RichardR
19th August 2005, 08:42 PM
Well, not really. But that is what it appears to be doing according to these squeals (http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/pigs.cfm) from the anti-GM crowd:
KANSAS CITY, Missouri - Monsanto Company, already a world powerhouse in biotech crops, is shaking up the swine industry with plans to patent pig-breeding techniques and lay claim to the animals born as a result.
We're afraid that Monsanto and other big companies are getting control of the world's genetic resources.
Christoph Then, a patent expert with Greenpeace in Germany
Agricultural experts are scrambling to assess how these patents might affect the market, while consumer activists warn that if the company is granted pig-related patents, on top of its tight rein on key feed and food crops, its control over agriculture could be unprecedented.
"We're afraid that Monsanto and other big companies are getting control of the world's genetic resources," said Christoph Then, a patent expert with Greenpeace in Germany.
Of course, that would be a bad thing. But it’s not clear from the article if this is exactly the truth. Later on we get:
The practices Monsanto wants to patent basically involve identifying genes that result in desirable traits in swine, breeding animals to achieve those traits and using a specialized device to inseminate sows deeply in a way that uses less sperm than is typically required.
Of course, Monsanto shouldn’t be allowed to patent natural processes already in use, but if they have developed something new and useful, it would be reasonable for them to patent it. For example, if they have developed a way of testing genes to facilitate selective breeding, it would be reasonable to patent that gene testing process. The thing is, can we trust the anti-GM crowd to tell the truth in this issue. Probably not, since we know they continue to lie about this kind of thing in the same article:
Monsanto already has a track record of suing farmers whose crops contain some of the company's patented genetic plant technology.
The are presumably talking about Percy Schmeiser, the farmer who we know stole GM seeds (http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=2126), and who was found not the innocent hard done by farmer of Greenpeace fame. Yet again with GM, the facts seem to count less than the previously arrived at position.
KANSAS CITY, Missouri - Monsanto Company, already a world powerhouse in biotech crops, is shaking up the swine industry with plans to patent pig-breeding techniques and lay claim to the animals born as a result.
We're afraid that Monsanto and other big companies are getting control of the world's genetic resources.
Christoph Then, a patent expert with Greenpeace in Germany
Agricultural experts are scrambling to assess how these patents might affect the market, while consumer activists warn that if the company is granted pig-related patents, on top of its tight rein on key feed and food crops, its control over agriculture could be unprecedented.
"We're afraid that Monsanto and other big companies are getting control of the world's genetic resources," said Christoph Then, a patent expert with Greenpeace in Germany.
Of course, that would be a bad thing. But it’s not clear from the article if this is exactly the truth. Later on we get:
The practices Monsanto wants to patent basically involve identifying genes that result in desirable traits in swine, breeding animals to achieve those traits and using a specialized device to inseminate sows deeply in a way that uses less sperm than is typically required.
Of course, Monsanto shouldn’t be allowed to patent natural processes already in use, but if they have developed something new and useful, it would be reasonable for them to patent it. For example, if they have developed a way of testing genes to facilitate selective breeding, it would be reasonable to patent that gene testing process. The thing is, can we trust the anti-GM crowd to tell the truth in this issue. Probably not, since we know they continue to lie about this kind of thing in the same article:
Monsanto already has a track record of suing farmers whose crops contain some of the company's patented genetic plant technology.
The are presumably talking about Percy Schmeiser, the farmer who we know stole GM seeds (http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=2126), and who was found not the innocent hard done by farmer of Greenpeace fame. Yet again with GM, the facts seem to count less than the previously arrived at position.