Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
1) There is no revolving door. Just a made up story about a person called Michael Taylor being head of FDA which is false
2) Labelling fights are everywhere in many nhp/food areas. There's two arguments against this. Number one: Who and how does one designate "Non-GMO" to prevent false advertising. There would need to be yet again another governing body. Number two: The company is protecting the thousands of costumers from people avoiding their product.
I'm not sure number 2 is a good enough reason to not label, but an entirely defendable position for Monsanto to make.
While the use of rBGH has been shown not to be harmful to humans, it does likely lead to increase in incidence of mastitis. This means more antibiotics are used. This does impact antibiotic resistance somewhat, so there's a defendable position here. However, I don't see Monsanto fighting the labelling as evil.
3) What's to defend here? Lawsuits to protect product are not ethically terrible and incredibly commonplace .
|
if they are not ethically terrible, then why do they feel the need to do it?
its a free market. why cant a producer of milk proudly state that their product is rGBH free? if the consumer is properly educated, then let them make the decisions. monstanto wants to take that equation out of the purchasing power of the consumer. the only tool that they have left to make a statement(right or wrong)
as for big business in bed with government or at they very least, people with influence, a quick google search shows all sorts of examples.