(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) More than 40 countries, including China, require the labeling of
genetically modified foods, but the U.S. is not one of them. Almost the
entire U.S. soy (94 percent) and corn (72 percent) crop is now GMO. The
only way to avoid these crops is to buy certified organic. Recent polls
show 90 percent of Americans want GMO labeling, yet the big food
corporations are still not required to label. Americans believe strongly
in their right to know what's in their food, yet we still don't have
any laws about it. Why?
The politicians that started it all
The
U.S. continues to adhere to a decades old policy regarding GMO
food-labeling. Twenty years ago then-Vice President Dan Quayle required
no new laws for genetically engineered foods, under the persuasion that
genetic engineering is no different than traditional plant breeding.
From Dan Quayle's policy speech regarding America's stance on GMOs:
"The
U.S. is already the world leader in biotechnology and we want to keep
it that way. In 1991 alone, it was a 4 billion dollar industry; it
should reach at least 50 billion dollars by the year 2000, as long as we
resist the spread of unnecessary regulation."
Quayle isn't the
only one to blame. Unbelievably the policy was written by a former
Monsanto lawyer named Michael Taylor, who served as the FDA deputy
commissioner of policy under the Bush administration. Incredibly, again
in 2009 the Obama administration elected Taylor as the deputy
commissioner of foods, where he presently supervises food safety policy
for the federal government.
Thanks to government corruption and
politicians like Quayle and Taylor, the U.S. is at odds with the rest
world and its own people on an issue that is so crucial.
The corporate anti-labeling team
As
the November ballot approaches the pro-GMO corporations are preparing
to launch a massive PR campaign designed to scare California voters into
voting against the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food
Act.
It is estimated that they will spend between 60 and 100
million dollars in an attempt to convince California voters that GMOs
are perfectly safe. They'll also try to scare voters into the belief
that labeling will make food more costly, that it will spark hundreds of
lawsuits against small farmers and small businesses, and that it will
contribute to world hunger.
The Coalition Against Costly Food
Labeling Proposition (CACFLP) runs a website called
StopCostlyFoodLabeling.com, giving the impression that this is a group
concerned about protecting consumers and their wallets. They refer to
the Right to Know GMO Foods Act solely as "The Costly Food Labeling
Proposition" and make unsubstantiated claims on their website including:
The
initiative would "Ban the sale of tens of thousands of common,
perfectly safe grocery products in California unless they are specially
repackaged and relabeled just for our state" and "Create a whole new
category of frivolous and costly lawsuits that will cost consumers and
taxpayers."
The movement
Pamm Larry started the
GMO labeling movement in California by simply gathering signatures for a
petition. She didn't have any corporate funding or big business
connections, she was simply a woman with a clipboard who believed in a
cause. That petition gathered nearly a million signatures (nearly double
the 504,760 signatures needed under the state's proposition rules) and
will therefore be placed on the California ballot this November. Now
California's voters will finally have the chance to be heard, as they
will vote to pass into law a bill that would require the labeling of all
foods containing ingredients from genetically modified crops.
California is just the beginning
California
is a trend setting state that represents a big piece of the food
market. Food labeling laws that start in California will undoubtedly
spread like wildfire. As for the food corporations, it's going to be
more costly for them to have separate packaging for California, so they
will put up the biggest fight in the beginning and thus this will be the
biggest win for the people.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.motherjones.com
http://agroinnovations.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com
http://www.labelgmos.org/
http://justlabelit.org/
http://www.alternet.org
About the author:
John Mckiernan is a health and fitness writer. He is the owner of Supplement Helper where he writes about supplements, health, fitness and more. He also manages CNA Info,
a small blog that is aimed at answering questions for those interested
in becoming nursing assistants. All articles are contributed by Fallon C
Clark, California registered CNA.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Take action to support 'Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act'
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) Every year for at least the last decade, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Oh.) has stood up for health freedom by introducing the Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act before the U.S. Congress, only to witness it later die in committee. And once again, Rep. Kucinich has introduced the bill in the current congressional session, this time as H.R. 3553, with 21 co-sponsors thus far -- and your help is needed to finally get this legislation acknowledged and passed into law.
More Americans than ever are waking up to the presence of genetically-modified organisms (GMO) in the foods they eat, which means momentum is strong to pass legislation at the national level requiring their proper labeling. After all, more than 90 percent of individuals polled in numerous surveys have indicated that labeling GMOs is essential in a free society (http://www.naturalnews.com/031569_GMO_GMOs_food.html).
But as it stands, the federal government is stonewalling all efforts, both public and private, to implement food transparency. It also continues to ignore all independent science on the matter, which shows conclusively that GMOs are not the same as natural foods, and that they are responsible for causing a host of illnesses in humans, and colossal environmental damage (http://www.naturalnews.com/GMO.html).
"Gen-M, 'Generation Monsanto,' the first generation of humans force-fed genetically modified foods, hasn't reached reproductive age yet (they were born in the late 1990s)," says a new Organic Consumers Association (OCA) Action Alert. "But, if a critical mass of animal feeding studies are any indication, the millennial generation, reared on Food Inc.'s unlabeled 'Frankenfoods' can look forward to a long-term epidemic of cancer, food allergies, sterility, learning disabilities, and birth defects."
You can access this important Action Alert where you can contact your Congressmen about GMO labeling here:
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=58123521
In California (http://www.naturalnews.com), Washington (http://www.naturalnews.com), and about a dozen other states there are currently efforts underway to pass GMO labeling laws statewide, which is a great start. But the federal government, controlled largely by pharmaceutical and biotechnology interests, refuses to require mandatory labeling, let alone require proper safety testing for GMOs before approving them.
But the issue is not going away anytime soon, and eventually a critical mass of awareness about GMOs and the immense damage they are causing to humans and the environment will spur a political and agricultural revolution. So our elected officials had better listen up now and take action before the people decide to take action for them.
Be sure to ask your representatives to cosponsor H.R. 3553:
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=58123521
You can view H.R. 3553 at:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3553/show
More Americans than ever are waking up to the presence of genetically-modified organisms (GMO) in the foods they eat, which means momentum is strong to pass legislation at the national level requiring their proper labeling. After all, more than 90 percent of individuals polled in numerous surveys have indicated that labeling GMOs is essential in a free society (http://www.naturalnews.com/031569_GMO_GMOs_food.html).
But as it stands, the federal government is stonewalling all efforts, both public and private, to implement food transparency. It also continues to ignore all independent science on the matter, which shows conclusively that GMOs are not the same as natural foods, and that they are responsible for causing a host of illnesses in humans, and colossal environmental damage (http://www.naturalnews.com/GMO.html).
"Gen-M, 'Generation Monsanto,' the first generation of humans force-fed genetically modified foods, hasn't reached reproductive age yet (they were born in the late 1990s)," says a new Organic Consumers Association (OCA) Action Alert. "But, if a critical mass of animal feeding studies are any indication, the millennial generation, reared on Food Inc.'s unlabeled 'Frankenfoods' can look forward to a long-term epidemic of cancer, food allergies, sterility, learning disabilities, and birth defects."
You can access this important Action Alert where you can contact your Congressmen about GMO labeling here:
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=58123521
In California (http://www.naturalnews.com), Washington (http://www.naturalnews.com), and about a dozen other states there are currently efforts underway to pass GMO labeling laws statewide, which is a great start. But the federal government, controlled largely by pharmaceutical and biotechnology interests, refuses to require mandatory labeling, let alone require proper safety testing for GMOs before approving them.
But the issue is not going away anytime soon, and eventually a critical mass of awareness about GMOs and the immense damage they are causing to humans and the environment will spur a political and agricultural revolution. So our elected officials had better listen up now and take action before the people decide to take action for them.
Be sure to ask your representatives to cosponsor H.R. 3553:
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=58123521
You can view H.R. 3553 at:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3553/show
Monday, March 26, 2012
Protesters successfully shut down California Monsanto office
(gmo-news.blogspot.com) A recent two-day protest in Northern California against genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) led to the complete shutdown of a Monsanto corporate office for an entire day, according to reports. On Friday, March 16, 2012, activists affiliated with the Global Days of Action to Shut Down Monsanto began rallying in front of the Davis, Calif., office of Monsanto, where they held up banners, gave speeches, and set up tents in front of the Monsanto building on Fifth Street, which caused the biotech giant to shutter its operations.
"In the course of the two-day event, activists held up signs, gave speeches to inform and inspire each other and solidify the movement, drafted a resolution about Monsanto with many proposed solutions to be presented to the California legislature, celebrated each other and went "freeway blogging" - displaying a large hand made banner that said, "Shut Down Monsanto" on the Pole Line Road overpass over I-80," writes Mark Graham of Food Freedom. "Thousands of drivers were shown this message."
Sponsored by The Anti-Monsanto Project, the Peace & Freedom Party, and various chapters of the Occupy movement from around Northern California, the weekend rally in Davis serves as a template for activists in other cities to follow. All it took to shut down Monsanto, after all, was a few dozen people standing in front of the building -- imagine what hundreds, or even thousands, of activists could together accomplish?
Awareness about GMOs and the fact that they continue to remain unlabeled in the American food supply is becoming a forefront issue in the public spotlight. And evidence of this is being fleshed out in California, Connecticut, Washington and nearly a dozen other states where mandatory GMO labeling laws have been proposed or are currently making their way through the legislative process.
The truth about the dangers and ineffectiveness of GMOs, as well as the extreme toxicity of Roundup (glyphosate) and the other chemical pesticides and herbicides used on GMOs, are also gaining national attention. A recent study published in the Journal of Toxicology in Vitro, for instance, revealed that even very low levels of Roundup destroy testosterone and lead to male infertility (http://www.naturalnews.com/035135_Roundup_herbicide_testosterone.html).
In 2009, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) concluded that GMOs "pose a serious health risk," and called for an immediate moratorium on their cultivation and use in food. Credible scientific studies continue to show that consumption of GMOs is linked to organ damage, gastrointestinal disorders, autoimmune illnesses, and infertility. GMOs also do not perform any better than natural or hybrid crops.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/gmo-wars/content?oid=5513229
http://naturalsociety.com
http://foodfreedomgroup.com/2012/03/21/davis-shuts-monsanto-down/
"In the course of the two-day event, activists held up signs, gave speeches to inform and inspire each other and solidify the movement, drafted a resolution about Monsanto with many proposed solutions to be presented to the California legislature, celebrated each other and went "freeway blogging" - displaying a large hand made banner that said, "Shut Down Monsanto" on the Pole Line Road overpass over I-80," writes Mark Graham of Food Freedom. "Thousands of drivers were shown this message."
Sponsored by The Anti-Monsanto Project, the Peace & Freedom Party, and various chapters of the Occupy movement from around Northern California, the weekend rally in Davis serves as a template for activists in other cities to follow. All it took to shut down Monsanto, after all, was a few dozen people standing in front of the building -- imagine what hundreds, or even thousands, of activists could together accomplish?
Awareness about GMOs and the fact that they continue to remain unlabeled in the American food supply is becoming a forefront issue in the public spotlight. And evidence of this is being fleshed out in California, Connecticut, Washington and nearly a dozen other states where mandatory GMO labeling laws have been proposed or are currently making their way through the legislative process.
The truth about the dangers and ineffectiveness of GMOs, as well as the extreme toxicity of Roundup (glyphosate) and the other chemical pesticides and herbicides used on GMOs, are also gaining national attention. A recent study published in the Journal of Toxicology in Vitro, for instance, revealed that even very low levels of Roundup destroy testosterone and lead to male infertility (http://www.naturalnews.com/035135_Roundup_herbicide_testosterone.html).
In 2009, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) concluded that GMOs "pose a serious health risk," and called for an immediate moratorium on their cultivation and use in food. Credible scientific studies continue to show that consumption of GMOs is linked to organ damage, gastrointestinal disorders, autoimmune illnesses, and infertility. GMOs also do not perform any better than natural or hybrid crops.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/gmo-wars/content?oid=5513229
http://naturalsociety.com
http://foodfreedomgroup.com/2012/03/21/davis-shuts-monsanto-down/
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Monsanto ‘Biotechnology Book for Kids’ Caught Brainwashing Children
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) Facing direct opposition from the public, biotechnology giants like Monsanto and Dow are now making a disturbing attempt to brainwash developing minds into accepting their genetically modified foods using blatant lies and propaganda. In a last ditch effort to potentially sway public opinion, the Council for Biotechnology Information (CBI) has launched the “Biotechnology Basics Activity Book” for kids. With the intent to be used by ‘agriculture and science teachers’, the activity book spreads absurd lies about GMO crops — even going as far as to say that they ‘improve our health’ and ‘help the environment’.
The book can be seen on the organization’s website, and makes it extremely apparent that it is full of misinformation and propaganda that completely ignores scientific research surrounding genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In fact, let’s examine some claims made by this book that serves as an ‘educational’ tool to be used by teachers. The first claim by the activity book is that genetically modified seeds actually grow more food than traditional seeds, and is followed by even more ridiculous statements. The activity book reads:
“Hi Kids! Welcome to the Biotechnology Basics Activity Book. This is an activity book for young people like you about biotechnology — a really neat topic…. You will see that biotechnology is being used to figure out how to: 1) grow more food; 2) help the environment; and 3) grow more nutritious food that improves our health. As you work through the puzzles in this book, you will learn more about biotechnology and all of the wonderful ways it can help people live better lives in a healthier world. Have fun!”
Disproving Monsanto’s Propaganda
According to 900 scientists, GMO crops actually do not grow more food than traditional farming practices. In fact, they are simply not an effective tool to fight starvation in any capacity, thanks to their excessive costs and immense failure to yield crops. Funded by the World Bank and United Nations, an organization was created known as the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Made up of 900 scientists and researchers, the group — whose mission was to examine the issue of world hunger — found that genetically modified crops were not a meaningful solution to the problem.
Instead, the group found that the genetically modified seeds were outperformed by traditional “agro-ecological” farming practices. Therefore, to say that biotech seeds and crops produce more food than traditional agriculture is not only scientifically incorrect according to these 900 scientists, but it is an outright lie.
Do GMOs ‘Improve Our Health’?
But what about the claim that GMOs improve our health? It turns out nothing could be farther from the truth. A prominent review of 19 studies examining the safety of GMO crops found that consumption of GMO corn or soybeans can lead to significant organ disruptions in rats and mice – particularly in the liver and kidneys. Of course the negative effects do not end there. Monsanto’s modified biopesticide, known as Bt, has been found to be killing human kidney cells in conjunction with Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup. That’s right, it exhibits direct toxicity to human cells.
Further adding to the long list of negative health consequences that go against the claim that the biotech inventions ‘improve our health’ , Monsanto’s Roundup ready crops have also been linked to mental illness, obesity, infertility, and DNA damage. Peer-reviewed research shows that Monsanto’s products are far from healthy, and to say that they actually improve our health is truly concerning when you consider the fact that children are reading this information as fact. The biotechnology organization also failed to mention how Monsanto has been caught running slave labor rings, forcing ‘employees’ into illegal working conditions in which they were forced to work 14 hours or more per day on the field. What’s more, the laborers were unable to leave the premises if they expected to ever receive their pay.
‘Helping the Environment’
The next claim that needs addressing is perhaps the most ludicrous of them all. Do Monsanto’s products really help the environment as the book claims? Remember, this is given to teachers as scientific information, not just presented as an opinion. Research has shown that Monsanto’s modified Bt pesticide is actually mutating the very genetic coding of insect life on the planet, creating super resistant ‘mutant’ bugs that are wreaking havoc on farms using Monsanto’s harmful concoctions across the globe. At least 8 populations of insects have developed some form of resistance, with 2 populations resistant to Bt sprays and at least 6 species resistant to Bt crops as a whole.
Perhaps most concerning is the mounting rootworm resistance as a result of Monsanto’s GMO corn usage. A group of 22 academic corn experts recently petitioned the EPA over the extreme danger presented by the crops, urging the EPA to take long awaited action. The experts sent a letter on March 5th to the agency explaining their worries regarding long-term corn production prospects in light of GMO crops failures. If nothing is done, experts worry that the future of agricultural stability is threatened. Experts are also concerned about the mass amount of ‘superweeds’ currently springing up around the globe as a result of Monsanto’s Roundup. These resistant weeds currently cover over 4.5 million hectares in the United States alone, though experts estimate the world-wide land coverage to have reached at least 120 million hectares by 2010. The onset of superweeds is being increasingly documented in Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Europe and South Africa.
The public is not buying the lies regarding Monsanto’s GMO crops, and as a result biotech giants are scrambling to preserve their dwindling role in our society. There is a serious war on for the minds of developing children right now, and it is being waged by government-approved mega corporations who care not for the health of these children but for profits. The claims made within this book are not only scientifically unfounded, but they are seriously dangerous to the health of children and adults alike. This phony book is far from an ‘educational’ resource.
This article first appeared at Natural Society
Anthony Gucciardi
Infowars.com
News from www.gmo-news.blogspot.com
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
USDA green-lights field trials of Monsanto drought-resistant corn after admitting it performs no better than natural corn
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) does not even pretend to legitimately evaluate genetically-modified organisms (GMO) before approving them anymore, having recently green-lighted approval for a new variety of "drought-resistant" GM corn produced by Monsanto that admittedly grows no better under drought conditions than natural varieties do.
According to the Washington Post, APHIS fast-tracked the corn, known as MON87460, without ever conducting an appropriate environmental risk analysis on the crop's efficacy, which includes determining whether or not the crop is even safe for humans or the environment. In fact, in accordance with the Obama Administration's new hands-off approach to regulating GMOs, APHIS decided to actually approve MON87460 even after a cursory evaluation of the data exposed it as a complete failure.
"The reduced yield [trait] does not exceed the natural variation observed in regionally-adapted varieties of conventional corn," wrote the USDA in an earlier report on the crop published last fall. "Equally comparable varieties produced through conventional breeding techniques are readily available in irrigated corn production regions" (http://www.naturalnews.com/032453_GM_corn_USDA.html).
MON87460 is the first GMO to be approved with resistance to drought, as opposed to a pesticide or herbicide. And even though many drought-adaptive varieties of natural or hybrid corn already exist, Monsanto is pushing MON87460 on farmers all across the Midwest, and primarily in the Western plains where drought conditions are still severe, with promises that it will translate into increased yields.
Based on its initial findings, however, as well as the fact that GM crops are known to contaminate nearby conventional and organic crops, APHIS should have wholly rejected MON87460 and told Monsanto to hit the road. Instead, thanks to embedded special interests throughout the USDA and the highest levels of the federal government, this former regulatory body has become nothing more than a bureaucratic rubber stamp for the biotechnology industry.
"[Bio]technology has been spectacularly unsuccessful at delivering complex traits such as drought tolerance, which involve multiple genes and complex interaction with the plant's environment," wrote Dr. Helen Wallace, director of GeneWatch U.K., in a piece last year on so-called drought-tolerant GM crops. "Meanwhile, conventional breeding and new techniques such as marker-assisted selection -- which uses knowledge of the plant's genome to inform breeding, without engineering the plant, have produced a long string of successes."
Sources for this article include:
http://www.washingtonpost.com
http://www.naturalnews.com/032453_GM_corn_USDA.html
http://myheirloomgarden.com
According to the Washington Post, APHIS fast-tracked the corn, known as MON87460, without ever conducting an appropriate environmental risk analysis on the crop's efficacy, which includes determining whether or not the crop is even safe for humans or the environment. In fact, in accordance with the Obama Administration's new hands-off approach to regulating GMOs, APHIS decided to actually approve MON87460 even after a cursory evaluation of the data exposed it as a complete failure.
"The reduced yield [trait] does not exceed the natural variation observed in regionally-adapted varieties of conventional corn," wrote the USDA in an earlier report on the crop published last fall. "Equally comparable varieties produced through conventional breeding techniques are readily available in irrigated corn production regions" (http://www.naturalnews.com/032453_GM_corn_USDA.html).
MON87460 is the first GMO to be approved with resistance to drought, as opposed to a pesticide or herbicide. And even though many drought-adaptive varieties of natural or hybrid corn already exist, Monsanto is pushing MON87460 on farmers all across the Midwest, and primarily in the Western plains where drought conditions are still severe, with promises that it will translate into increased yields.
Based on its initial findings, however, as well as the fact that GM crops are known to contaminate nearby conventional and organic crops, APHIS should have wholly rejected MON87460 and told Monsanto to hit the road. Instead, thanks to embedded special interests throughout the USDA and the highest levels of the federal government, this former regulatory body has become nothing more than a bureaucratic rubber stamp for the biotechnology industry.
"[Bio]technology has been spectacularly unsuccessful at delivering complex traits such as drought tolerance, which involve multiple genes and complex interaction with the plant's environment," wrote Dr. Helen Wallace, director of GeneWatch U.K., in a piece last year on so-called drought-tolerant GM crops. "Meanwhile, conventional breeding and new techniques such as marker-assisted selection -- which uses knowledge of the plant's genome to inform breeding, without engineering the plant, have produced a long string of successes."
Sources for this article include:
http://www.washingtonpost.com
http://www.naturalnews.com/032453_GM_corn_USDA.html
http://myheirloomgarden.com
Friday, March 16, 2012
Natural' foods are not organic, often contain GMOs and other toxins
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) The continued growth of the certified-organic products sector truly is revolutionizing the modern food system in many positive ways, and changing the way people view food and health. But along with this positive growth has come the not-so-positive growth of a highly-deceptive, unregulated "natural" products sector which churns out food and personal care products that are oftentimes loaded with toxic chemicals, genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), and many other distinctly conventional additives that health-conscious individuals are seeking to avoid.
Many NaturalNews readers will recall our story on the shocking breakfast cereal report released by the Cornucopia Institute last fall that exposed many popular "natural" breakfast cereals as containing GMOs, pesticide and herbicide residues, and other toxins (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html). Well, it turns out that the problem is not isolated to just breakfast cereals, as all sorts of "natural" products contain the same unwanted ingredients and additives as conventional products -- and yet these "natural" varieties are being sold to consumers at a premium as if they were something special.
To add insult to injury, many popular natural and organic retailers like Whole Foods Market continue to sell these GMO-laden, pesticide-contaminated "natural" products to unsuspecting customers who believe such products are healthier than their conventional counterparts. The truth is, many of these "natural" products are exactly the same as conventional products, but have simply been dressed up in "green" packaging to fool customers.
Sure, it has implemented the Non-GMO Project verification system for its 365 Everyday Value and 365 Organic product lines, which is commendable. But as stated in a recent blog response by customer inquiry specialist Libba Letton to criticism about the other brands its sells that may contain GMOs, Whole Foods Market denies that GMO labeling is effective, and instead insists that labeling non-GMO products is preferred (http://blog.wholefoodsmarket.com).
This reasoning, of course, appears to be in the best interests of Whole Foods Market's bottom line rather than in the interests of customers. And apart from any legal mandate, whether at the local, regional, or statewide level, Whole Foods Market and the others will likely never voluntarily label GMO-contaminated products.
Trader Joe's, another popular natural and organic retailer, states on its website that all private-label products in the store "are sourced from non-genetically modified ingredients," which is one step above Whole Foods Market. But Trader Joe's still sells many "natural" products that may contain pesticide residues and other conventional food-system additives and contaminants that health-conscious individuals intend to avoid when purchasing supposedly "natural" products.
Without a GMO labeling mandate that requires full-disclosure, and that prohibits "natural" products from containing GMOs, the phony "natural" products sector will only continue to flourish at the expense of the certified-organic products sector. This is why it is crucial to fight for mandatory GMO labeling requirements in every town, city, and state across the country to ensure our continued access to clean, truly-organic food and personal care products.
To learn more about how to fight the growth of imitation "natural" products and preserve the integrity of the certified-organics sector, visit:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24844.cfm
Many NaturalNews readers will recall our story on the shocking breakfast cereal report released by the Cornucopia Institute last fall that exposed many popular "natural" breakfast cereals as containing GMOs, pesticide and herbicide residues, and other toxins (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html). Well, it turns out that the problem is not isolated to just breakfast cereals, as all sorts of "natural" products contain the same unwanted ingredients and additives as conventional products -- and yet these "natural" varieties are being sold to consumers at a premium as if they were something special.
To add insult to injury, many popular natural and organic retailers like Whole Foods Market continue to sell these GMO-laden, pesticide-contaminated "natural" products to unsuspecting customers who believe such products are healthier than their conventional counterparts. The truth is, many of these "natural" products are exactly the same as conventional products, but have simply been dressed up in "green" packaging to fool customers.
Why mandatory GMO labeling is absolutely vital to preserve the future of organics
As we have pointed out on many prior occasions, Whole Foods Market has done much good in advancing the causes of local food systems and certified-organic food production. But one area where the company continues to fail as far as transparency is concerned is in the area of "natural" products -- Whole Foods Market refuses to voluntarily require full-disclosure of the GMO-laden products it sells.Sure, it has implemented the Non-GMO Project verification system for its 365 Everyday Value and 365 Organic product lines, which is commendable. But as stated in a recent blog response by customer inquiry specialist Libba Letton to criticism about the other brands its sells that may contain GMOs, Whole Foods Market denies that GMO labeling is effective, and instead insists that labeling non-GMO products is preferred (http://blog.wholefoodsmarket.com).
This reasoning, of course, appears to be in the best interests of Whole Foods Market's bottom line rather than in the interests of customers. And apart from any legal mandate, whether at the local, regional, or statewide level, Whole Foods Market and the others will likely never voluntarily label GMO-contaminated products.
Trader Joe's, another popular natural and organic retailer, states on its website that all private-label products in the store "are sourced from non-genetically modified ingredients," which is one step above Whole Foods Market. But Trader Joe's still sells many "natural" products that may contain pesticide residues and other conventional food-system additives and contaminants that health-conscious individuals intend to avoid when purchasing supposedly "natural" products.
Without a GMO labeling mandate that requires full-disclosure, and that prohibits "natural" products from containing GMOs, the phony "natural" products sector will only continue to flourish at the expense of the certified-organic products sector. This is why it is crucial to fight for mandatory GMO labeling requirements in every town, city, and state across the country to ensure our continued access to clean, truly-organic food and personal care products.
To learn more about how to fight the growth of imitation "natural" products and preserve the integrity of the certified-organics sector, visit:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24844.cfm
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Genetically modified organisms and bovine growth hormones are in thousands of prescription drugs
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) Genetically modified organisms and bovine growth hormones are in thousands of prescription drugs all over the world without any warning whatsoever. Plus, over 40% of humans are allergic to either consuming or injecting gelatin, which is the most popular hidden animal part in drugs and vaccines today. In fact, the gelatin coatings, capsules and liquid additives for medicines are not made from harmless food, but rather from the skin, cartilage, connective tissues and bones of animals, and to put "nails in the coffin," these are NOT the grass and grain fed, free range, humanely treated animals, that's for sure.
For decades now, gelatin has come from abused, hormone-fed, antibiotic injected, sick, dying, and disease laden animals; which means the dead animals that even the fast food giants won't accept are dumped into grinders and made into gelatin. These poor animals that are shot up with hormones and fed GMO, pesticide-ridden corn by-products their whole lives, have blood infections from mal-nourishment and corn sugar, and this settles into their body, so when humans consume gelatin, they are also consuming these horrific, disease breeding chemicals. Many animals in CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations) in the U.S. and the U.K. are also fed by-products of their own species. Remember the mad cow disease outbreaks?
A survey in a recent postgraduate Medical journal shows 25% of patients are unknowingly prescribed drugs containing gelatin, contrary to their beliefs. That's correct: there are unlabeled, cancer-causing growth hormones in prescription pharmaceuticals and vaccines. Are you ready to get that flu shot, or maybe the next swine flu scam shot? In vaccines, gelatin is used as a heat stabilizer and suspension agent. Allergic reactions include abdominal pain and cramping, high pitched breathing sounds, and anaphylaxis (can include swelling of the throat). Vaccine companies cannot guarantee the purity of animal cells used in their vaccine cultures.
In 1997, the FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) met with the TSE Advisory Committee (Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies; a.k.a. BSE/Mad Cow Disease) to help assess the safety of imported AND domestic gelatin, and gelatin by-products (how much worse can it get?) with regard to the risk of BSE posed by gelatin sourcing and processing. The big question at the meeting was whether the processing procedure was enough to optimally "inactivate" any contaminating agent. They all agreed that the "alkali treatment" was a key step, but also agreed that scientific evidence was "insufficient at this time to demonstrate that these treatments would effectively remove the BSE infectious agent if present in the source material." (Meaning it's too late to kill it at the factory).
TSE went on to recommend that the FDA consult "outside experts," and also assure that manufacturers adhere to these regulations. That's a complete joke, because the origin of gelatin, as defined by the FDA, states that it is "derived from either bovine, porcine (pig), or other animal source; however, no formally validated reference method to confirm the origin of gelatin's raw materials is available yet." So how are those inspections and regulations going to hold water if they don't even know where the raw materials are coming from? Maybe those raw materials are also cats, dogs and horses?
(http://www.gelatine.org)
Plus, if you think for one second that the FDA, the organization which allows nearly 90% of all food to be contaminated with GMO chemicals, is going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to consult "outside experts" to review the safety of gelatin, research where it comes from, and inspect the processing plants, you're dead wrong.
Gelatin is classified as "food stuff" by the FDA, so you can be sure it took years of research and lab testing, and millions of dollars to come up with such a technical and scientific name.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17182625
http://www.holistic-herbalist.com/vegetarian-capsules-1.html
http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=7609
http://www.drfostersessentials.com
http://www.peta.org
http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=10
http://www.gelatine.org/en/about-gelatine/properties.html
http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00112/mad_cow_frameset.htm
http://www.earthclinic.com/CURES/mad_cow.html
http://www.priondata.org/data/A_DMSO.html
http://www.anaphylaxistreatment.com/
For decades now, gelatin has come from abused, hormone-fed, antibiotic injected, sick, dying, and disease laden animals; which means the dead animals that even the fast food giants won't accept are dumped into grinders and made into gelatin. These poor animals that are shot up with hormones and fed GMO, pesticide-ridden corn by-products their whole lives, have blood infections from mal-nourishment and corn sugar, and this settles into their body, so when humans consume gelatin, they are also consuming these horrific, disease breeding chemicals. Many animals in CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations) in the U.S. and the U.K. are also fed by-products of their own species. Remember the mad cow disease outbreaks?
Meat in Medicine and Vitamins
World wide production of gelatin exceeds 300,000 tons per year. Vegetarians and vegans are usually very careful shoppers, trying to avoid all meat products and chemicals on a regular basis, but millions of consumers do not know about gelatin and where it comes from, and that's the way the food industry likes it. Vegan or not, everyone who takes vitamins and supplements is likely eating infected animal parts when they swallow gelatin capsules.A survey in a recent postgraduate Medical journal shows 25% of patients are unknowingly prescribed drugs containing gelatin, contrary to their beliefs. That's correct: there are unlabeled, cancer-causing growth hormones in prescription pharmaceuticals and vaccines. Are you ready to get that flu shot, or maybe the next swine flu scam shot? In vaccines, gelatin is used as a heat stabilizer and suspension agent. Allergic reactions include abdominal pain and cramping, high pitched breathing sounds, and anaphylaxis (can include swelling of the throat). Vaccine companies cannot guarantee the purity of animal cells used in their vaccine cultures.
Using common sense is vital
Would you take a pill which came in a gelatin capsule that contained a viral and bacterial mixture of the disease which that very pill's ingredients were intended to prevent? If you could inject a syringe in a diseased cow or pig's stomach, extract some blood, mix it with a small portion of a specific new disease, and then inject it into your arm, all in hopes of avoiding that disease, even though you might get it from this very procedure anyway, would you do it? Wouldn't it be wiser to just take vegetarian vitamins and minerals to build up immunity? (http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00112/mad_cow_frameset.htm)In 1997, the FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) met with the TSE Advisory Committee (Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies; a.k.a. BSE/Mad Cow Disease) to help assess the safety of imported AND domestic gelatin, and gelatin by-products (how much worse can it get?) with regard to the risk of BSE posed by gelatin sourcing and processing. The big question at the meeting was whether the processing procedure was enough to optimally "inactivate" any contaminating agent. They all agreed that the "alkali treatment" was a key step, but also agreed that scientific evidence was "insufficient at this time to demonstrate that these treatments would effectively remove the BSE infectious agent if present in the source material." (Meaning it's too late to kill it at the factory).
TSE went on to recommend that the FDA consult "outside experts," and also assure that manufacturers adhere to these regulations. That's a complete joke, because the origin of gelatin, as defined by the FDA, states that it is "derived from either bovine, porcine (pig), or other animal source; however, no formally validated reference method to confirm the origin of gelatin's raw materials is available yet." So how are those inspections and regulations going to hold water if they don't even know where the raw materials are coming from? Maybe those raw materials are also cats, dogs and horses?
(http://www.gelatine.org)
Plus, if you think for one second that the FDA, the organization which allows nearly 90% of all food to be contaminated with GMO chemicals, is going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to consult "outside experts" to review the safety of gelatin, research where it comes from, and inspect the processing plants, you're dead wrong.
Gelatin is classified as "food stuff" by the FDA, so you can be sure it took years of research and lab testing, and millions of dollars to come up with such a technical and scientific name.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17182625
http://www.holistic-herbalist.com/vegetarian-capsules-1.html
http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=7609
http://www.drfostersessentials.com
http://www.peta.org
http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=10
http://www.gelatine.org/en/about-gelatine/properties.html
http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00112/mad_cow_frameset.htm
http://www.earthclinic.com/CURES/mad_cow.html
http://www.priondata.org/data/A_DMSO.html
http://www.anaphylaxistreatment.com/
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
organic farmers can sue conventional, GMO farmers whose pesticides 'trespass'
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) Purveyors of conventional and genetically-modified (GM) crops -- and the pesticides and herbicides that accompany them -- are finally getting a taste of their own legal medicine. Minnesota's Star Tribune has reported that the Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled that a large organic farm surrounded by chemical-laden conventional farms can seek damages for lost crops, as well as lost profits, caused by the illegal trespassing of pesticides and herbicides on its property.
Oluf and Debra Johnson's 1,500-acre organic farm in Stearns County, Minn., has repeatedly been contaminated by nearby conventional and GMO farms since the couple started it in the 1990s. A local pesticide cooperative known as Paynesville Farmers Union (PFU), which is near the farm, has been cited at least four times for violating pesticide laws, and inadvertently causing damage to the Johnson's farm.
The first time it was realized that pesticides had drifted onto the Johnson's farm in 1998, PFU apologized, but did not agree to pay for damages. As anyone with an understanding of organic practices knows, even a small bit of contamination can result in having to plow under that season's crops, forget profits, and even lose the ability to grow organic crops in the same field for at least a couple years.
The Johnson's let the first incident slide. But after the second, third, and fourth times, they decided that enough was enough. Following the second pesticide drift in 2002, the Johnson's filed a complaint with the Minnesota Agriculture Department, which eventually ruled that PFU had illegally sprayed chemicals on windy days, which led to contamination of the Johnson's organic crops.
PFU settled with the Johnson's out of court, and the Johnson's agreed to sell their tainted products as non-organics for a lower price, and pull the fields from production for three years in order to bring them back up to organic standards. But PFU's inconsiderate spraying habits continued, with numerous additional incidents occurring in 2005, 2007, and 2008, according to the Star Tribune.
After enduring much hardship, the Johnson's finally ended up suing PFU in 2009 for negligence and trespass, only to receive denial from the district court that received the case. But after appealing, the Johnson's received favor from the Appeals Court, which ruled that particulate matter, including pesticides, herbicides, and even GM particulates, that contaminates nearby fields is, in fact, considered illegal trespass, and is subject to the same laws concerning other forms of trespass.
In a similar case, a California-based organic farm recently won a $1 million lawsuit filed against a conventional farm whose pesticides spread through fog from several miles away, and contaminated its fields. Jacobs Farm / Del Cobo's entire season's herb crop had to be discarded as a result, and the court that presided over the case acknowledged and agreed that the polluters must be held responsible (http://organicfood.einnews.com/article/1088-organic-farmer-wins-1-mil...).
Many NaturalNews readers will recall the numerous incidents involving lawsuits filed by Monsanto against non-GMO farms whose crops were inadvertently contaminated by GM material. In many of these cases, the defendants ended up becoming bankrupted by Monsanto, even though Monsanto's patented materials were the trespassers at fault.
Be sure to check out the extensive and very informative report compiled by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) entitled Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers for a complete history of Monsanto's war against traditional American agriculture: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/CFSMOnsantovsFarmerReport1.13...
But it appears that the tables are now turning. Instead of Monsanto winning against organic farmers, organic farmers can now achieve victory against Monsanto. In other words, farmers being infringed upon by the drifting of GM material into their fields now have a legal leg to stand on in the pursuit of justice against Monsanto and the other biotechnology giants whose "frankencrops" are responsible for causing widespread contamination of the American food supply.
Genetic traits are highly transmissible, whether it be through pollen transfer or seed spread, and organic and non-GMO farmers have every right to seek damages for illegal trespassing when such transmission takes place. It is expected that many more organic farms will step up and begin seeking justice and compensation for damage caused by crop chemicals, GM materials, and other harmful invaders.
For too long, Monsanto has been getting away with suing farmers whose crops have become contaminated by Monsanto's patented genetic traits and chemical materials, and winning. Thankfully, the justice system seems to now recognize the severe error in this, and is now beginning to rightfully hold polluters and trespassers responsible. Monsanto, your days are numbered.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.startribune.com/local/126151483.html
Oluf and Debra Johnson's 1,500-acre organic farm in Stearns County, Minn., has repeatedly been contaminated by nearby conventional and GMO farms since the couple started it in the 1990s. A local pesticide cooperative known as Paynesville Farmers Union (PFU), which is near the farm, has been cited at least four times for violating pesticide laws, and inadvertently causing damage to the Johnson's farm.
The first time it was realized that pesticides had drifted onto the Johnson's farm in 1998, PFU apologized, but did not agree to pay for damages. As anyone with an understanding of organic practices knows, even a small bit of contamination can result in having to plow under that season's crops, forget profits, and even lose the ability to grow organic crops in the same field for at least a couple years.
The Johnson's let the first incident slide. But after the second, third, and fourth times, they decided that enough was enough. Following the second pesticide drift in 2002, the Johnson's filed a complaint with the Minnesota Agriculture Department, which eventually ruled that PFU had illegally sprayed chemicals on windy days, which led to contamination of the Johnson's organic crops.
PFU settled with the Johnson's out of court, and the Johnson's agreed to sell their tainted products as non-organics for a lower price, and pull the fields from production for three years in order to bring them back up to organic standards. But PFU's inconsiderate spraying habits continued, with numerous additional incidents occurring in 2005, 2007, and 2008, according to the Star Tribune.
After enduring much hardship, the Johnson's finally ended up suing PFU in 2009 for negligence and trespass, only to receive denial from the district court that received the case. But after appealing, the Johnson's received favor from the Appeals Court, which ruled that particulate matter, including pesticides, herbicides, and even GM particulates, that contaminates nearby fields is, in fact, considered illegal trespass, and is subject to the same laws concerning other forms of trespass.
In a similar case, a California-based organic farm recently won a $1 million lawsuit filed against a conventional farm whose pesticides spread through fog from several miles away, and contaminated its fields. Jacobs Farm / Del Cobo's entire season's herb crop had to be discarded as a result, and the court that presided over the case acknowledged and agreed that the polluters must be held responsible (http://organicfood.einnews.com/article/1088-organic-farmer-wins-1-mil...).
Precedent has now been set for organic farmers to sue biotechnology companies whose GMOs contaminate their crops
The stunning victories of both the Johnson's and Jacob's Farm / Del Cobo against their chemical-polluting neighbors is huge, in that it represents a new set legal precedent for holding conventional, factory farming operations responsible for the damage their systems cause to other farms. And with this new precedent set, many more organic farmers, for instance, can now begin suing GMO farmers for both chemical and genetic pollution that drifts onto their farms.Many NaturalNews readers will recall the numerous incidents involving lawsuits filed by Monsanto against non-GMO farms whose crops were inadvertently contaminated by GM material. In many of these cases, the defendants ended up becoming bankrupted by Monsanto, even though Monsanto's patented materials were the trespassers at fault.
Be sure to check out the extensive and very informative report compiled by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) entitled Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers for a complete history of Monsanto's war against traditional American agriculture: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/CFSMOnsantovsFarmerReport1.13...
But it appears that the tables are now turning. Instead of Monsanto winning against organic farmers, organic farmers can now achieve victory against Monsanto. In other words, farmers being infringed upon by the drifting of GM material into their fields now have a legal leg to stand on in the pursuit of justice against Monsanto and the other biotechnology giants whose "frankencrops" are responsible for causing widespread contamination of the American food supply.
Genetic traits are highly transmissible, whether it be through pollen transfer or seed spread, and organic and non-GMO farmers have every right to seek damages for illegal trespassing when such transmission takes place. It is expected that many more organic farms will step up and begin seeking justice and compensation for damage caused by crop chemicals, GM materials, and other harmful invaders.
For too long, Monsanto has been getting away with suing farmers whose crops have become contaminated by Monsanto's patented genetic traits and chemical materials, and winning. Thankfully, the justice system seems to now recognize the severe error in this, and is now beginning to rightfully hold polluters and trespassers responsible. Monsanto, your days are numbered.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.startribune.com/local/126151483.html
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
petition to label GMOs nears one million signatures, organic foods
(www.gmo-news.Blogspot.com) Only a few more weeks remain before the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stops accepting public comments about a petition filed by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) seeking the FDA's compliance with requiring mandatory labeling of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). And with more than 850,000 comments already submitted, according to Just Label It!, truth in labeling advocates everywhere are hopeful that the petition will reach its target of at least 1,000,000 signatures by the March 27 submission deadline.
In conjunction with more than 450 other food freedom advocacy groups, organic food brands, and farmer and seed organizations, CFS filed a petition with the FDA on October 12, 2011, urging the food safety agency to stop delaying and begin enforcing mandatory GMO labeling. Citing near-unanimous support for mandatory labeling among all Americans polled in several national surveys, as well as the more than 20 other nations around the world that already require GMO labeling, CFS is demanding that the FDA take action.
And to spur along the effort, the Just Label It! campaign has been organizing a petition-signing drive to get at least 1,000,000 unique signatures in support of the petition by March 27, 2012, which is the FDA-established deadline for the petition. Filed as Docket # FDA-2011-P-0723-0001, the petition correctly states that failure to label GMOs is misleading individuals and families everywhere, and that pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the FDA has a lawful mandate to require that GMOs be labeled.
You can read the full petition here.
In preparation for its final push to gather the target number of petition signatures, Just Label It! will be releasing an "infographic" on March 7, 2012, that explains the issues surrounding GMOs and why they need to be labeled. When this infographic is released, we will post a link to it here on NaturalNews so you can share it with your family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, and anyone else you come into contact with. The infographic will also be linkable through Facebook and Twitter as well.
You can sign the petition through the Just Label It! portal by visiting: http://justlabelit.org/takeaction
To learn more about the Just Label It! campaign and to watch a short film about GMOs by Food, Inc. creator Robert Kenner, visit: http://justlabelit.org/
Sources for this article include:
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com
http://justlabelit.org/takeaction
http://www.regulations.gov/;D=FDA-2011-P-0723-0001#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2011-P-0723-0001
In conjunction with more than 450 other food freedom advocacy groups, organic food brands, and farmer and seed organizations, CFS filed a petition with the FDA on October 12, 2011, urging the food safety agency to stop delaying and begin enforcing mandatory GMO labeling. Citing near-unanimous support for mandatory labeling among all Americans polled in several national surveys, as well as the more than 20 other nations around the world that already require GMO labeling, CFS is demanding that the FDA take action.
And to spur along the effort, the Just Label It! campaign has been organizing a petition-signing drive to get at least 1,000,000 unique signatures in support of the petition by March 27, 2012, which is the FDA-established deadline for the petition. Filed as Docket # FDA-2011-P-0723-0001, the petition correctly states that failure to label GMOs is misleading individuals and families everywhere, and that pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the FDA has a lawful mandate to require that GMOs be labeled.
You can read the full petition here.
In preparation for its final push to gather the target number of petition signatures, Just Label It! will be releasing an "infographic" on March 7, 2012, that explains the issues surrounding GMOs and why they need to be labeled. When this infographic is released, we will post a link to it here on NaturalNews so you can share it with your family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, and anyone else you come into contact with. The infographic will also be linkable through Facebook and Twitter as well.
You can sign the petition through the Just Label It! portal by visiting: http://justlabelit.org/takeaction
To learn more about the Just Label It! campaign and to watch a short film about GMOs by Food, Inc. creator Robert Kenner, visit: http://justlabelit.org/
Sources for this article include:
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com
http://justlabelit.org/takeaction
http://www.regulations.gov/;D=FDA-2011-P-0723-0001#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2011-P-0723-0001
Monday, March 12, 2012
GMOs with 'stacked traits' exponentially more harmful to humans due to synergistic toxicity
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) Monsanto's pipeline of upcoming genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) includes several new varieties specifically engineered with "stacked traits," which means they contain multiple genetic modifications and built-in resistance traits as opposed to just one. And a new study published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology has found that these new multi-trait GMOs appear to be exponentially more harmful to humans than single-trait GMOs because of their synergistic toxicity.
Conducting actual research on the effects of GMO toxins on human cells -- this is something Monsanto will never do -- researchers from the University of Caen in France have found that the Cry1Ab protein, a Bt toxin deliberately produced in many GM crops, including Monsanto's MON810 Bt corn, destroys human cells at levels of 100 parts per million (ppm) dilution and higher when consumed by itself. This level of exposure is relatively low, considering human exposure to Bt toxin comes from multiple sources, including meat and dairy products from animals fed Bt corn feed, as well as direct human consumption of Bt corn ingredients and soon-to-be Bt sweet corn from the produce section (http://www.naturalnews.com/035029_GM_corn_Walmart_Monsanto.html).
Additionally, the researchers found that exposure to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup herbicide formula, induces human cell death at exposures as low as 50 ppm, which is "far below agricultural dilutions," according to the report. At a dilution of 57.5 ppm, which is only slightly higher, Roundup effectively kills 50 percent of human cells, which clearly illustrates its severe toxicity.
This important finding confirms the findings of numerous other reports conducted in recent days concerning Roundup's toxicity in humans, including the fact that this widely-used chemical causes birth defects, cancer, and death (http://www.naturalnews.com/033772_Monsanto_Roundup.html).
But the real kicker in the new research is the combined toxicity from exposure to both Roundup and Bt toxin which, according to the study, is tremendous. In their conclusion, researchers noted that "modified Bt toxins are not inert on nontarget human cells, and that they can present combined side-effects with other residues of pesticides specific to GM plants" (http://www.greenmedinfo.com).
So much for Monsanto's claim that Bt toxin, Roundup, and various other chemically-engineered traits are perfectly harmless. Monsanto actually claims on its website that human testing of GMOs is unnecessary because they are no different than conventional and natural crop varieties -- and regulatory authorities have never taken the agri-giant to task on actually proving this baseless claim, which flies in the face of independent science (http://www.naturalnews.com).
Sources for this article include:
http://www.greenmedinfo.com
Conducting actual research on the effects of GMO toxins on human cells -- this is something Monsanto will never do -- researchers from the University of Caen in France have found that the Cry1Ab protein, a Bt toxin deliberately produced in many GM crops, including Monsanto's MON810 Bt corn, destroys human cells at levels of 100 parts per million (ppm) dilution and higher when consumed by itself. This level of exposure is relatively low, considering human exposure to Bt toxin comes from multiple sources, including meat and dairy products from animals fed Bt corn feed, as well as direct human consumption of Bt corn ingredients and soon-to-be Bt sweet corn from the produce section (http://www.naturalnews.com/035029_GM_corn_Walmart_Monsanto.html).
Additionally, the researchers found that exposure to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup herbicide formula, induces human cell death at exposures as low as 50 ppm, which is "far below agricultural dilutions," according to the report. At a dilution of 57.5 ppm, which is only slightly higher, Roundup effectively kills 50 percent of human cells, which clearly illustrates its severe toxicity.
This important finding confirms the findings of numerous other reports conducted in recent days concerning Roundup's toxicity in humans, including the fact that this widely-used chemical causes birth defects, cancer, and death (http://www.naturalnews.com/033772_Monsanto_Roundup.html).
But the real kicker in the new research is the combined toxicity from exposure to both Roundup and Bt toxin which, according to the study, is tremendous. In their conclusion, researchers noted that "modified Bt toxins are not inert on nontarget human cells, and that they can present combined side-effects with other residues of pesticides specific to GM plants" (http://www.greenmedinfo.com).
So much for Monsanto's claim that Bt toxin, Roundup, and various other chemically-engineered traits are perfectly harmless. Monsanto actually claims on its website that human testing of GMOs is unnecessary because they are no different than conventional and natural crop varieties -- and regulatory authorities have never taken the agri-giant to task on actually proving this baseless claim, which flies in the face of independent science (http://www.naturalnews.com).
Sources for this article include:
http://www.greenmedinfo.com
Sunday, March 11, 2012
biotech industry is so proud of GMOs, why don't they tout GMOs on food packaging labels?
(www.gmo-new.blogspot.com) Genetically engineered foods will "feed the world," say Bill Gates and all the rest of the GMO pushers. GM crops are the result of "high-tech agriculture" and "advanced technology" created by super-smart agricultural geniuses who only enhance the properties of food crops. GMOs are better than God, better than Mother Nature, and one of the great gifts of science to humankind -- sort of like electricity, only more edible.
If this is all true, then why doesn't the GMO industry want credit for all this effort on food labels? Shouldn't the industry leap at the opportunity to have foods labeled with things like:
• Fortified with extra GMOs!
• Genetically Modified to grow strong bones!
• Now with GMO technology in every delicious bite!
If GMOs are so wonderful, in other words, then why wouldn't the industry tout all its amazing technology right on the labels of the foods containing GMOs?
• They don't want consumers to even know they're eating GMOs!
• They believe consumer ignorance is preferable to consumer choice.
• They want consumers kept in the dark, uninformed and unable to avoid GMOs.
The GMO industry, in fact, is already viciously fighting a proposed GMO labeling mandate in California -- a law that would merely require foods to be truthfully labeled when they contain genetically modified ingredients. What could be wrong with that? But in an age when consumers want to know more information about what they're buying, not less, the GMO industry somehow believes consumer ignorance is victory!
So when GMO pushers like Bill Gates say they want to "feed the world," what they really mean is they want to secretly force-feed the world mystery ingredients that are not listed on the labels so that consumers won't even be aware of what they're eating. (Such as the deadly insecticide found in every kernel of GM corn...)
If it was good for you, they would obviously want to brag about it on the label. All natural! Fortified with minerals! Low in sodium!
So how come the industry doesn't want to claim, "High in GMOs!" on every food box?
Want some flaked corn breakfast cereal? It's on sale for $1.99 a box, and it's high in GMOs!
How about some corn tortillas for your Mexican fiesta dinner? Those corn tortillas are fortified with extra GMOs, too!
Thirsty? Grab yourself a 12-pack of that famous brand sports drink -- it's sweetened with genetically modified corn syrup! Plus, it's got electrolytes!
Or how about a super-sized box of Genetically Modified Corn Flakes for breakfast? You can even eat it with a bowl of pasteurized, homogenized, Bovine Growth Hormone-contaminated, pus-filled factory-processed cow's milk! Yumm!
But you don't see any of this marketing material at the grocery store, do you? GMOs remain the dirty little secret of the food industry -- even at places like Whole Foods, which sort of try to imply they're against GMOs, but then they turn around and sell all sorts of GM foods anyway.
GMOs are the leaked Stratfor emails that reveal the U.S. is already on the ground working to destroy Syria's infrastructure. GMOs are the proof of election fraud in a so-called "free nation." GMOs are not just Big Ag's skeletons in the closet; they are the skeletons in a closet full of beaten, gagged children who have been kidnapped by CPS officials and sold into "white slavery" to the local community's business leaders who run the children's foundations.
GMOs are the dirty food secret that's so dirty, virtually no one would buy any food known to contain GMOs. They are worse than the plague. They are anti-food. Labeling foods with GMOs is essentially the same as slapping a large skull and crossbones on the package, and that's exactly why the death-worshipping, profit-sucking corporate whores who work for the biotech industry are fighting so hard to prevent GMO labels from appearing on foods. "Holy crap! We can't have consumers knowing the TRUTH, can we?"
Isn't it fascinating that the GMO industry depends entirely on hiding its products in order to stay in business? What other industry is so steeped in destructive, hateful products that it has to actively seek to HIDE THEM from consumers? Biotech is an industry whose products are sold entirely through trickery and deceit, not honest labeling and full disclosure.
I believe that day may very well come true in the near future, and I can only hope it will be followed by a series of very public trials where the GMO scientists, corporate CEOs and top marketing executives are all charged with crimes against humanity and tried by a jury of their peers. The genetic modification of seeds and the open planting of those seeds in the natural world should, I believe, be a crime against nature met by a most severe punishment such as life in prison for anyone found guilty of those crimes in a Constitutional court that abides by due process. Almost no punishment is too great against these criminals, because those who sow genetically modified seeds upon our natural world risk the death of billions of people in their careless arrogance. Some might even argue that the death sentence would be justifiable in such cases.
Because much of the time, you're actually buying "mystery food" containing all sorts of toxins, poisons or horrifying ingredients that are never listed on the label (by design, of course).
And that's the way Big Ag and Big Food like it -- keep consumers in the dark! The less they know about how processed food is made, where it comes from and what it contains, the better! And the more ignorant consumers can be kept, the more GMOs the biotech industry can shove down their gullible little throats.
www.LabelGMOs.org
Organic Consumers Association:
www.OrganicConsumers.org
Institute for Responsible Technology:
If this is all true, then why doesn't the GMO industry want credit for all this effort on food labels? Shouldn't the industry leap at the opportunity to have foods labeled with things like:
• Fortified with extra GMOs!
• Genetically Modified to grow strong bones!
• Now with GMO technology in every delicious bite!
If GMOs are so wonderful, in other words, then why wouldn't the industry tout all its amazing technology right on the labels of the foods containing GMOs?
The reality? GMOs are poison
But no, instead of the industry begging for regulatory permission to place GMO bragging rights on food labels, the industry has done exactly the opposite: It has demanded that consumers be kept in the dark about GMOs!• They don't want consumers to even know they're eating GMOs!
• They believe consumer ignorance is preferable to consumer choice.
• They want consumers kept in the dark, uninformed and unable to avoid GMOs.
The GMO industry, in fact, is already viciously fighting a proposed GMO labeling mandate in California -- a law that would merely require foods to be truthfully labeled when they contain genetically modified ingredients. What could be wrong with that? But in an age when consumers want to know more information about what they're buying, not less, the GMO industry somehow believes consumer ignorance is victory!
So when GMO pushers like Bill Gates say they want to "feed the world," what they really mean is they want to secretly force-feed the world mystery ingredients that are not listed on the labels so that consumers won't even be aware of what they're eating. (Such as the deadly insecticide found in every kernel of GM corn...)
Commonsense food rule: Beware of anything the food companies don't want to put on the label
If the ag giants and food companies don't want to put something on a food label, that's a pretty strong sign that you probably shouldn't eat it.If it was good for you, they would obviously want to brag about it on the label. All natural! Fortified with minerals! Low in sodium!
So how come the industry doesn't want to claim, "High in GMOs!" on every food box?
Want some flaked corn breakfast cereal? It's on sale for $1.99 a box, and it's high in GMOs!
How about some corn tortillas for your Mexican fiesta dinner? Those corn tortillas are fortified with extra GMOs, too!
Thirsty? Grab yourself a 12-pack of that famous brand sports drink -- it's sweetened with genetically modified corn syrup! Plus, it's got electrolytes!
Or how about a super-sized box of Genetically Modified Corn Flakes for breakfast? You can even eat it with a bowl of pasteurized, homogenized, Bovine Growth Hormone-contaminated, pus-filled factory-processed cow's milk! Yumm!
But you don't see any of this marketing material at the grocery store, do you? GMOs remain the dirty little secret of the food industry -- even at places like Whole Foods, which sort of try to imply they're against GMOs, but then they turn around and sell all sorts of GM foods anyway.
GMOs are worse than skeletons in the closet
GMOs are to the food industry what gay public toilet sex is to a pro-family Republican candidate. Or hidden camera photos of the naked choir boys and the Catholic priest. GMOs are the bones buried under the basement slab of a mass murderer who's also running for Governor. They're the prostitution ring records that reveal one very busy repeat customer named "Eliot Spitzer."GMOs are the leaked Stratfor emails that reveal the U.S. is already on the ground working to destroy Syria's infrastructure. GMOs are the proof of election fraud in a so-called "free nation." GMOs are not just Big Ag's skeletons in the closet; they are the skeletons in a closet full of beaten, gagged children who have been kidnapped by CPS officials and sold into "white slavery" to the local community's business leaders who run the children's foundations.
GMOs are the dirty food secret that's so dirty, virtually no one would buy any food known to contain GMOs. They are worse than the plague. They are anti-food. Labeling foods with GMOs is essentially the same as slapping a large skull and crossbones on the package, and that's exactly why the death-worshipping, profit-sucking corporate whores who work for the biotech industry are fighting so hard to prevent GMO labels from appearing on foods. "Holy crap! We can't have consumers knowing the TRUTH, can we?"
Isn't it fascinating that the GMO industry depends entirely on hiding its products in order to stay in business? What other industry is so steeped in destructive, hateful products that it has to actively seek to HIDE THEM from consumers? Biotech is an industry whose products are sold entirely through trickery and deceit, not honest labeling and full disclosure.
Why we will win this fight for the right to know what we are eating
But make no mistake, my friends, for the People shall be victorious against this insidious brand of agricultural imperialism. As I publicly shared just the other day, I had a vision (or was it a dream?) of a massive army of American farmers and consumers who marched on Monsanto, arrested all its employees and burned its buildings to the ground.I believe that day may very well come true in the near future, and I can only hope it will be followed by a series of very public trials where the GMO scientists, corporate CEOs and top marketing executives are all charged with crimes against humanity and tried by a jury of their peers. The genetic modification of seeds and the open planting of those seeds in the natural world should, I believe, be a crime against nature met by a most severe punishment such as life in prison for anyone found guilty of those crimes in a Constitutional court that abides by due process. Almost no punishment is too great against these criminals, because those who sow genetically modified seeds upon our natural world risk the death of billions of people in their careless arrogance. Some might even argue that the death sentence would be justifiable in such cases.
"Mystery" food?
Just remember: the next time you go shopping at the grocery store, take a closer look at the label of a food product and ask yourself, "What are they NOT telling me about what's in this product?"Because much of the time, you're actually buying "mystery food" containing all sorts of toxins, poisons or horrifying ingredients that are never listed on the label (by design, of course).
And that's the way Big Ag and Big Food like it -- keep consumers in the dark! The less they know about how processed food is made, where it comes from and what it contains, the better! And the more ignorant consumers can be kept, the more GMOs the biotech industry can shove down their gullible little throats.
Learn more:
Support the GMO mandatory labeling petition in California!www.LabelGMOs.org
Organic Consumers Association:
www.OrganicConsumers.org
Institute for Responsible Technology:
Friday, March 9, 2012
Whole Fraud: Exposing the myth of so-called natural foods
(gmo-news.blogspot.com) On Jan. 31, organic and natural foods giant Whole Foods Market (WFM) once again attacked http://blog.wholefoodsmarket.com Organic Consumers Association, the nation's leading watchdog on organic standards, as being too "hard-line" for insisting that retailers like WFM stop selling, or at least start labeling, billions of dollars worth of so-called "natural" foods in their stores - foods that are laced with unlabeled, hazardous genetically engineered (GE) ingredients.
WFM's most recent attack on OCA predictably backfired, throwing gasoline on the fiery debate surrounding my previous essay "The Organic Elite Surrenders to Monsanto." http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22449.cfm In that essay, written in January 2011, I criticized WFM and several other well-known organic companies for their foolish (now hopefully repudiated) stance of espousing "co-existence" with the USDA and Monsanto, in exchange for minimal federal regulation of genetically engineered crops.
In subsequent articles OCA has called for an end to "organic infighting" http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22499.cfm and for the organic industry, farmers, and consumers to join forces and pass laws or state ballot initiatives (like the current campaign in California) that would require mandatory labels on products containing genetically engineered ingredients, as well as to make it illegalhttp://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24074.cfm to label or market GE-tainted foods as "natural" or "all natural."
Anger is now running so high against Monsanto and the USDA, as well as anyone appearing to tolerate "co-existence" with either group, that rumors are fast spreading that Monsanto has bought out, or plans to buy out, WFM. That rumor is untrue. However, it has focused attention once again on the critical issue of food labeling. WFM, and all of us in the organic community, must put an end to labeling fraud in the "natural" products sector, by passing laws that will require brands and supermarkets to clearly label all genetically engineered ingredients on their products.
Routinely contained in nearly every bite or swallow of non-organic industrial food are genetically engineered ingredients, pesticides, antibiotics and other animal drug residues, pathogens, feces, hormone-disrupting chemicals, toxic sludge, slaughterhouse waste, chemical additives and preservatives, irradiation-derived radiolytic chemical by-products, and a host of other hazardous allergens and toxins.
If common sense weren't enough, scientists warn us that a public health Doomsday Clock is ticking. Big Biotech and Big Ag are the root cause of 80 million cases of food poisoning every year in the US, as well as an epidemic of allergies, reproductive disorders, food-related cancers, heart attacks, and obesity. Within a decade, these diet- and environment-related diseases - heavily subsidized under our Big Pharma/chemical/genetically-engineered/factory farm system - will likely bankrupt Medicare and the entire U.S. health care system.
Likewise millions of green-minded consumers understand that industrial agriculture poses a terminal threat to the environment and climate stability. A highly conscious and passionate segment of the population is beginning to understand that converting to non-chemical, non-genetically engineered, energy-efficient, carbon-sequestering organic farming practices, and drastically reducing food miles by relocalizing the food chain, are essential preconditions for stabilizing our out-of-control climate and preparing our families and communities for future energy and resource shortages.
Millions of us - consumers, farmers, activists - now realize that unless we act quickly, global warming and climate chaos will soon severely disrupt industrial agriculture and long-distance food transportation, leading to massive crop failures, food shortages, famine, war, and pestilence. Even more alarming, accelerating levels of greenhouse gases (especially from cars, coal, cattle, and related rainforest and wetlands destruction) will soon push global warming to a tipping point that will melt the polar icecaps and possibly unleash a cataclysmic discharge of climate-destabilizing methane, now fragilely sequestered in the frozen arctic tundra.
Thanks to this growing consumer awareness - and four decades of hard work - the organic community has built up a $30-billion "certified organic" food and products sector that prohibits the use of genetic engineering. The rapidly expanding organic/natural products sector - organic (4% of total retail sales) and natural (8%) - now constitutes more than 12% of total retail grocery sales, with an annual growth rate of 10-15%. Even taking into account what appears to be a permanent economic recession and a lower rate of growth than that seen over the past 20 years, the organic and natural market will likely constitute 31-56% of grocery sales in 2020.
This consumer-driven movement, under relentless attack by the biotech and Big Food lobby, and with little or no help from government, has managed to create a healthy and sustainable alternative to America's disastrous, chemical- and energy-intensive system of industrial agriculture. Millions of organic consumers are now demanding food and other products that are certified organic and non-GE, as well as locally or regionally produced, and minimally processed and packaged.
Recent polls indicate that many green-minded consumers remain confused about the qualitative difference between products labeled or advertised as "natural," versus those labeled as organic. Many believe that "natural" means "almost organic," or that a natural product is even better than organic.
Walk down the aisles of any Trader Joe's, Whole Foods Market, or any upscale supermarket and look closely. What do you see? Row after row of attractively displayed, but mostly non-organic "natural" (i.e. conventional) foods and products. By marketing sleight of hand, these conventional foods, vitamins, private label items, and personal care products become "natural" or "almost organic" (and overpriced) in the "natural" supermarket setting.
It's no wonder - and no accident - that consumers are confused. Companies selling these products are simply telling us what we want to hear, so they can charge a premium price.
In fact, all these "natural," "all-natural," and "sustainable," products are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a third-party certifier. Most "natural" or conventional products - whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods - are produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive.
Test these so-called "natural" products in a lab and what will you find? Pesticide residues, Genetically Modified Organisms, and a long list of problematic and/or carcinogenic synthetic chemicals and additives.
Trace these "natural" products back to the farm or factory and what will you find? Climate destabilizing chemical fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, and sewage sludge - not to mention exploited farm workers and workers in the food processing industry. Of course there are many products in WFM, Trader Joe's and other natural food retailers that bear the label "USDA Organic." But the overwhelming majority of their products are not.
Perhaps this wouldn't matter if we were living in normal times, with a relatively healthy population, environment, and climate. Conventional products sold as "natural" or "nearly organic" would be just one more example of of chicanery or consumer fraud.
But we are not living in normal times.
Demanding that natural and conventional products and producers make the transition to organic is a matter of life or death. And standing in the way of making this great transition are not only Fortune 500 food and beverage corporations, Monsanto, and corporate agribusiness, as we would expect, but the wholesale and retail giants in the natural products sector as well.
We must not allow the "natural" sector to degenerate into a "green-washed" marketing tool that merely disguises unhealthy and unsustainable food and farming practices. We must not allow "natural" to become a green shield for Monsanto and the biotech industry in their quest to take over global agriculture.
Instead, we must demand that the "natural" sector move our nation toward an organic future. How - and how quickly - can we move healthy, organic, and "natural" products from a 12% market share, to becoming the dominant force in American food and farming?
This is a major undertaking, one that will require a major transformation in public consciousness and policy.
But it is doable. And absolutely necessary.
The first step - before we overthrow Monsanto, Wal-Mart, and Food Inc. - is to put our own house in order. That means shopping for certified organic products.
What does certified organic or "USDA Organic" mean? Certified organic means the farmer or producer has undergone a regular inspection of its farm, facilities, ingredients, and practices by an independent third-party certifier, accredited by the USDA National Organic Program (NOP). The producer has followed strict NOP regulations and maintained detailed records. Genetically engineered ingredients, synthetic pesticides, animal drugs, sewage sludge, irradiation, and chemical fertilizers are prohibited. Farm animals, soil, and crops have been managed organically. Food can be processed using only approved methods. Ingredients must be on the "allowed" list.
If every one of us pays close attention to the labels on our food - choosing certified organic over "natural" - we can increase demand for organic, sustainable, healthy foods.
Step two? Demand that your local and state legislators pass labeling laws so that all so-called "natural" products move in a "transition-to-organic" direction. Tell your elected officials that you have the right to know what is - and isn't - in your food.
If we all work together, the U.S. will be well on its way to solving three of the nation's most pressing problems: deteriorating public health, climate change, and the energy crisis.
Don't be fooled. Stop buying so-called "natural" products unless you have no other choice. Buy certified "USDA Organic" products today and everyday. Your health and the health of the planet are at stake. And please join the rapidly growing campaign in California and other states to force mandatory labels on GE foods and to make it illegal to label or advertise GE-tainted foods as "natural" or "all natural."
WFM's most recent attack on OCA predictably backfired, throwing gasoline on the fiery debate surrounding my previous essay "The Organic Elite Surrenders to Monsanto." http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22449.cfm In that essay, written in January 2011, I criticized WFM and several other well-known organic companies for their foolish (now hopefully repudiated) stance of espousing "co-existence" with the USDA and Monsanto, in exchange for minimal federal regulation of genetically engineered crops.
In subsequent articles OCA has called for an end to "organic infighting" http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22499.cfm and for the organic industry, farmers, and consumers to join forces and pass laws or state ballot initiatives (like the current campaign in California) that would require mandatory labels on products containing genetically engineered ingredients, as well as to make it illegalhttp://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24074.cfm to label or market GE-tainted foods as "natural" or "all natural."
Anger is now running so high against Monsanto and the USDA, as well as anyone appearing to tolerate "co-existence" with either group, that rumors are fast spreading that Monsanto has bought out, or plans to buy out, WFM. That rumor is untrue. However, it has focused attention once again on the critical issue of food labeling. WFM, and all of us in the organic community, must put an end to labeling fraud in the "natural" products sector, by passing laws that will require brands and supermarkets to clearly label all genetically engineered ingredients on their products.
Growing awareness has created a strong organic movement
Millions of health-minded Americans, especially parents of young children, now understand that cheap, non-organic, genetically engineered, industrial food is hazardous. Not only does chemical- and energy-intensive factory farming destroy the environment, impoverish rural communities, exploit farm workers, inflict unnecessary cruelty on farm animals, and contaminate the water supply, but the end product itself is inevitably contaminated.Routinely contained in nearly every bite or swallow of non-organic industrial food are genetically engineered ingredients, pesticides, antibiotics and other animal drug residues, pathogens, feces, hormone-disrupting chemicals, toxic sludge, slaughterhouse waste, chemical additives and preservatives, irradiation-derived radiolytic chemical by-products, and a host of other hazardous allergens and toxins.
If common sense weren't enough, scientists warn us that a public health Doomsday Clock is ticking. Big Biotech and Big Ag are the root cause of 80 million cases of food poisoning every year in the US, as well as an epidemic of allergies, reproductive disorders, food-related cancers, heart attacks, and obesity. Within a decade, these diet- and environment-related diseases - heavily subsidized under our Big Pharma/chemical/genetically-engineered/factory farm system - will likely bankrupt Medicare and the entire U.S. health care system.
Likewise millions of green-minded consumers understand that industrial agriculture poses a terminal threat to the environment and climate stability. A highly conscious and passionate segment of the population is beginning to understand that converting to non-chemical, non-genetically engineered, energy-efficient, carbon-sequestering organic farming practices, and drastically reducing food miles by relocalizing the food chain, are essential preconditions for stabilizing our out-of-control climate and preparing our families and communities for future energy and resource shortages.
Millions of us - consumers, farmers, activists - now realize that unless we act quickly, global warming and climate chaos will soon severely disrupt industrial agriculture and long-distance food transportation, leading to massive crop failures, food shortages, famine, war, and pestilence. Even more alarming, accelerating levels of greenhouse gases (especially from cars, coal, cattle, and related rainforest and wetlands destruction) will soon push global warming to a tipping point that will melt the polar icecaps and possibly unleash a cataclysmic discharge of climate-destabilizing methane, now fragilely sequestered in the frozen arctic tundra.
Thanks to this growing consumer awareness - and four decades of hard work - the organic community has built up a $30-billion "certified organic" food and products sector that prohibits the use of genetic engineering. The rapidly expanding organic/natural products sector - organic (4% of total retail sales) and natural (8%) - now constitutes more than 12% of total retail grocery sales, with an annual growth rate of 10-15%. Even taking into account what appears to be a permanent economic recession and a lower rate of growth than that seen over the past 20 years, the organic and natural market will likely constitute 31-56% of grocery sales in 2020.
This consumer-driven movement, under relentless attack by the biotech and Big Food lobby, and with little or no help from government, has managed to create a healthy and sustainable alternative to America's disastrous, chemical- and energy-intensive system of industrial agriculture. Millions of organic consumers are now demanding food and other products that are certified organic and non-GE, as well as locally or regionally produced, and minimally processed and packaged.
The myth of "natural" remains a threat
As impressive as this $30-billion Organic Alternative is, it remains overshadowed by an additional $50 billion in annual spending by consumers on products marketed as "natural."Recent polls indicate that many green-minded consumers remain confused about the qualitative difference between products labeled or advertised as "natural," versus those labeled as organic. Many believe that "natural" means "almost organic," or that a natural product is even better than organic.
Walk down the aisles of any Trader Joe's, Whole Foods Market, or any upscale supermarket and look closely. What do you see? Row after row of attractively displayed, but mostly non-organic "natural" (i.e. conventional) foods and products. By marketing sleight of hand, these conventional foods, vitamins, private label items, and personal care products become "natural" or "almost organic" (and overpriced) in the "natural" supermarket setting.
It's no wonder - and no accident - that consumers are confused. Companies selling these products are simply telling us what we want to hear, so they can charge a premium price.
In fact, all these "natural," "all-natural," and "sustainable," products are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a third-party certifier. Most "natural" or conventional products - whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods - are produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive.
Test these so-called "natural" products in a lab and what will you find? Pesticide residues, Genetically Modified Organisms, and a long list of problematic and/or carcinogenic synthetic chemicals and additives.
Trace these "natural" products back to the farm or factory and what will you find? Climate destabilizing chemical fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, and sewage sludge - not to mention exploited farm workers and workers in the food processing industry. Of course there are many products in WFM, Trader Joe's and other natural food retailers that bear the label "USDA Organic." But the overwhelming majority of their products are not.
Perhaps this wouldn't matter if we were living in normal times, with a relatively healthy population, environment, and climate. Conventional products sold as "natural" or "nearly organic" would be just one more example of of chicanery or consumer fraud.
But we are not living in normal times.
Demanding that natural and conventional products and producers make the transition to organic is a matter of life or death. And standing in the way of making this great transition are not only Fortune 500 food and beverage corporations, Monsanto, and corporate agribusiness, as we would expect, but the wholesale and retail giants in the natural products sector as well.
The full transformation to organic begins with us
We cannot continue to hand over 88% of our consumer dollars to out-of-control, biotech, chemical-intensive, energy-intensive, greenhouse gas- polluting corporations and "profit-at-any-cost" retail chains such as Wal-Mart.We must not allow the "natural" sector to degenerate into a "green-washed" marketing tool that merely disguises unhealthy and unsustainable food and farming practices. We must not allow "natural" to become a green shield for Monsanto and the biotech industry in their quest to take over global agriculture.
Instead, we must demand that the "natural" sector move our nation toward an organic future. How - and how quickly - can we move healthy, organic, and "natural" products from a 12% market share, to becoming the dominant force in American food and farming?
This is a major undertaking, one that will require a major transformation in public consciousness and policy.
But it is doable. And absolutely necessary.
The first step - before we overthrow Monsanto, Wal-Mart, and Food Inc. - is to put our own house in order. That means shopping for certified organic products.
What does certified organic or "USDA Organic" mean? Certified organic means the farmer or producer has undergone a regular inspection of its farm, facilities, ingredients, and practices by an independent third-party certifier, accredited by the USDA National Organic Program (NOP). The producer has followed strict NOP regulations and maintained detailed records. Genetically engineered ingredients, synthetic pesticides, animal drugs, sewage sludge, irradiation, and chemical fertilizers are prohibited. Farm animals, soil, and crops have been managed organically. Food can be processed using only approved methods. Ingredients must be on the "allowed" list.
If every one of us pays close attention to the labels on our food - choosing certified organic over "natural" - we can increase demand for organic, sustainable, healthy foods.
Step two? Demand that your local and state legislators pass labeling laws so that all so-called "natural" products move in a "transition-to-organic" direction. Tell your elected officials that you have the right to know what is - and isn't - in your food.
If we all work together, the U.S. will be well on its way to solving three of the nation's most pressing problems: deteriorating public health, climate change, and the energy crisis.
Don't be fooled. Stop buying so-called "natural" products unless you have no other choice. Buy certified "USDA Organic" products today and everyday. Your health and the health of the planet are at stake. And please join the rapidly growing campaign in California and other states to force mandatory labels on GE foods and to make it illegal to label or advertise GE-tainted foods as "natural" or "all natural."
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Senator pushes for GMO labeling in Washington State
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) Regardless of whether the Republicans or Democrats occupy the White House, federal regulatory officials continue to disregard concerns about genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), and stonewall all efforts to mandate proper GMO labeling. As a result, individual states are having to craft their own GMO labeling legislation, including a new bill recently introduced in Washington State that would mandate GMO labeling beginning in 2014.
The Epoch Times reports that Washington State Senator Maralyn Chase has sponsored a new bill that would require both raw GMOs and processed foods containing GMOs to be properly labeled beginning July 2014. Any food product containing GMOs will have to bear a list outlining which ingredients are natural and which ingredients are GMO. Several other GMO labeling bills have also been introduced in the state legislature.
"People have the right to know what they're eating," said Sen. Chase about her bill. She has reportedly been working for years to address the GMO labeling issue, noting that it is a "question of transparency and accountability."
PCC Natural Markets reports that legislators from both sides of the aisle in Washington State are in support of several farmer-authored GMO labeling bills. After all, farmers trying to sell non-GMO crops, especially overseas, bear the brunt of not having GMOs labeled because their foreign market potential becomes greatly limited.
Of particular concern is the potential future approval of GM wheat, much of which would be grown in Eastern Washington. Farmers there are concerned that, if approved, GM wheat will ruin their foreign market potential since most other industrialized nations require GMO labeling, or flat out reject GMO imports. Japan, for instance, has already said it will reject GM wheat from the US, should it be approved.
Back in early 2011, more than 1,200 Eastern Washington farmers signed a petition brought before the state legislature to require GMO labeling. This "Committee to Safe Farm Markets" has tried for years to get the attention of legislators about GMO labeling, but to no avail.
As we reported previously, similar GMO labeling efforts are currently underway in California. Backed by a coalition that includes Dr. Bronner's Magic Soap, Nature's Path, Eden Foods, Lundberg, Organic Valley, and United Natural Foods, a GMO labeling initiative in California is moving forward with roughly 80 percent support among polled Californians.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/united-states/state-of-washington-seeks-labels-for-gmo-foods-176684.html
http://www.pccnaturalmarkets.com/sc/1201/gmo_labeling.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/033763_GMOs_California_ballot_initiative.html
The Epoch Times reports that Washington State Senator Maralyn Chase has sponsored a new bill that would require both raw GMOs and processed foods containing GMOs to be properly labeled beginning July 2014. Any food product containing GMOs will have to bear a list outlining which ingredients are natural and which ingredients are GMO. Several other GMO labeling bills have also been introduced in the state legislature.
"People have the right to know what they're eating," said Sen. Chase about her bill. She has reportedly been working for years to address the GMO labeling issue, noting that it is a "question of transparency and accountability."
PCC Natural Markets reports that legislators from both sides of the aisle in Washington State are in support of several farmer-authored GMO labeling bills. After all, farmers trying to sell non-GMO crops, especially overseas, bear the brunt of not having GMOs labeled because their foreign market potential becomes greatly limited.
Of particular concern is the potential future approval of GM wheat, much of which would be grown in Eastern Washington. Farmers there are concerned that, if approved, GM wheat will ruin their foreign market potential since most other industrialized nations require GMO labeling, or flat out reject GMO imports. Japan, for instance, has already said it will reject GM wheat from the US, should it be approved.
Back in early 2011, more than 1,200 Eastern Washington farmers signed a petition brought before the state legislature to require GMO labeling. This "Committee to Safe Farm Markets" has tried for years to get the attention of legislators about GMO labeling, but to no avail.
As we reported previously, similar GMO labeling efforts are currently underway in California. Backed by a coalition that includes Dr. Bronner's Magic Soap, Nature's Path, Eden Foods, Lundberg, Organic Valley, and United Natural Foods, a GMO labeling initiative in California is moving forward with roughly 80 percent support among polled Californians.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/united-states/state-of-washington-seeks-labels-for-gmo-foods-176684.html
http://www.pccnaturalmarkets.com/sc/1201/gmo_labeling.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/033763_GMOs_California_ballot_initiative.html
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Help support the GMO labeling campaign in California
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) 2012 could be the beginning of the end for Frankenfoods in the US as GMO's could lose their ability to operate by stealth in at least in one state. Californians may vote later this year on whether to require mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food and food ingredients.
Success in the Golden State may inspire food activists elsewhere in the US. Consumers have no choice but to boycott GMO's, and the labeling requirements will have a serious impact on the bottom line of companies who have invested heavily in creating these pseudo-foods, such as Monsanto. Predictably, these multinational corporations are spending some of the mega-millions they make on sales to uninformed consumers to defeat the California ballot initiative.
As much as 85% of all the corn currently grown in the US contains modified genes -- most of them from Monsanto. Although the corporation has claimed that GMO's will end hunger worldwide, prices for their corn have steadily climbed. The two most common genetically engineered traits are an insecticide in the tissue of "Bt Corn" and a compound in "Roundup Ready Soy" which enables high doses of Monsanto's RoundupR weed killer to be sprayed while the plant survives. BT Corn is currently regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an insecticide.
By taking the issue directly to the people, the California measure stands a good chance of becoming law. Public opinion polls show that more than 90 percent of California voters support GMO labeling. Previous efforts to pass labeling laws have been stalled due to the influence of big food and chemical company lobbyists. The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act was carefully written to avoid any unnecessary burden or cost to consumers or producers. California voters are expected to vote on the initiative in November 2012.
"These genetically engineered foods have been allowed into our food supply without warning, and they aren't labeled," says Pamm Larry, founder of the grassroots movement and the Committee for the Right to Know. "The bottom line is Californians have a right to know what's in the food we eat and feed our children. It's time to send a strong, direct message to those who govern us, whether they be agency or elected, that we want genetically engineered foods labeled."
Sources:
http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/2012/jan/05/local-spin-frankenfood-fight/
http://www.healingtalks.com/health/breaking-newscalifornia-gmo-labelling-initiative-is-filed/
http://www.naturalnews.com/033763_GMOs_California_ballot_initiative.html
http://www.labelgmos.org/
http://www.naturalnews.com/030902_GMOs_Australia.html
http://www.essentiallivingguide.com/article/california-ballot-initiative-to-require-labeling-of-genetically-engineered-foods-gmo-submitted-to-attorney-general/
New initiative would be first-ever US restriction of GMO's
A grassroots coalition of health, environmental and consumer organizations filed papers last fall with the California Attorney General's office to place a citizen's initiative on the ballot late in 2012. If the measure is successful, California would be the first state to adopt mandatory GMO labeling laws.Success in the Golden State may inspire food activists elsewhere in the US. Consumers have no choice but to boycott GMO's, and the labeling requirements will have a serious impact on the bottom line of companies who have invested heavily in creating these pseudo-foods, such as Monsanto. Predictably, these multinational corporations are spending some of the mega-millions they make on sales to uninformed consumers to defeat the California ballot initiative.
GMOs viewed with suspicious in other countries
The US has been slower than some other nations to restrict GMO's, largely because of the FDA's willingness to accept Monsanto's assurances that their laboratory concoctions are safe to eat. Ireland banned the growing of GMO crops in 2009 and uses a GMO-free label for animal products including meat, poultry, dairy, eggs, fish and crustaceans, which are raised with feed free of GMOs. Japan also does not grow any GMO food and limits the import of such foods from nations, including the US, Australia and Canada, which grow them. France requires that products containing more than 0.9 percent genetically modified ingredients indicate GM content on their labels. Worldwide, fifty countries have some form of restriction on GMO's, but so far, the US has been wide open to this dangerous form of food experimentation.As much as 85% of all the corn currently grown in the US contains modified genes -- most of them from Monsanto. Although the corporation has claimed that GMO's will end hunger worldwide, prices for their corn have steadily climbed. The two most common genetically engineered traits are an insecticide in the tissue of "Bt Corn" and a compound in "Roundup Ready Soy" which enables high doses of Monsanto's RoundupR weed killer to be sprayed while the plant survives. BT Corn is currently regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an insecticide.
GMO's untested -- consumers become guinea pigs
GMO foods were not sufficiently tested prior to their release on an unsuspecting populace. Serious questions have been raised about the scientific validity of the in-house studies run by GMO manufacturers which were accepted by the FDA as proof of safety. Independent studies have shown possible links between genetically modified foods and allergies, cancer risks and a host of other health problems. Labeling genetically engineered food will help pinpoint their effects on consumer health. "Because the FDA has failed to require labeling of GMO food, this initiative closes a critical loophole in food labeling law. It will allow Californians to choose what they buy and eat and will allow health professionals to track any potential adverse health impacts of these foods," says Andy Kimbrell, Director of the Center for Food Safety.By taking the issue directly to the people, the California measure stands a good chance of becoming law. Public opinion polls show that more than 90 percent of California voters support GMO labeling. Previous efforts to pass labeling laws have been stalled due to the influence of big food and chemical company lobbyists. The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act was carefully written to avoid any unnecessary burden or cost to consumers or producers. California voters are expected to vote on the initiative in November 2012.
"These genetically engineered foods have been allowed into our food supply without warning, and they aren't labeled," says Pamm Larry, founder of the grassroots movement and the Committee for the Right to Know. "The bottom line is Californians have a right to know what's in the food we eat and feed our children. It's time to send a strong, direct message to those who govern us, whether they be agency or elected, that we want genetically engineered foods labeled."
Sources:
http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/2012/jan/05/local-spin-frankenfood-fight/
http://www.healingtalks.com/health/breaking-newscalifornia-gmo-labelling-initiative-is-filed/
http://www.naturalnews.com/033763_GMOs_California_ballot_initiative.html
http://www.labelgmos.org/
http://www.naturalnews.com/030902_GMOs_Australia.html
http://www.essentiallivingguide.com/article/california-ballot-initiative-to-require-labeling-of-genetically-engineered-foods-gmo-submitted-to-attorney-general/
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Which cereal brands are truly committed to producing clean, organic food
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) The non-profit family farm advocacy group Cornucopia Institute (CI) recently released its Organic Cereal Scorecard, a comprehensive analysis of many popular "natural" and organic breakfast cereal brands that highlight both the best and worst players in the industry.
In the report, CI provides not only a detailed listing of the many companies producing phony "natural" products, but it also outlines those that are committed to producing and selling only clean, organic food to their customers.
You can view our first announcement about the report here: (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html).
Some health food stores and even conventional grocery stores continue to sell "natural" cereal brands that secretly contain chemical pesticide and herbicide residues, genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), and various other deadly toxins. These products are often marketed as being more "natural" than conventional brands, and are even priced at a premium -- but in reality, they are often no different than less expensive conventional brands (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html).
In order to better assist NaturalNews readers in making smart food choices and help them to avoid the "natural" product trap, we have provided a detailed listing of some of the best cereal brands available. These brands are considered to be fully trustworthy and committed to organics, and tests of their products have revealed that their labels truly do match their content. As a result, CI has awarded them top scores in each category, and they all have a full "Wheat Rating."
• Country Choice Organic (Country Choice Organic / Independent Company)
• Farm to Table (Farm to Table Foods, Inc. / Independent Company)
• Go Raw (Freeland Foods / Independent Company)
• Grandy Oats (Grandy Oats / Independent Company)
• Great River Organic Milling (Great River Organic Milling / Independent Company)
• Kaia (Kaia Foods / Independent Company)
• Laughing Giraffe (Laughing Giraffe Inc. / Independent Company)
• Lydia's Organics (Lydia's Organics / Independent Company)
• Nature's Path (Nature's Path / Independent Company)
• Tierra Farm (Tierra Farm / Independent Company)
• Two Moms in the Raw (Two Moms in the Raw / Independent Company)
Each one of these brands scored full points in all seven rating categories, including the organic status of their products; commitment by their corporate owner(s) to organics; policies against GMOs as a brand; policies against GMOs by corporate owner; level of hexane found in products; stance over use of agrichemicals by brand and product; and stance over use of agrichemicals by owner(s).
Some of the largest and most well-known brands in this category include Country Choice Organic, Kaia Foods, and Nature's Path.
Other companies that scored slightly less than perfect, but that deserve a mention for their commitment to organics, include Eco-Planet, Grawnola, Green Barn Organics, Food for Life, and Erewhon. Each one of these brands sells only 100 percent organic cereal and granola products (except for Grawnola and Erewhon).
To view the entire CI Cereal Scorecard and learn more about the criteria used to rate each brand, visit:
http://cornucopia.org/cereal-scorecard/by: Ethan A. Huff
News from www.gmo-news.blogspot.com
In the report, CI provides not only a detailed listing of the many companies producing phony "natural" products, but it also outlines those that are committed to producing and selling only clean, organic food to their customers.
You can view our first announcement about the report here: (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html).
Some health food stores and even conventional grocery stores continue to sell "natural" cereal brands that secretly contain chemical pesticide and herbicide residues, genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), and various other deadly toxins. These products are often marketed as being more "natural" than conventional brands, and are even priced at a premium -- but in reality, they are often no different than less expensive conventional brands (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html).
In order to better assist NaturalNews readers in making smart food choices and help them to avoid the "natural" product trap, we have provided a detailed listing of some of the best cereal brands available. These brands are considered to be fully trustworthy and committed to organics, and tests of their products have revealed that their labels truly do match their content. As a result, CI has awarded them top scores in each category, and they all have a full "Wheat Rating."
Brands that are fully committed to producing organic, GMO-free cereal and granola
• Ambrosial (Ambrosial Organic Inc. / Independent Company)• Country Choice Organic (Country Choice Organic / Independent Company)
• Farm to Table (Farm to Table Foods, Inc. / Independent Company)
• Go Raw (Freeland Foods / Independent Company)
• Grandy Oats (Grandy Oats / Independent Company)
• Great River Organic Milling (Great River Organic Milling / Independent Company)
• Kaia (Kaia Foods / Independent Company)
• Laughing Giraffe (Laughing Giraffe Inc. / Independent Company)
• Lydia's Organics (Lydia's Organics / Independent Company)
• Nature's Path (Nature's Path / Independent Company)
• Tierra Farm (Tierra Farm / Independent Company)
• Two Moms in the Raw (Two Moms in the Raw / Independent Company)
Each one of these brands scored full points in all seven rating categories, including the organic status of their products; commitment by their corporate owner(s) to organics; policies against GMOs as a brand; policies against GMOs by corporate owner; level of hexane found in products; stance over use of agrichemicals by brand and product; and stance over use of agrichemicals by owner(s).
Some of the largest and most well-known brands in this category include Country Choice Organic, Kaia Foods, and Nature's Path.
Other companies that scored slightly less than perfect, but that deserve a mention for their commitment to organics, include Eco-Planet, Grawnola, Green Barn Organics, Food for Life, and Erewhon. Each one of these brands sells only 100 percent organic cereal and granola products (except for Grawnola and Erewhon).
To view the entire CI Cereal Scorecard and learn more about the criteria used to rate each brand, visit:
http://cornucopia.org/cereal-scorecard/by: Ethan A. Huff
News from www.gmo-news.blogspot.com
Monday, February 6, 2012
Monsanto partners with USAID to push GM corn in Nepal
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) The southeast Asian country of Nepal is once again having to fight against foreign interests that are trying to take over its agricultural system. Biotechnology giant Monsanto apparently has its sights set on bringing genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) to this sliver of a country just north of India, and it is allegedly working with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), a so-called humanitarian group, and officials in Nepal to make it happen.
USAID issued a statement on Sept. 13, 2011, saying that it had partnered with Nepal's Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MoACs) and Monsanto to "promote hybrid maize (corn) seeds among 20,000 farmers of Chitwan, Nawalparasi and Kavre districts and provide training to them." Media across Nepal quickly picked up on the story, and massive public outcry ensued.
GMOs are not widely cultivated in Nepal, and the country has always taken a very cautious approach to adopting them. In fact, when it was discovered that some GMO ingredients had potentially already contaminated the nation's food supply back in 2003, government officials quickly made precautionary recommendations at the time to require GMO labeling on all food items.
But with multinational corporations and the US government working overtime to force GM corn on Nepali farmers, Nepal appears to be getting pushed to the brink of no return. Though Nepal still imports some of its corn from elsewhere, the country is having no problems with the conventional, organic, and heirloom varieties it currently cultivates, and has no need whatsoever for GM varieties.
Since the controversy erupted, Nepali officials have reportedly backed off from the plan. Hari Dahal, joint secretary at MoACs, told reporters recently that his agency had "no idea why USAID issued the statements saying that the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives was partnering with Monsanto" because "no agreement had been signed."
USAID was a little more ambiguous about whether or not MoACs was specifically involved in the matter, but the agency did make it very clear that it is working with Monsanto to promote GMOs around the world, including in Nepal. And based on the way Monsanto continues to thrust GMOs on the people of India just to the south, there is no doubt that the biotech giant is doing the same thing to people of Nepal as we speak.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue/2011/11/8/Nation/18676
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/90064942?Monsanto%20focus%20of%20...
USAID issued a statement on Sept. 13, 2011, saying that it had partnered with Nepal's Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MoACs) and Monsanto to "promote hybrid maize (corn) seeds among 20,000 farmers of Chitwan, Nawalparasi and Kavre districts and provide training to them." Media across Nepal quickly picked up on the story, and massive public outcry ensued.
GMOs are not widely cultivated in Nepal, and the country has always taken a very cautious approach to adopting them. In fact, when it was discovered that some GMO ingredients had potentially already contaminated the nation's food supply back in 2003, government officials quickly made precautionary recommendations at the time to require GMO labeling on all food items.
But with multinational corporations and the US government working overtime to force GM corn on Nepali farmers, Nepal appears to be getting pushed to the brink of no return. Though Nepal still imports some of its corn from elsewhere, the country is having no problems with the conventional, organic, and heirloom varieties it currently cultivates, and has no need whatsoever for GM varieties.
Since the controversy erupted, Nepali officials have reportedly backed off from the plan. Hari Dahal, joint secretary at MoACs, told reporters recently that his agency had "no idea why USAID issued the statements saying that the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives was partnering with Monsanto" because "no agreement had been signed."
USAID was a little more ambiguous about whether or not MoACs was specifically involved in the matter, but the agency did make it very clear that it is working with Monsanto to promote GMOs around the world, including in Nepal. And based on the way Monsanto continues to thrust GMOs on the people of India just to the south, there is no doubt that the biotech giant is doing the same thing to people of Nepal as we speak.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue/2011/11/8/Nation/18676
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/90064942?Monsanto%20focus%20of%20...
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Local residents sue DuPont for GMO pesticide 'dust' blowing on homes, children
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) For over ten years, Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., an Iowa-based genetically-modified (GM) seed company owned by DuPont, has been carelessly allowing GM crop pesticide dust to blow onto homes, cars, streets, yards, and children living in residential areas of Kauai, Hawaii. This is according to a new lawsuit.
The Associated Press reports that 150 local residents of Waimea (on Kauai), are suing Pioneer for using undisclosed and potentially deadly pesticides on GMO crops in open-air tests. The plaintiffs claim the company has routinely failed to control the spread of these contaminants as is required by state and county law, as well as identify them publicly.
Pioneer has several GM crop test fields in the Waimea area that are located very close to residential neighborhoods. Especially on windy days, residue from pesticide sprays travels from the fields into nearby neighborhoods, according to local residents, and contaminates practically everything. And despite having filed a petition with Pioneer back in 2000 to have the situation remedied, Pioneer has allegedly done nothing over all these years to curb the uncontrolled spread of pesticide poisons.
"[T]he influx of dust and chemicals from Pioneer's fields has continued while Waimea residents fight a daily battle to keep their homes and property free of dust and chemicals. They continue to suffer on a daily basis," says the lawsuit. It goes on to state that "pesticides and fugitive dust from Pioneer's GMO Test Fields are recognized pollutants that present known and unknown risks to human health and the environment associated with acute, sub-chronic, and chronic exposure."
After filing its initial petition back in 2000, Pioneer responded by promising to clean up the problem and do what it could to prevent the spread of these airborne toxins. But more than ten years later, the problem still persists, according to the plaintiffs, which is why they have no choice but to pursue remedies through the legal system.
Worse, Pioneer has refused to disclose which pesticides it is even using in the test trials, so there is no way to know exactly what is being sprayed, and what dangers they pose. Forcing Pioneer to disclose the identities of these pesticides is the primary goal of the lawsuit, which could later develop further into a case concerning the health effects of exposure to them.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20111216_Dust_from_GMO_crops_spurs_res...
The Associated Press reports that 150 local residents of Waimea (on Kauai), are suing Pioneer for using undisclosed and potentially deadly pesticides on GMO crops in open-air tests. The plaintiffs claim the company has routinely failed to control the spread of these contaminants as is required by state and county law, as well as identify them publicly.
Pioneer has several GM crop test fields in the Waimea area that are located very close to residential neighborhoods. Especially on windy days, residue from pesticide sprays travels from the fields into nearby neighborhoods, according to local residents, and contaminates practically everything. And despite having filed a petition with Pioneer back in 2000 to have the situation remedied, Pioneer has allegedly done nothing over all these years to curb the uncontrolled spread of pesticide poisons.
"[T]he influx of dust and chemicals from Pioneer's fields has continued while Waimea residents fight a daily battle to keep their homes and property free of dust and chemicals. They continue to suffer on a daily basis," says the lawsuit. It goes on to state that "pesticides and fugitive dust from Pioneer's GMO Test Fields are recognized pollutants that present known and unknown risks to human health and the environment associated with acute, sub-chronic, and chronic exposure."
After filing its initial petition back in 2000, Pioneer responded by promising to clean up the problem and do what it could to prevent the spread of these airborne toxins. But more than ten years later, the problem still persists, according to the plaintiffs, which is why they have no choice but to pursue remedies through the legal system.
Worse, Pioneer has refused to disclose which pesticides it is even using in the test trials, so there is no way to know exactly what is being sprayed, and what dangers they pose. Forcing Pioneer to disclose the identities of these pesticides is the primary goal of the lawsuit, which could later develop further into a case concerning the health effects of exposure to them.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20111216_Dust_from_GMO_crops_spurs_res...
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Rep. Kucinich proposes legislation to ban open-air cultivation of pharmaceutical-producing GE crops
(www.gmo-news.blogspot.com) A long-time advocate of protecting the food supply from the detrimental, and most-likely irreversible, effects of genetically-engineered (GE) crops on the environment and humans, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has proposed new legislation to ban the open-air cultivation of GE crops programmed to produce experimental pharmaceutical drugs and various other industrial chemicals and additives.
House Resolution (HR) 3554, also known as The Genetically Engineered Safety Act, will prohibit biotechnology companies like Monsanto from planting GE crops engineered to produce experimental drugs, industrial enzymes, and "novel proteins," in open-air fields. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has already allowed more than 300 outdoor field trials of such GE crops without ever requiring proper safety studies, and the threat of widespread food supply contamination is extreme.
"Under pressure from profit-minded industry, we have already allowed the spread of genetically modified crops into our agriculture at great cost to our economy and with unknown effects on our bodies," said Kucinich. "Many Americans are unaware that crops that are genetically engineered to produce experimental pharmaceutical drugs are being grown in this country in the open, allowing them to contaminate conventional crops without detection. We cannot rely on industry to prevent the unintended spread of genetically engineered organisms."
Besides the cultivation of GM crops like corn and soy for use in the food supply, Big Biotech has been busy cultivating GE crops that literally produce drugs and chemicals right on the plants. According to reports, the industry has already created corn, soybeans, rice, safflower, barley, alfalfa, mustard greens, peas, sugar cane, tomatoes, wheat, and a variety of other GE crops that perform this heinous function.
None of these crops has ever been proven to be safe -- and that is, of course, because they are not safe -- and yet the USDA has given the green light to the industry to plant them in fields near food crops where cross-contamination is inevitable. And once contaminated, there is really no reversing the damage done, which has the potential to completely and permanently alter the food supply for the worst.
"This commonsense legislation would simply ensure that our experimentation with genetic engineering and cloning do not disrupt our traditional food supply," added Kucinich. "When you are talking about the safety and stability of the food supply, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."
Rep. Kucinich has also authored several other GM crop bills that push for proper labeling of GMO foods, increased regulatory approval requirements for GMOs, and increased farmer protections against GM crop systems (http://kucinich.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=1459).
Sources for this article include:
http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=271932
House Resolution (HR) 3554, also known as The Genetically Engineered Safety Act, will prohibit biotechnology companies like Monsanto from planting GE crops engineered to produce experimental drugs, industrial enzymes, and "novel proteins," in open-air fields. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has already allowed more than 300 outdoor field trials of such GE crops without ever requiring proper safety studies, and the threat of widespread food supply contamination is extreme.
"Under pressure from profit-minded industry, we have already allowed the spread of genetically modified crops into our agriculture at great cost to our economy and with unknown effects on our bodies," said Kucinich. "Many Americans are unaware that crops that are genetically engineered to produce experimental pharmaceutical drugs are being grown in this country in the open, allowing them to contaminate conventional crops without detection. We cannot rely on industry to prevent the unintended spread of genetically engineered organisms."
Besides the cultivation of GM crops like corn and soy for use in the food supply, Big Biotech has been busy cultivating GE crops that literally produce drugs and chemicals right on the plants. According to reports, the industry has already created corn, soybeans, rice, safflower, barley, alfalfa, mustard greens, peas, sugar cane, tomatoes, wheat, and a variety of other GE crops that perform this heinous function.
None of these crops has ever been proven to be safe -- and that is, of course, because they are not safe -- and yet the USDA has given the green light to the industry to plant them in fields near food crops where cross-contamination is inevitable. And once contaminated, there is really no reversing the damage done, which has the potential to completely and permanently alter the food supply for the worst.
"This commonsense legislation would simply ensure that our experimentation with genetic engineering and cloning do not disrupt our traditional food supply," added Kucinich. "When you are talking about the safety and stability of the food supply, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."
Rep. Kucinich has also authored several other GM crop bills that push for proper labeling of GMO foods, increased regulatory approval requirements for GMOs, and increased farmer protections against GM crop systems (http://kucinich.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=1459).
Sources for this article include:
http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=271932
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)