Tag Archives: Monsanto

DARK Days Ahead?

dark days

Today, at 10 a.m., Reps. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) and their band of pro-GMO, anti-consumer, stomp-all-over-states’-rights outlaws will stand before the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health and ask the Committee to support H.R. 1599.

We’ve been calling H.R. 1599 the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, because that’s what the bill is intended to do—keep you in the dark about the toxic chemical-drenched GMOs in your food.

But that’s only half the story. Since Pompeo introduced his bill-to-kill GMO labeling laws earlier this year, he’s been tinkering with the language. Now, the latest version of the DARK Act is even darker than the original.

In fact, if you thought the Monsanto Protection Act was bad (and it was), the new-and-improved DARK Act is the Mother of all Monsanto Protection Acts.

In addition to preempting states’ rights to label GMOs, the latest iteration of H.R. 1599 will wipe out all state and local laws that regulate the growing of GMO crops—laws like the one passed in May 2014, Jackson County, Ore.—and weaken federal oversight of GMO crops and foods.

What can you do? Call Congress today, ask your Representatives and Senators to oppose H.R. 1599. Then, check our list of meetings and rallies being held at district offices around the country. OCA has been working with constituents in key districts to schedule these meetings, and get press coverage.

We still need volunteers to help organize meetings in the following districts: Kentucky: Guthrie, Whitfield; Texas -Burgess, Barton, Green; Tennessee – Blackburn; Washingon – Rodgers; Missouri – Long; North Carolina – Ellmers, Butterfield; Indiana – Brooks; New York -Collins; Michigan – Upton; Oregon – Schrader; California – Cardenas.

Today’s hearing is just the first step. We need to continue to meet with members of Congress in their home district offices to make it clear that voters and consumers want Congress to oppose this law. If you can help, email [email protected].

TAKE ACTION: Call Congress TODAY! 202-224-3121 (Tips for calling)

Join a district meeting or rally

Organize a district meeting or rally

 

Big Food: Kicking, Screaming, And Losing Lots Of Money

kraft

A red flag sign of an emotionally abusive relationship is when the abuser goes to great lengths to make the abused party seem “crazy” or “ridiculous.” This is actually just an attempt to maintain power in the relationship and the behavior worsens when they sense that their victim is breaking free. They humiliate, demean, and “tease” the victim in an effort to remain in control.  This is the classic pattern of a bully, whether it’s in a romantic relationship, a workplace relationship, or a parent/child relationship.

Apparently this is also how a dying multi-billion dollar industry behaves in an attempt to shame the fleeing customers.

Here’s Exhibit A, from Pepsi:

(Hat tip to John Vibes at True Activist)

This is just the most recent evidence of a trend mocking those who avoid putting processed garbage into their bodies in attempt to do some damage control.

A couple of months back, headlines screamed about “the new eating disorder” of eating as healthfully as possible. The mainstream media (heavily funded by Big Food, of course) co-opted the very real disorder of Orthorexia Nervosa and assigned the label to folks who refused to consume junk food. They based the media blast on a study published in a Spanish medical journal that said:

Orthorexia is an obsessive-compulsive process characterized by extreme care for and selection of what is considered to be pure ‘healthy’ food. This ritual leads to a very restrictive diet and social isolation as a compensation. Orthorexics obsessively avoid foods which may contain artificial colours, flavours, preservant agents, pesticide residues or genetically modified ingredients, unhealthy fats, foods containing too much salt or too much sugar and other components. The way of preparation, kitchenware and other tools used are also part of the obsessive ritual.

Their advertisers need you to think you’re nuts, because the Big Food Beast is failing. Companies are losing money hand over fist as consumers learn the truth about their unhealthy offerings.  Following is a list of companies that are grasping at anything they can get ahold of to maintain their power positions in the industry:

  • ConAgra (Hunts, Swiss Miss, Chef Boy Ardee)
  • Kraft (Oscar Mayer, Jell-O, Maxwell House, Velveeta)
  • Kellogg
  • Campbell’s Soup
  • Coca-Cola
  • McDonalds
  • Monsanto

(sources: Here and Here)

Meanwhile, businesses that focus on healthful, wholesome, non-processed foods are on the fast track to success. Lisa Leake, the author of the book, 100 Days of Real Food, started out with a blog journaling a challenge that she and her family took to break free of processed foods. The blog is now one of the top food destinations on the web and the book is a New York Times #1 bestseller.

While the trend in the direction of real food is bad news for food “manufacturers” (those words really shouldn’t ever be used together), its great news for the health of our nation.

Expect to continue to see the escalation of propaganda that scoffs at healthy eaters. And every time you see it, smile. It means we’re winning.


Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor who lives in a small village in the Pacific Northwestern area of the United States. She is the author of The Pantry Primer: How to Build a One Year Food Supply in Three Months. On her website, The Organic Prepper, Daisy writes about healthy prepping, homesteading adventures, and the pursuit of liberty and food freedom. Daisy is a co-founder of the website Nutritional Anarchy, which focuses on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Daisy’s articles are widely republished throughout alternative media. You can follow her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter, and you can email her at [email protected]

Take That, Monsanto!

image credit: farmwars.info

image credit: farmwars.info

Monsanto may be able to buy our politicians, but we still have some ethical judges on our side.

On May 29 (2015), a federal judge in southern Oregon ruled that Jackson County’s ban on genetically engineered crops doesn’t violate the state’s Right to Farm Act.

The ruling followed another anti-Monsanto decision in Vermont. On April 27 (2015), Vermont scored a victory in round one of its court battle with Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), when a district judge affirmed the constitutionality of the state’s GMO labeling law.

The Jackson County ruling means that the GMO crop ban, passed in May 2014, will take effect in June. (The ordinance allows farmers currently growing GMO crops to harvest them this season. But they have to remove all GMO crops by June 1, 2015).

In Vermont, the district judge’s ruling paves the way for the country’s first statewide mandatory GMO labeling law to take effect July 1, 2016.

These two victories were hard-fought, against Monsanto-funded odds. But they should give us all hope—and more important, inspire us to keep fighting.

 

Monsanto Bids To Take Over Syngenta – A Move To Assure A Pesticide-Saturated Future?

monsanto-company-mon-makes-45-billion-initial-bid-for-syngenta-ag-adr
By: Mercola.com |

Monsanto recently made a bid to take over European agrichemical giant Syngenta, the world’s largest pesticide producer. The $45 billion bid was rejected, but there’s still a chance for a merger between these two chemical technology giants.

Monsanto is reportedly considering raising the offer, and as noted by Mother Jones,1“combined, the two companies would form a singular agribusiness behemoth, a company that controls a third of both the globe’s seed and pesticides markets.”

As reported by Bloomberg,2 the possibility of Monsanto taking over Syngenta raises a number of concerns; a top one being loss of crop diversity.

“…[A] larger company would eventually mean fewer varieties of seeds available to farmers, say opponents such as [science policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, Bill] Freese.

Another is that the combined company could spur increased use of herbicides by combining Syngenta’s stable of weed killers with Monsanto’s marketing heft and crop development expertise.

‘Two really big seed companies becoming one big seed company means even less choice for farmers,’ said Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food and Water Watch, a policy group in Washington.

‘From a public health and environmental perspective this is a complete disaster,’ said Bill Freese… ‘The more I look at this, the more it worries me and the more it needs to be opposed.’”

What’s in a Name?

According to one analyst, the takeover might boost Monsanto’s reputation, as Syngenta has been “less publicly enthusiastic” about genetically engineered (GE) crops.

Personally, I don’t foresee Monsanto ever being able to shed its toxic reputation, no matter how it tries to rebrand itself. It recently tried to do just that by declaring itself “sustainable agriculture company.”

But actions speak louder than mere words, and there’s nothing sustainable about Monsanto’s business. Taking on the Syngenta name would do nothing to change the obnoxious dichotomy between Monsanto’s words and deeds.

In fact, Mother Jones astutely notes that by trying to acquire Syngenta, Monsanto contradicts “years of rhetoric about how its ultimate goal with biotech is to wean farmers off agrichemicals.”

It’s quite clear Monsanto has no desire or plans to help farmers reduce the use of crop chemicals. On the contrary, it has and continues to push for the increased use of its flagship product, Roundup.

March Against Monsanto: Could We Finally See Mandatory Labelling?

monsanto-672x400

Last weekend the March Against Monsanto once again saw millions join in around the world to stand up for quality food supply. Monsanto, the world’s largest biotech company and producer of GMO foods, has been challenged by the public since GMOs first began hitting grocery stores. People are concerned about the safety of GMOs when it comes to their health and the environment, as our right and ability to produce natural foods in a natural way is being compromised without our permission.

One of the largest themes that came out of this year’s event was that activists are no longer against any one person or thing, instead they are with and for nature, for health, and for truth.

Toronto was among 428 other cities from 38 countries around the world that participated in this grassroots march, which took place on May 23rd. People chanting and holding signs marched in Toronto from Queens Park to Christy Pits, where the Farm 2 Fork festival then took place, showcasing all organic and vegetarian food as well as speakers and performances that engaged hundreds of people.

The Movement Demands Rights

This movement is demanding a basic right we should all have: to know what we are eating. Labelling food that contains GMOs is common practice in 64 countries, yet the US and Canada are not one of them. It’s troubling to see so many other developed nations recognizing the dangers while we turn a blind eye here in North America.

This topic is also shaping up to be a hot one in the upcoming election, as more and more people are paying much closer attention to the food they are putting into their bodies. Leading the charge on the political front within government is NDP MP Murray Rankin (Victoria). He put forward a motion in the House of Commons calling for the mandatory labelling of food products containing ingredients that have been genetically modified.

He has been working closely with teen activist Rachel Parent, who has been advocating for labelling for some time now. Perhaps this will be the year of change, as endorsements for the motion have been well received. Industry organizations, consumer advocacy groups, prominent environmentalists, and food retailers agree that people have a right to know if they are consuming GMOs.

If you’re passionate about the topic you can add your name to an online petition at  http://petition.ndp.ca/the-food-you-eat.

Need a bit more information about GMOs? Check out this link as a starting point for better understanding http://www.davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/queen-of-green/faqs/food/understanding-gmo/.

You can also check out our GMO archives.

Photo Credit: AP Photo / Kamil Zihnigolu

 by Joe Martino

I created Collective-Evolution 5 years ago and have been heavily at it since. I love inspiring others to find joy and make changes in their lives. Hands down the only other thing I am this passionate about is baseball.

Once Again, The World Marches

march-against-monsanto-home

They marched in Australia. They marched in Africa. They marched in Canada. They marched in Dublin and London and all across Europe.

Here in the U.S., we marched in Portland, Maine and Seattle, Wash., and in between, in cities large and small, coast to coast.

On May 23, 2015, the world marched against Monsanto.

Monsanto isn’t alone in its greed-driven quest to sell toxic chemicals, to monopolize the world’s seed supply, to put small farmers out of business, to keep consumers in the dark about the pesticide-laden GMOs in our food. Dow, Dupont, Syngenta, Bayer. They are all destroying our soil and our food—which will ultimately lead to the destruction of the very ecosystem that sustains us.

But Monsanto has become the face of everything that’s wrong with our food and farming system today. And for that matter, everything that’s wrong with our Democracy.

So we marched. In great numbers. All over the globe.

And we’ll do it again next year. And every year after, as long as it takes. Until we rebuild our soil, our farms, our forests, our food system, and our health.

A sampling of photos and articles from the 2015 global March against Monsanto

Image credit: www.march-against-monsanto.com

Think The Anti-GMO Movement Is Unscientific? Think Again

“Anyone that says, ‘Oh, we know that this is perfectly safe,’ I say is either unbelievably stupid, or deliberately lying. The reality is, we don’t know. The experiments simply haven’t been done, and now we have become the guinea pigs.”  ~ David Suzuki, geneticist

Now that the mainstream media is catching on to the public sentiment against GMO food, or at least against unlabeled GMO food, to the tune of millions of Americans who made it a point to drag themselves out of their homes to protest Monsanto last month (as well as at least 40 additional countries), inevitably the indictment will be made: “the anti-GMO movement is “unscientific.”” Is that really so?

What we do know is that the unintended consequences of the recombinant DNA process employed to create genetically engineering organisms are beyond the ability of present-day science to comprehend.  This is largely due to the post-Human Genome Project revelation that the holy grail of molecular biology, the overly-simplified ‘one gene > one trait’ model, is absolutely false.

Only recently, for instance, a previously unidentified viral gene fragment was discovered to be present in most of the GM crops commercialized to date; a finding which calls into question the safety of 54 commercialized crops already commercialized and being used in both food and feed. There could be hundreds of viral-gene altered proteins within these foods, whose complex interactions with DNA and toxicity have never been characterized.

Which statement therefore is more unscientific?

1)      GMO food safety cannot be proven

2)      GMO food harms cannot be proven

The scientific and logical answer would be that both GMO food safety and harms cannot be sufficiently proven; for reasons that include the fundamentally unethical nature of a human clinical trial that could result in poisoning the test subjects.

But, the weight of evidence actually indicates that statement #2 is the more unscientific one, as there is a growing body of scientific research produced by independent scientists indicating that GMO food harms can be clearly demonstrated, and through a simple process of extending feeding studies beyond the 90-day cut-off mark established by biotech corporations with a vested interest in hiding chronic adverse health effects. [see the latest long-term feeding study]

In other words, a failure of science to positively identify a problem does not mean that a problem does not exist. To err on the side of caution, is no less scientific than to err on the side of reckless abandon. When we fail to exercise the precautionary principle in our risk assessments, we are basically saying that GM foods are innocent until proven guilty. Juxtapose that to the burden of proof applied to nutritional or dietary supplements, which despite billions of doses taken in the US each year, have never been found to take anyone’s life. These are increasingly defined as guilty unless proven innocent through multi-million dollar clinical trials.

The problem, of  course, is that the burden of proving safety or toxicity falls on the exposed populations (Suzuki’s “guinea pigs), which only after many years of chronic exposure reveal the harms in their diseases, and then only vaguely in hard-to-prove post-marketing surveillance and epidemiological associations and linkages.

So, with this in mind, let’s bring up one dimension of the toxicity of GM foods and agriculture that cannot be thrown out as ‘unscientific,’ because it is clearly proven to be a health problem in the peer-reviewed and published literature: Roundup herbicide.

Glyphosate Document

free Roundup herbicide download

First, GreenMedInfo.com would like to announce that we are providing a free PDF download of all the research we have accumulated on the dangers of the glyphosate-based herbicide formulations, the most well-known being Monsanto’s patented glyphosate-based formulation known as Roundup. This document contains over 100 study abstracts from the National Library of Medicine (NLM) linking these herbicides to over 40 adverse health effects. Each study in the document is hyperlinked back to the original citation location on the NLM’s bibliographic citation database  MEDLINE. Download the document for free here: Glyphosate formulation research.

As the research in this document will clearly show (and the related open access research page on our website which also contains all the abstract) Roundup’s main ingredient glyphosate is now a ubiquitous poison, found in virtually all water, air and rainfall samples tested. It contaminates the groundwater, the source of most of our natural drinking water, and the soil to the point where it has suppressed and destroyed the microbial biodiversity in certain regions of the world, including probiotic organisms of major food importance. Moreover, it has been found to exhibit toxicity and carcinogenicity in cell studies at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than found in agricultural applications (within the parts per trillion range).  When you calculate that several hundred millions of pounds are produced and used globally each year, this chemical is producing a health and environmental nightmare that is running completely out of control, with the future outlook looking even grimmer. With the discovery of  glyphosate-resistant weeds and insects, companies like Dow and Monsanto are planning on ‘stacking’ herbicide resistance GM traits, and producing plants that are resistant to a multitude of highly toxic agrichemicals, including the Agent Orange ingredient 2,4-D, guaranteeing the ratcheting up of a chemical arms race against the biosphere (and ourselves).

Another fundamental point that many miss with GM food safety is that not only is genetically engineered no longer food (food, by definition, are organisms that we have co-evolved with and consumed for hundreds of thousands, and sometimes millions of years), but in the case of the Bt gene-containing commercial crops are actually classified by the EPA as biopesticides.

But it gets worse. Roundup-ready foods have been engineered to survive the application of glyphosate-based herbicide poisoning. The toxic compounds in herbicides like Roundup, which include toxicity-amplifying surfactants like polyethoxylated tallow amine, end up in the tissue of the plants that we consume, or that our animals consume, bioaccumulating and amplifying their toxicity when we consume them as food.  One major metabolite of glyphosate called Aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), which accumulates in the plant tissues of all Roundup Ready GM plants, is itself highly toxic, but which has not fallen under stringent regulatory oversight.  Essentially, if you eat GM food, it is not just the transgenes and the unintended toxic proteins they produce that are the problem. Rather, the ‘food’ is guaranteed to contain residues of highly toxic chemicals.

While it can be argued that it is ‘unscientific’ to claim the transgenes and their proteins in GMO food cause harm, it is foolish to argue that the continual exposure to known biocides like Roundup residues in our food is safe. Those who make this argument are the ones who lack the guidance of good science, or use the term ‘science’ as a political weapon against those who would seek out and express the truth.

Next time the invective “Unscientific!” comes up in a discussion about GMO food safety, arm yourself with the research that already exists proving GM food is harmful to animal, human and environmental health. And please help us share this article and the PDF far and wide.

Looking to voice your opinion on GMOs? Join the upcoming Monsanto Video Revolt: http://monsantovideorevolt.com/


Article Contributed by Sayer Ji, Founder of GreenMedInfo.com.

Sayer Ji is an author, researcher, lecturer, and advisory board member of the National Health Federation. He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is internationally recognized as the largest and most widely referenced health resource of its kind.

May 23: Break Out The Boots!

march against monsanto

It’s almost time to march. In case you’ve forgotten why the world marches against Monsanto every year, here are a few reminders.

Monsanto’s Agent Orange was responsible for 400,000 deaths and disfigurements and birth defects in 500,000 babies. The company paid out $180 million in a lawsuit, but never took responsibility.

Monsanto has spent (and is still spending) millions of dollars to defeat GMO labeling laws. When the state of Vermont finally passed one, Monsanto sued. The company is determined to drag out that court case, despite a recent ruling suggesting Monsanto doesn’t have much of a case.

Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, the most widely used herbicide in the world, was recently declared a probable carcinogen. The company’s response? Demand a retraction (a move that so far has been unsuccessful). There are so many more reasons we need to keep the pressure on this corporation. So while it might be tempting to think, “Another March against Monsanto? Been there, done that,” think again! This year’s march will be every bit, if not more important than last year’s. Join the Social Media March! Can’t take to the streets on May 23? A group of creative and passionate activists in Georgia have organized a month-long Social Media March against Monsanto. Find out how here. Organize a Day of Action against the DARK Act OCA is asking everyone, but especially everyone whose representatives serve on either the House Agriculture or Energy and Commerce Committees, to organize a Day of Action against HR 1599 (The DARK Act) during the week immediately following the May 23 March against Monsanto. March Against Monsanto events list here Organize a Day of Action against the DARK Act Create a media advisory for your local press Submit a letter to the editor about stopping the DARK Act here

NYT Pro-GMO Propaganda

  nyt

Clear evidence shows GMO foods and ingredients are inherently unsafe. Reliable independent studies prove it.

Claims otherwise are Big Lies. Scientifically conducted animal studies show major human health risks from GMO products – including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, gastrointestinal abnormalities, and major organ changes.

Monsanto and other GMO producers spend millions of dollars burying hard evidence – including funding scientists, journalists and others on the take to lie for hard cash.

Americans don’t know what they’re eating. Labeling is prohibited.

Most foods and ingredients they ingest are GMO tainted – slow poison harming their health.

Congress lets these products go unregulated. Bipartisan support approves poisoning the nation’s food supply.

NYT editors are in lockstep with Monsanto and other biotech giants. They outrageously claim “no reliable evidence (proving) genetically modified foods now on the market pose any risk to consumers.”

They cite the corporate controlled FDA as its source. They claim “little reason to make labeling compulsory.”

Concerned consumers can buy organic products, they say. They ignore obvious issues.

Why hasn’t Washington mandated proved safe foods and ingredients? Why aren’t hazardous GMOs and dangerous chemicals banned.

America’s food supply isn’t safe to eat. Federal, state and local governments do nothing to change things.

Nor editors in the tank for money and power. Times editors gave feature op-ed space to Mark Lynas – an industry funded supporter through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – a known promoter of GMO products.

When asked the source of his funding, Lynas claims the Gates supported African Agricultural Technology Foundation provides it.

On April 24, he headlined his Times op-ed “How I Got Converted to GMO Foods.” He ignored how well paid he’s been to promote them.

He touted the alleged success of pest-resistant eggplant “supplied by the government-run Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute.”

He claimed productivity doubled. He ignored how it declines the longer GMO seeds are planted – or the toxic products they produce.

He claims farmers like Mohammed Rahman look forward to lifting his family out of poverty.

He nonsensically says he’s improving environmental conditions at the same time.

How one issue relates to the other. Activists want his GMO eggplant banned. It’s unsafe for human health. Not according to Lynas.

“I, too, was once in that activist camp,” he says. “I a lifelong environmentalist, I was opposed to genetically modified foods in the past.”

“Then I changed my mind. I decided I could no longer continue taking a pro-science position on on global warming and an anti-science position on GMOs.”He lied calling GMOs safe to human health.

“As someone who participated in the early anti-GMO movement, I feel I owe a debt to Mr. Rahman and other farmers in developing countries who could benefit from this technology,” he says.

“At Cornell, I am working to amplify the voices of farmers and scientists in a more informed conversation about what biotechnology can bring to food security and environmental protection.”

“We need this technology,” he insists. “We must not let the green movement stand in the way.”

It bears repeating. Independently conducted studies free from industry influence and pressure show GMO foods and ingredients harm human health.

The debate is over. It’s up everyone who eats to demand governments assure what they ingest is safe – that all harmful foods and ingredients are banned.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Revealed: A Secret Monsanto Document In The Maui GMO Case

gmo free

By: Jon Rappoport | NoMoreFakeNews.com

Imagine you are a lawyer arguing a case before a judge. There is no jury. The judge will decide the outcome.

The judge tells you, “Look, the other side, your opponents in this case, have filed documents with me. These documents are at the heart of their argument. I can’t allow you to read the documents. I can only give you access to heavily redacted versions. You’ll have to do the best you can. I have read the full documents. Your opponents, of course, know every word of those documents. But you don’t. And you won’t. Good luck. Limp along as well as you can.”

That’s what we’re talking about here.

(The link to the document is located at the bottm of this article.)

Last Election Day, the people of Maui County voted to halt all local GMO and pesticide experimentation being carried out by Monsanto and Dow.

During the temporary halt, a complete independent investigation would be done, to find out exactly how harmful the pesticides and GMOs were.

But the legal and binding vote was suspended, because Monsanto and Dow immediately sued.

The case is now hung up in Federal Court.

I’ve just learned that Monsanto filed documents “under seal,” to make its case in the proceeding now before Federal Judge Susan Oki Mollway.

Monsano requested the court make the documents secret, and the previous Judge, Barry Kurren, agreed to it.

Here, in legalese, is Kurren’s decision:

“ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL IN PART THE DECLARATIONS OF SAM EATHINGTON, JESSE STIEFEL, AND ADOLPH HELM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION re 13- Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 11/14/2014.

‘IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ ex parte application is GRANTED. Accordingly, the subject declarations shall be filed by the Court under seal, and redacted versions may be filed with the Plaintiffs’ Motion.’”

That means the lawyers for the voters of Maui can’t see those Monsanto documents. Not in full. They can only read redacted versions of Monsanto making its case for continued GMO/pesticide experiments on Maui—contravening the demands of Maui voters.

What kind of court is this?

Judge Mollway, who will decide the case, can read everything Monsanto offers in its defense, but the lawyers against Monsanto have no full access and, therefore, can’t argue their side from full knowledge.

This echoes of cases where prosecutors claim “national security” as an issue. In those instances, documents are either excluded as evidence, or only redacted versions are allowed in.

Is this what we’re dealing with here? Monsanto’s concerns have become, in a federal court, a matter of national security?

Below, you will see a link to one such redacted Monsanto document. You will see the many blacked out lines.

One section (no.7) states: “…Monsanto currently owns or leases approximately 784 acres of farmland on the island. Certain specific locations on Maui are uniquely suitable to multi-season/cycle breeding and research.” The next 14 lines of the section are blacked out.

It’s not much of a stretch to infer those 14 lines are blacked out to conceal Maui locations of Monsanto facilities. You mean the addresses and names of Monsanto stations and growing fields on Maui are a secret?

Suppose, in your city, in your region, a major corporation was carrying out, on a regular basis, experiments with new, non-commercial, toxic pesticide chemicals and genetically altered organic materials. And suppose you were told that the permanent facilities of that corporation in your region were located at secret sites. How would you feel about it?

Wouldn’t that raise significant suspicions in your mind? Wouldn’t you want to know exactly what was going on at each and every one of those facilities? And if you were denied that information, as well as the names and addresses of the locations, wouldn’t you infer the secrecy was covering up something harmful to you?

Whole sections of the Monsanto court document are blacked out (e.g., no. 8 and 9). What do they say? Only the Judge and Monsanto know. The lawyers representing the voters of Maui don’t have a clue.

Section 10 states: “The current [Monsanto] workforce in the County [of Maui] has been trained over many years at the precise pollination techniques required and to perform other specialized tasks.” The next two lines are blacked out. Why? Because Monsanto considers further explanation of what these workers do to be proprietary secrets? This is what the Maui voters want to know about, because they, the people of Maui, are on the receiving end of the secret wind-blown pesticide and GMO experiments.

Section 11 of the court document is quite strange. It states: “And the US Department of Agriculture [USDA] sets requirements for how regulated field trials of new GE [genetically engineered] crops must be conducted.” The next 12 lines are blacked out. Why? Are the USDA regulations themselves a secret? Is there something about these regulations Monsanto doesn’t want the public to know? The “field trials” are at the heart of what the people of Maui are objecting to. How toxic are the secret experimental pesticides? How dangerous to health are the secret experimental GMOs?

Section 13 mentions a corn-crop disease called Goss’s Wilt. Then, six lines are blacked out. Why? What is Monsanto hiding from the people of Maui?

How in the world can the lawyers representing the voters of Maui argue their case in federal court when all this information is being withheld from them? The answer: they can’t.

Is some of Monsanto’s federally funded biowarfare research (contracted by the US National Institutes of Health)—the details of which Monsanto won’t disclose—taking place on Maui?

The lawyers representing the people of Maui should be filing new motions to declare this case an impossible travesty. Until the lawyers can read every word of the documents Monsanto has filed with the court, there is no case, there is no proceeding, there is only a con job, with Monsanto the preordained winner by default.

And until the alternative media covers the Monsanto-Maui case and blows it up into the scandal it is, there will be no chance of justice.

Here is a link to the Monsanto court document I’ve been referring to:

Declaration of Sam Eathington, Vice President of Global Plant Breeding, Monsanto

Declaration of Sam Eathington, Vice President of Global Plant Breeding, Monsanto


original article: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/revealed-a-secret-monsanto-document-in-the-maui-gmo-case/

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

World Health Organization: Monsanto’s Roundup “Probably” Causes Cancer

monsanto roundup cancer

The WHO has issued a damning pronouncement about the world’s largest seed company:

Glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Monsanto’s toxic Round-up herbicide, is “probably carcinogenic.”

The announcement comes after a report was published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in a British medical journal.  The agency cited numerous studies in which occupational exposure to glyphosate was linked to “increased risks for non-Hodgkin lymphoma”.

The Wall Street Journal reported:

“The assessment followed a meeting this month among 17 experts representing 11 countries, who evaluated the cancer-causing potential of glyphosate and four other pesticides. The research agency, which hasn’t previously classified glyphosate, monitors global cancer cases while trying to identify causes and responses.”

Monsanto, unsurprisingly, disagrees with the assessment.  Phillip Miller, the Vice President of what is possibly the most hated company in the world, responded to the WHO’s announcement:

“We don’t know how IARC could reach a conclusion that is such a dramatic departure from the conclusion reached by all regulatory agencies around the globe.”

Other studies concur that Round-up is deadly

Actually, it isn’t just the IARC that has reached such a conclusion. I guess VP Miller missed it, but last year, two major, peer-reviewed studies offered proof that glyphosate is deadly.

The first study found that glyphosate increases the breast cancer cell proliferation in the parts-per-trillion range.

An alarming new study, accepted for publication in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology last month, indicates that glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide due to its widespread use in genetically engineered agriculture, is capable of driving estrogen receptor mediated breast cancer cell proliferation within the infinitesimal parts per trillion concentration range.

The study, titled, “Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors,” compared the effect of glyphosate on hormone-dependent and hormone-independent breast cancer cell lines, finding that glyphosate stimulates hormone-dependent cancer cell lines in what the study authors describe as “low and environmentally relevant concentrations.”

Another study found that consumption of glyphosate causes intestinal and gut damage, which opens the door to numerous human diseases, such as diabetes, gastrointestinal disorders, heart disease, obesity, autism, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s

However, another classification of allergy-type food is emerging and getting recognized for adverse effects on the human intestinal tract and gut. Those foods are genetically modified organisms known as GMOs or GEs. There is scientific research indicating intestinal damage from GMO food and the article “Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Disease” discusses how the inordinate amount of pesticides sprayed on GMOs leaves residues in GMO crops that, in turn, are being traced to modern diseases.  (source)

Monsanto’s stocks are falling

Monsanto’s stock has fallen more than 3% since the WHO’s announcement. Let’s spread this information far and wide and hope that stocks continue to fall for the company.


Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor who lives in a small village in the Pacific Northwestern area of the United States. She is the author of The Pantry Primer: How to Build a One Year Food Supply in Three Months. On her website, The Organic Prepper, Daisy writes about healthy prepping, homesteading adventures, and the pursuit of liberty and food freedom. Daisy is a co-founder of the website Nutritional Anarchy, which focuses on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Daisy’s articles are widely republished throughout alternative media. You can follow her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter, and you can email her at [email protected]

Paid By Monsanto: Universities Taking Money From The Biotech Bully

monsanto-money

By: Barbara Peterson | Farm Wars

I want food that Grandma ate. How hard is that to understand? I don’t want it chemically lobotomized and coated with poison. I don’t want it genetically spliced to become something between a salamander and a tomato. I don’t want it radiated and mutated. I don’t want a virus inserted in its DNA. I don’t want its RNA tampered with to change its traits. I just want good, old fashioned food. The kind you grow in your garden and use to feed your family and critters. The kind the bees like to collect pollen from and not go belly up the minute they enter the hive. The kind that you can pick with your bare hands and eat right from the plant. The kind that won’t turn your stomach into a pesticide factory and your guts into mush.

I actually have the gall to want food that is edible and good for me, not just something a chemical company threw together sporting a pretty label and packaging that says it is. Is that really too much to ask?

Well, according to Monsanto et al, it is. And the agribusiness giants have taken over the universities.

These corporate GMO and chemical farming pushers are brainwashing whole generations of young adults and senior adults that GMOs are safe, have been around for thousands of years, and are a perfectly natural alternative to Grandma’s garden, made by Monsanto. The chemical/life sciences company. You know the one. The one that appears to poison the very ground that it sits on along with the people around it.

Just how were Nitro citizens exposed to dioxin? Monsanto was producing the toxic herbicide Agent Orange in Nitro, and dioxin is a chemical byproduct of the substance. It is known to cause serious health conditions. The factory which produced Agent Orange was opened in Nitro in 1948 and remained in operation until 2004, even though usage of this herbicide in the past (in Vietnam and other Asian countries) was fatal to millions of citizens and the war veterans who were exposed to it.

http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-ordered-pay-93-million-small-town-poisoned-herbicide/#ixzz38ZTuFLvq

Is this what we want for our children? Our planet? Our dinner plates?

Monsanto laughed all the way to the bank while covering up the toxicity of its industrial shenanigans as Anniston, Alabama’s children played in and ate dirt soaked with PCBs at yet another toxic superfund site created by Monsanto.

On the west side of Anniston, the poor side of Anniston, the people ate dirt. They called it “Alabama clay” and cooked it for extra flavor. They also grew berries in their gardens, raised hogs in their back yards, caught bass in the murky streams where their children swam and played and were baptized. They didn’t know their dirt and yards and bass and kids — along with the acrid air they breathed — were all contaminated with chemicals. They didn’t know they lived in one of the most polluted patches of America.

http://farmwars.info/?p=664

That is what Monsanto is about. Greed and avarice. Not feeding a starving world as the PR would have you believe.

And this is the company my friends, that is hell bent on owning the foundation of the world’s food supply, including that snack you are munching on, organic or not. And we are supposed to trust its good intentions? I’ll just bet those kids who played on that toxic soil in Anniston are feeling the love about now, as they inhale their last breaths through a respirator in the cancer wing of the local hospital.

Want to know why supposed “scientists” from universities such as UC Davis can get by with purporting to be “not receiving funds” from the biotech industry while spouting Monsanto propaganda? Because the money they receive is laundered through the universities they work for. They don’t receive it directly from Monsanto, they simply receive their paycheck from the university that does. Or the foundation that does. Or whatever biotech sinkhole that will accept money for services rendered.

(click image tio enlarge)

universities

http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/PublicResearchPrivateGain.pdf

Land grant universities’ dependence on industry money has corrupted the independence of public science, as academics align their research projects with the ambitions of the private sector. Industry funding also diverts academic resources and attention away from projects that benefit the public, including research that challenges corporate control of food systems.

Donors can and do influence the outcomes of research to meet their business needs. More than 15 percent of university scientists acknowledge having “changed the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressure from a funding source.”

Individual examples of pro-industry research abound… [A] study found that around half of authors of peer-reviewed journal articles about the safety of genetically engineered (GE) foods had an identifiable affiliation with industry. All of these produced favorable results to industry sponsors, while very few acknowledged having received industry funding.

http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/PublicResearchPrivateGain.pdf

The future of a major research deal between UC Davis and the Monsanto corporation brings the role of the university into bold relief. How far can a university go in collaborating with private industry before its mission of contributing to basic knowledge becomes distorted? How will we know when it’s gone too far?

http://nature.berkeley.edu/srr/Alliance/novartis/davis.htm

Here is a link to a letter confirming only one of Monsanto’s many contributions to UC Davis:

http://www.cheeseslave.com/wp-cont…/…/2012/10/grfx_c3_31.pdf

The following is a portion of a Sacramento Bee article that has been removed from the newspaper’s site:

A “who’s who” of international biotechnology companies fund work at UC Davis. They include Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont and Bayer. Some grants pay for specific research, but many arrive with no official strings attached. Whatever the form, the companies get something in return – access to the university’s talent pool and, often, first crack at its scientific breakthroughs.

The public is having a hard time figuring out where the corporate door ends and where the university door begins,” said Bill Liebhardt, former director of the UC system’s sustainable farming program, which promotes nonindustrial farming methods.

Small farmers — the very people agricultural colleges like UC Davis were established to help — feel neglected. “The university is being led by industry,” said Judith Redmond, co-owner of Full Belly Farm, an organic vegetable farm in Yolo County. (Source: Sacramento Bee)

But don’t worry, Monsanto and its cohorts are feeding the world. What’s left of it when they get through is anyone’s guess.

This type of behavior is unacceptable by any standards. The Universities are essentially bought off by corporate biotech interests such as Monsanto’s and tasked with unleashing a technology with relatively unknown consequences on the general public under the guise of a love for humanity; a PR campaign designed to sell as much of the stuff as possible. This type of behavior is not only unethical, but criminal. Yet, that is exactly what Monsanto has a sordid history of doing and getting away with. With the government’s blessing and complicity. Money talks, reason walks. Along with common sense, compassion, and any spark of humanity left in the souls of those wretched creatures who are pulling the trigger on humanity one gene-spliced concoction at a time.


Article first appeared at Farm Wars.

 

Monsanto’s Land Grab In Ukraine

crop_wheat_wind_735_350

Although Europe has for the most part rejected genetically engineered organisms, that has not prevented GMO giant Monsanto from taking advantage of one-third of Europe’s arable land.

Long considered Europe’s “bread basket,” Ukraine’s agricultural potential is huge. It’s rich dark soil is highly valued and ideal for growing grain.

Farmland producing it matches Texas in size and amounts to about one-third of Europe’s arable land.

Ukraine exports include wheat, corn, barley, vegetables, sugar beets, sunflower seeds, meat and milk.

About one-fourth of Ukrainian workers are in agriculture or forestry related areas. Monsanto and other agribusiness giants intend exploiting Ukraine’s agricultural potential.

In 2014, the Oakland Institute published a report titled “Walking on the West Side: The World Bank and the IMF in the Ukraine Conflict,” saying:

“Whereas Ukraine does not allow the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture, Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies.”

“There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry.”

“As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, ‘Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont.”

Earlier Ukrainian law prohibited private sector farmland ownership. No longer. Private investors can buy it beginning in January 2016. More on this below.

IMF loan stipulations require permitting GMO production. Biowarfare is transforming millions pristine acres into poisoned wasteland. Ecogenocide for profit. Monsanto’s dirty hands are hugely involved.

In May 2014, The New York Times explained what was coming. Saying Ukraine’s agricultural success is crucial for its economy and ability to “reduc(e) its dependence on Russia.”

“Western interests are pressing for change…As part of (an IMF loan agreement), the country’s government must push through business reforms that” let agribusiness and other corporate sectors operate freely.

“Big multinationals” want to exploit Ukraine’s potential. Especially Europe’s richest farmland. Fascist run Ukraine is now ground zero for mass proliferation of harmful-to-health GMO crops in Europe.

On January 13, the European Parliament passed legislation granting member states the right to permit or prohibit GMO crops.

Nine EU countries currently ban them. Monsanto’s MON810 maize is the only GMO crop some European countries permit.

New legislation potentially opens things to greater GMO European production. According to UK-based Soil Association policy director Peter Melchett:

“The rights of farmers who do not wish to grow GMO crops, particularly in England are under threat by this proposal.”

“Indeed, the entire organic sector, growing rapidly in Europe and which may double by 2020, is in danger – as are the rights of anyone who wants to buy GMO free foods.”

Greens Party food safety spokesman Bart Staes said the new law “risks finally opening the door for genetically modified organisms to be grown across Europe.”

“Despite a majority of EU member states and citizens being consistently opposed to GMOs, the real purpose of this new scheme is to make it easier to wave through EU authorizations of GMO crops.”

“Countries opposed to GMOs are given the carrot of being able to opt-out of these authorizations but the scheme approved today fails to give them a legally-watertight basis for doing so. This is a false solution.”

Agribusiness giants like Monsanto may now apply more pressure than ever on EU countries to permit GMO production.

Friends of the Earth said the new law lets them have “first say in the decision-making process.”

Countries henceforth against GMO production may not ban them based on environmental concerns.

Only on environmental policy objectives, town and country planning, land use, socio-economic impacts, prohibiting GMOs in the presence of other crops, agricultural policy objectives or public policy.

Greenpeace said excluding environmental concerns could have “serious consequences.” According to its EU agriculture policy director Marco Contiero:

“This new law is supposed to give countries some legal muscle to prevent GMO crops from being grown on their territory.”

“But it has some major flaws. It grants biotech companies the power to negotiate with elected governments and excludes the strongest legal argument to ban GMO crop – evidence of environmental harm.”

Obama maintains strong ties to agribusiness giants like Monsanto. So do Bush and Clinton families. They oppose labeling.

Reportedly they eat organic foods whenever possible. Uncaring about mass marketing of harmful-to-human health GMOs.

On February 6, Sputnik News headlined “German Lawmakers Claim Ukraine Conflict Covers Up Massive Cropland Seizures.”

Saying it’s a “smokescreen” to let World Bank/European Bank for Reconstruction and Development financed agribusiness steal Ukraine’s highly valued farmland.

German left faction parliamentarian Birgit Bock-Luna said Ukraine’s conflict “is used to cover up a sale of farmlands in the interest of major corporations.”

A temporary ban prohibits it until January 2016. Monsanto, German and other agribusiness giants are circumventing the law.

Seizing land through leasing schemes. Generously financed by international money lenders, Millions of Ukrainian acres are being opened to GMO production.

“Lawmakers say they have reason to believe that the German government has been involved in funding farmland grabs in Ukraine through its ministries, providing assistance to joint EU and German agricultural projects with Kiev,” Sputnik News reported.

“The Ukraine Investment Climate Advisory Services Project, Germany’s agricultural center Deutsche Agrarzentrum (DAZ), and the German Advisory Group on Economic Reforms in Ukraine are some of the projects that helped to negotiate land grabs with Ukrainian government officials, lawmakers said.”

Kiev putschists are handing over Ukraine’s rich farmland to agribusiness in return for IMF loans.

The Oakland Institute’s report said Yanukovych’s pre-coup government began implementing “pro-business reforms” through the Ukraine Investment Advisory Services Project.

As well as by “streamlining trade and property transfer procedures…” Putschist takeover accelerated IMF/World Bank mandated structural adjustments.

Foreign investment followed. Agribusiness and other Western corporate interests are grabbing all they can.

At the expense of Ukraine’s economy and welfare of its people. Business giants “failed to demonstrate how (their) programs will improve the lives of Ukrainians and build a sustainable economic future.”

Free-wheeling plunder accomplishes the opposite. Ukraine is being systematically raped.

Its resources stolen. Its people exploited. Its economy deteriorating toward collapse.

While US supported war against its own citizens rages.

During a Wednesday Kiev press conference with illegitimate fascist prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Kerry repeated one Big Lie after another about conditions in Ukraine and Russia.

Claiming “remarkable democratic successes, even in the face of…incredible obstacles.”

Accused Donbas freedom fighters of Kiev-committed high crimes against peace.

“Let there be no doubt about who is blocking the prospect of peace here,” Kerry blustered.

“Russian weapons and fighters” are involved, he said. Despite no corroborating evidence whatever, Kerry claimed “no question about tanks flowing, rocket systems being transported, convoys of goods carrying both people, weapons, and other instruments of battle.”

On the one hand, Washington’s Ukrainian proxy war is murdering thousands of Donbas residents.

Irresponsibly challenging Russia at the same time. Positioning thousands of NATO forces near its border. Risking East/West confrontation.

On the other, Monsanto and other Western corporate predators are raping Ukraine. It’s a central European laboratory for plunder.

Poisoned with GMO crops. While its economy deteriorates toward collapse. On Thursday alone, its hryvnia currency lost 30% of its value.

Analysts called what happened stunning. Forbes said its economy “reached a breaking point.”

Its Donbas war is “put(ting) increasingly unbearable pressure on an economy” struggling to keep from collapsing altogether.

“Things can’t go on this way for much longer before something snaps,” said Forbes. Without multi-billions of dollars in aid, “there won’t be a Ukrainian economy left” before long.

Maybe no Europe if Washington’s rage for war isn’t stopped. On Friday, Munich’s 51st three-day Security Conference began.

Hundreds of politicians, diplomats, military officials, business executives, geopolitical experts, and various other public figures began discussing conflict resolution options while US manipulated war on Donbas escalates.

Twenty heads of state are attending. So are 60 foreign ministers. According to conference director Wolfgang Ischinger:

“The more serious the crisis, the more important the security conference will be for those diplomats who need to find solutions to conflicts.”

“The crisis in Ukraine, the continuing conflicts and processes of disintegration in the Middle East as well as new terrorist phenomena like the so-called ‘Islamic State’ have shown clearly that the basic rules of the international system are in question.”

Poroshenko is attending. So is Sergey Lavrov. Joe Biden and John Kerry head a US delegation.

According to Munich’s Suddeutsche Zeitung, they’re expected to urge tougher anti-Russian measures.

“(I)ncreas(ing) the price for (nonexistent) Russia(n) aggressive behavior.” Adding Europe’s security is at stake. Ignoring Washington’s full responsibility.

On Saturday, Biden, Lavrov and Merkel will address conference participants. Expect Ukrainian crisis conditions to be highlighted.

Lavrov is expected to meet Kerry and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg separately.

A panel discussion will address “The World in 2015: Collapsing Order, Reluctant Guardians?” Based on a report prepared for the conference.

Given Washington’s rage for war, Europe’s security is more jeopardized than any time since summer 1914 and 1939. Don’t expect Munich discussions to change things.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

GMO Bedfellows: Monsanto And The Nature Conservancy

The Nature Conservancy

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) calls itself “the leading conservation organization working around the world to protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people.” According to its website, TNC “addresses the most pressing conservation threats at the largest scale.”

So you might be surprised to learn that TNC is run and funded by some of the world’s worst polluters and destroyers of the earth’s soil, air, water and food system—and that one of those companies is Monsanto.

TNC, ranked among the nation’s most trusted organizations, makes no attempt to hide its connections to companies like Monsanto, Alcoa, BP Oil, and Dow. It’s right there on the organization’s website.

Here’s what TNC CEO Mark Tercek has to say about GMOs. (Warning: It’s pretty much the same thing Monsanto has to say about GMOs):

“Another agricultural technology we should consider carefully is genetic modification. The National Academy of Sciences has found no adverse health effects from GMOs, and also concluded that they can be environmentally beneficial in some ways.”

TAKE ACTION: Tell Nature Conservancy CEO Mark Tercek: Get Out of Bed with Monsanto!

Post on TNC Facebook Page

TNC CEO Mark Tercek on Twitter

 

Monsanto’s Bt-Toxins Found To Kill Human Embryo Cells

gmo corn
By: Christina Sarich | Natural Society

Many individuals have heard it a million times, but for the uninformed, or those just looking to fuel their 2014 fire to finally defeat Monsanto and their cronies, you’ll be interested to know that Monsanto’s Bt-toxin is far from ‘safe’ as the chemical company claimed it would be when filing their papers with the FDA. New research from Canada show that BT toxins are showing up in pregnant women, and low and behold – they are killing human embryo cells. 2014 is the year of the horse, but we’re not through beating this one to death.

It’s called reproductive toxicology, and just like their suicide seeds, these Bt toxins are starting to kill our own unborn children. This is no exaggeration. Hopefully reading further will compel you to take action. It is time to put Monsanto to rest, bankrupt them, and let the world know their ‘secrets’ near and far.

Bt toxins are prominent in genetically altered crops such as corn, soy, wheat, and others, called Cry1Ab – and they can be lethal. Not only do these cry-toxins target the kidney cells of developing human fetuses, but when Cry1Ab and Cry1Ac are combined with RoundUp, they can delay apoptosis of human cancer cells. What’s worse, glyphosate, the main ingredient in RoundUp, also causes necrosis – i.e. the death of human tissue, and this happens even when the substance is found in much smaller amounts than what is currently being used on our agricultural crops. The stuff is still carcinogenic in the parts per trillion range.

In its rush to remain the ‘agricultural leader’ of the world, the US government erected defunct regulatory bodies that have no means to truly examine the ramifications of biotechnology on our food. The National Institute of Health (NIH) is a joke and the FDA gave Monsanto an indefinite hall pass to cause mayhem on the food supply.

More people need to file lawsuits against this company until they are without one red cent to continue poisoning the planet and killing our unborn babies. The Organic Seed Grower’s Association sued Monsanto in 2011, and Idaho wheat growers are suing Monsanto for cross-contamination, but what about parental groups? Mother’s Against Drunk Driving was formed when a mom lost her baby to a drunk driver. Perhaps the mothers who face reproductive failure due to Monsanto’s hand can sue them collectively.

The FDA’s internal memos about their concerns surrounding GMO seed crops recently surfaced in one lawsuit, though the public was never meant to see them. GMO foods are not the foods we have always eaten. This is an outright lie.

Any lawyers out there willing to go against the monopoly? I’d sign a class action suit today. Would you? In the meantime, utilize these 5 tips for avoiding GMOs while you write your local senator, state representatives, congressman, and president.

12-Step Program For Consumers?

gmo

For two decades, Monsanto has randomly inserted the genes of one species into a non-related species, or genetically “interfered” with the instructions of an organism’s RNA—using viruses, antibiotic-resistant genes and bacteria as vectors, markers and promoters—to create gene-spliced seeds and crops.

All the while, Monsanto and its industry-paid scientists have claimed that GMO crops and foods, and the chemicals that accompany them, are perfectly safe. And therefore need no labeling or independent safety-testing.

Self-appointed GMO labeling “leaders” such as Scott Faber, a former lobbyist for the pro-GMO Grocery Manufacturers Association and now executive director of the Just Label It campaign, need to stop repeating Monsanto and Big Food’s lies that there is no “evidence” that GMOs are dangerous for human health or the environment.

It simply isn’t true. Here’s why. Along with 12 ways consumers can drive these dangerous, pesticide-laden foods off the market.

Read Essay

BREAKING: Monsanto/Bayer’s GM Plants Contaminate Europe Despite Ban

gmo contamination

New evidence reveals that despite a ban on cultivation of GM rapeseed in Europe, Monsanto and Bayer’s plants are now freely growing there. 

A new study published in PLoS titled ,”Unexpected Diversity of Feral Genetically Modified Oilseed Rape (Brassica napus L.) Despite a Cultivation and Import Ban in Switzerland,” is believed to be the first report of its kind showing that despite a cultivation and seed import ban of genetically modified (GM) oilseed rape in Switzerland, Monsanto and Bayer’s GM plants have been introduced into the environment there, confirming fears that once the GM genie has been let out of the bottle it can not be put back.

The GM plants were found growing freely along railway lines and in port areas at four sites in 2011 and 2012, with the most afflicted being the Rhine port of Basel and the St. Johann freight railway station in Basel, Switzerland.  The glyphosate-resistant GM plants were identified as Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready GM event GT73.  Additionally, the researchers found the glufosinate-resistant GM events MS8xRF3, MS8 and RF3 (all traded as InVigor, Bayer) at five sampling locations in the Rhine port. They noted that this is, to their knowledge, the first time that Bayer’s feral MS8xRF3, MS8 or RF3 plants were detected in Europe.

Another concerning finding was the discovery of ‘outcrossing’ (transference of genetic material between differing plant strains) between Monsanto’s GT73 GM plant and two non-GM oilseed rape plants. This confirms fears that GM plants are capable of transforming conventional and/or organically produced plants into GM ones (i.e. ‘biorape‘).

In fact, the study addresses this possibility directly:

“Another concern with respect to the cultivation of GM OSR [genetically modified oilseed rape] is an unintended gene flow towards conventional or organic OSR crops which could lead to co-existence conflicts between different farming systems [10].”

What is even more remarkable about the discovery of feral GM plants in Europe is that they have been banned from cultivation:

“In the European Union, GM OSR cultivation is presently prohibited and authorization for the import for food and feed processing is confined to the GM OSR events GT73 (Roundup Ready, Monsanto), MS8, RF3, MS8xRF3 and T45 (all traded as InVigor, Bayer CropScience)[11]. GM crop plants have found even less acceptance in Switzerland where currently neither the import nor the cultivation of GM OSR is allowed at least until the end of 2017 [12][13]. Nevertheless, the spread of GM OSR cannot totally be prevented by cultivation or import bans. In Japan, where GM OSR is imported but not cultivated, feral glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant GM OSR plants have repeatedly been detected in port areas and along transportation routes [14][17]. The feral GM plants found most likely originated from imported transgenic seeds that were spilled during transport to oilseed processing facilities. Two countrywide studies from Switzerland have reported the occurrence of glyphosate-resistant GT73 OSR from four sites in 2011 and 2012 [18][19]. The case of Switzerland is remarkable, because GM OSR has neither been cultivated nor imported into the country.” [emphasis added]

If Switzerland has banned both the cultivation and importation of GM rapeseed plants into the country, how did they end up there?

The authors of the study propose the feral GT73 OSR “probably originated from spillage of conventional OSR seeds or other seed imports that were contaminated with GM seeds.”

This raises a larger question: how much of the world’s food supply is now contaminated with GM plant material?

As we reported on last year in an article titled, “Illegal StarLink™ GM Corn Resurfaces in Saudi Arabian Food Supply,” StarLink™ maize, the first genetically modified organism to be pulled off the market over a decade ago due to safety concerns, was recently found to be contaminating food products in Saudi Arabia. Also, the recent discovery of illegal Monsanto GMO wheat growing freely in an Oregon field, illustrates just how little control and knowledge we have about the extent of contamination of both the biosphere and our food supply.

The larger implications of discoveries like these is illegal (unapproved) GM plants may still be produced in the US (accidentally or by intention), and exported domestically and abroad, admixed with conventional and/or organically-certified materials.


Article Contributed by Sayer Ji, Founder of GreenMedInfo.com.

Sayer Ji is an author, researcher, lecturer, and advisory board member of the National Health Federation. He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is internationally recognized as the largest and most widely referenced health resource of its kind.