Monsanto etc toxic GM crops attack fragile genetics

[outsider]

Stop Monsanto's Smoke and Mirrors!:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_K EY=1294175

'Yesterday Reuters reported that Frankenfood lobbyists spent a record-breaking $27 million in the first half of this year—nearly triple what they spent last year—to stop state GMO labeling campaigns.

And that doesn’t include the unprecedented millions Monsanto, Dow, Bayer and others have spent this year on false advertising.

Can you help us raise $250,000 by September 15, to support Oregon, Colorado and other state labeling campaigns? Your donation will help us counter Monsanto’s massive lobbying and disinformation campaigns in Congress and the mass media. Details on how to donate online, by phone or by email here.

What happens in November, in Oregon and Colorado, and early next year in Maine and other states, could make or break the anti-GMO movement in this country.

And Monsanto and Big Food know it.

The Pesticide Purveyors and Junk Food Giants have already made their first million-dollar-plus “smoke-and-mirrors” ad buy in Oregon. Their massive media campaign is likely to be full of the usual lies about how labeling will raise food prices, and how GMO foods are “proven” safe.

It will look much the campaigns they ran in California and Washington State, where they narrowly defeated labeling initiatives in 2012 and 2013.

Only worse. Because this time, the stakes are even higher.

The corporations that poison our food and planet are desperate to defeat state labeling initiatives in Oregon and Colorado—because they know if they lose either of these two state battles, they lose the state labeling laws war.

Why? Because Congress is not likely to pass the industry-sponsored DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) ACT, a bill to preempt state labeling laws, if Oregon and Colorado join Vermont, Maine and Connecticut in passing GMO labeling laws.

Even worse for Monsanto, once state laws mandating the labeling of GMOs in our food are the norm, and consumers get a clearer picture of just how prevalent GMOs are in our food, demand for organic foods will skyrocket.

It will be the beginning of the end of Monsanto’s domination of our food supply.

The laws in Maine and Connecticut don’t yet pose a threat to Monsanto and Big Food. Trigger clauses in those laws mean that they won’t take effect unless multiple other states pass labeling requirements.

So far only the Vermont law, passed in May, threatens to unravel Monsanto’s Great GMO Smoke and Mirrors Campaign. Which is why industry, led by the Grocery Manufacturers Association, has filed a lawsuit to try to overturn Vermont’s law.

But industry can’t sue every state in the nation. If voters pass GMO labeling laws in Oregon and Colorado in November, Monsanto will need more than smoke and mirrors to perpetuate its crimes against consumers, farmers and the environment.

We know, from years of fighting this battle that our government is going to protect industry profits. Not your health.

This has always been a battle fought by the grassroots. It’s up to us to win it. However long it takes.

Your donation, by September 15, will keep this movement going strong. Click here for details on how to donate online, or by phone or email. You can donate online, by mail or by phone—(go to above link).

What happens in the US WILL affect us in Europe; our 'EC Co(n)mmission' will cave in happily to TTIP and Monsanto pressure.


By the way, there is a TTIP Demo in London, this Saturday 11 October, 2 pm. Parliament Square (more details on Calendar)
TTIP will make it impossible for European countries (including the UK) from banning or restricting GMO's among many other vicious, evil consequences.

[outsider]

Another petition: sign & comment:

Keep Toxic New Agent Orange GMOs off Your Plate!:
http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/stop_Monsanto_and_Dows_new_tox ic_GMO_chemical_cocktail_now/?t=2&akid=1309.863753.LolNmq

[outsider]

Here's a small thing you can do to try to dissuade a UK representative from backing Monsanto etc.:

'The top three things you should never pack':
http://action.wdm.org.uk/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1784&ea.campaig n.id=31375

It's a simple matter to sign the email to Development Secretary Justine Greening.

[outsider]

GMO Ticking Time Bomb:
http://www.therealfoodchannel.com/videos/gmos-genetically-modified-foo d-1/gmo-ticking-time-bomb.html

and: Is Epicyte Gene That Causes Sterility In The GMO Corn You Eat?:
http://gmoreport.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/is-epicyte-gene-that-causes-st erility.html

'Gm Corn Set To Stop Man From Spreading His Seed

In 2001 scientists at the Epicyte bio-lab in San Diego created the ultimate GM crop—'contraceptive corn'—after researchers discovered a rare class of human antibodies that attack sperm. By isolating the genes that regulate the manufacture of these antibodies, and by putting them in corn plants, the company has created tiny horticultural factories that make contraceptives. Announcing his success at a press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants and announced, "We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies." Shortly after the 2001 Epicyte press release, all discussion of the breakthrough vanished. The company itself was taken over in 2004 by Biolex and nothing more was heard in any media about the development of spermicidal corn. Did it to go underground? Are your taco shells safe? What of your cornmeal or cornflakes? Is this killer cereal already turning up on our breakfast tables..? End of excerpt

Scientists Create GM Corn Which Prevents Human Conception

This from 2001.

Is this why biotech people are in Africa as I type this?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In 2001 a company based in San Diego named Epicyte isolated a protein that was said to bring on sterility in men and women. It has been noted in a few sources on the Internet that an alliance and deal were made with Monsanto and DuPont to place this epicyte gene into commercially available GM corn. Now, since Monsanto and other companies are so hush hush about their process and so vehement about opposing labeling one must wonder when they read such stories that would otherwise look like they came from science fiction if indeed we are consuming GM corn with an infertility gene in it that will ultimately bring about sterility within two to three generations to curb the overpopulation "problem."

It is no secret that certain organizations and eugenicists have for decades been working on ways to decrease populations specifically among those they deem to be undesirable. The eugenicist movement was very big in the beginning of the 1900s in the US with names like Margaret Sanger and even Nicola Tesla among others being associated with them.

Is it really out of the realm of believability to think that these biotech companies in league with Monsanto and other chemical companies and rich backers would not try in some way to pass on this philosophy clandestinely through plants? If so, how would we know? Our foods aren't labeled and we can't trust the agencies involved with disclosing the truth.

This is why though I am 100% behind labeling, I am ultimately more in favor of banning GMOs altogether. Independent tests as published by Jeffrey Smith from the Institute Of Responsible Technology showed that mammals fed these GMOs became sterile by the third generation. Considering we eat our approximate weight in GMOs every year and this transgenic garbage is in just about everything that is processed just how much are we really consuming? How much is truly building up in our guts?

Now pro GMO eugenicists and transhumanists who have no respect for nature will argue that we have been eating these food-like substances for almost two decades and nothing has happened. Nothing? My question to them is- HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT if plausible deniability is used as a reasoning and these "foods" aren't labeled?

The fact that we DO NOT KNOW and that the precautionary principle has given way to secrecy, deceit and cronyism at the highest levels of government as well as scientific finds pointing to inherent dangers down the line are why these organisms should be banned. I will be more than happy to settle for labeling for now but we should not stop there. That should not be where this ends. It should be the beginning because whether or not this Epicyte gene has been slipped into your morning cornflakes unbeknownst to you the genie has been let out of the bottle with unknown consequences that may take another generation to materialize.

Are you willing to risk your grandchildren's health and the biodiversity of this planet just to give these arrogant, nature hating, god playing psychopaths a few extra dollars?

I also found this video on Epicyte on You Tube. Watch it and do some research for yourself. We are playing with our own humanity and the biodiversity of this planet if we allow this to continue regarding what we eat.


This from the spanking brand new PR page of the chemical companies called "GMO Answers" questions this... No response yet though... I would guess one won't be forthcoming either.

GMO Answers

Wow guess what... A Monsanto mouthpiece answered the question with a standard issue no information denial on September 13 after this was posted. Wonder which one of their Internet PR plants read this and reported back?

Posted 8th August 2013 by J Moore


Is Bill Gates using Epicyte gene to control population of poor?:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/322920/is-bill-gates-using-epicyte .html

'Whatever the publicly stated aims of the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) sector, and however terrible its impact has been on cotton farmers in India, there is a much more sinister side to this industry.

In order to govern a population, apart from the use of violence, people’s consent must be achieved. Noam Chomsky’s book ‘The Manufacture of Consent’ discusses the important role of the media in this. However, possibly the most basic form of controlling a population is eugenics, a philosophy that includes reduced reproductive capacity of ‘less desired’ people.

There is a growing fear that eugenics is being used for the purpose of population control – to get rid of sections of the world population that are ‘surplus to requirements’. In the West, due to automation and the outsourcing of jobs, there is likely to be a large section of the population that will be permanently unemployed or underemployed. In places like China, Africa and India, promoting birth control has been high on the agenda for some decades.




Millionaire US media baron Ted Turner has stated that a global population of 250-300 million people, a 95 percent decline from present levels, would be ideal. Michael Oppenheimer of the Environmental Defence Fund asserts that the only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another US and that we can’t let other countries have the same number of cars and the amount of industrialisation currently in the US.

Billionaire Bill Gates has pledged hundreds of millions of dollars to improve access to contraception in the developing world. Based on the premise that the world is getting overpopulated, fewer people means elites and the better off can reduce the competition for the resources they covert so much and maintain their current high levels of material consumption. Gates has also purchased shares in Monsanto valued at more than $23 million. His agenda is to help Monsanto get their genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into Africa on a grand scale.

Here’s where things get interesting. In 2001, Monsanto and Du Pont bought a small biotech company called Epicyte that had created a gene that makes the male sperm sterile. In the US, GM foods are already on the market and unlabeled. US citizens have no idea what could be in their food. These foods where not independently tested for their impact on health. Would you like to know whether you are eating stuff that has been proven by Professor Seralini of the University of Caen in France to damage health?

Would you like to know if what you are eating contains something that could make you sterile?

Guiding light

Bill Gates’ father has long been involved with the eugenics group Planned Parenthood. In 2003, Bill Gates admitted that his father used to be the head of Planned Parenthood, which was founded on the concept that most human beings are just reckless breeders. Gates senior is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and a guiding light behind the vision and direction of the Gates Foundation, which is heavily focused on forcing GMOs on Africa via its financing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).
The Gates Foundation has given at least $264.5 million to AGRA. According to a report published in La Via Campesina in 2010, 70 percent of AGRA's grantees in Kenya work directly with Monsanto and nearly 80 percent of the Gates Foundation funding is devoted to biotechnology. The same report explains that the Gates Foundation has pledged $880 million to create the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), which is a heavy promoter of GMOs...'

[outsider]

Once again, The USDA stops an investigation, with no explanation. They doubtless were told, if the investigation shows undeniable Monsanto guilt, just drop it. Maybe, just perhaps, the sheeple will wake up to the totally criminal nature of their government, judiciary, police, 'Security Services' and top military, when they find themselves on a locked, secure train to one of the 'Detainment Facilities' built or refurbished by KBR (Halliburton).

New Experimental GE Wheat Contamination in Montana Puts Wheat Farmers at Risk:
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/3496/new-experimenta l-ge-wheat-contamination-in-montana-puts-wheat-farmers-at-risk#

'September 26, 2014 (Washington, DC)--The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today announced that experimental genetically engineered (GE) wheat was discovered in July, 2014 at a Montana research facility that has not legally grown the variety since 2003.

“Once again, USDA and the biotech industry have put farmers and the food supply at risk,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director for Center for Food Safety. “Coexistence between GE and non-GE crops is a failed policy that fundamentally cannot work. Genetic contamination is a serious threat to farmers across the country.”

In the same announcement, USDA closed its investigation into a May, 2013 GE wheat contamination episode in Oregon without any explanation for the incident. That contamination episode led to closures of vital export markets and a class action lawsuit against Monsanto by wheat farmers.

“Just as USDA closes one fruitless investigation, it tries to bury the story of yet another contamination. USDA cannot keep treating these as isolated incidents; contamination is the inevitable outcome of GE crop technology,” said Kimbrell. “It’s time for Congress to take definitive action.”

Monsanto is currently in the process of settling a class action lawsuit brought by wheat farmers impacted by the Oregon contamination episode, which forced exports to several Asian and European markets to be suspended and cost farmers millions of dollars. USDA records reveal that Monsanto has conducted 279 field tests of herbicide-resistant wheat on over 4,000 acres in 17 states since 1994. Monsanto has received at least 35 notices of noncompliance from 2010 through 2013, more than any other company.

“Farmers, not the biotech industry, are on the hook for these contamination episodes. There must be accountability for Monsanto,” said Kimbrell. “USDA should, at a minimum, immediately place a moratorium on open-air field testing of genetically engineered crops.”

After a decade of field trials, Monsanto dropped efforts to introduce Roundup Ready GE wheat in 2004 in the face of intense international opposition from consumers, farmers, wheat millers and food companies. However, after a six-year hiatus, Monsanto once again began extensive field-testing of GE wheat in 2011.

[b]Opponents of GE wheat have long argued that it would contaminate conventional wheat, making it unsellable to many markets that reject GE products. The U.S. is the world’s biggest exporter of wheat, an $8 billion business. A 2005 study estimated that the wheat industry could lose $94 to $272 million if GE wheat were introduced. Past transgenic contamination episodes involving GE corn and GE rice have triggered over $1 billion in losses and economic hardship to farmers.

In late 2005, the USDA’s own Inspector General issued a scathing report detailing numerous violations of agency rules in regulating genetically engineered crop field trials. USDA officials did not know the locations of many field trials it was charged with regulating, and did not conduct required inspections of others. In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences also criticized serious deficiencies in USDA’s regulation of genetically engineered crops.

In 2013, Center for Food Safety joined over 150 organizations and businesses in a letter to USDA Secretary Vilsack calling on the agency to protect the wheat industry by implementing necessary protections from GE contamination.'

[outsider]

[outsider]

In a short exchange of emails tonight, I asked my MP's opinion on GMO's, he replied 'Support'. I sent him the above info, and asked him if he supported the 90-day EU testing program, given Seralini and colleagues test results; he replied 'Thanks for that'. I asked him the same question again, and he replied, 'Sorry, no idea'.

Yet my MP Mr Jim Fitzpatrick (Lab) was:

Shadow Minister (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) 2010-10
Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) (Farming and the Environment) 2009-10

That is one MP that has no business parading as my representative in Parliament.

I urge you all (UK readers) to write to your MP's and MEP's with the same sort of question; it doesn't matter if you know they are going to be pro GMO's, ask them, and pm me with their reply. I'll try to figure out some way to use the info at a later stage.

[outsider]

Here is the latest news about Monsanto and Hawaii; I am not suggesting you donate, as I don't think that most Truthers have a lot of cash (after all, we haven't sold our souls!), but to those who can, obviously support this 'fightback':

SumOfUs Fighting for people over profits:
https://action.sumofus.org/a/monsanto-hawaii/2/3/?akid=7976.1189620.IM EM2z&ask=25&rd=1&sub=fwd&t=3

The people speak, but 'Democracy' is owned by the Banksters and Corporations, and that's what we'll get if TTIP (and even continuing membership of the EU) are not overthrown.

'Last Tuesday, the voters on the Hawaiian island of Maui passed a moratorium on genetically engineered crops.

The very next day, Monsanto announced plans to sue Maui to block the law from going into effect.

Maui is one of the most biologically diverse places on earth -- but it's being turned into one giant, open-air biological experiment by the rampant use of GMO crops and pesticides.

Monsanto and its allies spent more than $8 million to convince voters to defeat the GMO moratorium and still lost. So now they’re sending an army of lawyers to overturn the will of the people.

Can you chip in to stand with Maui and pressure Monsanto to drop the lawsuit?

Monsanto, Dow, BASF, and other huge biotech companies have flocked to Hawaii because the climate allows them to plant and grow seeds that they can sell all over the world. Today, nearly 10 percent of all Hawaii's farmland is owned by just five biotech firms, including Monsanto.

That’s why Maui voters have been asking their elected officials to do something about GMOs and the heavy pesticides that go with them. But the politicians, most of them funded by Monsanto, have ignored the people.

So earlier this year, they took matters into their own hands, collecting thousands of petition signatures to force the issue to be put before voters directly as a citizen referendum.

And last Tuesday, the voters spoke: no GMOs on Maui.

Whatever you think about GMO crops and pesticides, it's just wrong for a corporation to use legal action to intimidate the public and override the democratic process. That's why it's so important we stand up, and stand together, whenever Monsanto tries to use these dirty tactics.

Together we can stand with Maui, and fight back and win. Will you chip in today?'


These 'ah'so's' need a sharp kick up the watsit from, at least, us 'Truthers'.

These issues are deadly serious, for all Humanity.

[outsider]

Very worrying article:

'The Real Reason Wheat is Toxic (it’s not the gluten):
http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/real-reason-for-toxic-wheat-its -not-gluten/

Common wheat harvest protocol in the United States is to drench the wheat fields with Roundup several days before the combine harvesters work through the fields as the practice allows for an earlier, easier and bigger harvest

Pre-harvest application of the herbicide Roundup or other herbicides containing the deadly active ingredient glyphosate to wheat and barley as a desiccant was suggested as early as 1980. It has since become routine over the past 15 years and is used as a drying agent 7-10 days before harvest within the conventional farming community.USDA pesticides applied to wheat

According to Dr. Stephanie Seneff of MIT who has studied the issue in depth and who I recently saw present on the subject at a nutritional Conference in Indianapolis, desiccating non-organic wheat crops with glyphosate just before harvest came into vogue late in the 1990′s with the result that most of the non-organic wheat in the United States is now contaminated with it. Seneff explains that when you expose wheat to a toxic chemical like glyphosate, it actually releases more seeds resulting in a slightly greater yield: “It ‘goes to seed’ as it dies. At its last gasp, it releases the seed” says Dr. Seneff...'


But, it's not just in the USA; it occurs in Europe, too, including the UK:

Pre-harvest glyphosate application to wheat and barley:
http://www.hgca.com/media/185527/is02-pre-harvest-glyphosate-applicati on-to-wheat-and-barley.pdf


'Residues in bread
The Food Standards Agency promotes best practice to help minimise residues of glyphosate in bread. Reports of the UK Pesticides Residues Committee show that glyphosate residues are regularly found in bread samples (Figure 1). All residues in tests to date have been well below Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) – see
http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/prc.asp?id=956 (Sure, the Food Standards Agency is terribly anxious about public safety - pull the other one!)

'The precise incidence in home-grown milling wheat is not clear because UK bread typically contains some imported wheat. Residues monitored in
ongoing HGCA project 3100 on cereals have not exceeded MRLs.
Reasons for treatment
Pre-harvest glyphosate application for cereals was introduced in the UK in 1980.
The potential benefits are:
to control weeds, notably perennials such as common couch (Elytrigia repens) and annual weeds
to improve harvesting efficiency, ie as a harvest aid.
Not all cereal crops can be treated pre-harvest as some end-users impose
restrictions. As with any pesticide, treatment is only appropriate if clear agronomic advantages can be demonstrated.
TAG and SAC reviewed both their own experimental results and other published data on pre-harvest glyphosate use. This review focused on winter wheat in England and Scotland and spring barley in Scotland.
Weed control
Pre-harvest use in both crops provided very effective perennial weed control and also killed any annual weeds present. Perennial weeds are typically very susceptible at this stage. A large amount of foliage intercepts the spray; then rapidly-growing roots, or rhizomes, ‘draw down’ the herbicide. In suitable weather conditions high levels of control were achieved.
Treatment eased harvest of weed-infested crops and was most effective when weeds were growing rapidly in moist soil...'

Moral of this story: Buy organic!!

[outsider]

Tell the EPA: Stop the expansion of Enlist Duo:
http://action.foe.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16826

'The EPA recently made an enormous toxic mistake -- and now, we need your help to stop them from making it worse.

In October, the EPA approved the use of a new pesticide, Enlist Duo, produced by Dow Chemical, in six Midwestern states. Enlist Duo is a dangerous mix of glyphosate -- the chief ingredient in Roundup -- and 2,4-D, a key component in the Vietnam War defoliant Agent Orange.

This is terrible news -- not only for our planet, but for us as well. 2,4-D has been linked to serious health issues including cancer, Parkinson’s disease and reproductive harm.

Why are we taking these risks? So Dow Chemical can make more profits.

Now the EPA is considering extending approval of Enlist Duo to ten more states. The EPA is accepting comments on this decision until December 15th, so we need you to act NOW to stop it!

Tell the EPA: NO more 2,4-D on our crops!

We only have until December 15th to comment: Tell the EPA: we don't want more 2,4-D on our crops!'


Yep, same old EPA that said 'the air is safe to breath' after 9/11, knowing it was a lie.

[outsider]

Organic Consumers Association:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_K EY=1304918

'Today, consumers have come to Washington D.C.—in buses and cars and on foot—from all across the country to tell Congress that we will not sit by and let lawmakers pass H.R. 4432, otherwise known as the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act, a federal bill to preempt states’ rights to label GMOs.

A hearing is being held today on the bill....'


And if TTIP and/or CETA are agreed in the European Parliament and ratified, they'll be shipping their toxic Frankenfoods over here, UNLABELLED.

[outsider]

The world's most hated corporation just got even more evil.

Monsanto and its allies are suing the tiny, rural U.S. state of Vermont to stop a new law that simply requires genetically engineered foods to be labeled. In fact, the mere threat of a multi-million dollar lawsuit nearly caused the state to back off the labeling law altogether.

But Vermont is refusing to back down -- and they’re asking for our help. They're getting ready to fight back against Monsanto, and have even created a legal defense fund so people around the world can make donations to help them beat back Monsanto’s lawsuit.

The SumOfUs community is already fighting Monsanto on every front, but we need to show Monsanto now that we won't be intimidated. We won't let Monsanto bully our elected officials into submission.

The trial is about to start, and the legal defense fund is still short -- so Vermont is asking for help. Already, more than 22,000 SumOfUs members have chipped in. Can you join with a donation of £15 to stand with Vermont and fight back against Monsanto?

Yes, I'll chip in £15 to help Vermont stand up to Monsanto.

Vermont is a small, entirely rural state with just 600,000 people. Vermont vs. Monsanto, one of the most powerful corporations in the world, is a classic David and Goliath fight.

But there’s much more at stake here than just whether GMO foods will be labeled in a single U.S. state. Vermont is actually the very first state in the U.S. to require labeling, and dozens of other states have said they will require labeling as well -- but only if Vermont’s law can survive this legal challenge.

That's why Monsanto is fighting so hard to kill GMO labeling in Vermont. If we can win here, it’ll be a huge step towards the goal of GMO labeling worldwide, and making sure consumers know what they are eating.

Monsanto has been threatening this for weeks, but it's only just filed suit through the Grocery Manufacturer's Association, a trade group of which Monsanto is a core member. And Monsanto’s legal bullying is part of a growing trend of multi-national corporations suing sovereign governments to overturn regulations they don’t like. Since the biggest corporations are larger than many countries around the world, it’s critical that citizens of the world band together to fight back.

That’s what SumOfUs is all about -- harnessing the global consumer power of our nearly 5 million members to take on corporate abuses wherever they occur. And if enough of us donate, we’ll be able to not only help out with the Vermont legal defense fund, but launch our own campaign pressuring Monsanto to end these legal attacks on our right to know what’s in our food. Can you chip in £15 ?

Yes, I'll chip in £15 to help Vermont stand up to Monsanto.

Thanks for all you do,

Paul, Jon and the team at SumOfUs


GMA Members:
https://web.archive.org/web/20131226021050/http://www.gmaonline.org/fo rms/MemberDirectory/viewMemberDirectoryAll

This is a very long list; perhaps someone with considerable time on their hands can go through it and list the UK firms, in order to get a suggested boycott list?

[outsider]

Don't Let the FDA Destroy the Local & Organic Food Movement!:
http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/stand_up_for_the_local_food_mo vement_and_organics_final_comment/?t=1&akid=1462.863753.DyqX2v

'Right now former Monsanto super lobbyist Michael Taylor has crafted new food safety rules at the FDA that could drive tens of thousands of America’s small, local and organic family farmers out of business. That’s right, Michael Taylor, the former Monsanto lawyer who crafted the FDA’s 1992 policy that won’t allow GMO labeling in the U.S., is back at the FDA, this time appointed by the Obama administration as the new food safety czar.

Now Michael Taylor is responsible for writing rules that could kill the local food movement and drive thousands of America’s best family farmers out of business.

Even worse than having a former Monsanto lobbyist write these new food safety rules is the fact that the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) is bragging on their website about working with the FDA to craft these new regulations that could wipe out as much as 50 percent of small farmers' profits with one-size-fits-all regulations.

Small and midsize family farmers shouldn’t be forced out of business because factory farms and giant corporations have created greater risks in our food supply. We need your help today, stand up for local food and family farmers! Every voice counts...'

There is a petition on the link.

[outsider]

#EndMonsantoLies:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_K EY=1306581

The sickening trollops in Congress look certain to kow-tow to Monsanto's lies; I expect our shower of snout-in-the-trough MP's would go along with Monsanto's lies as well, if it were up to them. Anyhow, here's another appeal, maybe some of you can assist them:

'Dear Organic Consumer,

On December 10, I watched three important events unfold.

One of those events inspired hope.

Two of them filled me first with concern, then disgust, and finally, resolve.

Please help us raise $200,000 to #EndMonsantoLies in 2015. If we reach our goal by midnight December 31, natural health leader Mercola.com will match your donation. Details here on how to donate online, by phone or by mail.

On December 10, more than 600 activists gathered on Capitol Hill, many after riding buses all night from states as far away as Indiana, Michigan and Florida. They made the trip, after a last-minute call-to-action from OCA and our allies, to protest a federal bill (H.R. 4432) intended to strip states of the right to pass mandatory GMO labeling laws.

I was inspired by the crowd, the dedicated army of activists (maybe you were one of them?), willing to stand in the cold, in a show of solidarity, for health and democracy.

They gave me hope.

But as I listened online to the hearing on H.R. 4432, taking place just across the street from our rally, hope gave way to concern. After initially believing that Congress would never consider such a blatant attack on states’ and consumer rights, I could tell from that hearing that this bill poses a very real, potentially devastating and imminent threat.

During the hearing for H.R. 4432, lawmakers laid the ground for allowing GMO foods to be labeled “natural.” And one by one, the people in the room parroted Monsanto’s worst lie of all—that GMO foods are “perfectly safe.”

And then there was the third event that day. In Oregon, a judge ruled that 4,600 uncounted votes would not be counted—ending a long, costly campaign to pass Measure 92, a statewide initiative to require mandatory labeling of GMOs.

Once more, a Big Food and Monsanto-led $20.7 million advertising blitz sunk (by a mere 800+ votes) a citizen-led initiative to require corporations to be transparent, and accountable, for the products they sell.

And once more, they did it with lies. They lied about the impact on farmers of their corporate system of patented seeds and expensive fertilizers. They lied about the cost to consumers and retailers of a simple line on a label.

They lied about the impact of GMO foods, which are nothing more than pesticide-delivery systems, on your health.

The day ended with the realization that we've substantially won the GMO labeling battle by passing a solid mandatory labeling law in Vermont, which includes a ban on labeling GMO-tainted foods as "natural," and by successfully pressuring major retailers, including Whole Foods Markets, to label all their 50,000 products, including meat, eggs, dairy and deli foods.

But while we may be winning the battle for the hearts and minds of consumers, and influencing retailers, we have a long fight ahead of us as long as Washington bureaucrats remain indentured to Monsanto and Big Food.

Despite the day’s discouraging news on Capitol Hill and in Oregon, December 10 ended on a note of hope. Because we have you. And hundreds of thousands of people like you who are not buying Monsanto’s lies. People like you, grassroots activists from all political parties and all walks of life, who will ultimately expose the corporations that are poisoning our food and farming system.

We need you in this movement. We need you to help grow this movement.

Now, more than ever, we need your help to #EndMonsantoLies.

Please help us raise $200,000 to #EndMonsantoLies in 2015. If we reach our goal by midnight December 31, Mercola.com will match your donation. Details here on how to donate online, by phone or by mail.

Thank you!

Ronnie Cummins
National Director, Organic Consumers Association and Organic Consumers Fund

P.S. Contrary to Monsanto’s PR machine, there is no scientific consensus on the “safety” of GMOs. In October 2013, more than 200 scientists, physicians, academics, and experts from disciplines relevant to the scientific, legal, social and safety assessment GMOs issued a statement which said “we strongly reject claims by GM seed developers and some scientists, commentators, and journalists that there is a ‘scientific consensus’ on GMO safety and that the debate on this topic is ‘over.'" Please make a year-end donation today to help #EndMonsantoLies.'

[outsider]

Another one in the eye for Monsanto:

The Solution Under Our Feet: How Regenerative Organic Agriculture Can Save the Planet:
http://ecowatch.com/2015/01/06/regenerative-organic-agriculture/

'..Up until now, the big oil companies Exxon, Chevron and Shell have been perceived as the main climate villains. Yet a new and growing movement of “carbon cycle-literate” people and organizations now realize that Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta and big ag are much worse. We now know that 20-30 percent of all manmade green house gases in the atmosphere comes from industrial agriculture. Chemicals are for cars, not for the soil. By dumping agricultural chemicals onto our soils, we disrupt nature’s delicate balance of water, soil and air.

In his recent Huffington Post piece “Nature Wants Her Carbon Back,” Larry Kopald writes, “How is it possible that with the entire planet focusing on reducing CO2 emissions we’re not even paying lip service to the single largest contributor?”

Tom Newmark, ex-CEO of New Chapter and co-founder of the Carbon Underground Project, has said it best: “Many NGOs view carbon and agriculture as the ‘enemy.’ The regenerative movement sees carbon as our friend, and agriculture as our natural ally to help our friend carbon return to the land.” The challenge is that the enemies of all things natural, i.e., Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta, are culture jamming in hope that the regenerative message won’t go viral.

Two of those three carbon sinks are maxed out, while the soil, where the humus-sphere resides, has lost most of its humus due to the use of industrial farming techniques and bad land-management practices. This leaves the soil as the primary sink where our excess carbon can be sequestered. Yet nature is abundant and forgiving. Recent research in the fields of wetland, pasture, forest and crop production has illustrated that, by changing our management strategies, we can create more nature-centric systems that improve our quality of life rather than degrading it...'

[outsider]

Herbicide and Insecticide Use on GMO Crops Is Skyrocketing, and Rubber-Stamped Approvals Now Usher in Next-Gen GMOs:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/10/12/herbicid e-insecticide-gmo-crops.aspx

Monsanto’s New GMO Cotton Will Unleash a Triple Whammy of Toxic Herbicides:
http://permaculturenews.org/2014/11/04/monsantos-new-gmo-cotton-will-u nleash-triple-whammy-toxic-herbicides/

In case anyone is unaware, which I suspect is the case, 'cottonseed oil' does not need to be labelled as such; it can, and generally is, just listed as 'Vegetable oil'.

Just sayin..., (cor, blimey, Spivey's jargon is getting me!).

[outsider]

MIT Scientist Exposes Consequence of Monsanto’s Glyphosate & Aluminum Cocktail:
http://naturalsociety.com/dr-stephanie-seneff-mit-scientist-explains-s ynergistic-effect-aluminum-glyphosate-poisoning-cause-skyrocketing-aut ism/

A very good article, including info about the 'shikimate path'. Monsanto say it doesn't effect humans or animals, because we don't have this 'shikimate path'; but they know full well that our beneficial gut bacteria DOES have this path, and they are killed. This massively affects our immune system, as well as creating 'leaky guts'. And Monsanto's scientists must have known that from the outset. Glyphosate also kills soil bacteria, important for soil fertility.

And although Europe bans GMO's for human foods, it is allowed in the UK for animal feed; not only that, but some UK farmers spray Glyphosate on non-GMO wheat shortly before harvesting. It kills the wheat, but just before it dies it produces many more seeds, giving higher yields. Much of this will contain Glyphosate, destined for our 'Daily Bread'.

And if TTIP is forced through, we'll be through! GMO's, chlorinated chicken, hormone-loaded beef and milk, and God knows what else.

[outsider]

This is only actionable by US citizens, but it's useful for others to know just how far these socio/psychopaths will go: if TTIP gets passed, this means we'll get the same treatment, no labelling, as well as the 'FrankenFoods':

'We knew when we came within 837 votes of passing GMO labeling in Oregon last fall that anti-labeling forces nationwide were going to panic – and we were right.

Any day now, Monsanto’s favorite Congressman, Mike Pompeo of Kansas, is expected to reintroduce the Deny Americans the Right to Know (or DARK) Act – a bill that would actually prohibit states from choosing to label GMO foods. This legislation could be devastating to our movement, which is why we need to flood Congress with calls and emails from pro-labeling supporters like you.

With the DARK Act set to be introduced any day now, there isn’t any time to waste. We need to flood Congress with calls in support of GMO labeling, but we can’t do it without your help:

Paul, grab your phone and dial 1-877-796-1949 right now. You’ll hear more information about the DARK Act, and then you’ll be automatically connected to your Representative’s office

More than 90% of Americans support GMO labeling, which is why the big pesticide and junk food companies that profit from keeping consumers in the dark are going all out to stop this popular idea from moving forward.

Companies like Monsanto, Dow and PepsiCo, along with industry front groups like the Grocery Manufacturers Association, are sure to flood Washington with an army of lobbyists to kill GMO labeling. Their corporate mercenaries are no match for our grassroots movement, but we can only defeat them if we make our voices heard in the halls of Congress.

Your Representative needs to hear from YOU on this critical issue. Dial 1-877-796-1949 right now and you’ll be automatically connected with your Representative in Washington.

Thanks for standing with us,

Paige Richardson
Director, Oregon Right to Know

[outsider]

This isn't proposed by Monsanto, for a change, but it's still 'Frankenfood':

Tell Food Companies to Reject the GE apple!:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/1881/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action _KEY=15648

'After decades of promises from the biotech industry that genetically engineered (GE) food would feed the world, cure the sick, reduce agricultural dependence on toxic chemicals, and save countless crops from imminent collapse, USDA has just approved1 a product they think will solve a problem humans have struggled with for centuries… an apple that doesn’t brown when you slice it… Seriously; we couldn’t make this stuff up.


Further, since FDA does no independent, pre-market safety testing of GE food there are several unanswered questions about the safety of GE apples.
While these GE apples are a waste of time and money, we don’t want to downplay the real concerns about them. Pre-sliced apples are actually a frequently recalled food product. Once the whole fruit is sliced, it has an increased risk of exposure to pathogens. Since browning is a sign that apples are no longer fresh, “masking” this natural signal could lead people to consume contaminated apples, which is why some folks are calling it the “botox apple.”

Further, since FDA does no independent, pre-market safety testing of GE food there are several unanswered questions about the safety of GE apples. “Silencing” the genes that make apples turn brown when exposed to oxygen could have unintended consequences that will only be tested by hungry consumers. Although these “botox apples” are primarily targeted to the fresh-sliced apple market they could also find their way into non-GE juice, baby foods or apple sauce at the processing level, all products predominantly eaten by children and babies who are at increased risk for any adverse health effects.

Like other GE products in the U.S., no mandatory labeling would be required. While Okanagan (the manufacturer) says they’ll require growers to label their whole apples as “Arctic variety,” the government has announced no plans to require labeling of these apples as GE. If approved, Okanagan’s non-browning “Arctic” apple would be first commercialized in Granny Smith and Golden Delicious varieties, with Fuji and Gala on the horizon.

Even the apple industry has opposed this genetically engineered product. The U.S. Apple Association, Northwest Horticultural Council (which represents Washington apple growers, who grow over 60% of the apples in the U.S.), British Columbia Fruit Growers Association and other grower groups have already voiced their disapproval of these GE apples due to the negative impact they could have on farmers growing organic and non-GE apples through contamination, and to the image of the apple industry as a whole.

McDonald’s and Gerber have already indicated that they don’t plan to use these GE apples.

If the apple industry doesn’t want GE apples, and consumers don’t want GE apples, who do these apples really benefit? As usual, this product only benefits the biotech industry and big food processing companies.

Tell food companies parents do not want to feed their kids GE apples!

We’ll send your signatures along with a letter to the top fast food restaurants, supermarkets, and food companies to secure commitments from them that they will not sell or use this risky new product.'


'Further, since FDA does no independent, pre-market safety testing of GE food there are several unanswered questions about the safety of GE apples'.....
So WTF is this FDA, a rubber-stamp for the Cartels?
They do exactly the same with other GMO's, Aspartame etc.

[outsider]

Theobromine:
http://www.ewg.org/research/ewg-s-dirty-dozen-guide-food-additives/fda -failed-us

In 2010, Theocorp Holding Co. requested that the FDA list theobromine, an alkaloid found in chocolate that has effects similar to caffeine, as “generally recognized as safe” for use in a variety of foods, including bread, cereal and sport drinks. FDA scientists questioned the GRAS designation, noting that the estimated average human consumption rate was five times higher than the level the company reported as safe (NRDC FOIA 2013). They also said that the company had not adequately explained why the reproductive and developmental effects seen in animals exposed to theobromine were not a concern. In response, Theocorp withdrew its request to FDA, but theobromine was later declared GRAS and is being used in food outside FDA oversight (NRDC 2014).

Theobromine is just one example of an enormous loophole in the FDA’s voluntary GRAS notification process. The food additive industry is allowed to designate a substance as GRAS without even notifying the agency, relying instead on “expert panels.” Theocorp’s submission triggered important questions from FDA scientists about the additive’s safety. Instead of addressing them, the company withdrew the request, and the GRAS designation was made later without FDA approval. In some cases, companies forego FDA’s notification process altogether. The agency does not know the identity of these secretly GRAS-approved chemicals and cannot review data to determine whether they are truly safe in food (NRDC 2014).

This must change. In order for additives to be Generally Recognized as Safe, FDA must have access to safety information and assert jurisdiction over the approval of all GRAS-listed additives....'

As slack and 'Cartel Friendly' as the FDA is, companies can bypass the FDA altogether, and pass it themselves as 'GRAS' (Generally Accepted As Safe')!

[outsider]

Deadline March 2: Ask the Fish & Wildlife Service to Put the Monarch Butterfly on the Endangered Species List:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?actio n_KEY=15690

Here's the Organic Consumers Association homepage:
https://www.organicconsumers.org/

[outsider]

Great news!!!: 'Swiss Merchant Banker Gives Backing to $ 25 Million ‘Factor GMO’ Science Project:
http://factorgmo.com/swiss-merchant-banker-gives-backing-25-million-fa ctor-gmo-science-project/

'The world’s largest and most comprehensive study on GMO and pesticide safety – ‘Factor GMO’ – which held its public launch in November 2014 in London, announced on Wednesday that the Founder President of the international private Swiss Merchant Banking Advisory firm Najadi & Partners AG, Mr. Pascal Najadi, is its first official Public Board member and donor.

The ‘Factor GMO’ international Public Board is being created to support the study by working with the media and the general public to discuss the need for precautionary science related to GMOs and pesticides, to protect public health worldwide.

The ‘Factor GMO’ Public Board will include members with different points of views regarding GMO safety, however all members will agree on the need for precautionary science.

The Public Board will also support the public, corporate and government funding process for ‘Factor GMO’ and future precautionary science projects. However, the Public Board will have absolutely no involvement in the scientific study.

Elena Sharoykina, Initiator of the Factor GMO project, director and co-founder of Russian non-government organization National Association for Genetic Safety (NAGS), said; “We are glad to announce the launch of the ‘Factor GMO’ Public Board and we look forward to its development. Trying to find out the ‘scientific truth’ through independent scientific experiments will enable society to reach a consensus on GMOs and pesticides. ‘Factor GMO’ has taken a different public approach to the usually secretive science surrounding GMOs and pesticides. This neutral upfront stance has been taken so as to provide the public, farmers and governments worldwide with clear and trustworthy answers on GMO and pesticide safety.”

Pascal Najadi, the first official Factor GMO Public Board member stated; “It is a great honor for me to join the ‘Factor GMO’ Public Board and to support its endeavors to conduct the world’s largest independent GMO and pesticide study and to release the results publicly across the world. I personally believe that GMO foods could pose a serious threat to humanity if they are not studied carefully. We need to establish the facts on the level of potential danger. ‘Factor GMO’ being independent and truly global will offer concrete tangible results to make those assessments via a due diligence process in the comprehensive study that is soon to start. We are now establishing a powerful international Public Board that will enable to create more and more momentum for the ‘Factor GMO’ project............”

[outsider]

Independent website about Prof. Seralini's work:


GMO Seralini: Support Independent Science:
http://www.gmoseralini.org/en/

Seralini and associates did a two-year study, as opposed to Monsanto's three-month study, and it showed that tumours and other ailments started after four months (probably why Monsanto only published the three-month study!!!).

[outsider]

GMO Food — It's Worse Than We Thought - Dr. Russell Blaylock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA2GhOCtmBE

50 minute video

[outsider]

News on Monsanto and Cancer—Take Action to Ban Roundup Herbicide:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_K EY=1314805

'There’s news on Monsanto and cancer. The World Health Organization’s (WHO) panel of cancer experts published its latest review of the cancer risks of glyphosate (the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup) and concluded that the herbicide is probably causing cancer in humans.

This is the evidence we need to demand a ban and it has come at the perfect time. Glyphosate is currently under review by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has the power to ban its use in Roundup, or anywhere else.

TAKE ACTION! Tell the EPA to ban glyphosate:
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?actio n_KEY=16052

Monsanto uses its clout to force peer-reviewed journals to retract the most damning science on glyphosate. That’s what happened to the Séralini study that showed massive tumors, premature death and kidney and liver damage in rats exposed to Roundup at levels allowed in drinking water and genetically modified food. WHO reached its conclusion that glyphosate probably causes cancer without considering Séralini’s study or the work of other cancer researchers who have been victims of Monsanto witch hunts.

Monsanto has already called for a retraction of the WHO report, but independent scientists like Dave Schubert, head of the cellular neurobiology laboratory at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, are rushing to its defense.

"There are a number of independent, published manuscripts that clearly indicate that glyphosate ... can promote cancer and tumor growth," he said. "It should be banned."

The EPA says it will look at the WHO report as part of its review process for glyphosate. We’ve got to hold them to it—and make sure they give it proper weight.

And, we have to continue to press the EPA to review all of science on glyphosate, from the studies that Monsanto has wrongly discredited (like the Séralini study that eventually got republished) to the studies that just came out this week that show glyphosate and Roundup herbicide cause antibiotic resistance, genetic damage, endocrine disruption, and manganese deficiency.

Now that WHO, the world’s most respected health authority, has concluded that glyphosate is probably causing cancer, it’s time for the EPA to take action and once and for all ban this dangerous chemical.

Please tell the U.S. EPA to do its job: Ban glyphosate now.


And as I have pointed out previously, our bread and beer etc. can already be contaminated with glyphosate, because some farmers use it just before harvest to increase seed yield. And farmers regularly use GMO's to feed animals, bot for meat and dairy production.
If TTIP is steamrollered through, the floodgates will open to unlabelled GMO foods.

And watch this (even if you have seen it before; there is so much excellent info in it): 'Controlling Our Food - The World According To Monsanto' Full Length Documentary YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPt6UG1cJdI

[outsider]

'Weed Killer, Long Cleared, Is Doubted':
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/28/business/energy-environment/decades- after-monsantos-roundup-gets-an-all-clear-a-cancer-agency-raises-conce rns.html

'WHO Glyphosate Report Ends Thirty Year Cancer Cover Up':
http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/26/who-glyphosate-report-ends-thir ty-year-cancer-cover-up/#.VRiAgf90y1s

'..Following on from last week’s Word Health Organization (WHO) report on glyphosate, which confirmed the world’s most used herbicide probably causes cancer, Sustainable Pulse has discovered documents from 1991 that show how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) themselves were fully aware of glyphosate’s carcinogenic potential....'

And now, they are pushing GMO apples and potatoes:

'FDA Approves GMO Apples & Potatoes, Likely No Labeling':
Hidden GMOs to infiltrate your dinner table:
http://naturalsociety.com/fda-approves-gmo-apples-potatoes-likely-no-l abeling/

[outsider]

This article gives more detail about the WHO declaration:

'Glyphosate 'Probably Carcinogenic to Humans' Latest WHO Assessment':
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic -humans-latest-who-assessment

'....Significance of the assessment

To understand the real significance of the new assessment, some background information is needed. Substances and exposures that can lead to cancer are called carcinogens.

The IARC is part of the WHO, its major goal is to identify causes of cancer, and its classification for carcinogens is the most widely used and accepted in the world [3]. In the past 30 years, the IARC has evaluated the cancer-causing potential of more than 900 likely candidates, placing them into the following categories:

• Group 1: Carcinogenic to humans
• Group 2A: Probably carcinogenic to humans
• Group 2B: Possibly carcinogenic to humans
• Group 3: Unclassifiable as to carcinogenicity in humans
• Group 4: Probably not carcinogenic to humans

Commenting on the classification system, the American Cancer Society stated [3]: “Perhaps not surprisingly, based on how hard it can be to test these candidate carcinogen, most are listed as being of probable, possible, or unknown risk. Only a little over 100 are classified as “carcinogenic to humans.””

The Environmental Protection Agency uses a rating system similar to that of IARC [3]:

• Group A: Carcinogenic to humans
• Group B: Likely to be carcinogenic to humans
• Group C: Suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential
• Group D: Inadequate information to assess carcinogenic potential
• Group E: Not likely to be carcinogenic humans

Thus, a classification of 2A in cancer-causing potential for glyphosate on the IARC is almost the highest possible categorization.

As stated in the IARC press release [1]: “Group 2A means that the agent is probably carcinogenic to humans. This category is used when there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.”

It should also be noted that the two insecticides placed in the lower category (2B) in terms of cancer-causing potential are both in restricted use. Tetrachlorvinphos is banned in the European Union, but continues to be used in the US; while parathion has been severely restricted since the 1980s, and all authorized uses were cancelled in the European Union and USA by 2003.

Of the organophosphates in Group 2 A, diazinon has been used in agriculture and home and garden insect-control. It has been in low production especially after 2006 due to restrictions in the USA and the EU. Malathion is used in agriculture, public health and residential insect control, and continues to be produced in substantial volumes throughout the world. But it is minor league compared with glyphosate. As highlighted in the assessment [1, 2], glyphosate has the highest global production volume of all herbicides. The agricultural use of glyphosate has increased sharply since the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops tolerant to glyphosate. The largest use worldwide is in agriculture, but it is also deployed in forestry, urban, and home applications in more than 750 different commercial products. Consequently, glyphosate has been detected in the air during spraying, in water, and in food. The general population is exposed primarily through residence near sprayed areas, home use, and diet....'

As I have pointed out previously, some European, including UK, farmers use Glyphosate on non-GMO wheat, barley etc. shortly before harvest, as it makes the plants increase their seed production before they die from the Glyphosate.

[outsider]

'GERBER LIL’ CRUNCHIES':
http://www.gmofreeusa.org/food-testing/gerber-lil-crunchies/

'Gerber Lil’ Crunchies Veggie Dip Toddler Snack Full of Insecticidal GMO's -

'BACKGROUND

Babies are more vulnerable than adults because of their growing and still developing bodies. Babies consume more food per pound of body weight than adults, which exposes their tiny bodies to relatively higher levels of food borne toxins. In November 2012, The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a policy statement recommending that children’s exposure to pesticides be reduced. The AAP policy states:

“Children encounter pesticides daily and have unique susceptibilities to their potential toxicity. Epidemiologic evidence demonstrates associations between early life exposure to pesticides and pediatric cancers, decreased cognitive function, and behavioral problems.” (1)

In 2015, a statement signed by over 300 industry-independent scientific researchers and scholars, titled “No scientific consensus on GMO safety”, was published in the peer reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe. These researchers found that there are as many research groups still raising serious concerns about the safety of a number of varieties of GM products (mainly corn and soybeans) as there are groups that cite GM crops as safe and nutritious as the respective conventional non-GM plant. The review also found that most studies concluding that GM foods were as safe and nutritious as those obtained by conventional breeding were ‘performed by biotechnology companies or associates, which are also responsible for commercializing these GM plants’. (2)

We think parents are entitled to know if they are feeding their children GMOs and pesticides so we sent Gerber Lil’ Crunchies Veggie Dip toddler snack for testing.

TEST RESULTS: GMO

GMOFreeUSA_Donate_ChangeFoodSystem_Button_Horizontal

We sent a package of Gerber Graduates Lil’ Crunchies Veggie Dip Baked Whole Grain Corn Snack to a certified lab to test for the presence of GMO material. The quantitative PCR test verified, by DNA analysis, that 100% of the corn in the Lil’ Crunchies Veggie Dip was GMO. All of the corn has been genetically engineered to be herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) and the corn contained DNA sequences known to be present in Bt insecticide-producing GMO corn.

Herbicide tolerant GMO corn has been linked, in industry-independent peer reviewed studies, to kidney and liver damage in laboratory animals. (3)(4)

Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) corn produces insecticidal toxins from inside every cell of the plant that can’t be washed off. The corn is registered with and regulated by the EPA. The FDA, EPA, and USDA allowed the insecticidal GMO corn discovered in Lil’ Crunchies Veggie Dip to be commercialized without ever conducting human safety tests.

An in-vitro study found that the insecticides in this corn may be toxic to human cells (5). Feeding studies conducted on mammals found adverse effects, including immune system disturbances (6), blood biochemistry disturbances (7), male reproductive organ damage (, disturbances in the functioning of the digestive system (, damage to mucosal barrier of the stomach (11), hyperlipidaemia and higher blood glucose levels (12) and signs of organ toxicity (3)(4)((13). Industry claims that these insecticidal proteins are broken down in the digestive tract, yet a study found the proteins circulating in the blood of pregnant and non-pregnant women and the blood supply to fetuses (9). The research team conducting this study concluded, “Given the potential toxicity of these environmental pollutants and the fragility of the foetus, more studies are needed.” To date there has been no follow up study.

“As a physician in Hawaii I remain gravely concerned about the impact pesticides and pesticide dependent crops have on our children’s development,” said Josh Green M.D., Hawaii State Senator....'

Although Nestlé's products sold in Europe, including Gerber baby foods, are supposedto be GMO-free, Gerber is available on ebay and Amazon, and who knows where they source the product from? And of course, foods for sale in most US States don't need to be labelled.
Anyhow, Nestlé's abominable record, re promoting 'Formula Milk'; sucking up Canada's clean water for bottling, and paying peanuts for it; and pumping millions into the 'No GMO Labelling' lobby in the States, as well as selling GMO babyfoods in the States, means they are ripe candidates for another round of boycotts.
Come TTIP/CETA/TPP passing into law, we can look forward to Nestlé's Gerber GMO's here.

[outsider]

Protect our health, Stop Monsanto:
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/monsanto_dont_silence_science_loc_eu/?bdjY cab&v=57274

Please sign the petition, regardless of position on AVAAZ, which I agree is definitely dodgy.
If TTIP/CETA/TPP pass, Monsanto would have no trouble getting governments to allow the use of 'probably carcinogenic' Glyphosate, which is already used on some UK food crops, including wheat and barley (bread and beer!).

[outsider]

'Why Senator Bernie Sanders’ GMO Labeling Amendment to the Farm Bill Failed: Monsanto’s GMO Money':
http://occupy-monsanto.com/why-senator-bernie-sanders-gmo-labeling-ame ndment-to-the-farm-bill-failed-monsantos-gmo-money/

'Last week corporate cash killed Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) GMO Labeling amendment to the Senate Farm Bill (S. 3240). The Genetic Crime Unit of Occupy Monsanto decided to cross-reference the Amendment’s vote tally with the last 10 years of Monsanto’s PAC contributions to U.S. Senators.

It’s not surprising that of the 73 Senators who voted against (‘Nay’) the amendment, 37 Senators, or over 50%, received a combined total of $237,500 in campaign contributions from Monsanto’s PAC. Only 2 Senators, Senator Inouye from Hawaii & Senator Leahy from Vermont, who received a combined total of $8,000 from Monsanto’s PAC, voted in support (‘Yea’) of the GMO labeling amendment.

Monsanto’s GMO Money is rampant in the halls of Congress and the corporation’s patented genes are becoming a biohazard to the health of American democracy. With nearly half of American U.S. Senators becoming genetically mutated, we must take action to remove Monsanto’s GMO Money from the currency supply. Do you have plans for the third week of September? Yea.



State

Last Name

Vote

Monsanto’s GMO Money

MO Blunt Nay $36,000.00
GA Chambliss Nay $21,500.00
MO McCaskill Nay $15,000.00
IA Grassley Nay $14,000.00
IA Harkin Nay $13,000.00
NE Nelson Nay $13,000.00
MT Baucus Nay $11,500.00
ID Crapo Nay $11,000.00
KS Roberts Nay $9,000.00
IN Lugar Nay $8,000.00
UT Hatch Nay $7,000.00
MS Wicker Nay $6,000.00
LA Vitter Nay $6,000.00
ID Risch Nay $5,500.00
ND Hoeven Nay $5,000.00
OH Portman Nay $5,000.00
KY McConnell Nay $5,000.00
NC Burr Nay $5,000.00
IL Durbin Nay $5,000.00
KS Moran Nay $5,000.00
OK Coburn Nay $4,000.00
NE Johanns Nay $3,000.00
MI Stabenow Nay $3,000.00
SD Thune Nay $2,500.00
LA Landrieu Nay $2,000.00
MS Cochran Nay $2,000.00
AL Sessions Nay $2,000.00
AR Pryor Nay $2,000.00
NY Gillibrand Nay $2,000.00
PA Casey Nay $1,500.00
MN Klobuchar Nay $1,000.00
AZ Kyl Nay $1,000.00
GA Isakson Nay $1,000.00
ND Conrad Nay $1,000.00
DE Carper Nay $1,000.00
WY Enzi Nay $1,000.00
NC Hagan Nay $1,000.00
NM Bingaman Nay $0.00
KY Paul Nay $0.00
WY Barrasso Nay $0.00
NV Reid Nay $0.00
FL Rubio Nay $0.00
TN Alexander Nay $0.00
NH Ayotte Nay $0.00
CO Udall Nay $0.00
VA Webb Nay $0.00
VA Warner Nay $0.00
PA Toomey Nay $0.00
NH Shaheen Nay $0.00
NY Schumer Nay $0.00
ME Snowe Nay $0.00
AL Shelby Nay $0.00
SC Graham Nay $0.00
MN Franken Nay $0.00
DE Coons Nay $0.00
TX Hutchison Nay $0.00
NV Heller Nay $0.00
OH Brown Nay $0.00
ME Collins Nay $0.00
IN Coats Nay $0.00
SC DeMint Nay $0.00
TX Cornyn Nay $0.00
TN Corker Nay $0.00
AZ McCain Nay $0.00
MA Brown Nay $0.00
MI Levin Nay $0.00
FL Nelson Nay $0.00
NJ Menendez Nay $0.00
WI Kohl Nay $0.00
WI Johnson Nay $0.00
OK Inhofe Nay $0.00
AR Boozman Nay $0.00
UT Lee Nay $0.00
IL Kirk Not Voting $0.00
HI Inouye Yea $7,000.00
VT Leahy Yea $1,000.00
OR Merkley Yea $0.00
OR Wyden Yea $0.00
MD Mikulski Yea $0.00
AK Murkowski Yea $0.00
CT Lieberman Yea $0.00
WV Manchin Yea $0.00
MT Tester Yea $0.00
NM Udall Yea $0.00
RI Whitehouse Yea $0.00
WA Murray Yea $0.00
RI Reed Yea $0.00
VT Sanders Yea $0.00
CT Blumenthal Yea $0.00
CA Boxer Yea $0.00
WA Cantwell Yea $0.00
HI Akaka Yea $0.00
AK Begich Yea $0.00
SD Johnson Yea $0.00
MA Kerry Yea $0.00
NJ Lautenberg Yea $0.00
CO Bennet Yea $0.00
CA Feinstein Yea $0.00
MD Cardin Yea $0.00
WV Rockefeller Yea $0.00

Note: These figures are only from Monsanto’s PAC. Congress receives millions of dollars from the biotech industry as a whole, undoubtedly influencing their vote against the people’s right to know if they are eating GMOs.

Interestingly, Bernie Sanders is considering running for the Democratic Presidential Nomination (I would rate him the best possible choice, though I don't have info on lots of the others, I do know Bernie stands for the people: at present, he is an Independent Senator).

'Chuck Todd Responds: Looking at Whether Meet the Press Mentioned Sanders or Not Is 'Arbitrary': http://us10.campaign-archive2.com/?u=8c573daa3ad72f4a095505b58&id=2cc7 8b9cff&e=2ceb86273a

'
Meet the Press covers Bernie Sanders’ presidential announcement–but only on the Web, not on the show itself.

We did not note Web-only features Meet the Press ran on Sanders, like this video (whose first on-screen headline was “Long Odds for Bernie”), because Meet the Press is primarily a broadcast TV show, watched by roughly 4 million viewers every week, and its Web features are unlikely to be seen by more than a small fraction of that audience. But if Meet the Press is covering Sanders repeatedly on the Web, that only raises the question of why he’s then not worth mentioning on TV.

Todd may think seeing whether or not someone has been mentioned on Meet the Press is “some arbitrary way to judge the show,” but it seems to us to be a fairly straightforward way to gauge who the show thinks is an important part of the political discussion and who is not. And a tally of the show’s mentions of potential presidential candidates so far in 2015 is revealing.

At the top of the list is Hillary Clinton, mentioned on 16 episodes of Meet the Press this year. (Seventeen episodes have aired so far in 2015.) Then there is a top tier of Republican presidential candidates: Jeb Bush (13 shows), Scott Walker (12), Chris Christie (11), Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee (10 each). Bringing up the rear of this top group is Ted Cruz, mentioned on eight shows.

Next comes Elizabeth Warren, who has seemingly made clear that she will not run for president in 2016, but has still been mentioned seven times this year on Meet the Press.

Below that is a middle tier of GOP hopefuls: Marco Rubio and Rick Santorum (mentioned on 6 shows apiece), Bobby Jindal (5), John Kasich, Ben Carson and Rick Perry (4 each). Also mentioned on four shows is Vice President Joe Biden, who is still considering a presidential run.

Bringing up the rear are those Meet the Press treats as long shots, like Democrats Martin O’Malley (3) and Jim Webb (2), along with a string of Republicans: Carly Fiorina (3); Sarah Palin, John Bolton and Mike Pence (2 each); and Jim Gilmore, George Pataki and Peter King (1 each).

So may we infer that Meet the Press considers Bernie Sanders’ presidential bid to be a less important part of the 2016 election story than any of these politicians–many of whom poll lower, have less experience, have raised less money and have taken fewer steps toward an actual campaign than Sanders has?

Alternatively, perhaps Meet the Press isn’t talking about the candidates it thinks are most important. But why would that be?'