Monsanto Loses Millions of Dollars after Indian Farmers Switch to Indigenous Seeds

ASIA & THE PACIFIC, BRICS, ORGANIC, GMO, GENETIC ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, 25 Mar 2019

Ruth Milka | Nation of Change – TRANSCEND Media Service

Monsanto claims that the genetically modified cotton seeds they sell are superior. So why are so many people trying to switch?

Nation of Change

9 Mar 2019 – Monsanto is losing millions of dollars now that farmers in India are switching to indigenous cotton seeds rather than Bt cotton.

The agrochemical company is known for pushing a form of Bt cotton in India for the last decade. They have been accused of manipulating laws in order to enter the Indian market.

Monsanto’s manipulation and greed in India has caused hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers to commit suicide. Between the years of 1995 and 2013, more than 300,000 farmer suicides occurred, many of which were linked to Monsanto. Farmers are forced to pay for Monsanto’s costly seeds, which then force them to pay for the expensive pesticides to effectively grow them, as Bt cotton’s pest resistant quality fades over time.

These farmers are losing their lands, and their livelihoods, due to the debt they incur trying to afford Monsanto’s products. Many of the farmers drink the chemical insecticides in order to commit suicide.

But recently the Indian government has been promoting the use of indigenous seeds as an alternative. In the past year Monsanto has lost $75 million in royalties from the switch. As Keshav Raj Kranthi of India’s Central Institute for Cotton Research stated, “Just wait for the crucial three to four years to see a complete, natural turnaround. By then most farmers will give up Bt cotton and go for the indigenous variety.”

Monsanto claims that the genetically modified cotton seeds they sell are superior, but places in West Africa, where Monsanto is similarly pushing their Bt seeds, rejected the gm seeds after finding it produced poor quality cotton.

Go to Original – nationofchange.org

 

Share this article:


DISCLAIMER: In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


There are no comments so far.

Join the discussion!

We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.

*

code

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.