It Cost The Koch Brothers Only $299,000 To Block Labeling Of Genetically Modified Foods~ ZeroHedge


Tyler Durden's picture

In what may have been the most underreported event overnight, the House quietly passed legislation that would keep states from issuing mandatory labeling laws for foods that contain genetically modified organisms, often called GMOs. The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015, as the law is formally known, passed 275-150, creating a federal standard for the voluntary labeling of foods with GMO ingredients. And since clearly nobody wants to advertise they are using GMOs in their food, the number of “volunteers” will be precisely zero.

As the Hill reports, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), who authored the bill, called mandatory labeling laws — which have already passed in Vermont, Connecticut and Maine — unnecessarily costly given that GMOs have been deemed safe by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“Precisely zero pieces of credible evidence have been presented that foods produced with biotechnology pose any risk to our health and safety,” Pompeo said. “We should not raise prices on consumers based on the wishes of a handful of activists.”

Well, sure. Then there is the curious case of a lobbyist who back in March proclaimed that Monstanto’s weedkiller “won’t hurt you”, only to promptly refuse drinking it on live it adding “I’m not stupid.”

Somehow we doubt Mike Pompeo is stupid either, which is why he will use all his hard-earned lobby dollars to only purchase organic foods which do not have GMO ingredients, and which happen to be a premium food category, precisely for that reason. Which makes Pompeo’s statement even odder, considering the prices of non-GMO foods are already substantially higher.

And while a minority was not willing to trade off healthy food for higher food prices, the victorious majority claimed a patchwork of labeling laws at the state level would drive up food costs.

Citing a study from a Cornell University professor, the Grocery Manufacturers Association said state-level GMO labeling mandates would increase grocery prices for a family of four by as much as $500 per year and cost food and beverage manufacturers millions of dollars to change food labels and supply chain systems.

Actually, where it would hurt manufacturers would be in the public’s revulsion to eating foods clearly labelled as being genetically modified, leading to a collapse in sales in this high margin food category, and forcing even higher non-GMO prices. Outcomes that would lead to a dramatic erosion in shareholder value for the owners of those companies who stood to lose the most should the Labeling act not pass in its current form.

Owners such as the Koch Brothers and Monsanto.

Last night’s passage of the anti-labeling law was the culmination of a very long and tedious process, one which started well over a year ago. In fact, as Andrea Germanos recalls, it all started last April, when in a move slammed as sealing “an unholy alliance between Monsanto and Koch Industries,” a Kansas congressman submitted legislation that would ban state-level GMO labeling laws.

Called the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2014, the industry-supported legislation sponsored by Republican Rep. Mike Pompeo would “amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to food produced from, containing, or consisting of a bioengineered organism, the labeling of natural foods, and for other purposes.”

At least between its 2014 name and the final 2015 version Pompeo and his backers added “Safe” to the front just in case the irony was lost on someone.

Which brings us to the biggest winners from this law, and how Rep. Pompeo made a few very rich people even richer.

Starting with the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA).

According to The Center for Food Safety: “Koch Industries’ subsidiary, Georgia-Pacific, is a member of the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which donated more than $7 million against the recent Washington State ballot initiative to label GE foods. Monsanto, another GMA member, was the single largest contributor to that campaign. Between Washington State and California, Monsanto, GMA (including Georgia-Pacific), and others, have contributed over $67 million to keep consumers in the dark about GE foods.”

Others quickly jumped onboard, especially those who would reap the biggest incremental profits such as biotech companies, and now the GMA and other industry groups like the Biotechnology Industry Organization are cheering Pompeo’s legislation.

At the time, many were livid that a full-court press by a few corporations and even fewer billionaires would keep Americans in the dark as to the genetic content of the food they eat:

“GMA’s selection of Congressman Pompeo as their champion shows how extreme the proposal really is,” stated Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs for Center for Food Safety. “Selecting Pompeo creates an unholy alliance between Monsanto and Koch Industries…”

Well, today the unholy alliance won, and the GMA was delighted:

“Today’s bipartisan passage of the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act (HR 1599) clearly demonstrates the growing support for this critically important legislation,” said Pamela G. Bailey, president and CEO of the Grocery Manufacturers Association.  “We thank the sponsors of this bill, Congressmen Mike Pompeo (R-KS) and G.K. Butterfield (D-NC), along with Congressmen Mike Conaway (R-TX), Collin Peterson (D-MN), Fred Upton (R-MI) and the other members who supported it for standing on the side of consumer choice, science and fact-based labeling. We now call on the U.S. Senate to move quickly on a companion bill and pass it this year.”

Finally, the question everyone is dying to get the answer to: how much did it cost the Koch Brothers to purchase Mike Pompeo and his bipartisan congressional peers, both republicans and democrats, and pass a law that would save the company billions in profits?

The answer: $299,000

Which is why the stock market with its annual return of 7% is for chumps. If you want to make the kinds of quadruple digit returns on investment, you better buy yourself a congressman.

As for the general American population, well: your food may be every so slightly more mutated, but the good news is that it will remain as cheap and unhealthy as always.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-24/it-cost-koch-brothers-only-299000-block-labeling-genetically-modified-foods

Hungary Destroys All Monsanto GMO Corn Fields


by admin Jul 4, 2015

burning-gmo

Hungary has taken a bold stand against biotech giant Monsanto and genetic modification by destroying 1000 acres of maize found to have been grown with genetically modified seeds, according to Hungary deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar.

Unlike many European Union countries, Hungary is a nation where genetically modified (GM) seeds are banned. In a similar stance against GM ingredients, Peru has also passed a 10 year ban on GM foods.

Almost 1000 acres of maize found to have been ground with genetically modified seeds have been destroyed throughout Hungary, deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar said.

The GMO maize has been ploughed under, said Lajos Bognar, but pollen has not spread from the maize, he added. burning-gmo

Unlike several EU members, GMO seeds are banned in Hungary. The checks will continue despite the fact that seek traders are obliged to make sure that their products are GMO free, Bognar said.

During the invesigation, controllers have found Pioneer Monsanto products among the seeds planted.

The free movement of goods within the EU means that authorities will not investigate how the seeds arrived in Hungary, but they will check where the goods can be found, Bognar said. Regional public radio reported that the two biggest international seed producing companies are affected in the matter and GMO seeds could have been sown on up to the thousands of hectares in the country.

Most of the local farmers have complained since they just discovered they were using GMO seeds.

Source

THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: A LOSS IN HAWAII, GAINS IN FRANCE AND GERMANY?


Courtesy of https://followingworldchange.wordpress.com/
THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: A LOSS IN HAWAII, GAINS IN FRANCE AND GERMANY?

If you’re following the GMO issue, it’s been a week both of setback(or sorts) and gains. First, in what comes as no surprise, the judge in the Maui county, Hawaii case against Mon(ster)santo not surprisingly has ruled against the county(My thanks to Ms. M.W. for two of the following articles, and to Mr K.L for another):Federal Judge Strikes Down Maui County’s GMO MoratoriumHere’s the legal essence of the case:

(Judge Susan) Mollway emphasized that the ruling is not a statement on whether genetically modified organisms are beneficial or detrimental.

“The court recognizes the importance of questions about whether GE activities and GMOs pose risks to human health, the environment, and the economy, and about how citizens may participate in democratic processes,” she said. “But any court is a reactive body that addresses matters before it rather than reaching out to grab hold of whatever matters may catch a judge’s fancy because the matters are interesting, important, or of great concern to many people.”

Yea… sure… tell that to the Supremes…

Now, while from a strict legal standpoint, Judge Mollway is correct, as Mr. Jon Rappaport has reported, her background does suggest connections to the GMO industry. But if that’s the case, her statements regarding the actual risks of GMOs are noteworthy. Mollway is taking great care to avoid making any statements from the bench about the actual GMO debate itself. In a sense, one may perhaps view the (expected) decision as a kind of Pyrrhic victory.

But there’s little to now debate over what’s happening in the United Kingdom, Germany and France:

UK GM wheat ‘does not repel pests’

Now, note first that the U.K. article is from the BBC, the mouthpiece of the British government and oligarchy, itself, a piece that should be causing some concern in St. Louis. Then there;s these:

France bans the sale of glyphosate

Well… we knew that, but nonetheless, this ban, coming within the same time frame as the U.K.-BBC article, suggests that Europe is quietly beginning to coordinate a revolt against GMOs, and hence the American dominance of the field(though Europe has its own giant participants in the game). As if that’s not enough, there’s this news from Germany, and it may be the most significant of them all:

German farm KTG plans China expansion after Fosun buys stake

Take note of one significant statement in this last article:

KTG, one of the few listed farms in Europe, hopes to increase food sales to China to between 100 million and 200 million euros annually in the coming three years from 20 to 30 million euros expected in 2015, KTG CEO Siegfried Hofreiter told Reuters.

“China could become KTG’s largest market,” Hofreiter said.

Currently about 80 percent of KTG’s sales are in Germany and 20 percent are exports.

Fosun International purchased a 9.03 percent shareholding in KTG via a Portuguese unit, KTG said on Monday.

Fosun has interests in a Chinese food retail chain with 8,000 shops and also in Internet commerce which should help the launch of KTG’s food products in China, Hofreiter said.

“China’s middle class is around 700 million people and I see strong demand there for organic German foods free of GMOs (genetically modified organisms),” Hofreiter said.(Emphasis added)

In other words, the market, and China’s market in particular, will ultimately determine the fate of the GMO issue, not the mercantilist policies of Mon(ster)santo and other companies (and, while we’re on the subject…can you say RICO?)  In short, if America intends to remain a major agricultural powerhouse, it might want to rethink that whole GMO thing, for what these articles are all suggesting is that the “GMO geopolitics”, which I’ve been predicting will inevitably occur, with the finger of blame being pointed clearly at the US government’s shielding of the GMO corporations, is happening before our eyes, and Europe seems to be quietly, slowly, but discernibly, turning in that direction.

See you on the…

Oh, and one more thing, courtesy of this article also shared by Ms. M.W.: you can add South American agricultural powerhouse Argentina to the list as well:

Justice ordered the National Executive to suspend the sale of GMOs and associated pesticides

See you flip side…

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Jon Rappoport – Survey: only 15% of farmers would eat GMO food


{I love Rappoport’s “in your face” style of journalism, he always tells it EXACTLY like it is! Nice find, courtesy of FollowingWorldChange…{~A~}

1

Survey: only 15% of farmers would eat GMO food

by Jon Rappoport

July 25, 2013

http://www.nomorefakenews.com

The British survey was funded by Barclays Bank and done in collaboration with Farmers Weekly.

Only 15% of farmers polled said they would eat GMO food. Talk about a blanket rejection. It can’t get much clearer than that.

Obviously, these backward farmers want to protect their own health. Who ever heard of such a thing! How dare they! They’re supposed to follow the party line. They’re supposed to say, “Yum yum, give me some GM.”

Well, funny things happen when people consider their own bodies. They tell you what they really think.

You see, 61% of the farmers said they’d grow GMO crops “if they had the opportunity.” In other words, they’d willingly endanger other people’s health, but not their own.

“Just business, nothing personal.”

Reminds me of the idea of sending government officials who declare war into the field with weapons.

“No, I said the war was necessary. I didn’t say I’d risk my own life out there with all those crazies running around. Besides, I suffer from migraines and my doctor told me I have to avoid stress.”

Or: “Everybody is hereby ordered to go on the Obamacare plan. Except those of us in the Congress who have our own plan.”

The farmers survey should have included the following questions, for the 61% of farmers who said they’d grow GMO crops if given the chance: “Would you eat what you sell every day of your life?”

“And if not, what is wrong with you?”

On a related note, we have this from Mike Adams at Natural News: “Polls were taken by accomplished scientists at the McGill Cancer Center from 118 doctors who are all experts on cancer. They asked the doctors to imagine they had cancer and to choose from six different ‘experimental’ therapies. These doctors not only denied chemo choices, but they said they wouldn’t allow their family members to go through the process either!”

Oh, and lest I forget, we have the famous vaccine proponent, Dr. Paul Offit, who said babies can handle “10,000 vaccines at once.” Well, since babies have only partially developed immune systems and Offit is an adult, I’d be willing to take a crash course in how to give an injection and pop Offit with 10,000 vaccines, as a test. Why not? What could go wrong?

And while I’m at it—all those clinical trials of new drugs using volunteers who don’t have a clue about what they’re getting into? Seems only fair to include the researchers who developed the drugs and other doctors and pharmaceutical execs as volunteers in the trials. In fact, they should be first in line. If they fall over dead or develop life-threatening conditions, then everyone else will know there’s a slight problem.

Moving along, if the government is spying on all of us, for our own good, and in order to protect the country, then we should spy on them for the same reasons. Let them experience their own programs up close and personal. Long ago, when funding for NSA started to accelerate into the wild blue yonder, the Congress should have offered themselves up on a platter, to set a good example.

“You boys know our phone numbers, email addresses, and where we live and play. So please, spy on us 24/7, because we’re about to let you do it to all Americans.”

No? Am I missing something here? Don’t government officials endanger the nation? Haven’t they already proved that over and over? Shouldn’t they be watched carefully, as you would watch wild animals in a zoo?

The examples keep multiplying, don’t they? Oil spills, radiation leaks from nuclear reactors. Why aren’t the heads of companies and governments involved, who are telling us it’s all okay…why aren’t they living close to the reactors and seas where it’s “so safe?” What could give us greater assurance and peace of mind?

Just trying to be helpful.

What if certain government officials, who’ve been praising programs to fund the resurgence of inner cities, had to live in St. Louis and Detroit and experience the results/non-results of the federal programs?

What if conservative legislators, who’ve never met a big corporation they didn’t love, lived on farms where Monsanto’s vaunted Roundup Ready tech isn’t working at all, and the farmers have to do burn-downs, using far more toxic herbicides, to destroy the superweeds that are thriving and taking over the land?

If you’re a president with a Nobel Peace Prize in your pocket, and you’re ordering drone strikes, wouldn’t you benefit from actually being there and seeing the explosions on the ground and the bodies?

At least the British farmers are being honest. Only 15% would eat GMO food.

Source: GM Watch, “UK citizens reject GM food and even farmers don’t want to eat it”

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 http://www.nomorefakenews.com

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and the New EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 http://www.nomorefakenews.com

http://www.insolutions.info

qjrconsulting@gmail.com
http://www.nomorefakenews.com

Use this link to order Jon’s Seminar Series
MARKETPLACE

A BOLD PLAN FOR SAVING POLLINATORS


Jun 27, 2015 Posted by


bees

“We need solutions to the bee crisis,” said Laurie Davies Adams, head of the Pollinator Partnership, at a packed briefing on Capitol Hill, which was organized by her organization and the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). The honey bee crisis Adams is deeply worried about is caused by the spread of colony collapse disorder, which has decimated hives across the U.S. Scientists say a combination of stressors is killing off honey bees, including the loss of the habitat they need for foraging, the widespread use of agricultural pesticides and fungicides, and disease. Other critical pollinators, like native bees, monarch butterflies, and bats, face similar challenges. While the destruction of these species is a cause of concern in itself, it’s also causing real fears among many of country’s farmers who rely on honey bees to pollinate their crops, at a cost of billions every year.

President and First Lady Obama have a “personal interest” in fixing the problem, said Adams. President Obama launched an inter-departmental task force that led to a new national strategy for honeybees and other pollinators, which was just released a few weeks ago. Adams called this the “most comprehensive blueprint for conservation in the 21st century.” But she cautioned that the federal government alone can’t solve this problem: it will take state and local governments, non-profit community groups, farmers, businesses, and homeowners, too. In fact, a key part of the effort will be to get people with any type of property to step up, which is the goal of the newly-launched Million Pollinator Garden Challenge. As Nancy Somerville, Hon. ASLA, CEO of ASLA, added, landscape architects and designers also play a key role in turning landscapes at all scales into healthy habitats. “Restoring habitat for pollinators can happen even in very small patches.”

At the briefing, Anne Kinsinger, U.S. Geological Survey and one of the leaders in the presidential task force, said the group successfully brought together the many departments that can help — defense, transportation, education, and the General Services Administration (GSA). This task force, together with Reps. Alcee Hastings and Jeff Denham, have pushed for the Highway BEE Act, which would transform 17 million acres around highway right-of-ways into habitat for pollinators. For example, Interstate 35, which runs from Mexico from Canada, could be planted with milkweed, providing a source of nutrients for Monarch butterflies all along their migratory route.

interstate

Rep. Denham, who spoke at the briefing, said it would be a way to “beautify the highways while also creating a transportation system that supports healthy pollinators.” As of writing this post, the Highway BEE Act has passed the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Next steps to make this law are getting the act through the full Senate and also moving it through the House of Representatives.

While the Highway BEE Act moves through the Hill, the national strategy has already made some important contributions. It pulled together 75 leading bee scientists to come up with a “research action plan.” There are now targets: reduce colony collapse disorder by 50 percent in 10 years. Increase Monarchs’ numbers from around 37 million today to 225 million in 5 years. Restore 7 million acres of pollinator habitat through public-private partnerships, to aid all kinds of pollinators. As Kinsinger explained, “you can’t separate European honey bees from the 4,000 native bees.” The GSA is also already revising its policies for 3,000 government facilities to include best-practice land management techniques.

Robert Sneickus, FASLA, national landscape architect with the USDA’s National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), which is charged with restoring vast public wildlife habitat, said pollinators are essential to 80 percent of flowering plants. In turn, the health of pollinators themselves are dependent on access to productive habitat. For Sneickus, what’s important is planting “winter cover crops” that will be green all winter so bees will have access to forage in all seasons as well as flowering annuals that come back year after year. Also, all types of landscapes should be planted for both pollinators and beauty. “If a landscape looks great, more people will want it.” He said landscape architects can create a “pollinator master plan” to restore even small patches and corridors as healthy, beautiful habitats.

pollinator

And then John Chandler, a fourth-generation California farmer and agriculture advocate, explained how honey bees are crucial to his farm, which grows almonds, peaches, plums, and nectarines. As bees continue to die off, the cost per hive continues to go up, reaching about $200 these days. Each acre of almonds, explained Chandler, needs about two hives, so just for one growing season Chandler will spend $350 million to cover his entire 800,000-acre farm. “It’s the single largest check to payout.”

“What are we doing as an industry?”, wondered Chandler. Beginning in the 70s, Blue Diamond almonds started to finance advanced bee research and then created some pamphlets for farmers. There were some common sense ideas: When bees are out pollinating during the day, farmers shouldn’t be spraying chemical pesticides or fungicides. Farms now do that spraying at night when bees have gone home to their hives. During spraying, all water sources are also covered up so they aren’t contaminated. Chandler said “bees are like us, they want clean, fresh water.”

But, clearly, even more is needed to restore pollinators to health. According to the speakers, a key piece of the puzzle is bringing back nutritious forage wherever possible. Let’s start with better integrating forage opportunities along highways. With today’s problems, we can’t afford single-use infrastructure anymore; a highway for both cars and pollinators makes more sense. And farmers could be given greater incentives to set aside parts of their farmland as forage, a strategy the UK government has been using for some time. Communities can turn their own thoroughfares into pollinator pathways. Just about any strip will work, given many pollinators have a multiple-mile foraging range, and, as Adams, explained, “if you plant it, they will find it.”

pollinator-path

Lastly, everyone with a yard needs some plants for pollinators, too. Learn more at the Million Pollinator Garden Challenge.

http://www.globalpossibilities.org/a-bold-plan-for-saving-pollinators/

Ed. Note: Not mentioned here is placing a BAN on ALL residential and commercial use of ROUND-UP. To restrict it’s use to evenings is only pandering to biotech firms and allowing the destruction of the environment to continue. Round-up’s residue on plants also has adverse effects on any living organism that comes into contact with it and it can also be aerosolized and carried by the wind, infecting children, adults and wildlife with the same detrimental affects.

Herbicide-resistant insects are destroying GMO crops like never before


Bt corn was originally created, or so Monsanto claims, to eradicate a farming nuisance known as rootworm. But as evidence from a GMO corn lab comes in, we are learning how the pests are living the lives in fields planted with GM Bt corn seed.

In 2011, a cornfield planted in Iowa with Bt corn was found to be completely decimated by rootworm. A study, just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, describes the western corn rootworm’s rapid evolution after dining on the engineered crop.

The study’s lead author, AaronGassmann, states that:

“The widespread planting of crops genetically engineered to produce insecticidal toxins derived from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) places intense selective pressure on pest populations to evolve resistance.

Western corn rootworm is a key pest of maize, and in continuous maize fields it is often managed through planting of Bt maize. During 2009 and 2010, fields were identified in Iowa in which western corn rootworm imposed severe injury to maize producing Bt toxin Cry3Bb1. Subsequent bioassays revealed Cry3Bb1 resistance in these populations.

Here, we report that, during 2011, injury to Bt maize in the field expanded to include mCry3A maize in addition to Cry3Bb1 maize and that laboratory analysis of western corn rootworm from these fields found resistance to Cry3Bb1 and mCry3A and cross-resistance between these toxins.

Resistance to Bt maize has persisted in Iowa, with both the number of Bt fields identified with severe root injury and the ability western corn rootworm populations to survive on Cry3Bb1 maize increasing between 2009 and 2011.”

Read: Rootworms Prevail as they Develop Resistance to Toxic GMO Crops

The authors also found that not only did the rootworm thrive in Bt corn fields, but the pest had the potential to “develop resistance rapidly” when Bt crops don’t produce a high enough level of Bt toxin, and therefore would require farmers to use more pesticides to eradicate the pest.

In short, Bt corn didn’t eradicate the pest it was meant to destroy; it only made it stronger, thereby causing even more pesticide use. Sounds like a perfect biotech creation made in cahoots with companies that sell chemicals for a living – and yet we trust them to make our food?

Additional sources

Photo by Joseph Spencer, INHS

News.Illinois.edu

Source: http://www.sott.net/article/298159-Herbicide-resistant-insects-are-destroying-GMO-crops-like-never-before

Monsanto herbicide faces global fallout after World Health Organization labels it a probable carcinogen


Image

© PiggingFoto/Shutterstock

The fight against glyphosate is gaining momentum, and where governments are not stepping up to enforce bans, citizens and private companies are taking it upon themselves with major successes.

The World Health Organization’s official recognition of the health damage caused by glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, is having ramifications around the world. National governments are moving to restrict the chemical, campaigns to ban it are intensifying, and now ‘Roundup Ready’ GMO crops are coming under the regulatory spotlight.

Could it be that the World Health Organisation’s classification of glyphosate as a ‘probable carcinogen’ (see [1] Glyphosate ‘Probably Carcinogenic to Humans’ Latest WHO Assessment, SiS 66) will be the final nail in the coffin for the world’s most popular herbicide and Monsanto’s flagship product?

Recent weeks have seen the intensification of campaigns to ban or remove the product as well as lawsuits being filed against Monsanto; in the US for false safety claims of glyphosate, and in China, for hiding toxicity studies from the public.

El Salvador has already banned the chemical though yet to be signed into law [2], while the Netherlands last year banned private sales [3]. Sri Lanka had a partial ban in place in regions most afflicted by chronic kidney disease that has been linked to glyphosate use (see later).

People have known the truth for years. Industry and government regulators have conspired to bury copious evidence of toxicity for decades, and they feel to some extent vindicated by the latest WHO assessment (see [4] Glyphosate and Cancer, SiS 62) and [5] EU Regulators and Monsanto Exposed for Hiding Glyphosate Toxicity, SiS 51). More importantly, governments are finally beginning to take action.

Outright Bans

Colombia has taken the lead, deciding to suspend aerial spraying of illegal coca as well as poppy plants, which is expected to come into effect in a few weeks’ time following a majority 7 to 1 vote for the ban by the National Narcotics Council [6].

The day before the ban, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defence (AIDA) delivered 24,000 signatures to the Minister of Justice who also chairs the Narcotics Council to push for this decision [7].

Colombia had been employing US contractors to spray glyphosate for two decades, covering an estimated 1.6 million hectares of land. This spraying for the ‘war on drugs’ has been ineffective in eradicating illegal cocaine production, but has instead caused rising illness in local communities, killing local crops and polluting land and water supplies.

Indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities have borne the brunt of the fumigation programs, prompting protests against both coca production and glyphosate use that has been displacing people from ancestral lands [8]. Colombia is not alone.

Bermuda, the British overseas territory in the Atlantic also banned glyphosate imports with immediate effect following the WHO assessment, as announced by their Minister of Health, Jeanne Atherden, whose decision was supported by local farmers [9]. The Minister said she believes the”action we are taking today is prudent and in the best interests of a safe environment…Like any area of science, there are competing studies and a wealth of information on both sides of the argument … I am satisfied that this action is warranted and we are committed to conducting an open and thorough investigation.” [10]

Sri Lanka is the latest country to declare an outright ban. The decision follows the election of the new president, a farmer and previously the Health Minister, Maithripala Sirisena taking the decision due the epidemic of chronic kidney disease [11]. The spread of kidney disease highlights the wide-ranging toxicity of glyphosate not limited to carcinogenicity.

The country’s battle to ban the chemical precedes the WHO declaration, coming after studies by Sri Lankan researchers linked the chemical to hard water, heavy metal contaminants and glyphosate use (see [12] Sri Lanka Partially Bans Glyphosate for Deadly Kidney Disease Epidemic, SiS 62).

This prompted an initial ban, which was later restricted to certain regions of the country following intense lobbying pressure. With the government paying for healthcare of over 25,000 residents and supplying them with fresh water, the latest decision for an outright ban could not come soon enough.

Imminent bans, protests, and fresh calls for bans

Brazil is facing growing pressure to follow suit, with the country’s public state prosecutor writing to Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) asking it to urgently re-evaluate their stance on glyphosate and also revoke authorisations on glyphosate-tolerant GM crops [13].

He has even gone as far as launching an investigation into whether regulatory authorisations are legal for the GM crops. ANVISA are stalling their decision however, until the full report by the WHO is published.

In Argentina, 30 000 health professionals belonging to the union of doctors and health professionals (FESPROSA) have come out in support of the WHO decision [14], claiming thatglyphosate “not only causes cancer. It is also associated with increased spontaneous abortions, birth defects, skin diseases, and respiratory and neurological disease.” The statement continues:

“Health authorities, including the National Ministry of Health and the political powers, can no longer look away. Agribusiness cannot keep growing at the expense of the health of the Argentine people. The 30,000 health professionals in Argentina in the FESPROSA ask that glyphosate is now prohibited in our country and that a debate on the necessary restructuring of agribusiness is opened, focusing on the application of technologies that do not endanger human life.”

Similarly, the Society of Paediatric Haematology-Oncology (SAHOP) issued a statement calling for an immediate ban of glyphosate fumigation, signed by the President of the Paediatric society Pedro Zubizarreta. They objected to the massive use of toxic products being sprayed in ever increasing concentrations in combinations of both insecticides and herbicides, and being sold as ‘technological advancements’.

They also warned of storing the grains in plastic bags, which leaves grains teeming with aflatoxins, categorised by the WHO’s IARC as a known carcinogen since 1993 [15]. Glyphosate has already been previously linked to the growth of these fungi in scientific studies, along with many other crop diseases [16].

Successful protests in Argentina were also recently mobilised to prevent Dr Medardo Ávila Vázquez from losing his job after the agribusiness-funded university threatened to sanction him for conducting and disseminating studies showing the high levels of cancers affecting his region as a result of agrichemical spraying [17].

These protests are a tribute to his work in exposing the toxicity of glyphosate, as well as the groundswell of opposition to glyphosate spraying in the country despite support by the national government.

Local residents are gaining strength to voice their concerns following the WHO news as well as the recent decision by the Ministry of Production in the province of Santa Fe to ban aerial spraying of 2,4-D within 6 km of residents, confirming the health risks of the chemical agricultural system that leaves children covered in chemical and dust particles as they walk to school [18].

In Europe, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE) (an influential body with member organizations in 27 countries) has written to officials at the EU parliament and Commission asking for an immediate ban of glyphosate herbicides and for insecticides also judged by the WHO to be carcinogens, without exceptions [19].

A member of the EU commission stated in the 2015 GMO-free conference 2015 in Berlin, Germany that they will include the WHO assessment in their re-evaluation procedures that is due to be completed later this year.

However the corrupt process of reassessment that was led by a consortium of chemical companies (see [20] Scandal of Glyphosate Re-assessment in Europe, SiS 63) means that EU campaigners will have to push hard to force the EU to have some semblance of integrity in their final decision making.

Meanwhile,Germany’s state consumer protection ministers are calling for an EU-wide ban on selling glyphosate for home use, for precautionary reasons [21], and the German retail giant REWE has decided to remove all glyphosate from its ‘toom Baumarkt DIY’ store shelves by September 2015 [22].

Swiss companies are following suite, with Coop supermarkets and Switzerland’s largest retail company, Migros declaring they will both no longer sell any products containing it [23].

In Denmark, the Danish Working Environment Authority has decided to follow the WHO decision and has now declared glyphosate a carcinogen, with the expected outcome being a switch to alternative, less toxic chemicals (see [24] Roundup Listed Carcinogen by Danish Authority, SiS 67).

The decision is backed by one of the world’s leading toxicologists, Philippe Grandjean, a professor at the University of Denmark where he is head of the Environmental Medicine Research Unit as well as being an adjunct professor at Harvard University.

Commenting on the decision he stated, It is so common a substance — and our use of it is so extensive — that this WHO report must be taken seriously, while encouraging people to rid the chemical from their homes.

With such a decision, it now seems unlikely that the post-harvest spraying of crops for desiccation will go ahead this year, which contributes to it being the most widely used herbicide in the country. This is big news in a country about to face an election, with the highly-respected Professor Grandjean’s media appearances drawing much public attention, leaving little room for industry to defend themselves.

U.S. Citizens File Class Action Lawsuits Against Monsanto for False Safety Claims

A group of citizens in Los Angeles County are taking court action against Monsanto for falsifying safety claims that Roundup® “targets an enzyme found in plants but not people and pets” in its labelling of the herbicide [25]. The lawsuit applies to residents of California who have purchased Roundup at any time during the last four years. This lawsuit, if successful can encourage similar actions elsewhere in the country.

The claim that glyphosate targets an enzyme (EPSP synthase) that does not physically exist in people ignores the fact that EPSP synthase is present in the bacteria that live inside people. Moreover, these microbes are intimately linked to many physiological functions in the body that are vital to human health, and their disruption is increasingly linked to illness.

The plaintiffs state in the lawsuit that “…this claim is absolutely, positively false because glyphosate does indeed target an enzyme ‘found in people’ — in our gut bacteria”, making Monsanto’s claim “objectively false (and inherently misleading)”.

The class action further alleges that Monsanto,”cannot deny that Roundup targets an enzyme that is physically located inside of people…this fact lay beyond dispute.”

Monsanto’s claim that glyphosate targets a single enzyme is also a fallacy. It has been shown to disrupt the function of many enzymes at least in part due to its metal chelating activities, a property for which the chemical was originally patented in 1964. Metals act as co-factors for many enzymes which is why metals are key to any healthy diet.

Anyone wishing to support the suit filed by T. Mathew Phillips can visit the attorney’s website [26].

Comment: Monsanto sued in Los Angeles County for false advertising

In today’s lawsuit, Monsanto is accused of deliberate falsification to conceal the fact that glyphosate is harmful to humans and animals. “Defendant intentionally misleads consumers by misrepresenting and concealing the true and correct facts concerning glyphosate…” Attorney T. Matthew Phillips says, “We are not trying to prove that Roundup is harmful or carcinogenic, we are merely pointing out that Monsanto is lying about the enzymes that Roundup targets. Roundup kills the weeds in your backyard and the weeds in your stomach.”

Chinese Citizens Sue Government for Hiding Toxicity Studies from Public

Three Beijing residents, have filed a lawsuit against China’s Ministry of Health requesting full disclosure of the toxicology report submitted to the Chinese government for registration of the chemical almost three decades ago [27].

The case, a rare example of private citizens against the Chinese government comes after more than a year of the Ministry of Agriculture failing to meet the requests of the Beijing food volunteers after they submitted the first application of disclosure in February 2014. So far, the government has refused to disclose the report for privacy and business reasons, protecting Monsanto’s commercial interests.

The toxicology report was not performed independently by Chinese institutions, but was instead conducted by US-based Younger Laboratories and commissioned by Monsanto [28]. The tests were restricted to acute toxicity in rats and rabbits being exposed via the mouth and skin, hardly a comprehensive safety test that the Chinese people can have confidence in.

Further, while Monsanto filed the report for registration of the formulation product Roundup, the tests were performed on glyphosate alone. The case has not yet been heard, but the Ministry of agriculture has added Monsanto as a defendant [29].

The country is by far the largest producer of glyphosate, producing an estimated 70% of the world’s supply [30]. It is also the largest importer of GM foods.

Despite it being a centre of origin for soybean plants, China is now importing most of it from overseas, the majority of which is GM, making the country not only the leading producer, but also one of the leading consumers of glyphosate (see [31]How Grain Self-Sufficiency, Massive GM Soybean Imports & Glyphosate Exports Led China to Devastate People & Planet‘, SiS 67).

If successful, the suit will only further expose the toxic effects of this herbicide, which go beyond its carcinogenic properties, with evidence of teratogenic and endocrine disrupting effects among others (see [32] Roundup of Roundup® Reveals Converging Pattern of Toxicity from Farm to Clinic, SiS 65).

The Beginning of the End for Glyphosate?

The fight against glyphosate is gaining momentum, and where governments are not stepping up to enforce bans, citizens and private companies are taking it upon themselves with major successes.

A major campaign to stop local governments from spraying glyphosate has just been launched by a group of 81 scientists/medical professionals (Independent Scientists Manifesto on Glyphosate.).

In less than two days, the number of scientists who have signed the Manifesto has more than tripled, while over 300 non-scientists have endorsed the Manifesto. Add your name now.

This article was originally published by ISIS, the Institute of Science in Society.

Please circulate widely and repost, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to articles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in Society, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications.

References

1. Ho MW and Swanson N. Glyphosate ‘Probably Carcinogenic to Humans’ Latest WHO Assessment, Science in Society 66, 16-18

2. El Salvador Government Bans Roundup over Deadly Kidney Disease. Sustainablepulse.com, accessed 27th February 2014

3. “Dutch Parliament bans Roundup, France and Brazil to follow“, The Healthy Home Economist, 12 April 2014,

4. Ho M. W. Glyphosate and cancer. Science in Society 62, 12-14, 2014.

5. Sirinathsinghji E and Ho MW. EU Regulators and Monsanto Exposed for Hiding Glyphosate Toxicity. Science in Society 51, 46-48, 2011

6. Colombia to ban coca spraying herbicide glyphosate, BBC.co.uk, accessed 18th May 2015.

7. AIDA celebrates historic decision to suspend fumigation with glyphosate in Colombia, aida-americas.org, accessed 19th May 2015.

8. Ineffective U.S. Fumigation Policy Adversely Affects Afro-Colombians. Wola.org, accessed 19th May 2015.

9. Farmers back decision to ban Roundup spray. RoyalGazette.com, accessed 20th May 2015.

10. Bermuda Suspends Glyphosate-Ridden Roundup Indefinitely. Naturalsociety.com, accessed 19th May 2015.

11. Sri Lankan President orders to ban import of glyphosate with immediate effect, www.colombopage.com, accessed 26th May 2015.

12. Sirinathsinghji E. Sri Lanka partially bans glyphosate for deadly kidney disease epidemic. Science in Society 62, 2014.

13. Brazil’s Public Prosecutor Wants to Ban Monsanto’s Chemicals. Naturalsociety.com, accessed 20th May 2015.

14. 30,000 doctors and health professionals demand ban on glyphosate, GMWatch.org, accessed 18th May 2015.

15. Reclamos contra un pesticida. Página12.com.ar, accessed 20th May 2015.

16. Barberis CL, Carranza CS, Chiacchiera SM, Magnoli CE. Influence of herbicide glyphosate on growth and aflatoxin B1 production by Aspergillus section Flavi strains isolated from soil on in vitro assay. J Environ Sci Health B2013, 48, 1070-9. doi: 10.1080/03601234.2013.824223.

17. University drops action against cancer researcher in face of massive support for his work, GMWatch.org, accessed 18th May 2015.

18. Argentina: Chemical Warfare on Towns, upsidedownworld.org, accessed 20th May 2015.

19. International Doctors Demand Immediate Ban on Glyphosate Herbicides, isde.org, accessed 18th May 2015 [PDF]

20. Swanson N and Ho MW. Scandal of glyphosate reassessment in Europe. Science in Society 63, 8-9, 2014

21. German states call for ban on household pesticide, euroactiv.com, accessed 18th May 2015.

22. German Retail Giant REWE Removes Glyphosate from DIY Stores, sustainablepulse.com, accessed 18th May 2015.

23. Swiss Supermarkets Stop Sales of Glyphosate over Health Concerns. SustainablePulse.com, accessed 3rd June 2015.

24. Ho MW. Roundup Listed Carcinogen by Danish Authority, Science in Society 67 (to appear) 2015.

25. Monsanto re/Roundup Class Action Lawsuit, accessed 18th May 2015. [PDF]

26. Monsanto Glyphosate Advertising Class Action.

27. Chinese citizens sue government over transparency on Monsanto herbicide. Reuters.com, accessed 18th May 2015

28. Chen I-wan. Chinese People Fight Back on Monsanto Against Glyphosate-based Roundup

29. Chen I-wan. Chinese Citizen Sues American GM Giant, Accuses It’s Herbicide Possible Carcinogen.

30. An insight into glyphosate trend. Agropages.com, accessed 18th May 2015.

31. Ho MW. How Grain Self-Sufficiency, Massive GM Soybean Imports & Glyphosate Exports Led China to Devastate People & Planet, Science in Society 67, (to appear) 2015.

32. Sirinathsinghji E. A roundup of Roundup reveals converging patterns of toxicities from farm to clinic to laboratory studies. Science in Society 65, 26-31, 2015.

About the author

Dr. Eva Sirinathsinghji is a scientist working on GMOs with the Institute of Science in Society (ISIS).

Comment: More information on the ‘global fallout’ of Monsanto’s evil herbicideglyposate:

http://www.sott.net/article/298123-Monsanto-herbicide-faces-global-fallout-after-World-Health-Organization-labels-it-a-probable-carcinogen

Lamb genetically modified with jellyfish sold as meat by Paris butcher


Ed note: Welcome to the era of the GMO-Clusterf*ck!  The entire food industry needs a “reset button” to get corporations and their mad science laboratory’s out of farming and our food supply, and back into the cultivating hands of compassionate farmers. Which begs the questions: “Are there any compassionate farmers left after 30yrs of factory farm takovers???”

So let me get this straight…A lamb genetically modified with Jellyfish has sex with an “unmodified” lamb (?) and births a genetically-modified-hybrid-lamb-baby which ends up as mystery meat on an untold number of dinner plates??? Really??? How does this happen in a civilized society?

Ahh but there’s one caveat to this “civilized society”, corporations aren’t “civilized” even tho they’re recognized as “persons” by the U.S. Supreme Court.

That said, it’s guaranteed we’re going to see a lot more of these “GMO faux paux’s” and if the ugly truth be known – they’re likely much more common than we care to know.

What a mess, n0w I understand why some people “wake-up” and go right back to sleep…{face palm, shake head}

Blessings, {~A~}

The following article takes the concept of Frankenfood to a whole other level.

© Alamy
A GM lamb (not shown) was sent to an abattoir from the National Institute for Agricultural Research in Paris late last year and somehow ended up on a butcher’s slab.

From the Guardian:

French authorities are looking into how a lamb genetically modified with jellyfish protein was sold as meat to an unknown customer, a judicial source told AFP on Tuesday.

The jellyfish-lamb, called “Rubis”, was sent to an abattoir from the National Institute for Agricultural Research in Paris late last year and somehow ended up on a butcher’s slab.

Yummy.

“A female lamb born to a sheep that was genetically modified as part of a medical research program was sold to a person in the Parisian region in October 2014,” said the National Institute for Agricultural Research in a statement, confirming a story first reported by Le Parisien newspaper.

The case has been taken up by a public health court in Paris, a judicial source told AFP.

Rubis “found itself on a plate! Who ate it? No one knows,” exclaimed Le Parisien on Tuesday.

France remains one of the staunchest opponents of GM research, ever since environmental protesters pressured the government into banning GM crops in the 2000s.

The European Union authorised the import and sale of 19 GM crops in April, but is likely to pass legislation allowing individual countries to block their use – in part thanks to demands from France.

Don’t worry my fellow Americans, that is France, something like this could never happen here.

After all, Congress is hard at work making sure future Americans will have as difficult a time as possible identifying the source of their meat.

For example, let’s revisit last month’s post, Congress Moves to Eliminate Labels Showing Consumers Where Meat Comes from Following WTO Ruling, where we learned that:

A House committee has voted to get rid of labels on packages of meat that say where the animals were born, raised and slaughtered.

The House Agriculture Committee voted 38-6 to repeal a “country-of-origin” labeling law for beef, pork and poultry Wednesday — just two days after the World Trade Organization ruled against parts of the law. The labels tell consumers what countries the meat is from: for example, “born in Canada, raised and slaughtered in the United States” or “born, raised and slaughtered in the United States.”

As usual, Congress is hard at work on behalf of their corporate sponsors.

For related articles, see:

States Move to Criminalize Whistleblowing on Food Fraud and Animal Cruelty

How Undercover Animal Rights Activists are Winning the Ag-Gag War

This is What Happens to Walmart Pork Before it Reaches Your Plate

Hot Pockets Recalls 8 Million Pounds of Meat Due to “Diseased and Unsound Animals”

Forget Horse Meat or Fake Tuna, Rat Meat is Being Sold as Lamb in China

Food Fraud Hits a New Low with the Potential Emergence of Dog Meat in the UK

The Meat Industry Now Consumes 80% of All Antibiotics

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

http://www.sott.net/article/298193-Lamb-genetically-modified-with-jellyfish-sold-as-meat-by-Paris-butcher

Groups Urge New York State Government, Cornell University to Notify Public About Genetically Engineered Diamondback Moth Field Trial


Washington, D.C.–Environmental, advocacy and organic farming organizations 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, urging them to release information to the public about the field release of genetically engineered (GE) diamondback moths at Cornell’s agricultural experiment station in Geneva, New York and to stop any outdoor trials until more adequate information is available.

In September 2014 several of the organizations commented on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed field release of Oxitec’s GE diamondback moths at Cornell University. The agency did not contact the organizations to address their myriad concerns, and months later, the groups found out through a separate correspondence with the USDA that the GE moth permit had been quietly approved with no press release or other public notification.

“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,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch. “The USDA’s irresponsible management of this genetically engineered insect is putting the environment and agriculture at risk.”

“Proposals to release GE moths in England were halted in 2012 amid concerns about the risk assessment. Many issues that would be closely studied before the moths were released in Europe have not yet been considered in the USA,” said Helen Wallace, Director of GeneWatch UK. “Consumers and farmers deserve much better information about GE insects that could end up in the food chain.”

“The USDA took comments on whether this first genetically engineered insect should be released for field trials and then without responding to our comments approved the trials without public notice,” said Jaydee Hanson, Senior Policy Analyst at Center for Food Safety. “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.”

The mechanism for these GE moths to control population levels is for offspring to die in the larval stage. The larval moths will die on plants, including crops such as broccoli and cabbage. In its assessment, the USDA failed to recognize that if farms near the field trial sites happen to be certified organic or non-GE, their certification could be lost if these larval stage GE moths were present because genetic engineering, even for pest control, is prohibited. With no prior public information, accidental escapes and contamination would be a significant issue for proximate fields.

“The USDA has dropped the ball by approving this field trial without a thorough review and without notifying New York’s organic farmers. The loss of certification would be a major economic problem for these operations, threatening future earnings from their crops and wiping out a major investment of time and money to get the certification,” said Anne Ruflin, Executive Director of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York. “If GE contamination occurs, it has the potential to not only permanently damage long-standing partnerships with organic buyers but also to destroy an organic farmer’s livelihood and standing in the community.”

“The maker of these moths, Oxitec, has had a long track record of conducting GE insect field trials throughout the world without proper notification of the public and now they have brought their model to the United States,” said Lisa Archer, Friends of the Earth Food & Technology Program Director. “The USDA and Cornell must put a stop to this activity and ensure that these insects have been thoroughly reviewed before they are released into the wild.”

Read the letter here: http://fwwat.ch/1FIVQid

Contact:

Kate Fried, Food & Water Watch, 202-683-4905, kfried(at)fwwatch(at)org

Abigail Seiler, Center for Food Safety, 202-547-9359, aseiler(at)centerforfoodsafety(dot)org

Anne Ruflin, Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, Anne(at)nofany(dot)org, 585-271-1979 ext. 501

Helen Wallace, GeneWatch UK, +44-7903-311584

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/pressreleases/groups-urge-new-york-state-government-cornell-university-to-notify-public-about-genetically-engineered-diamondback-moth-field-trial/

Is Roundup Driving The Autism Epidemic? Leading MIT Researcher Says YES


 

Is Roundup Driving the Autism Epidemic - Leading MIT Researcher Says YES

31st May 2015

By Carolanne Wright

Contributing Writer for Wake Up World

Just thirty short years ago, 1 in 10,000 children were diagnosed with autism in the United States. The latest statistics show 1 in 50 children now have autism. Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a researcher at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), believes we could be looking at half the children in America as autistic within the next ten years.

What is at the root of this disturbing trend? It cannot be genetic because genes do not mutate that rapidly, asserts Dr. Joseph Mercola. Instead, he feels there can be no doubt the skyrocketing rate has an environmental cause. Dr. Seneff agrees. And she’s convinced that she has found the culprit.

Connecting the dots

For the last 30 years, Dr. Seneff has been fascinated with the potential reasons behind autism after a close friend had a son who was diagnosed. Having conducted research at MIT for decades, she has an undergraduate degree in biology and a minor in food and nutrition. Over the the years, Dr. Seneff’s research has provided pioneering insights into the vital importance of sulfur for health. She’s also discovered that glyphosate (the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup Ready) severely affects how sulfur is utilized within the body.

“[W]e show how interference with CYP enzymes acts synergistically with disruption of the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids by gut bacteria, as well as impairment in serum sulfate transport,” the study authors note.

“Consequences are most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet, which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. … [T]he recent alarming increase in all of these health issues can be traced back to a combination of gut dysbiosis, impaired sulfate transport, and suppression of the activity of the various members of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) family of enzymes.”

Dr. Seneff established two central issues in autism that are related to glyphosate exposure:

  • Disrupted sulfur metabolism / sulfur and sulfate deficiency. Autistic children have about 1/3 of sulfur levels compared to an average child.
  • Gut dysbiosis — the imbalance of gut bacteria, inflammation, leaky gut and food allergies.

The party line of Monsanto is that Roundup is absolutely harmless to animals and people because it uses the shikimate pathway (which is absent from animals and humans) to kill weeds. Be that as it may, the minor detail Monsanto chose to omit is that the shikimate pathway IS found in bacteria. And these microbes within the body outnumber the cells in the human body by a ratio of 10 to 1.

“Glyphosate causes extreme disruption of the microbe’s function and lifecycle. What’s worse, glyphosate preferentially affects beneficial bacteria, allowing pathogens to overgrow and take over. At that point, your body also has to contend with the toxins produced by the pathogens. Once the chronic inflammation sets in, you’re well on your way toward chronic and potentially debilitating disease,” said Dr. Mercola.

In short, glyphosate damages beneficial bacteria in the gut, allowing for harmful bacteria to flourish, which in turn, begin pumping out their own poisons. These toxins damage the gut lining and encourage leaky gut syndrome. At this point, the toxins are able to seep into the blood stream and migrate to various areas of the body, including the brain. The effect? Inflammation goes into high gear, thereby triggering autoimmune disease and food sensitivities — including gluten intolerance and celiac disease.

To make matters worse, certain microbes breakdown glyphosate into the toxic byproduct of ammonia, causing brain inflammation and subsequent developmental delays. Children with autism are shown to have remarkably higher levels of ammonia than the general population.

Is Roundup Driving the Autism Epidemic - Leading MIT Researcher Says YES

Another damaging substance associated with genetically modified foods is formaldehyde, which in humans devastates DNA and encourages cancer. Genetically modified corn, for example, exceeds safe maximum levels of formaldehyde established in animal tests — by a factor of 200.

Dr. Seneff believes the characteristics of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity and presents data that supports the strong correlation between the increasing use of Roundup with the rising rate of autism. Biomarkers of high levels of glyphosate in the body include: zinc and iron deficiency, low sulfur levels, seizures and mitochondrial disorder — all of which are present in autistic children.

And while consuming an completely organic diet is a good start, glyphosate is becoming a seriously pervasive issue around the world. In the U.S. alone, glyphosate was found in an astounding 75% of rain and air samples taken in the Mississippi Delta agricultural region during the 2007 growing season. If we don’t get a handle on glyphosate use now, there will come a time where we won’t be able to escape it’s damaging effects, no matter how clean we think our diet is.

How you can take action

If you’re worried about the environmental and health hazards of glyphosate — and the alarming autism rate — here are several steps you can take to help curb this poisonous trend:

  • Sign the petition to tell the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to halt the sale of Roundup.
  • If you live close to an agricultural area, reach out to farmers and growers to educate them in a friendly and accessible way about the negative effects of Roundup.
  • Contact autism support groups and pass along information about the dangers of glyphosate.
  • Make sure to watch the interview below with Jeffrey Smith, of the Institute for Responsible Technology, and Dr. Seneff — then share with family and friends. Let’s get the word out.

The health dangers of Roundup (glyphosate) herbicide

Jeffrey Smith and Stephanie Seneff

Article Sources

Previous articles by Carolanne:

Source: Wake Up World

Victory Against Monsanto – Federal Judge Rules in Favor of GMO Ban


http://wearechange.org/victory-against-monsanto-federal-judge-rules-in-favor-of-gmo-ban/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wrc+%28We+Are+Change%29

gmo-omg-wtf

by  | May 30, 2015

Source: Revolution News

The Center for Food Safety, a nonprofit critical of biotech crops, considers the ruling a “big win” but expects the plaintiffs will challenge it before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said George Kimbrell, senior attorney for the group.

The judge has recognized that genetically engineered crops pose a significant commercial threat to non-biotech growers, which was a key issue in the litigation, Kimbrell said. “This case is a resounding affirmation of the right of farmers to protect themselves from Genetically Engineered contamination.”

The lawsuit brought by two local farmers backed by Monsanto opposed the anti-GMO ordinance and cited the Oregon Right to Farm Act that protects farmers from neighbors who might complain about noise, smells, dust and other farming practices. Judge Clarke said “While farming practices may not be limited by a suburbanite’s sensitivities, they may be limited if they cause damage to another farm’s crops”

Under the ordinance, farmers who already have genetically engineered crops can harvest this year but must remove the crops within 12 months.

While Clarke has dismissed the farmers’ arguments regarding “right to farm,” their claim seeking $4.2 million in compensation from Jackson County remains alive in the case.

The growers argue that forcing them to remove about 300 acres of herbicide-resistant “Roundup Ready” alfalfa amounts to the county condemning their property for public use, which requires just compensation.

Case History

On May 20, 2014, 66% of Jackson County voters cast their votes to ban the growing of genetically engineered crops in Jackson County. Backed by more than 150 family farms, six local granges and hundreds of local businesses, the bi-partisan campaign to protect family farmers from contamination by genetically engineered crops was approved by voters in every part of the county. The victory came despite almost $ 1 million in spending by Monsanto and other chemical corporations that have engineered GMO’s to withstand heavy herbicide spraying or produce their own insecticides.

On November 18, 2014, two alfalfa growers raising Monsanto’s “Round-up Ready Alfalfa” filed suit against Jackson County arguing the Jackson County GMO ban (“the Ordinance”) violated Oregon’s Right to Farm Act. Media statements released when the farmers filed suit admitted the suit is being backed by a host of industrial interests.

The Effect of Senate Bill 863: After the Jackson County Ordinance was proposed, the Monsanto front group, Oregonians for Food and Shelter, and other GMO-backers went to work in the Oregon Legislature attempting to prevent counties from voting to protect farmers growing traditional crops from banning GMO’s. The Legislature ultimately passed SB 863 to try to pre-empt other counties from banning GMO’s. But at the insistence of Sen. Bates and Rep. Buckley, a specific exemption for Jackson County was added into the law.

Our Family Farms Coalition (“OFFC”), Center for Food Safety and farmers Chris Hardy and Elise Higley (Oshala Farm) were allowed to join the case as “Defendant-Intervenors” to help defend the Ordinance. Both the family farmers and Jackson County argued that the Right to Farm Act does not prohibit the Ordinance since it was adopted to protect traditional crops from being damaged by GMO’s.

Sources
Our Family Farms Coalition
Capital Press

https://followingworldchange.wordpress.com/2015/05/30/victory-against-monsanto-federal-judge-rules-in-favor-of-gmo-ban/

Sri Lanka’s New President Puts Immediate Ban on Glyphosate Herbicides


http://wearechange.org/sri-lankas-new-president-puts-immediate-ban-on-glyphosate-herbicides/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wrc+%28We+Are+Change%29

by  | May 27, 2015

Source: Natural Blaze

Sri Lanka’s newly elected President Maithripala Sirisena announced Friday that the import of the World’s most used herbicide glyphosate will be banned with immediate effect. The release of already imported stocks has also been stopped.

Sirisena, a farmer and ex Health Minister, stated that glyphosate is responsible for the increasing number of chronic kidney disease (CKDu) patients in Sri Lanka and added that the move would protect the Sri Lankan farming community.

In Sri Lanka alone CKDu now afflicts 15% of people of working age in the Northern part of the country; a total of 400,000 patients with an estimated death toll of around 20,000.

Watch the videos “Mystery in the Fields” and “Cycle of Death” for 5 minute documentaries providing additional background information on afflicted areas around the world.

Sri Lanka’s ban comes after two scientific studies led by Dr. Jayasumana showed that drinking water from abandoned wells, where the concentrations of glyphosate and metals are higher, as well as spraying glyphosate, increased the risk of the deadly chronic kidney disease (CKDu) by up to 5-fold.

It also follows the recent World Health Organization announcement that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen.

Sri Lanka did ban the sale of glyphosate herbicides in March 2014 but this decision was overturned in May 2014 after a review. The decision by Sri Lanka’s new President, however, has huge significance following the latest WHO report on glyphosate.

Sri Lanka now becomes the second country to fully ban the sale of glyphosate herbicides following El Salvador’s decision in 2013, also taken due to the fatal CKDu disease. Bermuda has also put a temporary ban on glyphosate imports and is holding a review.

Source: Sustainable Pulse

https://followingworldchange.wordpress.com/2015/05/30/sri-lankas-new-president-puts-immediate-ban-on-glyphosate-herbicides/

World stands up against Monsanto: Over 400 cities protest GMOs


march-against-monsanto-global
Thousands of people across the world have joined together in a global movement, protesting against American biotech giant Monsanto. Activists from over 400 cities are speaking out against GMOs and Monsanto’s monopoly over the food supply.

Saturday marked the third global annual March Against Monsanto (MAM). According to the organizers, 48 countries were scheduled to participate in a massive global turnout.
A total of 452 rallies have been registered with the MAM organization.
Activists accuse the agricultural corporation of selling toxic chemicals, which are bad for people’s health, water supplies, vital crop pollinators and environment in general. The giant is also criticized for its attitude towards food safety regulations and a staunch opposition to GMO labeling. Meanwhile, small farmers blame Monsanto for monopolizing the seed market.
One of the first protests of the day took place in Sydney, Australia, with the demonstrators holding up placards saying: “Sick of lies” and “GMO is killing our children slowly.”
An activist at the rally told RT’s video agency Ruptly that corporations like Monsanto must be held accountable for the damage done to the planet. “This company has repeatedly committed, I would say, crimes against the Earth and what we are trying to show is accountability for corporations,” the action’s organizer said. “Also we want to promote clean food. Food that’s free of pesticides, which our grandparents just called food.”
There were also great turnouts at rallies in Asia, Africa, and Europe.
Demonstrators in Bangladesh formed a human chain around the faculty of fine arts at Dhaka University in the country’s capital. In India, thousands of farmers suffering the monopolistic push of the biotech giant have been protesting against Monsanto. A documentary on the rising suicide rates among Indian cotton farmers struggling to reap profits after GMO cotton replaced their crops is coming soon on RT.
Meanwhile, crowds of activists in South Africa braved the rainy weather in Cape Town during their march against genetically engineered products.
In France over 20 cities participated, with some central Parisian streets coming to a complete standstill. France is one of the biggest markets for Monsanto.
Germany’s capital Berlin saw a big turnout even though Germany does not use Monsanto’s seeds. However, activists say local farmers still use Monsanto’s pesticides and herbicides, which end up leaving traces in breast milk of feeding mothers, the water supply and even urine of people who have not eaten GMO products.
“The changes to the food supply are irreversible. And that is for the rest of human history. We are losing choice because it will all become GMO,” protester in Paris, Heidi Osterman, told RT.

“I think the general population will not wake up until they realize that they are getting seriously ill from this,” activist and Vice President True Food Foundation, Dietrich Wittel said.

Demonstrators in London, UK said they are concerned with GMO crops taking over their island given its isolation and size, which can potentially encourage a faster ‘takeover’ of GM crops.
What we believe is that GMOs are untested. These kind of pesticides and fertilizers infects our food and is going to affect us in a very negative way. This is why we profoundly disagree with GMOs,” a protester at the London rally told RT’s Laura Smith.
Americas demand GMO labeling, end to biotech monopoly

A wave of marches against Monsanto and GMO food hit the United States. Among the cities to join the protests were New York; Washington, DC; Los Angeles; San Franciso; Chicago; Indianapolis; Portland, Oregon; Oakland, California and dozens of others. Activists decried Monsanto’s control of 90 percent of the US seed market.
Hundreds of protesters marched on the White House and Monsanto’s Washington, DC headquarters as part of the anti-GMO action. People in New York also seized the opportunity to voice their concerns.
Chicago protesters have marched against Monsanto and GMO food, blocking off traffic in several streets.
“Monsanto is the reason why GMOs are in most of our food and we are one of the countries that haven’t banned them. It is a really big deal and people need to speak out in order to make a change,” a protester from New York told RT.
One of the central issues in the US is the battle over labeling GMO products. “Our biggest concern is that they are not labeling to begin with,” another activist stressed.

America’s northern neighbor also showed its opposition to the agriculture giant. Toronto, Canada’s most populated city, was the center of action. Hundreds of people began their rally at Queens Park and marched through the city’s streets with banners saying: “Ban GMOs.”

“People are here to take back control of the food system,” activist Jodi Koberinski told CBC. “We want government to hold these corporations responsible for the damage they are creating.”

Demonstrators from the city of Kelowna in British Columbia, Canada, shouted: “Hey hey, ho ho, GMOs have got to go!” Protesters in London, Ontario, Canada shouted they want “Real food” – and that they want it “now!” Ontario beekeepers have also symbolically dumped a coffin full of dead honey bees, which they gathered from farms across the province, CBC News reported.

Both the Hawaii and the Caribbean were protesting Monsanto’s power, with Hawaiian activists demanding “GMO-free” islands and Puerto Ricans marching along to music with signs saying “No more venom.”

South America has seen powerful anti-GMO protests with some striking imagery on placards carried by demonstrators. Many protesters chose to stress they believe Monsanto’s pesticides and genetically modified products have been causing neurological diseases and cancer.

Protesters in Brazil dressed up in gas masks and white uniform, carrying anti-Monsanto signs seemingly covered in blood. In Buenos Aires, Argentina, Guy Fawkes masks and placards against the biotech behemoth mixed with demands for green and real food.
The first annual MAM action was held in 2013. It saw over two million protesters from around the globe taking to the streets to demonstrate.

Monsanto was founded in 1901 and originally produced food additives. In over a century, it has become the world leader in the production of genetically engineered seeds and chemical herbicides. It currently employs over 22,000 people in factories across 61 countries.
Monsanto spokesperson, Charla Lord, issued a statement in response to the global movement today: “The company is committed to making a more balanced meal accessible for everyone.”
In light of thousands of people opposing Monsanto on Saturday, a few individuals came out in support of the agricultural giant, gathering outside Monsanto’s headquarters, with banners in favor of the use of GMOs. The pro-Monsanto demonstrators said protesters are spreading “myths” about genetically modified products.

http://rt.com/news/261573-monsanto-global-protests-gmo/

Russian President Putin Signs GMO Labeling Liability Law


Posted on Jan 3 2015 – 2:17pm by Sustainable Pulse

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed the Russian Federation Code of Administrative Offences into law, including a new article establishing liability for the violation of mandatory requirements for the labeling of food products that contain GMOs.

Vladimir Putin

Putin signed the new bill on the last day of 2014 TASS news agency reported.

The bill which was submitted by the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Protection and Welfare (Rospotrebnadzor) imposes fines for vague or unclear labeling on food products containing genetically modified ingredients.

According to the bill, individual entrepreneurs could be fined up to 50,000 rubles ($890), and the products will be confiscated. Business entities face a fine of up to 150,000 rubles (over $5,300).

President Putin said in 2014 that Russia must protect its citizens from over consumption of products containing genetically modified organisms. Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev followed this with a statement that Russia has no intention to import GMOs, however there are still large quantities of GMO foods being imported in to Russia.

Russian Minister of Agriculture Nikolai Fyodorov believes that Russia must remain a GMO-free country. At a meeting of deputies representing rural areas organized by United Russia, he said that the government will not “poison their citizens.”

In February, a group of senators from Russia’s Federation Council introduced a bill seeking to prohibit the distribution and import of products containing GMOs in Russia.

According to the explanatory note attached to the bill, only 18 lines of GMOs are officially allowed in Russia at the moment. This is a far lower number than in other countries, as the Russian farming industry has long maintained extensive restrictions on the use of technology related to GMOs. The senators say that because of its WTO membership, Russian markets could import numerous genetically modified products from other countries, thereby destabilizing the situation.

Ef Note: Now here’s a “Three Stooges” moment on the geopolitical world stage…

President Putin said in 2014 that Russia must protect its citizens from over consumption of products containing genetically modified organisms”Russian Minister of Agriculture Nikolai Fyodorov said that the government will not ‘poison their citizens’.”

Ouch…It doesn’t take a Rocket Scientist to figure out who Russia poked in the eye! lol!

Non-GMO popcorn anyone? 

March Against Monsanto, May 23, 2015



This is a Call to Action for a
Non-Hierarchical Occupation of Monsanto Everywhere

Whether you like it or not, chances are Monsanto contaminated the food you ate today with chemicals and unlabeled GMOs. Monsanto controls much of the world’s food supply at the expense of food democracy worldwide. This site is dedicated to empowering citizens of the world to take action against Monsanto & it’s enablers like the FDA, USDA, EPA, GMA, BIO, and the processed food companies that use Monsanto’s products.



March Against Monsanto, May 23, 2015


Occupy Monsanto supports the March Against Monsanto!

MAM ALL May23 e1431096215781 March Against Monsanto, May 23, 2015 USDA Tumors Protest Organize organic Notes Monsanto Protection Act Monsanto March Against Monsanto March infertility GMO Seeds GMO Labeling gmo Global Day of Action FDA EPA Demonstration Congress civil disobedience cancer Boycott birth defects Activism #OpMonsanto

EARTH – Saturday, May 23, a broad coalition of individuals and groups will gather in cities and towns all over the world, as part of a global March Against Monsanto. The intention of this march is to raise public awareness and bring increasing political pressure to bear regarding Monsanto’s corporate farming and business practices and to fight for labeling of foods that contain genetically engineered and/or modified materials.

It has been estimated that 38 countries spanning 6 continents and 428 cities will be participating in the Global March Against Monsanto for a peaceful, non-violent, informational protest.

Monsanto’s and other companies (e.g., Dow, Syngenta) genetically engineered food pose scientifically established health risks. These include, but are not limited to: organ damage, sterility and infant mortality, birth defects, immune reactions, allergies and increased cancer risks, http://healthyfoodnaturally.com/2012/02/07/gmo-health-risks/

“Monsanto is bankrupting famers, causing soil infertility, mono-cropping, loss of biodiversity, and bee hive collapse. Furthermore, their practices pose a very real threat to organic farming and loss of native plants. It is causing dependency on a centralized food system. In aggregate, this is a recipe for global famine,” warns long-time activist and member of the Gateway Greens, Daniel Romano.

An “Open Letter from World Scientists to All Governments Concerning Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)” (www.i-sis.org.uk/list.php), signed by 828 scientists from 84 countries, detailed concern regarding GMOs coupled with a call for immediate 5 year suspension of GMO crops in order to conduct “a comprehensive public enquiry of agriculture and food security for all.”

GMOs have been removed and banned by Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Japan, Luxembourg, Madeira, New Zealand, Peru, South America, Russia, France, and Switzerland.

“Monsanto does not want consumers to know what they are eating and is continuing to aggressively fight labeling of GMOs in food. This effort is now reaching even further than blocking attempts by states like California, Oregon and Hawaii from passing labeling laws. Currently a Monsanto former lobbyist is one of the corporate representatives drafting the newest and largest international trade agreement, the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership). Non-Labeling of GMO foods is being written into the TPP.” – Barbara Chicherio, Gateway Green Alliance

The legislation pushed by the opposition is known much maligned (and misleading) “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act,” which has been dubbed by activists as the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act.

The DARK Act was actually introduced by a powerful pro-GMO food lobby (learn more about it here).

An online event can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/events/753961208032987/
A complete list of events can be found here: http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/events
SOURCE: March Against Monsanto

More here: http://occupy-monsanto.com/march-against-monsanto-may-23-2015/

Pesticides in Paradise: Hawai‘i’s Health & Environment at Risk ~ Center for Food Safety


May 6th, 2015

The chemical industry’s experimentation with pesticide-promoting genetically engineered (GE) crops increasingly threaten Hawai‘i’s public health, biodiversity and food independence. To curb these threats and raise public awareness about this issue, HCFS has published the groundbreaking, in-depth report Pesticides in Paradise: Hawai‘i’s Health and Environment at Risk.

Download the key findings
Download the abridged report

On O‘ahu, Kaua‘i, Maui, and Moloka‘i, chemical and biotechnology companies Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont-Pioneer, Dow Chemical, and BASF have purchased prime agricultural land, taking advantage of Hawai‘i’s isolation and year-round growing season, in order to field test crops that have been genetically engineered to withstand greater applications of pesticides.

Hawai’i is a relatively small state, but has one of the highest rates of open-air GE field tests in the U.S – in 2014, chemical companies conducted GE field tests on over 1,381 sites. Herbicide resistance has been the most frequently tested trait over the past five years. This means GE crops tested in Hawai‘i, by and large, are designed to withstand ever greater applications of herbicides, posing a direct threat to human and environmental health..

Pesticide drift is a primary concern for communities living alongside GE operations. In the report, HCFS reviews over 150 published scientific and medical research examining the threats pesticides used in Hawai‘i pose to public health, especially the risk to pregnant women and young children. The findings reveal that pesticide exposure in utero and early life has been linked to childhood cancers, neurobehavioral and cognitive deficits, adverse birth outcomes, and asthma.

Neither pesticides nor GE crops are adequately regulated in the state of Hawai‘i, and this report is a major advancement in efforts to establish stronger regulations that protect Hawai‘i’s people and natural resources from harmful exposure to pesticides.

Read the abridged version of “Pesticides in Paradise: Hawai‘i’s Health & Environment at Risk”

 

As a resource for communities across the islands, HCFS is offering free presentation of the report’s key findings, and we encourage you to sign-up for a presentation in your neighborhood or for your organization – Sign up here.


Simon Parkes reveals mind control secrets


Whitby Councillor and experiencer Simon Parkes knows so much of the secrets in mind control that he just now is the best source on earth to receive information on this horrible topic. Usually somebody whistleblowing on secrets of mind control, as Simon Parkes does, would not survive a minute, but Simon has proper protection and his connection to the dark rulers of planet earth (Dracos) enhances his capabilities. Some of those secret rulers may have liberated themselves from their own mind control and changed side for the better of all.

All the secret facts that Simon Parkes confirms or reveals to the audience are mind-boggling. This is the most groundbreaking interview on mind control that has ever been made in modern times. Never has an Illuminati insider told so frankly and pedagogically on those hidden facts and technology of the most pivotal tool to remote control homo sapiens and other races.

The only 48 min short interview (because people usually have little time) focuses on metal and etheric implants in humans, how to detect and remove them, how to shield against mind control with gold and why that is working. The techniques for mind control are discussed: horrible torture, scalar waves distributed with cell phone and television technology, phased array radar, chemtrails, morgellons, HAARP, military stations on Moon and Saturn and a lot more.
The threat of artificial intelligence (AI) is warned about.
The murder of Michael Jackson and the helping hand of Sir Elton John to celebrity victims is mentioned.
This interview is a must for all targeted individuals (ti’s) on the planet. A lot of them got help from Simon Parkers already. He is good for the rescue of the most hopeless cases of remote controlled humans.

From Henning Witte on Vimeo.

https://vimeo.com/126314745

Kochs, Corps, and Monsanto Trade Group Have Bankrolled Group Attacking Dr. Oz


A group of ten doctors has called for NBC’s Dr. Oz (Dr. Mehmet Oz) to be fired from Columbia University, where he is vice chairman of the surgery department.

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) has long tracked the group that is connected to several of the signers attacking Dr. Oz, and CMD’s Executive Director Lisa Graves spoke with the Dr. Oz show about the background of that group and some of the signers. (CMD does not receive any funding from Dr. Oz or NBC.)

One of the doctors, Dr. Gilbert Ross, is a convicted felon who works for the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH). CMD’s updated review of ACSH’s funding confirms that it has been funded by a trade group of food corporations that heavily opposes GMO labeling.

One of ACSH’s most common activities is bashing people concerned about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and chemicals used in factory farming.

ACSH poses as an independent science-based organization devoted to outing “junk science,” but consumer advocates have called it “a consumer front organization for its business backers” that “glove[s] the hand that feeds it.”

The majority of ACSH’s funds have come from corporations and major foundations.

ACSH cartoon by Joe Mohr

CMD examined ACSH’s funding last summer and also looked into the groups when its name surfaced in 2012 in litigation involving concerns about Syngenta’s agricultural chemical, atrazine. CMD’s investigation of unsealed court documents revealed that Syngenta’s PR operation had identified ACSH as a way for it to attack and try to discredit those raising concerns about atrazine; and that ACSH was to be paid for its work defending Syngenta. Other documents that were subsequently leaked to Mother Jones confirmed that Syngenta has been funding ACSH, along with providing additional details on other corporate funders, as of two years ago.

An updated review of all available information about ACSH’s funding sources by CMD reveals that some of the hands that feed the group are not only those of the Koch brothers, Charles and David Koch, through the Koch family fortune (Koch Industries profits from petroleum products like ammonia fertilizers and other agribusiness-related operations), but also those of the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), a $41.4 million trade group representing such companies as Monsanto, Campbell Soup Company, Kraft Foods, Cargill, ConAgra, General Mills, Coca Cola, and Pepsi.

ACSH Spins Pesticides, GMOs, Fracking, E-Cigarettes, and More

In recent months, ACSH has:

  • published reports calling a Harvard School of Public Health report on pesticides’ effect on men’s sperm “full of faulty data and conclusions that it makes a perfect example of common study flaws”;
  • attacked the International Agency for Research on Cancer (an agency of the World Health Organization and United Nations) for its conclusion that glyphosate–the primary ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup–is “probably carcinogenic,” calling IARC “among the worst of the hyper-regulators… [with] a well-deserved reputation for breezing past or simply ignoring the latest (or even the consensus) science in the service of their precautionary principle-based agenda”;
  • lambasted food columnist Mark Bitman’s support for the precautionary principle when it comes to GMOS as “frothings” and “bilious insinuations” that go “overboard as usual”; and
  • called fracking “a safe and efficient path to energy independence,” despite the hazardous chemical cocktail used in hydraulic fracturing, which uses and spoils millions of gallons of fresh drinking water each year in the fracking process.

And, of course, ACSH regularly criticizes Dr. Oz’s policy position that GMOs in foods should be labeled as “GMO fear-mongering.”

ACSH has published claims about GMOs that make outrageous statements like “opposition to agricultural progress . . . causes blindness and death worldwide.” ACSH has also made patently false and easily disprovable claims such as, “[T]here are no alternative technologies available to plant breeders with which new improved varieties can be created to overcome the current limitations of global agriculture to produce sufficient food, feed, fuel, and fiber on available land.”

Traditional plant breeding continues to develop crop varieties that are better adjusted to local conditions, produce more, and have other beneficial traits. Take, for example, the work done by the Organic Seed Partnership, a collaborative effort of Oregon State University, the University of Wisconsin, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service, Cornell University, and the Organic Seed Alliance.

For a period, tobacco was the rare consumer health hazard about which ACSH had publicly expressed concern. As a result, some of its funding from the food industry dried up after those companies were acquired by Philip Morris (now the global tobacco company Altria), which took umbrage at ACSH’s position against tobacco. “ACSH’s warnings about cigarette smoking resulted in the loss of substantial contributions from food manufacturers that had been acquired by tobacco companies,” ACSH once stated on its website.

But ACSH has since received funding from Altria and at least one manufacturer of electronic cigarettes called “The Safe Cig.”

With the rise of e-cigarettes–and ACSH’s receipt of funding from companies selling them–ACSH has reversed course. It now advocates that “electronic cigarettes should be made as accessible as cigarettes. Electronic cigarettes should be sold widely and lightly regulated…” In another publication, it expresses the hope that the Food and Drug Administration will continue to “allow… millions of desperate addicted smokers continued access to this lifesaving technology.”

E-cig companies have been making the rounds at groups like ACSH as well as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the State Policy Network (SPN) in search of third parties to help promote its product and derail regulation.

ACSH Buddy Henry Miller Lead Signer on Oz Letter

The letter calling on Columbia University to fire Dr. Oz includes among its signers Dr. Gilbert Ross, ACSH Acting President and Executive Director, who was convicted of the felony offense of Medicaid fraud and had his medical license revoked in 1995. The letter’s lead signer, Dr. Henry I. Miller–like Ross, an outspoken advocate of GMOs–was a board member of ACSH and the founding director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Office of Biotechnology. He is now a senior research fellow at the right-wing Hoover Institution.

Miller gained recent notoriety for his appearance in a political ad by the “No on 37″ campaign to squelch California voters’ effort to label GMOs by way of a 2012 ballot initiative, as CMD reported. GMO corporations and other businesses spent over $40 million on the ad and outreach campaign that Miller was featured in. There is no public information about whether they funded him personally or through an organization or not, but there appear to be no legal restrictions on them doing so in the past or future.

The “No on 37″ ad originally listed campaign spokesperson Miller as “M.D., Stanford” and showed Stanford University buildings in the background. The campaign had to pull that version off the air at the request of Stanford University and re-do it because “the Stanford ID on the screen appeared to violate the university’s policy against use of the Stanford name by consultants,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

What Miller is most notorious for are his unusual public positions. In 2003, Miller penned an op-ed for the New York Times defending DDT and arguing for its resurrection. This prompted a U.S.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) response pointing out the estimated “increase in infant deaths that might result from DDT spraying.”

Miller was also a founding member scientist of The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition, a now-defunct, tobacco industry-funded public relations front group run by the APCO Worldwide PR firm that worked to discredit the links between cigarettes and cancer.

Perhaps most outrageously, Miller wrote in a 2011 op-ed for Forbes that some of those exposed to radiation after the damage to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant “could have actually benefitted from it.”

Miller also penned a 2012 Forbes op-ed on GMO labeling suggesting that it is the supporters of GMO labeling who are engaged in “no-holds-barred advocacy … to disparage farming methods and promulgate fraudulent health claims about the foods we eat.”

Miller, who accused Oz of undisclosed conflicts of interest, is no stranger to conflicts of interest himself.

GMA, Kochs, DonorsTrust, Bradley, Searle, and Others Fund ACSH

In addition to such corporate and trade group funders as ExxonMobil, Chevron, the American Petroleum Institute, Syngenta, Bayer CropScience, CropLife America, Procter and Gamble, Pfizer, the Personal Care Products Council, Coca-Cola, Dr. Pepper/Snapple, and McDonald’s, ACSH funders have also included the Koch brothers’ David H. Koch Foundation and Claude R. Lambe Foundation (which closed in early 2013), the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the Bradley Foundation. In this partial list of funders (ACSH stopped disclosing its donors early in the 1990s), the second-largest funder is DonorsTrust, which is known for its “murky money maze” of anonymous right-wing funding connected to the Kochs.

New to this group of funders as of 2013, according to CMD’s research, is the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), a $41.4 million trade group representing such companies as Campbell Soup Company, Kraft Foods, Cargill, ConAgra, General Mills, Coca Cola, and Pepsi. The anti-GMO labeling trade group gave ACSH $25,000 in 2013, according to its most recently available IRS disclosure. The grant was listed for “general support,” and so what ACSH activities GMA funded are not known.

GMA sued Maui after citizens of the Hawai’i county voted to ban GMO crops on the island in November 2014. GMA also sued the state of Vermont over its law requiring GMO labels in 2014, as CMD has reported.

GMA has also repeatedly lobbied Koch-backed Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas to introduce what it calls “The Safe & Accurate Food Labeling Act” and proponents of GMO labeling call the “Deny Americans the Right to Know Act” or DARK Act.

ACSH’s funding stream overlaps significantly with the web of right-wing think tanks called the State Policy Network (SPN), which CMD has dubbed “stink tanks.” For example, the Bodman Foundation, endowed by the investment banking fortune of the late George Bodman, has funded SPN members including New Jersey’s Common Sense Institute and the Empire Center for New York State Policy as well as associate members the American Enterprise Institute, the Acton Institute, the Empire Center’s parent group the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, and the National Center for Policy Analysis. Altria (the global tobacco company), the Armstrong Foundation, the Bradley Foundation, Donors Capital Fund, DonorsTrust, the JM Foundation, the Claude R. Lambe Foundation, the Olin Foundation, and Searle Freedom Trust have all funded both ACSH and SPN.

Many of ACSH’s funders also have ties to the controversial ALEC, which CMD has called a “corporate bill mill.” Special interests such as 3M, Altria, the American Petroleum Institute, Bayer CropScience, the Bradley Foundation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chevron, Coca-Cola, CropLife America, Donors Capital Fund, DonorsTrust, Dr. Pepper/Snapple, ExxonMobil, the JM Foundation, the Claude R. Lambe Foundation, McDonald’s, the Olin Foundation, PhRMA, Procter and Gamble, the Randolph Foundation, and Searle Freedom Trust have all funded both ACSH and ALEC.

See CMD’s full review of ACSH’s known financial underwriters below:

Funder Amount Donated Funding source Years
3M $30,000 2012
Bodman Foundation $90,000 investment banking 2007-2012
Altria $25,000 2012
American Petroleum Institute $37,500 petroleum industry 2012
Amvac Chemical Corporation $5,000 2012
Armstrong Foundation $15,000 2003-2012
Bayer CropScience $30,000 2012
Bradley Foundation, Lynde and Harry $270,000 factory automation equipment manufacturer Allen-Bradley 2004-2012
Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation $300,000 2002-2012
Chevron $18,500 oil 2012
Chinook Foundation $600 2011, 2013
Coca-Cola $50,000 2012
Conrad Family Foundation $100 2011
Cox Family Foundation $1,000 2009
CropLife America $25,000 pesticide industry 2004
Distilled Spirits Council of the United States $30,000 2008-2012
Dodge Jones Foundation $42,000 railroad and minerals 2003, 2009-2013
Donors Capital Fund $89,500 anonymous “donor directed” fund 2008-2011
DonorsTrust $534,574.62 anonymous “donor directed” fund 2005-2011
Dr. Pepper/Snapple $5,000 2012
Earhart Foundation $212,000 2002-2009
Ethox Chemicals $2,000 2012
ExxonMobil $315,000 petroleum 2000-2013
Finley, A.E. Foundation $1,000 equipment & machinery distribution 2009, 2012
Fragrance Materials Association of the United States, Inc. $20,000 2011
Friedmann, Philip M. Family Charitable Trust $11,900 Recycled Paper Greetings company 2003-2012
GE Foundation $396,000 General Electric (including a small amount of donations matching employees’) 2003-2012
Gerstacker, Rollin M. Foundation $10,000 Dow Chemical Company 2010
Gilder Foundation $5,000 stockbroker Richard Gilder 2005
Griffin, Dorothy G. Charitable Foundation $3,000 Varflex Corporation (electrical insulating sleeving and tubing) 2010-2012
Grocery Manufacturers Association $25,000 anti-GMO labeling trade association 2013
Hayden Foundation $2,300 2009-2013
International Formula Council $10,000 2012
JM Foundation $15,000 Borden Milk Company 1997
Kayser Family Foundation $2,500 2006-2009
Kirby, F.M. Foundation $347,000 Woolworth and Alleghany Companies 1998-2013
Koch, David H. Foundation $6,000 Koch Industries 1986-1987
Olin, John M. Foundation $915,500 Olin Corporation chemical 1985-2004 (foundation closed in 2005)
Lambe, Claude R. Foundation $95,000 Koch Industries 2005-2008 (also contributed $30,000 in 2006 that was returned to the foundation in 2009)
McDonald’s $30,000 2012
McNutt, Amy Shelton Charitable Trust $1,500 2009, 2011
Nolan, David P. Foundation $250 2010
Opportunity Foundation $2,500 2009-2013
Penn, Arthur S. and Marilyn Charitable Trust $500 retired president of Elmrock Capital, Inc., board member of Center for Individual Rights 2010
Personal Care Products Council $20,000 personal care products (cosmetics, toiletries, fragrances, etc.) industry 2011-2002
Pfizer Foundation $300 pharmaceutical industry (matching employee gifts) 2011-2013
PhRMA $160,000 pharmaceutical industry 2008-2010
Procter and Gamble $6,000 2012
Randolph Foundation $73,920 Vicks chemical company 2006
Roberts, Gilroy and Lillian P. Charitable Foundation $200 sculptor, gemstone carver, and former Chief Engraver of the U.S. Mint 2013
Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation $27,500 oil 1998-2001
Sarah Scaife Foundation $205,000 Mellon industrial, oil, aluminum and banking 1985-1991
Searle Freedom Trust $100,000 pharmaceuticals 2007
Stare Fund $7,500 2012
Roger and Susan Stone Family Foundation $5,000 Smurfit-Stone (paperboard and paper-based packaging) 2009, 2012
Syngenta $22,500 2012
Tepper Family Foundation $500 2013
Texmark Chemicals (David Smith) $5,000 2012
The Safe Cig $4,100 electronic cigarette manufacturer 2012
Tober, Barbara and Donald Foundation $23,500 2007-2012
Triad Foundation $35,000 (“Gen/fracking”) 2012
Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program $39,400 donor-advised fund 2012-2013

Cartoon by Joe Mohr. This is an updated version of an article published by CMD in 2014. For more on the billionaire industrialist Koch brothers and the power and influence of the Koch cadre and Koch cash, see CMD’s unique wiki resource, KochExposed.org.

 http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/07/12538/koch-and-gma-funding-group-attacking-dr-oz#sthash.QbrqteYm.dpuf

Dr. Oz Addresses His Pro-GMO Critics


Note: Will Dr . Oz finally come clean on vaccines now that he’s being attacked from within his own inner circles?

As many of you know, I addressed my critics in last Thursday’s show. If you missed it, you can watch my response here” Dr. Mehmet Oz

For more from this show, click here: http://bit.ly/1bxVz9q

Petition to Swiss Govt: Protect Hawai`i from Syngenta!


 

Stand with the People of Kaua`i, sign the Petition to Syngenta’s Swiss HQ!

I join the residents of Kaua`i and support them in asking the government and people of Switzerland to instruct Syngenta, which is headquarted in Switzerland, to:

  1. Offer Kaua`i and all Hawai`i the same respect and protections that are afforded to the residents of Switzerland.
  2. Stop spraying Atrazine, Paraquat and 4 other pesticide “active ingredients” which are banned in Switzerland but are sprayed by Syngenta on a regular basis next to and upwind from Kaua`i schools, hospitals and homes.
  3. Honor Kaua`i’s laws as they honor the people and the laws of Switzerland. Ask Syngenta to drop their lawsuit against the people of Kaua`i over a democratically passed law (Bill 2491/Ordinance 960) that would establish pesticide buffer zones around the places we live and go to school. Ask them to stop using the courts to hide information about what they spray and to what they expose Kaua`i’s people on a daily basis.

I stand with Kaua`i and all the people of Hawai`i in asking the Swiss people and the Swiss government for their support.

SIGN HERE: https://ujoin.org/campaigns/44/actions/public?action_id=48#sthash.MNaQwgYl.dpuf

why sign?

  • Kauai`i is “Ground Zero” for pesticide intensive research operations by the world’s largest chemical corporations!
  • West Kaua`i residents have no choice but to live, work and sleep downwind from restricted use pesticide spraying 2 out of every 3 days a year!
  • People of Kaua`i should be afforded the same rights and protections by Syngenta that its home country of Switzerland requires for its own people!
  • Please sign the petition, share with your friends and help the residents of Kaua`i send a loud message half way around the world on behalf of all Hawai`i.

SIGN HERE: https://ujoin.org/campaigns/44/actions/public?action_id=48#sthash.MNaQwgYl.hBpw9ntN.dpuf

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,667 other followers

%d bloggers like this: