Nonsanto: A Month Without Monsanto

Nonsanto: A Month Without Monsanto
by Sarah Newman
April 8, 2010 Abridged; link to full article below

When I first heard about April Davila's quest to live without Monsanto for a month, I thought she was doing something noble in a public setting. But would it really be that hard? As a locavore, I pride myself on purchasing my produce from farmer's markets, so couldn't she just do the same? When we decided to meet, I soon realized that my arrogant assumptions had enough hot air to heat a compost bin.

After many attempts to find a place to meet, we settled on having organic herbal tea at a local coffee shop. She greeted me in her new wardrobe. No, she's isn't an Angeleno fashionista. Rather, Monsanto owns most cotton seeds, so she had to purchase clothes and shoes made from other sources. April is plain and soft-spoken -- I wouldn't pick her to stand with a bull-horn outside of a McDonald's protest. Despite her demeanor, her month without Monsanto was her own small, but very impactful way of positively affecting our food system.

April wasn't a food activist before she saw Food, Inc. She's a scientist, writer and mom who was a conscious food consumer, but hadn't let it define her life. After seeing the film, she started reading more about Monsanto and was disturbed by an article about the possible harmful kidney and liver effects of the company's genetically modified corn. She decided to go Monsanto-free for a month after casually mentioning it to a friend who challenged her to do it (and this friend was critical in helping her succeed as the volume of research became more than a full-time job).

April's life radically changed from shopping at farmer's markets and purchasing organic products at supermarkets to one where she was tracking the source of every seed of everything she ingested and wore. She was caught flat footed when she began her journey as she didn't realize the extent of the company's reach. Her first few days consisted of wild fish and seaweed because she couldn't confirm anything about the company (she nearly gave up at this point). She learned that Monsanto controls many, many seeds and seed subsidiaries and even owns major organic seed companies (e.g. Western Seed). She switched to heirloom-only produce (non-Monsanto) and started contacting companies and their suppliers about their seed sources. She received responses from CEOs who did their own research on their seed sources (for example, Lundberg rice and certain Annie's macaroni and cheese were confirmed to be non-Monsanto). Farmers might not be aware, even if they grow
organic, because they order from seed distributors who don't list their sources.

It wasn't just that Monsanto owns most seeds. April started to examine them through her scientific lens. It turns out, not surprisingly, that some of their scientific evidence is questionable as they have paid off scientists....

Please read the full article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-newman/nonsanto-a-month-without_b_530325.html


Share this on Facebook: Share

IMPORTANT ARTICLE: Amid Monsanto’s antitrust troubles, another study questions the health effects of GMOs

Amid Monsanto’s antitrust troubles, another study questions the health effects of GMOs
by Tom Philpott
16 Dec 2009
LINK TO FULL ARTICLE BELOW

Better living through biotechnology? Pity executives at genetically modified seed giant Monsanto. Not only are they having to knock heads with Department of Justice lawyers over the company’s business practices, but some of their most-cherished PR talking points are being obliterated by researchers.

In the past few months, we’ve learned that its much-vaunted technologies don’t really increase yields after all; and aren’t really all that promising for adapting to climate change.

We’re also getting a trickle of information that calls into serious question the PR talking point on which the entire GMO seed industry hangs: that GMO products are safe to eat. This is a widely held assumption; but as Don Lotter showed in a recent paper in the International Journal of the Sociology of Food and Agriculture, there has actually been shockingly little research done on the long-term effects of eating GMO foods—and most of what has been was conducted by the industry itself.

The problem is that government funding for independent research on GMOs is scant—and industry funding is non-existent. And it’s extremely difficult for independent researchers to get their hands on GMO seeds without signing restrictive contracts with their patent holders, as the New York Times reported earlier this year.

The independent research that has been done on the health effects of GMOs paints an alarming picture. Here’s my discussion of the results of a multigenerational study, funded by the Austrian government, that came out last year on the effects of GMO corn on mice. Short story: in the third and fourth generations, mice fed GMOs showed “statistically significant” reproductive dysfunction.

PLEASE READ THE FULL ARTICLE: http://www.grist.org/article/2009-12-16-monsanto-GMO-safety-health/

IMPORTANT ARTICLE: GM seeds threaten food supply, claim researchers

GM seeds threaten food supply, claim researchers
By Caroline Scott-Thomas
11-Sep-2009 Link to full article below

Modern seed companies are reducing crop diversity – and this could have serious consequences for food supply as the climate heats up, researchers claimed at the World Seed Conference in Rome this week.

This is the second time in a week that researchers have raised fears about the impact of climate change on crops. According to a study published online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences last week, climate change could result in severe shortages of two of America’s most important grains – corn and soy. Although yields increase with temperature up to 29C for corn and 30C for soybeans, there is a sharp decline in yield above these thresholds, they said.

Now fresh concerns have been raised that food manufacturers could find it more difficult to source ingredients in the future, as researchers from the International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED) have suggested that large-scale seed companies could squeeze out traditional plant breeding.

To read the full article: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Financial-Industry/GM-seeds-threaten-food-supply-claim-researchers/?c=NAUpDVS3q2ru3gWl7Xwh1w%3D%3D&utm_source=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%2BWeekly

******************************************************
If you enjoyed this, would you please make a donation?
Even $1 or $5 helps us to serve you.

Survey shows most Canadian farmers oppose GM wheat

Survey shows most Canadian farmers oppose GM wheat
By Caroline Scott-Thomas 06/30/09
(link to entire article below)

Most Canadian wheat farmers are opposed to the introduction of genetically modified (GM) wheat unless market conditions change, according to a Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) survey.

The annual CWB survey was based on 1,300 telephone interviews with Western Canadian farmers. It found that most (57 percent) thought that GM wheat should not be grown in Canada until certain conditions are met, such as added agronomic benefits for farmers or an identified market demand.

Nineteen percent said that GM wheat should not be grown in Canada, while only nine percent said it should be grown as soon as it becomes available.

The survey showed split opinion in how interested farmers would be in growing a GM wheat variety: 51 percent said they were “not interested at all”, while 46 percent said they were “somewhat” or “very” interested.

To read the full article: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Financial-Industry/Survey-shows-most-Canadian-farmers-oppose-GM-wheat/?c=NAUpDVS3q2ru8Pktt7fL8Q%3D%3D&utm_source=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%2BWeekly

Food Inc - See the movie!

Meet Your New Farmer: Hungry Corporate Giant
June 12, 2009




Forget buckets of blood. Nothing says horror like one of those tubs of artificially buttered, nonorganic popcorn at the concession stand. That, at least, is one of the unappetizing lessons to draw from one of the scariest movies of the year, “Food, Inc.,” an informative, often infuriating activist documentary about the big business of feeding or, more to the political point, force-feeding, Americans all the junk that multinational corporate money can buy. You’ll shudder, shake and just possibly lose your genetically modified lunch.

Divided into chapters dedicated to points along the commercial food chain — from farm to fork, to borrow a loaded agribusiness phrase — the movie is nothing if not ambitious. “There are no seasons in the American supermarket,” the unidentified voice intones in the opening scene, as the camera sweeps the aisles of one such brightly lighted, heavily stocked if nutritionally impoverished emporium. From there the director Robert Kenner jumps all over the food map, from industrial feedlots where millions of cruelly crammed cattle mill about in their own waste until slaughter, to the chains where millions of consumers gobble down industrially produced meat and an occasional serving of E. coli bacteria.

To read the full article from NYTimes:
http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/movies/12food.html?ref=arts

New collaboration for GM-free wheat traits

New collaboration for GM-free wheat traits
By Caroline Scott-Thomas
05-Jun-2009


Dow AgroSciences and World Wide Wheat (W3) have teamed up to develop new wheat traits for “advancements in productivity and quality” of crops, without using genetic modification (GM).

The reason for the collaboration is to combine Dow AgroScience’s experience in commercializing seed traits and W3’s expertise in plant breeding research to bring the “next generation” of wheat to markets in North America, South America, Europe and Australia, the companies said.

Spokesperson for Dow Agrosciences Robyn Heine told FoodNavigator-USA.com that the company could not be more specific at present about what traits the collaboration is looking to develop.

She added that although this first generation of traits will be GM-free, the company would not rule out the possibility of marketing GM traits in the future.

GM wheat debate

Controversy surrounding the development of GM wheat traits has been stirred up recently after a group of wheat industry representative organizations from the US, Canada and Australia signed a joint statement vowing to synchronize their efforts to commercialize GM wheat last month.

This led to a corresponding tri-national statement from organizations opposed to the commercialization of GM wheat, with arguments centering on a lack of consumer acceptance as well as a lack of agronomic benefits from currently available GM crops, such as greater nutritional value or increased yield.

There are currently no GM wheat varieties commercially available.

To read the full article:
http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Science-Nutrition/New-collaboration-for-GM-free-wheat-traits/?c=NAUpDVS3q2pF%2BllTRt%2BftQ%3D%3D&utm_source=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%2BWeekly

Consumers won’t accept GM wheat, says tri-national statement

Consumers won’t accept GM wheat, says tri-national statement
By Caroline Scott-Thomas
02-Jun-2009


A group of organizations from the US, Canada and Australia has released a joint statement expressing their opposition to wheat industry plans to commercialize genetically modified (GM) wheat.

The group made its position known in response to a joint statement released last month by a group of wheat industry representative bodies that vowed to synchronize plans for the commercialization of GM wheat. There are currently no GM varieties of wheat commercially available.

The statement, “Definitive Global Rejection of Genetically Engineered Wheat”, centers on the lack of consumer acceptance for GM wheat, lack of agronomic benefits of existing GM crops, and disputes the idea that wheat is less favored by farmers than GM crops.

“Locally-bred varieties are critical to ensuring local food supplies during times of weather-related disasters,” the statement reads. “In Australia, Canada, and the US, farmers and public scientists have worked collectively with this diversity to develop varieties adapted to local conditions and suited to relevant markets. Multinational seed companies have played an insignificant role in fundamental wheat seed development in these countries or anywhere else in the world.”

It says that introduction of GM wheat would put the seed supply in the hands of a small number of powerful companies and that cross-contamination from GM wheat could threaten the survival of varieties bred for local conditions.

To read the full article: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Financial-Industry/Consumers-won-t-accept-GM-wheat-says-tri-national-statement/?c=NAUpDVS3q2oVoknJ7hQZJw%3D%3D&utm_source=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%2BWeekly

Doctors Call for Ban on Genetically Modified Foods

Doctors Call for Ban on Genetically Modified Foods

On May 19, 2009 the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM)
released a landmark position paper signed by physicians across the U.S.
calling for a moratorium on GE foods:

"Avoid GM (genetically modified) foods when possible... Several animal
studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food... There is
more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects.
There is causation...The strength of association and consistency between GM
foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies."

Learn more:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=1kbPB4fXdi3IZd95i78y
Z5eF8B31OtGa

LAWSUIT ENDS GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS ON WILDLIFE REFUGE

LAWSUIT ENDS GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS ON WILDLIFE REFUGE
Ruling on Delaware’s Prime Hook May Affect Farming on Scores of Other Refuges
by Jeff Ruch
(202) 265-7337
March 24, 2009

http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1171

Washington, DC — A federal court has ordered the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to stop planting genetically engineered (GE) crops on its Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge in Delaware. While the ruling is limited to Prime Hook, the lawsuit may serve as a model for similar litigation at more than 80 other national wildlife refuges now growing GE crops across the country.

Filed in April 2006 by the Widener Environmental and Natural Resources Law Clinic on behalf of Delaware Audubon Society, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and the Center for Food Safety, the federal suit charged that the Fish & Wildlife Service had illegally entered into Cooperative Farming Agreements with private parties, allowing hundreds of acres to be plowed over without required environmental review and contrary to the Service’s own policy prohibiting GE crops.

To read the full article: http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1171