Follow by Email

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Monsanto Protection Act Part 2? New Bill Introduced Spells Bad News for GMO Activists



Published June 22, 2015


SOURCE: COLLECTIVE EVOLUTION

A couple of years ago, a bill was introduced (H.R. 933) allowing big biotech corporations, like Monsanto, to override United States federal courts on the issue of planting experimental genetically engineered crops all across the US. This rendered the government powerless when it came to stopping other biotechnology corporations from planting and harvesting. The measure shields sellers of genetically modified seeds from lawsuits, even if the resulting crops cause harm. As a result, the public labelled this bill “The Monsanto Protection Act.”

This time, a bill has been introduced, dubbed the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act Of 2015.” Proposed by United States Congressman Mike Pompeo, the bill is aimed at overriding bills in roughly two dozen states that would require foods made with genetically engineered crops to be labeled as such.

“Activists in nearly 30 states are considering legislation that would require government warning labels on food products containing ingredients derived from biotechnology. These common ingredients, which include corn, soybeans, and sugar beets, are safe to eat. Unfortunately, activists are demanding an official notice that food may contain these ingredients. If consumers are misled to believe the food supply isn’t safe, there is little incentive to innovate or grow these important crops.” (source)

He goes on to state that:

“More than 100 research projects over 25 years involving dozens of independent research groups have affirmed and reaffirmed the safety of genetically modified ingredients. We’re seeking a common sense, science-based solution that will protect consumers, facilitate informed consumer choices, as well as guard against a costly, unnecessary and inefficient state-by-state food labeling system.” (source)


The Other Side Of The Coin And Why This Bill Is Ridiculous

“As part of the process, they portrayed the various concerns as merely the ignorant opinions of misinformed individuals – and derided them as not only unscientific, but anti-science. They then set to work to convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that the new foods were safe.” –Jane Goodall (source)

Sure, as the congressman points out, there have been many publications outlining the supposed safety of genetically modified foods. At the same time, there have been just as many publications outlining their potential danger, which makes it clear that they should not be approved completely safe for consumption. The science alone warrants a label, why is this research constantly ignored?

“The safety of GMO foods is unproven and a growing body of research connects these foods with health concerns and environmental damage. For this reason, most developed nations have policies requiring mandatory labeling of GMO foods at the very least, and some have issued bans on GMO food production and imports.” – David Suzuki, geneticist, academic, environmental activist (source)

For example, here is a study, published by Environmental Sciences Europe, linking GMOs to cancer and liver/kidney damage, as well as severe hormonal disruption. You can read more about that story here.

Here is a study a study recently published in the Journal of Organic Systems last September that found a “very strong correlation” between GMOs and two dozen diseases. You can read more about that story here.

I could probably post 100 studies, but I’m not going to do your research for you. Feel free to browse through our site or do some research on your own. Numerous concerns have been raised with GMOs that deserve serious attention, and, as Suzuki states in the quote above, should have our food industry/governments labeling these products so consumers know what they are eating.

There are so many problems associated with consumption of these crops, and that doesn’t even include the pesticides that go hand in and with GMOs. These have been linked to cancer, birth defects, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and much more.

Here are some studies showing what happens to your body when you switch to organic food.

A worldwide movement is currently taking place that has seen millions of activists gather from all over the world, voicing their desire to have a mandatory GMO label on all food. This would provide consumers with an option, a choice, and the awareness that their food was genetically modified. Seems harmless, doesn’t it? After all, nobody can really argue against the fact that we should have a right to know what is in our food, so why not just label it? More than 60 countries across the globe already require mandatory GMO labeling, and it’s time for Canada and the United States to catch up, but it’s not an easy process.

I’m going to leave you with this:

“Altered Genes, Twisted Truth will stand as a landmark. It should be required reading in every university biology course.” – Joseph Cummins, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Genetics, Western University, London, Ontario

You can learn more about that book and what it’s about, HERE.

Monday, June 22, 2015

Help Fund the Roundup Class Action Lawsuit to Stop Monsanto's False Labeling of this Deadly Poison!


Sunday, June 21, 2015, Jonathan Benson, Staff Writer

(NaturalNews) Three residents of Los Angeles have filed a class action lawsuit against the Monsanto Company for false and misleading advertising. Monsanto's Roundup herbicide currently bears the claim "Glyphosate targets an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets" (italics added for emphasis) that is patently false, and plaintiffs are seeking both monetary damages and a preliminary and permanent injunction against Monsanto's continued use of this false claim.

The filing maintains that, based on the latest science, Roundup does, in fact, target an enzyme found in both plants and people. Those represented in the plaintiff class include every person who purchased Roundup or Roundup-related products in California at any time during the last four years.

As outlined in the suit, Roundup targets an enzyme known as EPSP synthase that's produced by weeds, plants, bacteria, fungi, algae and various other microbes. EPSP synthase is also present in humans, it turns out, though Monsanto adamantly refuses to admit this in its product literature. As a result, millions of people are being mislead and exposed to this deadly, mislabeled chemical concoction.

"This lawsuit challenges a specific claim that appears on all Roundup labels ... and this claim is absolutely, positively false because glyphosate does indeed target an enzyme 'found in people,'" reads the suit. "Produced within our bodies, the targeted enzyme is in fact 'found in people'—in our gut bacteria."

"Because the enzyme that glyphosate targets is indeed found in people—in our gut bacteria—it is therefore objectively false (and inherently misleading) for [Monsanto] to claim that glyphosate targets an enzyme not found in people."

Glyphosate absorbs into plants and accumulates in humans, killing the gut microbiome

In light of the World Health Organization's (WHO) recent admission that glyphosate "probably" causes cancer, and the fact that glyphosate accumulates in human tissue over time, these false claims by Monsanto don't come without human harm. How many backyard gardeners, farmers and ordinary homeowners have doused their crops or yards with Roundup thinking that the product is safe for pets and humans?

Roundup, and particularly glyphosate, absorbs directly into plants and food crops that are later eaten by animals and humans. So on top of the glyphosate residue that lingers on the outside of plants, humans are regularly exposed to the systemic residue that's abundant inside plants that are sprayed with glyphosate.

The consequence of this is prolific contamination with glyphosate in our food supply, our water supplies and our air. A government study, in fact, found that glyphosate is now present in some 75% of air and rain samples, which means this cancer-causing poison is literally raining down on all of us on a regular basis.

"Glyphosate is a 'biocide,' essentially an 'antibiotic,' which means that most Americans eat 'antibiotics' at every meal," adds the suit. "Because glyphosate kills-off gut bacteria that regulate digestive functions, many believe it is responsible for America's chronic indigestion, and because it kills-off gut bacteria that regulate immune system functions, many believe glyphosate is responsible for America's chronic auto-immunity disorders."

Sign petitions calling on Lowe's and Home Depot to stop selling toxic Roundup in stores!

The 11-page lawsuit containing further details about the harm caused by glyphosate and damages sought by plaintiffs is available here:
MonsantoClassAction.org.

Also, be sure to sign the following two petitions calling on the nation's two largest home improvement stores, Lowe's and Home Depot, to stop selling toxic Roundup:

Home Depot:
Change.org.

Lowe's:
Change.org.

Sources:

http://www.monsantoclassaction.org

www.change.org

http://www.naturalnews.com

Learn more:

 http://www.naturalnews.com/050147_Monsanto_Roundup_class_action_false_claims.html#ixzz3doaJNWUw

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Outrage! Oxitec's GM Moths Are Released in New York



Source: Christina Sarich, Natural Society

Biotech company Oxitec has released genetically engineered (GE) diamondback moths at Cornell's agricultural experiment station in Geneva, New York as part of an outdoor trial, and New Yorkers are more than just miffed.

Organic farmers, environmental groups, and New York citizens have sent a letter to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Agriculture Commissioner Richard Ball along with Cornell University President David Skorton and Agricultural School Associate Dean Susan Brown demanding that field trials stop and to provide information to the public about the release of these GM moths.

Oxitec proposed field trials of their GE diamondback moth in September of 2014 to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This is more than likely the first time you are hearing of it.

While Oxitec claims they have had a genetic engineering breakthrough with their GM moth, since the diamondback is indeed a huge agricultural nuisance which damages thousands of acres annually, costing farmers more than $1 billion, they have no idea if their GM moths will cause even more damage.

This Isn’t the First Oxitec Disaster

As Natural Society previously reported, GM moths look to be no better than the GM mosquitoes that are planned for release in the Florida Keys. Oxitec has ties to Syngenta, so it is likely that they aren’t trying to breed out a nuisance moth, but create a super-pest that will make it easier to sell even more pesticides and herbicides.

Furthermore, are we trust the premise for the GM moth’s creation? When Oxitec wanted to release GM mosquitoes I Panama and Florida it was supposedly to control dengue which is spread by the Aedes mosquitoes, but the US hasn’t seen but a handful of dengue fever cases in the past several decades. Oxitec’s GM mosquitoes have a genetic ‘kill switch’ but no one is sure if it will work on just the GM variety or also on the bugs that interbreed with the GM ‘test’ insects. This is likely what we can expect with their GM moths.

Speaking to a Key Haven, Florida resident recently, it became apparent that Oxitec didn’t listen to neighborhood surveys that overwhelmingly were against the release of GM mosquitoes, so it is unlikely that the biotech company will listen to a letter. But what other recourse does a New York resident have? Certainly Florida residents didn’t sign up to be inundated with millions of GM mosquitoes carrying kill switch genes, which not only affect their ecosystem, but likely human health.

In fact, Oxitec and the FDA seem to be working together to deny citizen’s rights altogether. The concerned Key Haven resident I spoke with, Beth Eliot, said that in the last Florida Keys Mosquito Control District Board Meeting which she attended, public comments which were allowed at the meeting were against the release of these GM bugs. However, the District reports support of the release, even when door to door surveys conducted by FKMCD have painted a very different picture.

The Public is Repeatedly Ignored

It seems the decision to release these GM moths in New York is no different. Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch says:

“This release of genetically engineered autocidal moths is the first of its kind in the United States and it sets a very poor precedent that they were released with minimal environmental review and transparency. The USDA’s irresponsible management of this genetically engineered insect is putting the environment and agriculture at risk.”

It may be the first release of its kind regarding GM moths, but Oxitec has already set precedence for working with the FDA to ignore public opinion and go ahead with its master plan. There has been no press release, and no forum for public discourse on the subject – though it is largely assumed, that just as with the GM mosquitoes, no one is looking for more genetically modified pests to be let loose in their neighborhoods.

Similarly to the release of Oxitec’s first round of GM insects, the USDA did not contact the organizations who opposed this release to address their many concerns, and months later, the groups only found out about the impending release through unrelated correspondence with the USDA that the GE moth permit had been quietly approved.

Why the Secrecy?

The big question here is why the secrecy? If these GM insects are so harmless, then why not simply inform the public? When comments were open for the USDA to take preventative measures, the overwhelming outrage was simply ignored.

Jaydee Hanson, Senior Policy Analyst at Center for Food Safety says:
“The first use of GE insects in an agricultural setting should have required public consultations with potentially affected parties, as well as, trials in physically enclosed spaces before even considering open field trials. This violates one of the basic principles of biosafety for genetically engineered organisms—that they should be physically constrained in trials, not openly released.”

Oxitec’s Methods Have Already Failed

As Collective Evolution points out:

“Oxitec has already released a large number of GM olive flies that were used to kill off wild pests that damage crops. In the Cayman Islands, 3 million GM mosquitoes were released, and in this case over 90 percent of the original natural native mosquito population was suppressed. The same results were also seen in Brazil. (source)

Supporters of the GM insects, like Oxitec, claim that those who oppose the idea are simply fear mongering. This is currently the same response from the big biotech giants to opposers of genetically modified foods.”

I have one phrase for Oxitec and the USDA. Karma’s a B@#ch.

To read the letter sent in opposition of the New York GM moth release, look here: fwwat.ch/1FIVQid