Is Monsanto's advertising of solving world hunger by helping third world farmers an act of humanity or personal gain? Monsanto claims to decrease hunger and malnutrition in the third world by selling GMO crops that increase financial results by increasing quality and reducing costs through tolerance to herbicides, drought and insects, genetically modified specifically for the particular conditions of certain areas . However, pesticide resistance and adaptation of pests and weeds, coupled with the financial conditions of farmers, make Monsanto not a long-term third world improver, but rather a business that creates influence and income for all the costs. First, Montano increases the disposal of GMO crops by leveraging farmers' uneducated status, resulting in confusion between genetically modified and traditional selective breeding technology. A study into the potential modification of GMO crops such as Bt MON810 maize by smallholder farmers in Nigeria and Ghana has highlighted the extreme unawareness of the possible health risks and environmental risk that GMO crops may pose. Most farmers were primarily interested in the proclaimed increased yields, insect tolerance, nutritional composition and shorter growth cycle. They confused the term genetically modified with traditional selective breeding, as the study showed, that most farmers did not know or understand the term GM since “Only 6 out of 54 (…) said they had already heard of the technology GM.” (Adenle, Alhassan, & Solomon, 2014, p. 249) since most of the knowledge is found in traditional plant breeding biotechnology, as shown in Figure 1 of the same study. This lack of education is due to the absence of primary school... half of the paper... in the next few years. Furthermore, this gene could also be transmitted to wild plants, which would lead to a loss of diversity. The environmental and financial risk associated with the production of terminator seeds is too high to be ethically correct. The power to regulate the world's food/seed supply with this feature could be used as a weapon for economic or political extortion, since food is essential to the lives of humans, making the use of this feature morally wrong . To conclude, Monsanto uses advertising to help third world countries develop better incomes and advertise better nutritional values ​​and pest resistance, but on an objective level, the monopoly built through these GMO crops only benefits Monsanto itself. The polypoly recommendation, to create competition, would increase the possibilities of helping third world farmers, as well as rotational farming.