It’s not often that the mainstream media actually publishes an article critical of Monsanto, GMOs, or the agrochemical industry that has taken over American farm life.
But in a new editorial on CNN.com, Leah Douglas sounds the alarm over a proposed new Bayer-Monsanto merger, spelling out countless reasons why it could be disastrous for everyone but Bayer and Monsanto themselves.
“It’s time for anti-trust regulators, who have been allowing mergers and acquisitions such as this for decades, to look closely at how allowing this merger could hurt farmers and the environment,” Douglas writes in the op-ed, which can be read in its entirety by clicking here.
A recent study found that genetically engineered seeds cost “about twice as much as conventional seed, and that the cost of them has risen more than 140% since 2001…” Douglas writes. Farmers become dependent on these seeds and companion chemicals and end up losing their control and sovereignty to massive seed corporations.
The German chemical, pharmaceutical and GM crop giant Bayer (through its Bayer Crop Science division) best known for its aspirin products has offered $62 billion to purchase Monsanto, which could mean the end of Monsanto (at least its infamous name).
But in its place a new agrochemical and GM seed giant would stand (the largest in the world), and that could be especially bad news, Douglas continues.
“The recent involvement of the Department of Agriculture in reviewing the ChemChina-Syngenta deal suggests a growing awareness that consolidation in this sector poses dangers to the environment, to agriculture and the economy,” she writes.
“But without dramatic action from regulators, when the dust settles from this flurry of deal making, the seed and agrochemical sectors will be consolidated as never before. And farmers, consumers and the environment will pay the price.”
All things considered it would allow the new mega-corp to consolidate its power and make farmers even more dependent on a single source, much like recent deals with competitors could do, as Douglas writes:
“Seed prices could rise for farmers, consumers could see more genetically engineered foods on supermarket shelves, and our global agricultural system could end up depending on just a few companies to meet a high percentage of the world’s agricultural needs…
“In short, the $62 billion deal would further concentrate power in an already highly consolidated global seed and chemical industry.”
To read the full editorial you can click on this link.