The Canvendish Banana

In February of this year Parliament voted on Bill C-474. This bill was of special interest to those who have investments in our agricultural industry. The bill was designed to ensure that the government take our sustainable development into account with the passing of each new bill.  It would force our politicians to take a look at the effects of GMOs on both our environment and our economy.



          At first glance, GMOs seem to be a step in right direction. They increase production of all sorts of agriculture and we find ourselves in a good place economically when we start to export all the surplus food. We run into problems when confronted with the concept of biodiversity. Genetically modified organisms are made to withstand environmental factors that natural plants cannot. They may be pest and pesticide resistant, or they may grow fatter and juicer than the natural version.  The problem is is that they are all the same! This is a direct threat to biodiversity, which is the principle that accounts for any thriving population. This means that if there is an unforeseen hazard, environmental or otherwise, that the modifiers didn’t think to prepare for, an entire population can go extinct in no time. This is because genetic diversity is what allows a certain percentage of a population to survive whatever disaster befalls it. By surviving and reproducing it sends the gene along, building a natural resistance while maintaining some diversity.



A Banana Tree



          This is happening right before our eyes in the case of the Cavendish Banana. Did you know there are over 1000 varieties of banana? The Cavendish variety accounts for 95% of global banana trade because we’ve decided we like the taste of them best.  We didn’t always, but our number 1 pick has already gone extinct! It was infected with a virus called the Panama virus, the very virus that is now starting to infect our beloved Cavendish banana. Some experts believe the Cavendish will be gone within 10 years. Contributing to the problem are those who farm GMOs. The GMOs cannot yet be made resistant so an entire farm can be gone in one fell swoop. You may think these farmers are just getting a healthy dose of karma, when in reality this has become their only viable option. GMOs are designed by humans to be better than natural, organically grown bananas, so if a farmer wants to sell any bananas, they better be growing something that can compete in a market economy.



Cartoon from BreakTheMatrix.com



          GMOs are just another issue our modern world is facing. I think that when analyzing the issue we need to know something about the people supplying GMOs to the farmers. There’s one corporation who acts as the poster child for various biotech giants that supply farmers all over the world with GMOs. You may have heard the name Monsanto before. There’s a wonderful documentary on the company that can be seen here. If you don’t have time right now for a full-length movie then here’s a summary.  The basic story is that they have a monopoly on the world's soybean inustry and they are ruining oppertunities for farmers across the globe. Yet another fascinating view into the world of agriculture can be seen in the movie Food Inc. It will make you think twice about the food you consume on a regular basis. I wish I could say more about the corporations but the issue is so vast and very complicated so instead I will encourage you to do your own research and take a look at the resources I’ve supplied.

Corporate Influence on the Media Industry

          The media is unquestionably a driving force in our society. It influences our culture and our attitudes. But who influences the media? This blog will focus on mainstream media and corporate media. Through the internet we are exposed to all sorts of media from independent sources and otherwise, but our society as a whole cannot escape the multinational companies who feed us information every day.

          I found a very interesting website that explains all the connections that can be made between corporations. You can see their associates and even who donated what to whose political campaign. It shows very simply the way that our news and entertainment are intertwined with our governing body.  Here is a video that talks about the disconnect between public opinion and leaders and what the media has to do with it.

          When very rich and well-invested people own our media, the ideas portrayed in our media are ripe with ulterior motives. I’m not saying that the evening news is full of subliminal messages. I’m just saying that we need to remember who is in charge and what their interests are. These are very powerful people and they didn’t get where they are by relinquishing control of their circumstances. Manipulation is their job. If it is in their best interest for one political candidate wins the election, they will do everything in their power to make it happen. It is most certainly a threat to the democratic process but if you can take a step back and be critical of the information you hear you are reducing the threat. With the internet it’s easy to do some research and look at a great variety of sources. Most of these will be bias but if you learn to be properly critical and seek out differing opinions you can usually find a good overview of the issue.

          Recently we have seen a new type of media that has emerged. Spearheaded by Wikileaks, this radical transparency movement has spurred debate about the ethics of journalism. We have to decide how transparent we expect our governments to be. How far should media go to expose their misconduct? In an ideal world they would have nothing to hide. Unfortunately that is not the case. Maybe if they will clean up their act if they are being watched, maybe not. What happens then? Who’s going to pay for the damage to foreign relations? Hint: probably not the rich CEOs. This issue has roots in the Watergate scandal where the people had to decide how much they would let their leaders could get away with.  It causes us to analyze what we hear and take the time to think about the power of information. Through the release of these top-secret documents we are witnessing first hand the influence media can have on politics and foreign policy.

Cartoon from "Farther Off
The Wall" Blog

        Already the leaks have resulted in diplomats having to leave their positions. This is minor when you look at the potential these documents have to change how countries interact with each other. The leaks can be good and bad. On the one hand, it can make the people hungry for positive change. On the other, governmental organizations may stigmatized and can no longer do their jobs effectively. Critics of the organization believe that Wikileaks is doing the world great disservice by compromising national security with no real reason to do so. They have not actually uncovered anything that is cause for reform. I think most people who are on board with Wikileaks just like the idea of transparency, and are reluctant to admit that some things are classified for a reason.

             It’s unfortunate that the majority of our news is controlled but we can always be thankful for the internet and the human ability to think critically. Corporations have a large influence on all aspects of our lives but we shouldn’t sit by and take it all in without questioning. We have to be responsible consumers of information as well as products. In an ideal world we won’t have to seek out the truth but for now that’s where we stand. Transparency is something to work towards and will only work properly with cooperation from all parties.

The Issues of Exporting Generic Drugs

Pharmaceutical Companies are often considered "Public Enemy #1" by those who view themselves as advocates for corporate ethics.  They have often been accused of gross misconduct and violations of the trust that so many people put in them. When you pay for a drug manufactured by a brand name drug company, most of what you are paying for goes to supposed research and development rather than the actual manufacturing. This money allows drug companies to fund new research projects that will theoretically improve our health later. We put our trust in these companies when we pay for the brand name drug. Many critics accuse the industry of using this money for less honourable purposes, such as marketing. The way drugs are marketed is thought to increase prescription drug addiction and understate the adverse side effects of many of these drugs.




Cartoon from CartoonStock.com

  All these allegations can make the average consumer nervous. After all, our health lies in the hands of these profit driven corporations, but never fear, generic drug companies are here! Generic drug companies run their business by selling drugs at a significantly reduced price, allowing consumers to choose whether or not they want to contribute to "research and development". Generic drug companies sell the very same drug at a lower cost by waiting until the patent runs out on the pharmaceutical and then beginning the manufacturing process. Often drug plans will only cover the generic type of the drug, simply because it's more cost efficient.

The solution to our woes seems simple enough, support the generic drug companies! The only problem is is that they really don't come up with anything new. Universities often do testing and research on drugs, so you could say that we pay for this with our taxes. But the big drug companies really do make significant advancements in the field of medicine. So we have a choice to make. This choice is easy enough to make on a small scale, just put some balance in your shopping bag.





Anti-Retroviral Drugs

  

We encounter great controversy when we arrive at the issue of which drugs our country should be exporting to developing countries. The specific drug that is at the heart of this issue is Anti-Retroviral Drugs, or ARV drugs, used to treat HIV/AIDS. You can find out more about them here. The big drug companies are maintaining that exporting the generic forms of these drugs is a violation of their rights as patent holders. It also decreases the ability of the big companies to do any research at all. That's a fair argument to make, but this has repercussions beyond the cancellation of the CEO's vacation plans. It has become a humanitarian issue .

Countries being devastated by HIV/AIDS are in no position to pay for the original ARV drugs. If we were to start exporting generic drugs the countries would have a chance to supply their people with these drugs and allow them to live longer, more productive lives. The results could be so uplifting that many countries of Sub-Saharan Africa would need a lot less of our aid  and money in the future. The economies in these countries would experience a much needed boost. They would have more people ready to work and a smaller dependency load. The current trend is an increase in the number of those orphaned by AIDS. If that trend could be reversed there would be undeniable benefits for these countries.

So why aren’t we rushing to help? It’s because the pharmaceutical corporations are legally obligated to keep their focus on making a profit. And these companies simply cannot be ignored by the government, they are a significant influence on the economy of our country. If we don’t support the big companies they won’t take a hint and change their ways. They just won’t do research and development at all. We also have to face the fact that another surge in population could make the goods we consume so rapidly more expensive, and result in a decrease in our standard of living over here in the developed world.
Familiarize yourself with the prevalence of AIDS with the image below.




Map supplied by the UNAIDS Organization. The darker the colour the
higher the concentration of people with HIV/AIDS

 

In March 2011 Canada passed Bill C-393, making it easier to export these drugs in their generic form. Many people were thrilled because it means thousands of lives saved that would have otherwise been lost. Only as long as generic companies like Apotex follow through on their promises to actually export these drugs. We will have to wait and see what kind of repercussions this bill will have on our country and our world.