I think the GM seeds are all hybrid. I buy only open pollinated seeds for my annuals and veggies, and I save the seeds every year.

Some of the places I've bought seed from recently are:

https://organicseedpeople.com/shop/

http://www.cherrygal.com/

http://sweetcornorganicnursery.com/store/categories/Corn-Seeds/

As far as purchasing vegetables at the supermarket, I buy as much organic (and thus non-GM) produce as possible. I hate Monsanto and won't allow anything containing their high fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeteners into my kitchen. It's bad for you!

I'm glad spedigrees mentioned Monsanto. I'm not a fan. There is so much GM out there now, especially corn and soy. We try to buy almost all organic as well.

This is on the FAQ section of the World Health Organization website. There is a lot of info available about GM-seeds, but I thought this was interesting:

"Q18. Why are certain groups concerned about the growing influence of the chemical industry on agriculture?

Certain groups are concerned about what they consider to be an undesirable level of control of seed markets by a few chemical companies. Sustainable agriculture and biodiversity benefit most from the use of a rich variety of crops, both in terms of good crop protection practices as well as from the perspective of society at large and the values attached to food. These groups fear that as a result of the interest of the chemical industry in seed markets, the range of varieties used by farmers may be reduced mainly to GM crops. This would impact on the food basket of a society as well as in the long run on crop protection (for example, with the development of resistance against insect pests and tolerance of certain herbicides). The exclusive use of herbicide-tolerant GM crops would also make the farmer dependent on these chemicals. These groups fear a dominant position of the chemical industry in agricultural development, a trend which they do not consider to be sustainable."

Somehow I preferred when the local farmers were taking care of business. Now it is being handed over to a chemical company. Blech.

Ooh, don't get me started on Monsanto. I'll get kicked off the forum.

But that aside, don't get confused between hybrid plants/seed and genetically modified. There is a big difference.

I believe - and I may be wrong and please, if I am, someone correct me - but I believe that as far as flowers, there are no genetically modified seeds on the market, at least not for home gardeners. The same may hold true for vegetables, but I'm not as sure on that. I think the plants that have been genetically modified are the big cash crops - corn, canola, cotton, soybeans, sugar beets, perhaps rice. There was a GM tomato, (FlavrSaver or something like that) but it was a commerical failure and I'm not sure if it is still sold, either to farmers or to home gardeners.

Dee

Well, a quick google search showed that I missed a few. Seems alfalfa, papaya, sugar cane, and some squash and peppers are now GM also. See the link below for a chart on wikipedia.

Nasty stuff....

Dee

Here is a link that might be useful: GM foods

At the end of the article in Mother Earth News, April/May 2012, there is a reference for the Council for Responsible Genetics that, when the website is pulled up, provides a .pdf file of all certified NON-GMO seed companies. It is listed below. Burpee did post a public letter online from its CEO that it, as a privately held company, did not participate in the sale of genetically modified seeds.

For those who have seen the documentary, Food,Inc., there is little dispute about 'the company-that-shall-not-be-named' and it's dastardly doings. But for those of us who want pure and simple, this is a good list of vendors from which to buy and feel safe.

Kindly,
Jane

Here is a link that might be useful: Council for Responsible Genetics.org

OK, someone explain this to me in a way that makes sense. If we breed two different species of the same genus we get a cultivar. Isn't that genetic modification? We've been doing this for centuries. AFAIK, there is no evidence that any GM food is any different than any other hybrid. Does anyone have any evidence that any of this stuff is bad for you? I don't like Monsanto any better than anyone else. But the sources for this info seem to be less than scientific. Mother Earth News? Good grief.

Steve

Steve: "Does anyone have any evidence that any of this stuff is bad for you?" Most libraries have a copy of the film 'Food, Inc.' Borrow it if you are interested in seeing more. Also, view the difference in the orange and green noted countries in the Scientific American article listed below. Only North America does not require GMO food labeling when the the majority of the rest of the industrialized world does require it.

Genetically modifying seeds in a lab is not the same as creating a cultivar. The GM seeds have lab-induced pesticides, bacteria, and specific viruses to combat natural elements in a field which, in turn, is now creating super viruses, bugs now pesticide resistant, the killing of good bugs,et cetera. If you are truly interested, there are a number of resources available online, such as the NY Times list of sources referenced here:
"http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/g/genetically_modified_food/index.html"

The lack of university papers on this subject ought to be appalling. There are too many unanswered questions about GMOs which is why annie in nh is wise to ask the question.

Here is a link that might be useful: Scientific American, Oct. 14, 2011

The Times link didn't work, but I read the SA article. It didn't tell me anything I didn't know. I'm not interested in propaganda from either side of this. I want to see science or facts. Some source with a .edu would be helpful.

Here's what I think. GM is technology. The shrill outcry against GM seed is an anti-technology rant. Technology in and of itself is not bad, but the uses to which it can be put are sometimes bad.

Here's my example. Let's say a hybridizer set out to hybridize corn that was resistant to corn borer. After many generations of hybridizing (likely a lifetime of work) this hybridizer produced a cultivar that was resistant. Would we reject this work as being a Genetically Modified monster? Likely not. Would the corn be safe to eat? We wouldn't know until it was tried. (Hopefully, it would first be tried on voles.)

Now let's say a scientist who works for the evil company Monsanto, takes some genetic material from Bt (a naturally occurring bacterium) and in a lab dish combines it with sweet corn to produce a GM hybrid that is resistant to corn borer. Is it a monster? Probably not. Is it safe to eat. We wouldn't know until it was tried (voles first). Unless you are a corn borer, it's probably fine to eat this stuff.

To me it's the same process, only sped up and made much more efficient. Not everything that happens in a lab dish is bad. Invitro fertilization happens all the time and doesn't produce monsters. Yet some people wring their hands about that.

Now, let's say some other evil scientists at Monsanto create a form of soybean that is resistant to glyphosate. Of course they sell Roundup so now they can sell both seed and synthetic herbicides to farmers so they can weed by spraying. This is very bad because 1. they are putting a lot of synthetic chemicals into the watershed near those farms, and 2. eventually the weeds around those fields will become resistant to glyphosate making it less useful as an herbicide when it is used properly.

So it's not the technology that is bad in and of itself. It's the uses to which it is put that can be either helpful or harmful to society in general. That's my point. Sorry to be so long winded.

Steve

Steve, good for you for having the sense to admit that we don't even know what we don't know. Good point about technology. Too many people nowadays run screaming that the sky is falling, out of ignorance or irrational fear. They have allowed Hollywood and the media to influence them, replacing the ability to think for themselves with hysteria. Denis Leary, crass as he may be, just wrote a second book about how dumbed down and hyperemotional the average Amercian has become, thanks to our school systems, and lax parenting skills. Mother Earth News is not exactly a bastion of scientific thought or impartial credible research.

I've seen Food, Inc a few times, and it is sobering. One of the messages in it that seems to be ignored by the biased all natural crowd is that open pollinated crops can easily be pollinated by GM crops, in the next field, or a mile away, so it is basically impossible to state that all open pollinated crops are completely free of GM traits unless they were grown in strict isolation, such as in a greenhouse. Companies which don't tell you that are being just as deceitful as the big corporations. They just aren't intentionally or knowingly selling GM seeds. Our judicial system is just as much a failure as our education system for allowing the ruling which held an open pollinated farmer liable for breach of copyright by planting his seeds which were infected by GM crops from the next field, through absolutely no fault or intent of his own.

BTW, crossing two different species creates a hybrid, not necessarily a cultivar, but it may eventually be propagated as such. A cultivar may also be created by crossing cultivars of the same species and genus, or it may occur on it's own as a natural mutation. And, no, a mutated organism is not something sinister, despite how science fiction uses the term. All hybrids may be developed into, or considered to be cultivars, but not all cultivars are hybrids.

Thanks, Dee for that list. I was glad to see Comstock,Ferre on it. That's a marvelous place but the last time I was there a few years ago, they were 'closing'. I'm glad it's been rescued because I like to support a company that's been around for 200 years.

Molie

I am somewhat cynical about this subject. You can't address corporate control of agriculture without addressing one of the fundamental problems facing humanity - how on earth are we going to feed all the people on this planet, with an exploding population and diminishing resources? Especially when when the US economy is based on growth, and people show little restraint, either on the producer or consumer side, about our use of natural resources.

What we consider "food" and how big AG produces it is probably only going to get weirder.