I accuse the GE Seralini on GMOs

[izentrop]

Pierre-Henri Gouyon enlightens us from 21:15 https://youtu.be/VSf6j_wYeQM?t=1278

Note that at 28:10 PH Gouyon says "a dear ... (excuse me) ... a man named Séralini". He does not consider his work to be scientific but emphasizes the vindictiveness of researchers towards him.
I completely agree with his speech which puts researchers today too much at the service of agribusiness and honestly enlightens us as a researcher on the flaws of his profession and on the ineffectiveness of GMOs.

[izentrop]

I got carried away a little quickly, there is a plot in the air http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article892

[Earthquake]

Hi, janic, izentrop and ahmed,

So cover crops combined with no-till practices made possible by GMOs have multiplied and have enabled a reduction in erosion by 40% ...

it is very good that one, no-till techniques existed long before GMOs were discovered and developed (sic). This is called taking credit where GMOs have nothing to do with it.
This kind of statement will probably make Did!

Probably not Did and Ahmed ...

Should ask the gardeners of lazy vegetable gardens from what proportion of GMOs they have adopted this "new technology" to no longer plow and just rely on earthworms and other organisms to oxygenate and fertilize their plantations!

But what I would really like to know is which Monsanto products they use to achieve such satisfactory results !!



Heck, they have too much work to take the time to answer this question, after all, all you have to do is look for yourself:
http://www.monsanto.com/global/fr/nos-engagements/pages/une-agriculture-durable.aspx

[izentrop]

Hello,

what Monsanto products they use to achieve such satisfactory results !!
Heck, they have too much work to take the time to answer this question, after all, all you have to do is look for yourself:
http://www.monsanto.com/global/fr/nos-e ... rable.aspx

More specifically here: http://www.monsanto.com/global/fr/nos-e ... -plus.aspx

It is clear that they offer products for a much higher level of production than the family vegetable garden.
If farmers buy them, it is because they find their interest.

Soil cover is not essential for agricultural production in temperate climates, as long as fertilization is maintained.

Lahaye, opinion trial?

We are not going to pass judgment. We will issue an advisory opinion. More specifically, we will check whether Monsanto's activities are in accordance with the rules of law as they exist in the essentially UN legal instruments that I have mentioned. We are therefore not a criminal court, nor judge a civil fault.
http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... DCJDdXV.99

[Janic]

More specifically here: http://www.monsanto.com/global/fr/nos-e ... -more.aspx

Monsanto VIRTUOUS? What he offers or rather what he takes up, like less plowing, makes sense because decried for more than half a century (it's like the biggest polluters who adorn themselves with virtues by making renewable energy).
Generations of peasants have used them for drought-tolerant plants (and are coming back to them via groups, independent of industry) before the industry replaces them with others that are more productive but need more water. .
Why is sustainable agriculture necessary?
Farmers supply the world with food, fuel and textile fibers.
Resources such as land, water and energy are limited.
A 40% increase in the world's population is expected over the next few decades.
An exponential increase in food production will be necessary to respond to this population growth.
Monsanto knows very well that it is not plant production that poses a food problem, but its use for livestock purposes (big wasters of water, agricultural land, food, but it goes in its productive sense) will reach saturation very soon.

It is clear that they offer products for a much higher level of production than the family vegetable garden.
If farmers buy them, it is because they find their interest.

Momentarily, until they realize that the promises are not kept and that they are stuck in its spider web.

Soil cover is not essential for agricultural production in temperate climates, as long as fertilization is maintained.

the two are interdependent and artificial fertilization only hides the gradual decay of soil life.

[izentrop]

Soil cover is not essential for agricultural production in temperate climates, as long as fertilization is maintained.

the two are interdependent and artificial fertilization only hides the gradual decay of soil life.

In the breeding region it is mainly organic matter.
Because you think the peasants will let the fertility of their soil lose http://www.inra.fr/Chercheurs-etudiants ... -de-labour . Those to whom it has happened probably do not have the knowledge of today's farmer.

[Janic]

Janic wrote:

Soil cover is not essential for agricultural production in temperate climates, as long as fertilization is maintained.

the two are interdependent and artificial fertilization only hides the gradual decay of soil life.

In the breeding region it is mainly organic matter.

Do not mix everything up; pastures are not used for industrial cereal production intended for human consumption and especially animal consumption. (supposed to feed the world population, while they impoverish and desertify these same countries they claim to save from famine) What hypocrisy!
So on one side there are the farmers, on the other the big industries of "fertilizers", of treatment products, etc ... who seek above all their own enrichment.

Because you think the peasants will let the fertility of their soil lose

Farmers have no chemical training and little in biology. They are told that such a cultivation mode (deep plowing required large tractors, which is good for business, as for banks that pocket interest on debts, etc.) that such product is good for that, and they especially believe when accompanied by promises, very momentarily kept. Until yields begin to stagnate, then decrease, while their expenses increase in fertilizers and phytosanitary products, in addition to their debts in materials, the more the fall in purchase prices.
http://www.inra.fr/Chercheurs-etudiants ... of plowing.
The tripod of conservation agriculture
Practiced for almost a century, conservation agriculture only received an official definition in 2001. [*] Despite this effort of standardization, this appellation covers very diverse farming systems, which have in common the absence of the soil being turned over by plowing.

INRA was forced to admit that the route taken went into the wall, while the AB, which was so criticized, showed that it was possible to do otherwise and young students know it. (But "yesterday" this organization, widely supported by industry, was the most ferocious enemy of this AB)

Those to whom it has happened probably do not have the knowledge of today's farmer.

This is partly true! Now that the damage caused by this farming method has been noted!
For those who are a little older like me and have known the change in farming methods with the arrival of more and more powerful tractors going each time deeper, in an attempt to break the plowing sole caused by the coulters, the INRA's turnaround is not an illusion, however
I met, a very long time ago, these small farmers who worked their soil with a plow pulled by a horse, their organic fertilizers drawn from manure, their mowing of cereals with scythe, etc ... and water at the well , the soil of clay houses, the protective hedges of soils and flora and fauna do not make necessary this mismanagement of chemical treatments. For them the plowing sole was insignificant.
In her investigations, including one on agriculture, Elise Lucet and her team showed their difficulties in introducing this closed environment, from INRA, and she had to force the doors to have an icy reception from her decision-makers (including the Minister ) pro GMO and phytosanitary (since they are, for some, the representatives.)
So, certainly, young farmers have more knowledge, it is inevitable, but of what type?
These are completely independent of the major industries which sponsor their schools, as for the pharmaceutical industries which subsidize universities.
[*] between existing and officially practicing, there is a huge gap! While it has been more than half a century that some have warned of the deadlock in the mode of cultivation of the moment

[izentrop]

Do not mix everything; ... industrial cereal production ... 'they impoverish and desertifythe same countries they claim to save from famine) What hypocrisy!
So on one side there are the farmers, on the other the big industries of "fertilizers", of treatment products, etc ... who seek above all their own enrichment.
Farmers have no chemical training and little in biology. They are told thatsuch a cultural mode (deep plowing required large tractors, which is good for business, as forbanks pocketing interest on debts, etc…) that such a product is good for that, and they believe in it especially when it is accompanied by promises, very momentarily kept. Until yields begin to stagnate, then decrease, while their expenses increase in fertilizers and phytosanitary products, in addition to their debts in materials, the more the fall in purchase prices.

You see conspiracy everywhere.

Practiced for almost a century, conservation agriculture only received an official definition in 2001. [*] Despite this effort at standardization, this appellation covers very diverse cropping systems, which have in common the absence of the soil being turned over by plowing. [/ I]

Plowing is not absent from the CA http://agriculture-de-conservation.com/ ... iques.html and no-till is not a universal solution:

wheat yields remain below those of the intensive system by 20% on average, with wide variations between years. The economic performance of the no-till system (net margin) is the weakest, compared to the three other systems present onthe essay

In her investigations, including one on agriculture, Elise Lucet and her team showed their difficulties in introducing this closed environment, from INRA, and she had to force the doors to have an icy reception from her decision-makers (including the Minister ) pro GMO and phytosanitary (since they are, for some, the representatives.)

Not surprising http://www.legorafi.fr/2016/10/19/cash- ... s-humains/ [Quote] http://hommelibre.blog.tdg.ch/archive/2 ... 78907.html

[Janic]

janic wrote: impoverish and desert these same countries they claim to save from famine) What hypocrisy!

who seek above all their own enrichment ..
They are told that
banks that pocket interest on debts, etc.).

You see conspiracy everywhere.

It turns out that I have neither the means nor the time to be able to establish the reality of a conspiracy. So I do like most people, I listen to the news, I read reports, I follow the scandal trials in France and elsewhere and it looks more like conspiracies than the innocence of the baby who just to be born.
When tobacco companies swear under oath that they don't put addictive products in their cigarettes, isn't that part of a conspiracy? When asbestos was questioned, it took a century for this fact to be officially recognized and the product prohibited: no conspiracy? etc ...

DEPLETE AND DESERTIFY: yes as the independent lobbies surveys show, the deforestation of developing countries (as some say) is not a sight of the spirit and whose aim is neither to feed the populations local or national, or enrich them (apart from a few large owners or pension funds), but the wealthy countries like America and Europe and therefore you… and not me!
THEY ARE SAID THAT: And, yes these people do not have the infused science and must listen, learn, and practice that which one told them… as for each one of us. But what do we tell them? Who decides what will be told to them? There it feels like the plot indeed!
BANKS THAT POCKET: Same thing: who complains about debt and the bills (not milk) that keep them in the throat? and who says debt, says bank and if the debt cannot be repaid who will seize the goods? Santa ?

Practiced for almost a century, conservation agriculture did not receive an official definition until 2001. [*] Despite this effort at standardization, this appellation covers very diverse farming systems, which have in common l absence of the soil being turned over by plowing.
Plowing is not absent from the CA http://agriculture-de-conservation.com/ ... ics.html

I have only quoted a passage from INRA, which is only binding on this institution, not me.

and no-till is not a universal solution:

It took hundreds of generations to invent and practice plowing (which cannot be compared to industrial plowing with its huge coulters). Let us hope that it will not take generations to return to an agriculture more respectful of the soil, of its varied and complex life (see Did) and deep plowing does not participate.
wheat yields remain below those of the intensive system by 20% on average, with wide variations between years. The economic performance of the no-till system (net margin) is the lowest compared to the other three systems present in the test
You have to compare things that are really comparable. If the test is done on a soil with a plowed sole, not broken, it goes without saying that the sown plants will have immense difficulties in crossing this sole and therefore the yields will be affected. But if this sole was broken, that the lumps were themselves broken and therefore that the soil is again aerated and crumbled, I doubt that its yields are lower, on the same plot.

In her investigations, including one on agriculture, Elise Lucet and her team showed their difficulties in introducing this closed environment, from INRA, and she had to force the doors to have an icy reception from her decision-makers (including the Minister ) pro GMO and phytosanitary (since they are, for some, the representatives.)

Not surprising http://www.legorafi.fr/2016/10/19/cash- ... s-humans /

You'd better indicate the survey itself so that everyone has their own opinion.
Elise Lucet is not the only journalist focusing on this aspect, others have preceded it, she is just more publicized.
For the article you indicate; Elise Lucet questions some religious speeches, with reason moreover, as to sue God himself, it is like wanting to sue the automobile because VW has “cheated” on NEDC measures.
The author of this article, who claims to be falsely "humorous", clearly has no theological knowledge, which would have enabled him to make the distinction, but catchy titles are his livelihood. May God forgive him for his sin! amen, hallelujah and all-quanti!
That said, I do not credit certain excesses in her approach, but no more than that of the individuals and systems that she and her team question and who think only of their money and little or not to consumers.

[Ahmed]

You see conspiracy everywhere.

I don't think at all that Janic allude to any conspiracy theory.
It is however interesting to understand that the genesis of all those which flourish on the web, although perfectly unfounded, are explained by a concordance of facts which do not however come under this explanation: one could say that everything goes like a conspiracy, except that the reason is simply that the same determinism is at work among agents who have no particular links between them, except this common constraint ...
Those who persist in seeing only isolated, accidental phenomena, which have no relation whatsoever to each other, deprive themselves of an all-encompassing vision, yet the only way to give each phenomenon its meaning within a whole. coherent.