TopicPaper2.docx - RUNNING HEAD MONSANTO VS CONSUMERS 1...

RUNNING HEAD: MONSANTO VS CONSUMERS
1
Monsanto: The Future of Food
Kenneth Wong

MONSANTO VS CONSUMERS 2
( 1a ) For two hundred years, the government did not allow for the patenting of life or
anything in relation to mother nature. This made sense for obvious moral reasons, but, that
eventually changed. Scientists were able to patent plants and crops despite the unpredictable
genetic mutations that may occur in the future. This opened doors for genetic engineering and
big corporations such as Monsanto.
( 1b ) According to the documentary (2004), Monsanto, initially a pesticide company,
bought out all the seed companies in the United States. Because Monsanto owned all the seed
companies, they were able to patent all kinds of seeds regardless if they were genetically
modified or regular seeds. This resulted in Monsanto monopolizing the seed industry and
indirectly monopolizing the pesticide industry because they would have control of what the seeds
are vulnerable to. Monsanto’s actions are ethically reasonable under both utilitarianism and
egoism. If what Monsanto is doing is beneficial for consumers, then it would be for the greater
good. Also, buying all the seed companies and patenting them would be in the self-interest of the
company to make more money.
( 1c ) For example, Monsanto found out a small farmer, Percy Schmeiser, sprayed
roundup, a pesticide product from Monsanto, and half of Schmeiser’s canola crops had perished
while the other half thrived. He had believed his crops simply built a resistance from the
pesticide after so much exposure, but it was discovered that his plants were actually accidentally
cross-pollinated with Monsanto’s canola seeds. Monsanto had trespassed onto Schmeiser’s land
to test the plants to discover they were the patented genetically modified canola seeds. As a
result, Monsanto had sued Schmeiser for patent infringement.
( 1d ) Schmeiser fought against the lawsuit from Monsanto because he believed he did
not do anything wrong and if Monsanto were to bully him, they would bully other farmers as

MONSANTO VS CONSUMERS 3
well. Unfortunately, the judge ruled that regardless of how the seed appeared on Schmeiser’s
land, it would be an infringement of Monsanto’s patent. The judge’s ruling would discourage all
other farmers from trying to fight Monsanto’s future lawsuits.
( 1e ) Seed hunters or plant hunters, provide “the greatest service which can be rendered
to any country is to add a useful plant to its culture” (Simon & Schuster, 2010, p.141). Seed
hunters are people that go around the world searching for undiscovered or endangered seeds.
Many of these seeds are endangered because of climate change or other natural catastrophes. To
ensure the possibility of having a future with these plants, the seeds are preserved until
technology can provide a safe hospitable environment for these seeds.