Monsanto Food Politics

1776 Words 8 Pages
An infamous agribusiness named Monsanto, which is best known for their agricultural biotechnology Genetically Modified (GMO) foods, works on grounds of dubiousness and dishonesty, but they were still able to earn the seal of approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Given the responsibility of testing, Monsanto continued to report the safety of its own GMO foods as being “well.” However, a Monsanto study done on rats that had eaten the GMO food source began growing tumors the size of a golf ball after six months proving that their foods are not safe. Yet, the FDA still allows agricultural industries like Monsanto to be open for business; rather than focusing on the health of Americans the FDA has allowed powerful agribusiness to distort …show more content…
The FDA has allowed powerful agribusinesses to change the mental concepts of healthy eating just to earn substantial sums of money. The agroindustry’s “food politics” taps into the subconscious of the U.S. consumer by way of advertising to boost the consumption of particular products. To clarify, “food politics” refers to the political aspects of the production, control, regulation, inspection, distribution and consumption of food. Marion Nestle, who is the Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University and Ted Wilson who is the leader of the Seventh Day Adventist World Church, has shed light on what food politics is and how it affects American health. Collectively, Nestle and Wilson stated in Food Industry and Political Influences on American Nutrition that “In 1999 direct media spending (advertising going through agencies) by McDonalds, Burger King, Taco Bell, Coke and Diet Coke was $627, $404, $207, and $147 million respectively” (2012). Familiar brands well known by the US consumer have been advertising food …show more content…
They create a “front group” labeled by the Center for Food and Safety, who wrote The Best Public Relations That Money Can Buy, which states these front groups are created to hide a company’s true agenda and to manipulate the FDA by using tools of propaganda and misinformation. The Center for Food and Safety says some tactics include “Astroturfing” to pretend your group represents the “little guy” usually the farmers, small business owners, and consumers, they use this idea to trick the public into thinking that they are on their side. They will use the the technique entitled “Shooting the Messenger” to discredit critics often by mocking, often calling them names like “food police” and “extremists”. The other techniques include “Buying Science”, which means to fund research hiring scientific experts as spokespeople, “placing science stories in media, all without disclosing the conflict of interest” and “Scaremongering”, which means praying on people’s fears “especially related to the economy” for example saying a policy will result will result in higher food prices or job losses. A powerful example of a front group attempting to control the public dialogue on agriculture is the U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance (USFRA). In 2010, the New York Times described them as a company made up by

Related Documents