"I don't think it's fair for you to use my little joke to try to discredit the entire thread." I'm not. I'm just trying to piggyback on your joke to extend it. Woo internet. We wouldn't have this issue if we were face to face, but it's hard to convey everything in text alone. Being a huge bad movie, horror, gore fan...I'm very in tune to the various coming zombie apocalypses. I'm not in the pocket of big agriculture, nor do I use/promote GM crops or chemical culture. I don't use either on my own vegetable garden aside from a light chemical fertilizer (aka, Miracle Grow). I just work in/around some of the "evil" (very indirectly, mostly end-user farmers), but most of the research and work I've done involve how to use less resources...that's where agriculture research is. Less water, less pesticides, less chemicals...part of this, unfortunately, is the role GM crops play in putting less of these other inputs into the soil. For us managing a few dozen to a few hundred rows of crops we don't need it, but when a person is planting/managing 100 acres+ things get a little harder. I'm not happy where GM is going or the companies pushing it or the governments that can't even get patent law under control approving most of it and letting judges with limited knowledge battle it's roll-out. I walk in both worlds, but I know where I stand.

http://www.ijbs.com/v05p0706.htm http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-gmcrops-safety-idUSBRE88I0L020120919 The point of the reuters article was to see if longer term studies were needed, and it seems that both of these studies agree on such things. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rat-study-sparks-furor-over-genetically-modified-foods Same thing as the reuters one. Both of those articles never state that either or is right. Any scientific study will meet criticism its just that the GMO thing is more public. http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/81/8106.pdf Another study suggesting further long term studies (yeah, maybe a bit bias...) Then there is this one http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/25/roundup-health-study-idUSL2N0DC22F20130425 this is the one fab posted, and again, suggests that more studies need to be done (with apparently the EPA is already doing in the US). Im assuming the study was published in entropy, because roundup is thought to cause problems with ecosystems (or the opposition of GMO/monsanto say) Also, im sure youve all heard about the oregon wheat fiasco: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/29/genetically-modified-wheat/2370533/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-gunther/unauthorized-gm-wheat_b_3392319.html The point is, many people who are against gmo, do indeed need to stop beliveing everything they read on the internet. Motherearthnews.com is a horrible source.... on the other hand, many people for GMO, cannot ignore the studies that are comming to light now, and at the very least long term studies need to be done.

digdirt, I took the addy directly from the article. I'm not sure why it doesn't go there now. My sole intention was to share information about seeds with conscientious growers. This looked like an appropriate forum for the topic, controversial as it may be. I'm new here, so if I've offending anyone for posting inappropriately, I apologize. After researching this issue however, I certainly do not apologize for being non-objective. Thank you for the feed back.

Hi Molanic - Yes, I'm glad they are not truncating long posts any more. ;-) I appreciate that you see some value in it. :-) I get Mother Earth News out of the library once in awhile. I used to read it a lot when they first became a magazine. That coincided with my first efforts to begin gardening and their organic, 'love the earth' approach was like a life line. Back in the early 1980s, there was only a 'seed' of the organic movement. There was no Whole Foods, or organic seed, fertilizers, etc. I completely agree with you, that we do dive headfirst into what is considered 'progress' and in the process we let go of what is very valuable and sometimes priceless then only in hindsight, do we acknowledge or understand what we've done. You only have to look around at many examples of when we have done that. You wonder why we don't learn our lesson. I don't like giving them my money either and I don't. I'm trying to avoid their products too. I stick to the few seed companies, who I think take avoiding their seed pretty seriously. and aside from seeds, I don't use the kind of products they make any way. And you are right, we're probably not putting a dent in their bottom line. If home gardening seed is a small portion of the seed they sell, then targeting commercial seed sales seems to be the way to go. If someone could only convince farmers to stop using GMO seeds. edit: As it is, many people are already avoiding corn and soy products in the supermarket because it is difficult to find any that are not genetically modified. And I wonder if anyone has thought of trying to convince shareholders to stop supporting Big Agriculture? I imagine there are many people who have stock funds that they don't even know have these stocks in them. I was unaware that there are graphs 'trying' to track what they now own. I'll have to look for them, to see if I can't expand the seed companies I do business with. Didn't know someone was trying to track the government officials who are making policy that allows Monsanto to continue along. That is the scariest part to me too. Between Monsanto having all the wealth on their side, to blanket us with their own carefully crafted PR campaign and the government having the power to give them carte blanche, it's easy to see why those that oppose what they are doing have a hard time being heard and understood. Thanks for pointing me in a direction to find a better list of Seed Companies that are owned by Monsanto.