• IMongoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t mean to sound like a Monsanto shill, but farmers are not forced to use those seeds. They could use their own seeds if they wanted. But the GMO crops are so much more efficient that they are worth the cost.

    • KillerTofu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Also Monsanto has people go out and collect samples off farms that didn’t buy their seed and then sue them into either submission or destruction if they don’t pay anyway. So yeah, it’s cheaper either way to just buy their seed.

      • IMongoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Possibly, but there is no proof of this. In all the court cases Monsanto has won (which is apparently all of them), the defendant was trying to scam the company.

        https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2024/01/05/dissecting-claims-about-monsanto-suing-farmers-for-accidentally-planting-patented-seeds/

        They have a disclaimer (which is not legally binding though) that they will not go after accidental cross pollination.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          the defendant was trying to scam the company.

          No, that’s a lie. Monsanto may have characterized it as “scamming,” but I don’t give a fuck about monopolists’ opinions and neither should anybody else.

          Even intentionally preferentially gathering and replanting “Monsanto’s” “patented” seeds is not wrong, end of!

          • IMongoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            These are public court cases, Monsanto isn’t characterizing anything. The ones I’ve seen are deliberate attempts to use the seeds without paying. Do you have examples of a farmers livelihood destroyed by Monsanto? Because it doesn’t seem good business to me for them to attack random farmers. I implore you to look at the link I posted or google it yourself.

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              The ones I’ve seen are deliberate attempts to use the seeds without paying.

              Yes, I know. Re-read my last sentence.

              • IMongoose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Ok, again, no one is forcing these farmers to use the seeds. They have every opportunity to use their own heirloom seeds that they can replant forever, but they don’t because even when paying for seeds the GMO ones bring in more money. It’s a business, if they want to use them they need to pay. It’s ok to fundamentally disagree with seeds as a service but recognize (as the courts did) that this applies to all IP. Just owning a product doesn’t give you the right to duplicate and redistribute it.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah. For most common crops, harvesting and using your own seeds is simply not done. Farmers have been buying seeds for a hundred years or so.

    • 342345@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      My knowledge stems from just my memory of one or two documentations I watched. But there they stated that the gmo advantage is just a marketing lie in the long run, because nature adapts and yields decrease and herbicide/ fungicide usage increases.

      Is there a study that shows that gmo performs better (yield wise, impact on the fauna, toxicity) than all other approaches?

        • 342345@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Thanks. That’s interesting. The outcome looks positive regarding the yield sold/ha and spray of pesticides.

          I wasn’t able to find the duration of the study and an answer to the question: Are the improved yields/ reduced pesticide results stable over multiple years (1/5/10 years after the switch to Bt brinjal)? I searched for year and duration in the text and wasn’t able to find it. But I’m at my mobile phone atm. 😒