Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

salvorhardin

(9,995 posts)
Tue Mar 20, 2012, 04:33 PM Mar 2012

How NPR Got It Wrong on Monsanto's Superweeds (or how NPR gullibly accepts industry apologists)

For much of the 1980s ... scientists in Monsanto's budding agriculture-biotechnology wing struggled mightily to find a gene that would effectively confer Roundup resistance and also allow plants modified with it to grow robustly. After years of near misses and tantalizing failures in the lab, they "discovered that nature had trumped all of their efforts."

Their eureka moment involved a vast Luling, Louisiana, chemical factory where Monsanto manufactured Roundup...

There are glyphosate residues in the ponds, in the mud at the bottom pf the ponds, and in the soil alongside. Those residues exert a steady pressure on the population of microorganisms in the water and the soil, eliminating those that are sensitive to glyphosate and selecting for those that are less vulnerable.


People from the company's cleanup team collected sludge samples ... until the GMO team thought to look there. When they did, they found the gene they were looking for in that glyphosate-laced sludge from Luling— a gene that "proved to tolerate Roundup far better than any gene the scientists had created in the laboratory," and didn't interfere with plant growth.

...

All in all, I think Charles is being too generous to Monsanto scientists in uncritically reporting their claims that they were shocked, shocked by the emergence of superweeds. Their explanation reminds me of a famous quote from the writer who could be thought of as industrial agriculture's first prominent critic, The Jungle author Upton Sinclair: "It's hard to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding."
Full article: http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/monsanto-scientists-superweeds-NPR
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How NPR Got It Wrong on Monsanto's Superweeds (or how NPR gullibly accepts industry apologists) (Original Post) salvorhardin Mar 2012 OP
gullible or complicit, tough call, fine line Lionessa Mar 2012 #1
Meh. I prefer to be generous. salvorhardin Mar 2012 #2
Truly nothing personal meant here, but Lionessa Mar 2012 #3
 

Lionessa

(3,894 posts)
3. Truly nothing personal meant here, but
Wed Mar 21, 2012, 02:06 PM
Mar 2012

that in a nut shell is why Democrats lose, imo.

The whole bleeding heart part of the liberal, progressive, Democratic POV just causes us to seem weak and motivated by emotions instead of logic.

Generosity instead of suspicion causes any type of counter measures to be deployed way too late.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How NPR Got It Wrong on M...