GM seed destroying of 10K years worth of cultural seed saving and food crop biodiversity in order to make a quick buck, that's reason enough to tell Monsanto, Dupont, Pioneer, Bayer, et. al. to take their patented seeds and shove them up their collective arses. Or lets just limit ourselves to those few patented cultivars given to us by our corporate miracle workers and hope for the best. Anyone for the Irish Potato famine writ large?

[antigone382]

117. I'm sorry, but could you please provide a source for the "two or three times" production claim?

I have studied the controversy surrounding GMO's pretty extensively, and I have never seen any claim like that as far as GM crops go. Green revolution crops versus traditional varieties perhaps (but only in a context of extensive fertilizer application), but not GM crops (or more specifically, transgenic crops) over conventionally bred varieties.

[Texano78704]

121. +1

A couple of interesting points from a blog on a related topic:

"How to meet market demand was another big issue. Though consumer demand has continued to grow or at least hold its own, domestic production of organic grains, needed for organic livestock feed and grain-based foods, has declined – down about 15-20% in Ontario from five years ago. The problem is the combination of greater profitability for non-organic grain growers, high production costs and production challenges, very volatile organic grain prices and imports of organic grain. "

"According to the now famous Mark Lynas, 3 ½ trillion meals containing GM ingredients have now been consumed globally with not a single illness related to the technology. Microbial contamination of organic foods has killed many. And yet the organic advocates attack the former and ignore the latter."

http://tdaynard.com/2013/03/07/why-is-organic-agriculture-so-neglected-by-organic-advocates/

[socialsecurityisAAA]

132. You sound like a corporate representative

Gm companies love to spout about the fact that less pesticides are used on their crops and they have higher yields. Unfortunately neither of these claims are true. Insects have developed a resistance to most gm crops forcing farmers to use more and more pesticide and more dangerous pesticides every year, not only this, but the gm crops have actually helped insects develop cross resistance. Basically gm crops are creating super bugs that are becoming ever more harder to kill or repel.
As for the higher crop yield claim, this has never been true. Industry studies abound, however, farmers aren't convinced. Many countries don't allow GM crops and they enjoy great bounties year after year.
As for the fields becoming more profitable. This is a laughable claim at best. Many farmers are going bankrupt now since they have to buy seeds every years, instead of storing seeds like they used to and using these for next years crops. Add this to the fact that GM crops are failing, well, you have hundreds of Farmers who used GM seeds filing bankruptcies, their livelihoods destroyed while they are forced to sell the family farm to pay off debts. Guess who buys the farm, none other than the GM companies that put them out of business.
Not to mention those poor Indian farmers who commit suicide after crops fail! These guys took out huge loans often made available to them by GM companies. When the crops fail they are shamed and destroyed. They commit suicide rather than face public humiliation.
But yeah, GM crops are a boon to humanity............only if your a misanthrope.

[StrayKat]

62. Yes, we had this when I was in school.

I remember watching a video 30 years ago in elementary school about genetically engineered rice (fish genes as I recall) that had a 3 fold yield and was going to resolve hunger in Asia. They were also working on some plants to thwart tobacco mosaic virus and create better tomatoes. My memory of this movie is far from perfect, but I don't recall any concerns about the 'advances' being discussed. So, from my perspective, it's actually an improvement that the opposing view was even raised.

Schools have always been a major source of propaganda, some good and some bad. It would be great to get corporations out of classrooms, but this is very unlikely to happen. It's good that you're able to use this as a learning opportunity for your child.

[cantbeserious]

64. What Does One Think The Charter School Movement Is All About - Money, Message, Control And Power

eom

[arcane1]

65. Pioneer supplied the GMO and "non-GMO" seeds for the experiment?

I wonder if the "non-GMO" seeds were, in fact, genetically modified to grow poorly

[JHB]

72. Or simply bred or treated, and maybe "pre-infested" with pest eggs/spores

I noticed that point too; with all the materials coming from a single GMO-industry source, it wouldn't be hard to only include materials that are heavily skewed toward a particular outcome -- while providing the illusion of a fair comparison.

It would be interesting to rerun the experiment using seeds from another source (or better yet, several sources), if only at home.

[CoffeeCat]

66. ...

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:58 PM - Edit history (1)

[mnhtnbb]

68. Black out the name of the school and teacher and post away.

[arcane1]

73. Seconded!

[Cleita]

67. It's up to you to set her straight. Also, look at it as an opportunity for her to

learn that what she is taught in school is sometimes crap and she sometimes has to go along to get along, like fill in the answers expected of her, but that she should really question everything she learns from now on. It will be up to you to teach her critical thinking as you and your husband already have decided to do. Also, you should enlist other parents in this and pressure the school or in public school it would be the board of education to reexamine their curriculum and to stop teaching false facts in those schools.

[datasuspect]

70. it's better if slaves simply aren't literate at all

but that might be too jarring to the average Uhhhhmerican denial bubble: so just make the kids stupid, i suppose that's close enough.

[moondust]

71. Discussion with the teacher and/or principal?

Would that help? Maybe they have some experience dealing with textbook material some parents find objectionable. That must be fairly common in this politically polarized environment.

[drm604]

74. Regardless of how one feels about GMOs,

lesson plans should not be written by parties with a financial interest in the subject matter.

This is corporate PR masquerading as school lessons. It should be illegal.

[City Lights]

80. Exactly! nt

[jeff47]

77. Well, if it's a science class, that's appropriate.

"Concerns" aren't science. They're concerns. They can lead to hypotheses which are then tested. But concerns are not a substitute for those tested hypotheses.

The science, at the moment, doesn't back up the concerns. Admittedly, that science was funded by the producers of GMO crops. But if it was such a threat, you'd think a university or other non-profit-motivated institution would have been able to test those concerns and show they are more than just concerns.

[Arugula Latte]

82. Wow.

I'd like to sell you some Florida real estate ...

[jeff47]

93. Well, provide your proof.

Again, if it's a science class, you have to show proof.

If it's a public policy class, then the criteria is different. "Concerns" are sufficient there.

[Jim__]

85. Really? GM crops are wonderful and a miracle? That's science?

[jeff47]

94. They're producing more per acre than non-GMO

Which is probably a good thing.

Again, if it's science class, you have to show your evidence. If it's a public policy class, then the criteria are different.

[LeftyLucy22]

90. GMOs have just officially been connected

To cancer. Thst is science.

[jeff47]

92. No, the chemicals some GMOs were engineered to resist have. (nt)

[socialsecurityisAAA]

130. Industry funded groups call this study biased

Last edited Tue Apr 30, 2013, 06:34 AM - Edit history (2)

They scream that the rats shouldn't be used in studies because of their cancer rates, meanwhile these rats are the most used in research. They forget to mention that the types of cancers the rats developed after consuming gmo's were different, far more aggressive and deadlier than the control which nullifies their claims of bias, misrepresentation.
But hey, according to industry insiders, if they don't fund the study themselves it's biased! Lol

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

[Crunchy Frog]

111. Corporate propaganda isn't science either.

[jeff47]

127. Then it'd be pretty easy to disprove their hypotheses.

So how come nobody has?

Sure, the chemicals sprayed on GMO crops have been show to cause problems, but that's a problem with the chemical.

Feel free to list all the dangers from the new super-sweet corn crops. The crops themselves.

[farminator3000]

120. no it is not appropriate at all, there is no science at all proving GMOs are good

i'd think you could post a link if that were the case?

(Reuters) - Heavy use of the world's most popular herbicide, Roundup, could be linked to a range of health problems and diseases, including Parkinson's, infertility and cancers, according to a new study.

The peer-reviewed report, published last week in the scientific journal Entropy, said evidence indicates that residues of "glyphosate," the chief ingredient in Roundup weed killer, which is sprayed over millions of acres of crops, has been found in food.

Those residues enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and toxins in the environment to disrupt normal body functions and induce disease, according to the report, authored by Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant from Arthur D. Little, Inc. Samsel is a former private environmental government contractor as well as a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/25/us-roundup-health-study-idUSBRE93O13H20130425

[jeff47]

126. You're complaining about a chemical, not a GMO.

The "good" from GMOs is they produce more per acre. Which isn't in dispute.

The problem comes from chemicals some GMOs are designed to resist, as you point out. But that's a problem with the chemical, not GMOs.

[farminator3000]

144. A US Department of Agriculture report confirmed the poor yield performance of GM crops, saying, “GE

A US Department of Agriculture report confirmed the poor yield performance of GM crops, saying, “GE [genetically engineered] crops available for commercial use do not increase the yield potential of a variety. In fact, yield may even decrease.... Perhaps the biggest issue raised by these results is how to explain the rapid adoption of GE crops when farm financial impacts appear to be mixed or even negative.”6
http://earthopensource.org/index.php/5-gm-crops-impacts-on-the-farm-and-environment/5-1-myth-gm-crops-increase-yield-potential

[harmonicon]

128. Thanks for being a voice of reason.

I get incredibly upset about the economics and associated politics surrounding GMOs, but the way people conflate these terrible things with the science behind the products really gives me pause for concern.

People too often see things as black and white, or simply fail to see the real problem at all. If you put a tiger in a nursery, it might kill and eat a few babies. This doesn't mean that tigers are bad or that trying to save tigers is bad, it just means that you shouldn't leave wild animals in a room of defenseless babies. In the right context, saving tigers is pretty great.

[veganlush]

79. This is not new, however.

When i was a kid, the national dairy association and the meat board, both industry lobbying groups, supplied the growth charts that hung on the walls of kindergarten class, and i think that's part of the reason so many people today think they have to eat animal products while science points in a different direction. The advent of the modern factory farm makes this especially sad. While the right-wingers were demonizing "Gummint" in all things, the real villains were the corporations and their propaganda.

[love_katz]

83. Bravo and huge kudos to you, CoffeeCat...

for being involved and paying attention to what your child is being taught in school, for your knowledge of the GMO propaganda issues, and most of all, for using this situation as an opportunity to teach your child critical thinking skills.

I am not surprised at corporate sponsored propaganda masquerading as a 'lesson plan' in our schools. It is disgusting, and needs to be opposed by thoughtful people everywhere.

Huge to you and yours, and support to whatever you decide to do.

Perhaps trips to successful organic gardens and farms can be proposed as a counter-point to corporate sponsored GMO propaganda. Seeing the excellent results of organic methods, and talking to organic gardeners and farmers could help counter the corporate rip-off talking points.

[perdita9]

84. This is what you get with Tax Cuts

Schools need money and materials and companies seek to exploit a profit motive.

[highprincipleswork]

86. IDIOCRACY

The film "Idiocracy" completely covers this. It's just amazing the unbelievable b.s. that passes for truth and suitable governance these days.

Those who can laugh at such stuff and not go completely insane or feel like doing themselves in could get some decent laughs from "Idiocracy", if you haven't seen it.

But, thank you for taking action on this. Terrible, terrible stuff.

[LWolf]

88. That's easy to believe.

While I haven't seen these materials, it's common to recieve a free promotional package of "curriculum" provided by a private corporation with an agenda.

We get those kinds of things all the time; materials and activities light on substance, promoting education that favors a particular product or point of view.

In an era of constant cost-cutting, when teachers aren't provided with the materials necessary, it doesn't surprise me that someone would use something provided for "free." It disappoints me.

For some perspective:

In my district, for example, new social studies materials were supposed to be adopted in 2012. Every state has an adoption cycle to keep curriculum updated, and a list of approved materials are posted by the state for districts to choose from. We heard nothing; our district did not adopt, nor purchase, anything new. The new cycle runs through 2018, and what we've got is in tatters, and does not align with new CCSS.

In my district, we adopted new Language Arts materials in 2007. These materials consisted of a teacher's manual, student workbooks, and an online component. The district stopped paying for the online materials after the first year. They stopped providing work books after the 2nd year. We've been operating with a teacher's manual that refers to materials we don't have ever since. In other words, we've got nothing, and have to scramble around patching stuff together on our own. We are supposed to adopt new curriculum in 2013. NOTHING has been said about this. No preview, no rating of available materials; nothing at the school site or district level. Not a word from the school board. We aren't getting anything.

That doesn't make the GMO propaganda okay. It does put it in perspective, though.

[VPStoltz]

89. Watch out for one in which she is asked to write about a 6,000 year old earth...

on which Jesus rode a dinosaur!

[Arugula Latte]

98. That's just ridiculous.

Everyone knows the Earth is 4,000 years old.

[mettamega]

101. I am saddened - can you say where this is happening ?

[RKP5637]

102. Follow the money trail and see if the school is getting funding big $$$$ and this is part of the

deal. The Koch Brothers, for one example, are fond of shelling out zillions to spread their brand of capitalism as they work to inherit the earth and you too.

[calimary]

104. You need to bring this to the attention of the school. And the school BOARD.

This is corporate propaganda being fed to our children.

[RainDog]

105. She's so fortunate to have you as her parent

Great job on your part. You give me hope for the future.

Thank you.

I hope you can make other parents aware of what corporate education is telling children.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

106. I can believe anything that makes a profit for the 1%. n/t

[airplaneman]

108. More and more I think

the biggest problem we face is how powerful so many corporations have become.
And that the only solution is to break them all up.
Monsanto, the big food companies, Wal-Mart - bust them up and get small family farms and family businesses that will care more about our world and their employees in their place.
The small companies will not buy all the control that the large corporations are doing.
-Airplane

[mahina]

110. Molokai families have some stories she should hear.

Sister lives about a mile from a Monsanto cornfield and became active when a dust storm whipped up all the poisons and made her child so sick.

Walter Ritte at UH Manoa on GMOs.



The poison that these companies saturate the soil with, runs off into our reefs and poisons our fish, blows in the dust and poisons us, and causes unknown effects on future generations.

[TNNurse]

112. DAMN

Yours is the kind of home schooling that makes sense. I am not a parent. I cannot imagine with two degrees BA and BSN that I could teach a child everything they need to learn. Adding to public (or private) education with parental involvement is the the very best education a child could have. You are truly parents. There are so many people who just have children without the responsibility of being parents. Thank you for all you do.

[DeSwiss]

115. Always follow the money.

- Propaganda being used on the next generation of customers through their bought-and-paid-for minions of government. Of course these geniuses are assuming that this rank poison shit they've created will not have killed everyone off in ten years time (would be a real shame if these scientists are eating their own work).

Pioneer is a stooge of Dupont.

K&R

[Raine]

131. That's absolutely DISGRACEFUL! nt

[DiverDave]

133. You are not overreacting

Good on ya for paying attention to whats being taught.
Now write a letter to the local rag.
Getting it printed may be a struggle.

[OneGrassRoot]

135. Any corporate influence (Big $) in public schools is unacceptable to me.

I'd be PISSED.

[davidpdx]

136. What I'd suggest is to find out the name of the teacher

and arranging to pick up your daughter one day and just drop by and casually ask about the materials and find out as much information as you can first. It sure would be interesting if you posted where they came from (if they didn't reveal any personal information of course). If this is happening in your daughter's school, you can bet it is happening in others.

[Junkdrawer]

137. Just another advantage of a Cradle-to-Grave Corporate State...

Consumer education.

[RobinA]

138. Overreacting

A little actual knowledge about GMOs would not be a bad thing in the current discussion. Granted, it would be better if it were presented from the scientific community rather than a corporation with an interest in the subject, but some much of what passes for GMO information out there is presented by the anti crowd, something from the pro people could balance things out.