Home >> News >> Anti-GMO protest against Monsanto takes place in 428 cities

Anti-GMO protest against Monsanto takes place in 428 cities

The 3rd annual “March Against Monsanto” was held in 428 cities, 48 countries and 6 continents for the fight against genetically modified organisms (GMO). The protesters claim that GMOs do harm to the environment, people and supplies.Activists protest against the production of herbicides and GMO food products outside Monsanto headquarters in Creve Coeur

Monsanto (NYSE:MON) is the prime target of the protest as they are the largest producers of GMO products. However, Monsanto and its supporters claim that its products will be able to feed a large number of people only if they use GMOs instead of normal seeds and normal methods to keep weeds away from crops. The protesters do not seem to care about their claim, and they provide evidence of the massive harm it is causing to the people.

“The World Health Organization, has already determined Monsanto’s roundup to be a ‘possible carcinogen’ within the food supply,” said the announcement about protests.

However, Monsanto has the financial strength to defend the accusations and promote its products. In its recent quarter, the company reported a net revenue of $5.2 billion and an income of $1.4 billion. Monsanto formed a case against the protesters, and released a 2014 sustainability report. The report mentioned that it made a balanced meal accessible to all and other claims. Several doctors, experts and researchers also spoke about the ill effects of GMOs on May 23.

Protesters claim that using GMOs can lead to health conditions like development of cancer tumors, birth defects and infertility in humans. Monsanto stresses that its products are safe despite the concerns. The company’s stock rose by 136 percent in the last five years, and fared much better than S&P 500. According to Wall Street, the protests does not seem to affect the shares. Even though the ‘March Against Monsanto’ is held for the right reasons, Monsanto seems to have gained support due to its sustainability report.

[ Via ]

About Anirudh Madhav

A movie buff, a bookworm, and a compulsive doodler. All posts by Anirudh


  1. 428 cities worth of scientifically illiterate luddites. GMO's are perfectly safe.

  2. GMO's may or may not be safe; however, roundup ready crops allow roundup to be sprayed at high doses in turn killing everything else that is not roundup ready. So in controlling the weeds, they kill the microorganisms that keep soil healthy. I don't think polluting the land we eat from is very healthy and studies have shown that the roundup, to a degree, ends up in the plant. That means you are eating roundup. Does it have a cumulative affect on health? No one knows yet.

  3. Monsanto pays people to troll social media to attack activists by calling them names.

  4. Just label GMOs to give everyone the informed choice to decide for themselves. I choose to say no to herbicide laden/pesticide producing GMOs.

  5. William Turner First of all, I'm not employed by Monsanto, never have been, never will be. I'm the economist who figured out Quantitative Easing and a medical scientist who, after many years effort, has cured a disease, ADHD. Never in the history of science has any human-created gene prospered in the wild. We weaken the plant's natural resilience when we craft it to our needs. Every living thing has genetically selected tolerances for all sorts of chemicals with zero risk. Creating hysteria that is in contravention of the facts does nothing excepting perhaps, to hurt your political enemies or hinder commercial competitors, both examples of the worst of human loathsomeness. Everybody looses when ignorance, fear, and nostalgia contest for the reigns of public policy. Fools prefer luddite tactics like this obnoxiousness.

    It's fine to insist upon eating only wild-picked blackberries, but if we all were forced to do that, most of us would never taste blackberries.

  6. No. Ink costs money. Bureaucracies regulating socially useless labeling cost money. Anti-GMO ignorance would be furthered. Other religions could require "blessed" labeling with equally unsubstantiated ploys. If you want to advance ignorance, you should pay for it, not commerce, not society.

  7. Don't fall for the lies told by the GMO biotech companies, it has been estimated to cost only about $3 a year for GMO labels and the manufacturers will probably pick up that cost. Manufacturers change their packaging frequently anyway, we see it all the time on grocery store shelves, and it doesn't raise the price of the product. Besides, they are already labeling for other countries so it would be easy for them to do it for us as well. We here in the USA deserve the same freedom that they have, to know what is in the food we pay for and feed to our families. You may believe labels are "useless" but not everyone feels the way you do. No one else should be allowed to decide for us what we should know and what we shouldn't know about the food we consume.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *