Editing Monsanto (section)

==== Bovine somatotropin ====
{{Main|Bovine somatotropin}}

Monsanto developed and sold [[Recombinant DNA|recombinant]] [[bovine somatotropin]] (also known as [[Bovine somatotropin|rBST]] and [[rBGH]]), a synthetic [[hormone]] that increases milk production by 11–16% when injected into cows.<ref>{{Cite journal 
| last1 = Dohoo | first1 = I. R. 
| last2 = Leslie | first2 = K. 
| last3 = Descôteaux | first3 = L. 
| last4 = Fredeen | first4 = A. 
| last5 = Dowling | first5 = P. 
| last6 = Preston | first6 = A. 
| last7 = Shewfelt | first7 = W. 
| title = A meta-analysis review of the effects of recombinant bovine somatotropin. 1. Methodology and effects on production 
| journal = Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 
| volume = 67 
| issue = 4 
| pages = 241–251 
| year = 2003 
| pmid = 14620860 
| pmc = 280708
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal 
| last1 = Dohoo | first1 = I. R. 
| last2 = Descôteaux | first2 = L. 
| last3 = Leslie | first3 = K. 
| last4 = Fredeen | first4 = A. 
| last5 = Shewfelt | first5 = W. 
| last6 = Preston | first6 = A. 
| last7 = Dowling | first7 = P. 
| title = A meta-analysis review of the effects of recombinant bovine somatotropin. 2. Effects on animal health, reproductive performance, and culling 
| journal = Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 
| volume = 67 
| issue = 4 
| pages = 252–264 
| year = 2003 
| pmid = 14620861 
| pmc = 280709
}}</ref> In October 2008, Monsanto sold this business to [[Eli Lilly and Company|Eli Lilly]] for $300 million plus additional considerations.<ref name="urlEli Lilly to Buy Monsanto's Dairy Cow Hormone for $300 million - DealBook Blog - NYTimes.com">{{Cite news|url=http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/eli-lilly-to-buy-monsantos-dairy-cow-hormone-for-300-million/ |title=Eli Lilly to Buy Monsanto's Dairy Cow Hormone for $300 million – DealBook Blog |work=The New York Times| date=August 20, 2008}}</ref>

The use of rBST remains controversial with respect to its effects on cows and their milk.<ref name=Dobs>Dobson, William D. (June 1996) [http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap397.pdf The BST Case] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200921122744/https://aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap397.pdf/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060209122114/http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap397.pdf |archive-date=2006-02-09 |url-status=live |date=September 21, 2020 }}. University of Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Staff Paper Series No. 397</ref>

In some markets, milk from cows that are not treated with rBST is sold with labels indicating that it is rBST-free: this milk has proved popular with consumers.<ref name = "nytimes milk label">[https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/business/09feed.html Fighting on a Battlefield the Size of a Milk Label], ''[[The New York Times]]'', March 9, 2008</ref> In reaction to this, in early 2008 a pro-rBST advocacy group called "American Farmers for the Advancement and Conservation of Technology" (AFACT),<ref>{{cite web|url=http://itisafact.org/ |title=AFACT: American Farmers for the Advancement and Conservation of Technology |publisher=Itisafact.org }}</ref> made up of dairies and originally affiliated with Monsanto, formed and began lobbying to ban such labels. AFACT stated that "absence" labels can be misleading and imply that milk from cows treated with rBST is inferior.<ref name = "nytimes milk label" />