Ministry of Controversy, Who's Ranting About Us

It’s a Miracle! Scotts backs off You Can Grow That

… grow the YCGT campaign!

Happy endings to stories that involve corporations vs. individuals are all too rare, so we’re very pleased to report that garden writer C.L. Fornari will be able to continue her “You Can Grow That” campaign without any opposition from Scotts Miracle-Gro.

As she just posted:

Recently the Director of Public Relations for Scotts Miracle-Gro contacted me to let me know that this company is going to let their application of the trademarking of this phrase expire. They will not pursue their application through to registration and if I, or a YCGT non-profit group would like to file for the trademark of this phrase we will be able to do so.

C.L. credits Amy’s great post on this (you may remember it for the title alone)—Dear Scotts: Just Try, One Time, Not to be So Shitty—for at least part of Scotts’ change of heart. However it happened, we’re thrilled for her, and look forward to the continuing development of this excellent strategy for spreading the optimism about gardening.

Posted by on September 19, 2012 at 8:03 pm, in the category Ministry of Controversy, Who's Ranting About Us.
Comments are off for this post

34 Responses to “It’s a Miracle! Scotts backs off You Can Grow That”

  1. There now, wasn’t that easy? An unlikely victory in a landscape full of people trademarking or patenting things that shouldn’t be owned in the first place (phrases, genes, etc). Not sure that the “shitty” post had that much to do with the turnaround, but it certainly was entertaining. Amy–just in case it did, set your sights on Monsanto next, huh?

    • Cynthia says:

      The “Sh***y” post had to be at least partly responsible – it was what made me visit the Scott’s website, in an effort to research the story further. When I was greeted with a survey questionnaire before I could even enter their site, I took the opportunity to lay into them. Perhaps others did the same . . . anyway it’s wonderful to see a David kick Goliath’s butt. Cheers!

  2. Robin Ripley says:

    Like! Forceful post from Amy. Positive response from Scotts. The cynic inside me says they didn’t have anything invested in the idea, so why not let the little garden blogger/writer have her slogan? Let the PR people win this point. The optimist says that Scotts is listening. Either way, we all need to keep talking about the importance of making sure the environment and wildlife is protected. Don’t just roll over and take it.

  3. That is wonderful news! Congratulations and good work.

  4. Johannes Reitter (Vienna/A.) says:

    I second Boneponio Gardenerd on Monsanto.
    And why not Bayer et al. while your’re at it?

  5. Is Monsanto bashing a favourite national passtime in the US? There is a dedicated group of Monsanto bashers here too, although they tend to have to content themselves with preaching to the converted – that being each other.

    If Monsanto have done something really terrible in the past to get people jumping up and down in rage then I must have missed it. They were after all the developers of Round Up and where would we be without Round Up? I know my past 30 years in Horticulture would have been a hell of a lot more difficult without it. It works well and doesn’t effect the soil, so crops can go in straight after spraying.

    Monsanto also research and develop the new systems and products for the future. With 7 billion people and rising I don’t think there really is any choice other than for companies like Monsanto to carry on their work. It would be nice to be able to live in a totally natural world but then if we did there would only be about 500million people in total in the whole world and we could then live with low yields and crop failures. Am I Ignorant, or Realistic or just Plain Provocative I wonder??? Any thoughts???

    • Norma says:

      Colin, as wonderful as Roundup may seem to a home gardener, it has become a major problem to commercial farmers. Its widespread use has resulted in Roundup-resistant “superweeds” that are taking over many fields. Do an online search to see a number of news articles on the subject.

  6. Ellen says:

    Congratulations and thanks to Amy and gardenrant!

  7. It is great to hear that the small business can win against a large money intense company. That is great news! Thanks for sharing the positive news!

  8. Susan says:

    Colin Seymour, Monsanto has an unbelievable amount to answer for! I’ve read a great deal, and – well, where to begin? First of all, their GMO foods seem to be responsible for many of the health problems and unusual conditions that people are experiencing. Just as an example, the bovine growth hormone in milk; I read several books and reports that say that cows given the hormone showed up with nasty cases of mastitis (inflammatory breast disease), but Monsanto got the results hushed up, as they generally do with anything that puts their creations in an unfavorable light. Our FDA and Monsanto have a revolving door between them, so as a result, we are the largest lab experiment in modern history – without our knowledge and/or consent. What’s more galling is that Monsanto is fighting labeling our foods as containing GMO’s, so that consumers can’t make an informed decision about their health. On an agricultural level, you may have heard that India has banned Monsanto’s GMO crops. Why? Because they’ve turned out to have multiple cultivation problems, and farmers were starving. The problem was that the farmers had to sign a contract to buy Monsanto’s seeds. If the farmers had a crop failure because of these problems, too bad. They either continued to buy Monsanto’s seeds at Monsanto’s price, or they had no seeds, no crop and they starved. “Monsanto-bashing” is entirely appropriate on a great many levels, IMHO!

    • Ahhh haaaa I thought that last comment of mine would get a response from one or two and maybe even cause someone to blow a fuse.

      As Susan’s reply was the longest my reply is going under Susan’s but hello Norma, Susan and Sandra. Firstly the answer to my own 3 questions – Am I ignorant? Am I realistic? Am I plain provocative? is I am all 3 of those. I am ignorant because many of the things connected to the production of food and permitted in the US to be sold to its own people to eat are not permitted in food in the EU. They don’t need to fight the EU parliament about not wanting labelling of GM foods because GM foods aren’t allowed here anyway. They did get fined here a few years ago for labelling Round Up biodegradable when it isn’t I remember. The GMs were onsale for quite a few years but the antiGM people did a good enough job in scaring the population about GM so that no one would eat GM food. I think GM food was withdrawn more to do with sales or the lack of sales than anything else. But yes I am ignorant because so many of the practices you are campaigning against I am unaware of. I know about the superweeds becoming resistant but I think they are developing a new formula which the superweeds will not survive.

      I am realistic because like it or not 7 billion people and rising on ever shrinking acres will eventually not get fed were it not for the developments in agriculture that agro-chemical companies and research stations strive for. Well meaning as the organic folk are the organic methods are not going to provide the food needs unless we were to have a massive cull of the human population or contraception in the drinking water. As neither of those drastic measures will ever happen then there is no choice but to keep on developing modern agriculture to be even more modern. Organic growing is really just a niche market which carries a price premium in the shops for those willing or able to pay it and an alternative gardening method for the amateur gardener who feels less guilty by gardening the organic way. It helps to ease the feelings of guilt for what will otherwise be an extravagant lifestyle. Here in the UK the further up the wealth scale we go the more likely someone is to be organic. For people who barely have enough income to eat properly at all do not give a thought to whether something has been grown organically or not as they will have their eyes on the Buy2 get one free offers and the half price bargains. Likewise a home gardener who is growing veg to try and make the money stretch will be interested only in maximum yield of good quality veg. The option to gamble with organic methods will not be priority.

      Thirdly yes I am plain provocative because I find that is usually the only way to get any decent comments flowing, especially on gardening websites where online gardeners arent exactly the most dynamic of people. It never fails, there are always comments which come back with various hyperlinks to attempt to educate me out of my ignorance. A little provocation goes a long way and produces a good conversation.

      To be honest I do not know who’s side is right and who’s side is wrong. Who are the good guys and who are the bad. I suspect the right balance is somewhere inbetween at about half way. I am a notorious ranter which is never very much appreciated by the tea sipping ladies of the uk gardening websites who regard someone who even dares to disagree with someone else as being a trouble maker.

  9. Sandra Knauf says:

    Colin Seymour – Here’s another tidbit that I hope will enlighten you. Two people sent it to me just yesterday. http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_GMO_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html

    Congratulations to C. L. Fornari–and hooray for Amy Stewart!

  10. Jason says:

    Congratulations. You’ve demonstrated that it is possible, though rarely easy, to get corporations to change their policies through public pressure.

  11. CindyP says:

    Woot Woot!!! Are you feeling a little like David today?

  12. Steve A. says:

    Ha! Now I’m trademarking “You Can Grow That.”

    Thanks, Scotts!

    You snooze, you lose, Fornari! (Oh, I should trademark that one, too.)

  13. Donna B. says:

    Whee! I guess either someone in Scotts read the article and saw everyone’s negative reactions to their decisions and changed it through that? Either way, even though I still won’t buy their stuff, they earn some kudos points. I stress *some*…

  14. Laura Bell says:

    So those of us who sent a letter or email to Scotts, & or who posted & re-posted and liked and commented, or who complained in whatever way we could find … we actually had an affect on Goliath ?!? Woooo-hooooo !!! Guess the old saying “no such thing as bad publicity” didn’t hold true here, hm ? I might just carry this big ol’ grin around all day. XD

  15. Slam! Thinkin’ it’s high time I joined in YCGT…

  16. Susan says:

    Colin, I certainly appreciate that you like to be a contrarian – I have some of that in my makeup as well, being half Irish! Still, there is a lot of information out there that supports my contention that Monsanto is interested only in profit, not philanthropy.

    As to the GMO foods, I don’t think that it’s any coincidence that the twin epidemics of diabetes and obesity began showing up in our population within a couple years of GMO’s entering the food supply. Monsanto insists that they’re perfectly safe, so there’s no need to label them. Well, people such as myself say that if they’re so safe, Monsanto should have no problem with labeling them as such, proudly, and letting us make our own choices. It’s that simple.

    Unless you’re talking industrial farming, it’s not that difficult to garden organically. IPM techniques are available to all, and agricultural techniques that go back centuries can still be used today. Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready seeds are demonstrating that they can’t feed the world at all – every month or so, I read news stories saying that the pests they were created to subjugate are adapting, and the seeds are essentially no good. And I’m sorry, but who wants to ingest Bt??? Not me! God knows what that will do to people. And Monsanto’s dealings with farmers are heavy-handed at best. Perhaps you didn’t hear about this, but several years ago, a farmer up in Canada got taken to court (and to the cleaners) by Monsanto. Their industrial spies (yes, actually) were snooping around farms in the area, and found that he had some of their canola growing in his fields. Now, he had never purchased Monsanto’s canola – it showed up as a result of wind drift (if I remember correctly). But they sued him successfully for pretty much everything he had. Nice folks! Anyway, those are some of the reasons I feel as I do. For whatever it’s worth……

    • Susan.

      What you say is all fair enough and I have never heard of any company large or small who is not interested in profits. There is a risk attached as with everything which involves tinkering with nature. Are you opposed to prescription drugs for people? The same risks apply!!! Always a risk, especially when something is new and not stood the test of time.

      I don’t know if obesity is directly linked with GMs. There is no doubt that the US is at the top of the league when it comes to obesity in the population but we don’t eat GM food here in UK and obesity is also rapidly rising here too. Obesity is now the number 1 reason for premature death here. But you must surely realise that Monsanto and other agro-chemical companies are mainly concerned with serving the needs of large scale farmers who produce the food for the majority of the population who do not grow their own. The amateur gardening trade probably accounts for a very small percentage of their business. It is the big boys they serve.

      What do you suggest we do? Should everyone give up their day jobs and buy a hoe? Should we go back to the days of army’s of Peasants working in fields hoeing up and down the rows? That will just not happen. Most people wouldn’t even know which way up a hoe is used.

      Fields are big here in UK but I know they are enormous in the US stretching as far as the eye can see. Without industrial scale practices and efficiency how can the levels of food production needed be achieved without such companies researching and producing the weedkillers and other pesticides used.

      I am not being deliberately contentious but I do challenge ”base level organic fundermentalism”. I am taking the arguement from both angles and trying to keep a grip on reality. I do not believe in opposition for opposition sake just because a company is big and makes a profit. I am not anti organic gardening and on an amateur or small scale commercial basis it is entirely viable.

      Farmers have to be highly efficient nowadays to even stay in business at all because the large supermarket chains squeeze them on price and will not pay a fair wholesale price for the produce. Gambling with crops is not an option for farmers and companies like Monsanto produce the products they need to use.

      I write too much in comments and never know when to shut up so I am going to try and not comment too much on the website as there is a risk of other people getting annoyed with one person writing too much. There will never be common ground and compromize between organic gardeners and conventional gardeners.

      • Sandy says:

        Colin, re: your second-to-last paragraph, your comment about supermarket buying conglomerates squeezing farmers is accurate – and simply illustrates another huge problem with our food chain, especially here in the U.S., far better than it convinces me that Monsanto (and Dow, Novartis, and a couple other companies) might actually be right.

        • Sandy

          Re: supermarket chains becoming fewer and fewer and ever more powerful, it will continue and not only in the US and Europe but everywhere. They are trying to get into India now and put all their local traders out of business. The traders will protest on the streets but it will happen anyway. When we are down to just one food retailer then they will pay as little as they want to and we will have to pay as much as they demand.

          The squeeze on wholesale prices paid to the farmer only fuels the demand for greater farming efficiency and therefore less environmentally friendly practices. I believe the average percentage of income spent on food in the US is still very much lower than here although of course income vary widely in all countries and that gap is also increasing. Agro-chemical companies are just serving a demand. If there was no market for their chemicals they wouldn’t produce them and they would have to diversify into other areas.

          It is the very reason why I turned my back on ornamentals and lawns and the like and went almost entirely on to veg. I’m lucky, I know what to do to produce home grown veg in quantities greater than I can eat but amateur gardening skills here are almost non existant now. The old reputation that ‘British are a nation of gardeners’ is just not true anymore. With very cheap food we had here during the 80s and 90s meant a whole generation never bothered to learn how to grow veg. Nowadays it is a pitiful sight to see people trying to. They just do not know where to start.

          There is an urgent need for home gardening skills to improve and especially with growing fruit and veg. It will one day be the only alternative to paying extortionate prices to a single retailer. The population has more interest in gardening now than about 10 to 20 years ago but that interest doesn’t translate into ability. After a few years of endless failure people give up growing and go back to buying all their fruit and veg again. There does need to be a massive shift towards people growing their own and being less dependent on it being grown for them.

  17. Cynthia says:

    And yes, Colin, they are working on a new super-chemical that will kill the weeds that have become resistant to RoundUp. What happens when those weeds become resistant to that super-chemical? There is no good end to this arms race.

    • Cynthia

      Really what I wrote in responce to Susan covers it but what you are saying about Round Up resistant weeds then becoming resistant to a new version of Round Up is exactly the same as Bugs becoming resistant to Anti-Biotics and therefore always a need to research and develop new ones. same applies to us being given vaccines when we are babies – a little of the bug injected causes us to develop immunity. It is always going to happen because it is the way all species whether animal or vegetable defend their long term survival.

      So the answer is we will always need research and development of new products in the business of biology and chemistry sciences. We cannot pick and choose whether to live in a totally natural world or a world where man has to fight nature all the time. We could go back to Darwinism/natural selection and then we can be totally organic and have no need for agro-chemical products. Unless a natural disaster happens like a big solar flare knocking out the electricity for 10 years we will not be going back to Darwins Natural Selection / survival of the fittest, which is the way it is supposed to be but isn’t.

      • Colin the question you need to ask yourself is how long can agribusiness continue to farm relying so heavily on massive chemical, genetic, petroleum and financial inputs before the soil is dead or washed away, the toxins in the environment are so high no life forms are safe, rapid response to a changing climate is not possible and the whole system collapses? Then what happens to the 7 billion and counting? There is enough evidence now to point out that this better farming through chemistry approach is dangerous and not really sustainable.

        It very well could be that many people end up back on the farms working in the fields. They will learn very quickly which end of a hoe to use.

        • Christopher C

          Yes Christopher I do ask myself that question. I also always conclude that as things stand I don’t know what alternative there is. We could indeed end up back with a situation where we are all down on the farm with hoe in hand. If you mean more people work on farms hoeing while the rest carry on as usual then that can’t be done. The cost of production would multiple several times over with such inefficient practices and production would fall to such low levels the world as we know it in developed western countries like US and UK could not function. Those people learning very quickly which way up a hoe goes would be back to living like peasants on barely survival wages. How many people in the US or Europe or any other developed country would tolerate that? Nobody!!

          However don’t think that we are going to have 7 billion people alive and surviving by those methods. If everyone ended up down on the farm hoeing then they aren’t doing anything else so life as we know it would grind to a halt – Although it would have ground to a halt long before the hoes were picked up. I’m not saying that new natural world doesn’t have great appeal to me because it does but by the time we are at that stage 9/10ths of the population will already be dead then it would be sustainable.

          Whichever way you look at it where we are now is not sustainable. We can carry on the way we are with ever more toxins being used or we can go the way you suggest but we cannot sustain things the way they are.

          Whether the change happens quickly or whether it happens over decades can’t be predicted but unless the masses and not just those of us who do actually use our brains and consider these things are willing to change lifestyle on a dramatic scale then the agro-chemical business will remain a necassary evil in the attempt to survive with ever increasing people on ever decreasing acres.

          It is a pleasure to communicate with people like you who think and care enough about it to want what is best. I do too, I’m just a touch more realistic or perhaps I am just too cynical.

          I enjoy the commenting here but unfortunantly I must be guilty of putting forward too strong an arguement which isn’t what others want to hear. Ranting is OK as long as you rant as you are supposed to rant. I have received word from on high (admin) that my views are unwelcome. As I am a Brit intruding on your US website even though we do live on one planet I will not make any further comments. I have decided to retreat to my own garden and content myself with my own blog and leave the cyber-warriors to put the world right without my input. Whatever I write or not will make no difference. Remember the power is in the hands of a tiny few and ranting online is nothing more than a permitted pressure release valve for the powerless masses of ordinary folk who’s only purpose is to work and pay tax then die.

  18. Susan says:

    Colin, here’s another reason that so many of us here are opposed to GMO crops and food; this actually goes to the crops. I subscribe to a news compendium magazine called “The Week”, which is a completely objective source of news. They publish all points of view on subjects, from the right, left and overseas journalists. This week’s edition had a section on labeling GMO foods, but also had a sidebar regarding the emergence of superweeds that are resistant to Roundup, and are now growing into hulking, six foot tall behemoths that are unaffected by any chemical control. They are outcompeting the crops, causing an estimated $1.9 billion in damage last year alone! This is not going to feed anyone at this rate, and it’s absolutely unsustainable. This is why this has to be given intense scrutiny before any more such seeds are put into the marketplace.

  19. OK Susan
    I accept what you say as accurate and appreciate the concerns. I also understand that a lot of things permited in food in the US are already banned in Europe so there is concern.

    I was trying to look at the situation from both sides and not be single minded. I have not ever looked deeply into what the agro-chemical business’s do so if I did I may be in for some shocks. I’ve always thought under the global circumstances we live in there is no choice but to go down that route.

    There are great risks involved in manipulation of genes as there are in pharmaceuticals for people. There have been drugs released onto the market in the past with devasting side effects. It is the same thing really. Cloning, Fertility treatment so women can have babies at 60 yrs old. It is all risky stuff and all because people will not accept the law of nature.

    If you and the others can tell me how we can grow sufficient food by your methods without the need for agro-chemicals then you have my fullest support.

    I have given up the style of ranting which comes across as insulting. We have a little bit of a culture difference between UK and US even though we speak in virtually the same language. Wild exaggeration to put across a point is a typically British way of commenting/ranting and is done with mild humour and not meant to be taken literally. It is a kind of humour which is understood only by Brits. Americans always take everything said quite literally and take everything seriously. So I now moderate my ranting and resist the ‘Foghorn Voice” approach.

    Of course you are all well meaning people who want what is best and so do I
    I was going to shut up permanantly but as usual I cannot. USA timezone suits me as I am a terrible sleeper.

  20. Susan says:

    Colin, you have my complete sympathy on the sleep issue – I’ve been a lousy sleeper pretty much since infancy.

    Regarding your style of ranting, I love it. Here in America at present very few people have a sense of humor about anything. It’s so refreshing to communicate with someone who doesn’t resort to gross insults and infantile expressions to get their point across. As to how to feed the world, I’m not at all sure of what other alternatives might be for the problem. I’m just thoroughly convinced that GMO isn’t the right path in any way, shape or form. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it!

    • Susan

      Your reply has uplifted me and made me feel perhaps I’m not so bad after all. I understand why you have a sleep problem and i am sure it will be for the same reason as myself and that is you will be a very deep thinker. The fact that you are on here typing what you type proves that. You aren’t typing the same beliefs as myself but you have given your beliefs as much thought and care enough to want to spread those beliefs. If you are like me you will be laying in bed tired in body but brain buzzing with thoughts. Next day an even more tired body with a busy brain. If my body could muster enough energy to keep up with my brain i would be alright but I spend my whole life unable to relax but feel like I could just drop on the spot.

      Here too having a sense of humour is a dangerous thing nowadays due to the sensitivities and politcal correctness that prevails. Sexist or racist jokes will get someone a prison sentence nowadays. With religious humour it is still OK to make jokes about Christians who are the butt of any religous joke but no-one will ever dare make jokes about Islam or Jews. To do so is to invite real trouble but of course they can say anything they like and that is ok. Making jokes or humour about anyone who fits into any minority group is strictly forbidden. The only minority group who are ruthlessly persecuted and treated like sub-humans nowadays are people who smoke and yes I am one of them and intend it to stay that way because I must have a few pleasures in life. But nowadays it means going outside to stand in the rain and cold and be excluded from applying for certain jobs. the latest notices to start appearing do not read ”no smoking” they read ”no smokers” because apparantly passive tobacco smell on cloths is now too much for some people to breathe. But the air full of aviation fumes from the various flightpaths over head is OK to breath and no-one complains.

      Humour that is still allowed is of the infant school playground type which I stopped appreciating after I left infant school. Sexual jokes are allowed if they are evenly balanced between me and women but jokes about sexual minorities again is to invite arrest. innuendo and sarcasm is typical British humour and it is allowed sometimes depending on what it is and how obvious it is. The comedians play it so safe now there is nothing left to laugh at unless people in the audience have maybe had a few too many drink or a snort of something before hand. My cynicism knows no limits but I even turn that cynicism into humour sometimes.

      here I am 5.37am and still awake and head as busy as ever. I am being thrown off a gardening website today because I have been given a condition that I must agree to never rant and must never disagree with anyone or criticise anything or anyone and I must make a public statement to the other members declaring I deepest regret for comments made in the past. I’ve emailed them back to tell them to ”Go To Hell” That is exactly what we are up against in this pathetic country I live in of weak timid people.

  21. Susan says:

    Good Lord, Colin – from the sounds of it, you’re not losing much if you’re being thrown off that website! Your comments (at least from what I’m seeing here) are very temperate. You should see the comments on our local newspaper’s website accompanying some of the editorials; some of the most rude, scurrilous, inflammatory slander I’ve seen in years. I hope you won’t remove yourself from here – I think most people here would agree that there are many viewpoints in gardening, horticulture and agriculture, and all of them are valid. Cheers!

    • Colin Seymour UK says:

      Susan

      I’m not losing much and it didn’t take them long after receiving my email refusing to publically grovel. I went to log in this morning and the account had been deleted and all my content like comments and articles. My comments are temperate by the standards of comments which appear below online versions of newspaper articles. The commenting here is very extreme on many websites but the gardening world folk are a timid gentle lot of folk who mainly talk about the weather and cooking the dinner and flower arranging and things like like. They frighten easily.

      The political websites with forums and chat rooms are extreme here especially the neo-nazi / white supremist political websites. There is government spyware which comes into the computer and tracks the computer when those types of websites are entered and anti spyware software doesnt remove it. people here get monitored by the state. People on political websites actually threaten to go around to peoples houses with iron bars and bash them. People do things like publish private emails online from people and take screenshots and upload them. there are name and shame website where the dirt from peoples private lives is reveiled. Insult is the usual means of communication. Nearly every comment is liablious although there was the first procecution for internet liable here recently.

      The gardening website moderators would have known that I would never agree to those terms. The demand for my grovelling public statement was to get rid of me.

  22. greg draiss says:

    This is so cool………………….
    Scotts just let go Mark Alotta a long time Scotts employee. As well he was a good guy. I have known him for many years and found him to be one of the few at Scotts who could be approached.
    Arlotta was given the job of bringing independents back into the fold.

    However the Whitney Farms project was a joke.

    I just wish I could convince my company to dump Scotts

    the TROLL

  23. Ang says:

    First and foremost I’d be proud to be a citizen of a country that parted ways with GMO’s. It saddens me that it’s all about the money and not the health of people or the planet but it is what it is. I don’t believe in giving antibiotics for colds and I don’t believe in using heavy handed pesticide or pesticide ready crops to fight off weeds. The scientific data trickles out to the public in the US so slowly how Bt has been found in the blood of pregnant woman and their unborn children, if I’m not meant to eat it why is it being engineered into my food? Just this week more information on how super weeds and super bugs have caused the use of pesticides and herbicides to increase. Why don’t more people find it odd that the very people that are creating the GM products are also creating the chemicals to kill said super bugs and weeds? Oh and not to over look the rats and the tumors that were big enough news to cause Russia to say thanks but no thanks. When I go grocery shopping I actually believe it or not, read the labels. If it doesn’t say organic I don’t buy it. If it has corn or one of the million corn or soybean derived products I don’t buy it. Why I shouldn’t be able to read a label and know for a fact that what I’m about to buy does or does not contain a GMO just baffles me. People don’t even know (and granted MANY don’t care) about what is actually in the products that they are putting into their bodies. I do, I want to know and it matters to me. It doesn’t have anything to do with feeding the rest of the world for me, it’s about feeding ME and MY FAMILY!

  • Follow Garden Rant

    Follow Me on Pinterest RSS