Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546
    New, More Toxic Breed of Genetically Engineered Crops Gain Approval


    Dr. Mercola
    Waking Times

    Two major categories of genetically engineered (GE) seeds currently account for 99 percent of all acreage dedicated to GE crops in the US:

    1. Those engineered to withstand high amounts of herbicide, such as Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready varieties
    2. Those engineered to produce their own internal insecticide (so-called Bt crops)

    The widespread use of these GE crops has led to chemical resistance among weeds and insects alike, despite initial assurances from the chemical technology industry that such an outcome was highly unlikely.
    Well, the results are now too evident to ignore—weed resistance has been documented on 60 million acres on farms across the US, and Bt resistant rootworm is being reported in the US and Brazil.
    As GE seeds became the norm, chemical resistance rapidly emerged. As a result, farmers have been applying increasingly higher amounts of pesticides in an effort to keep up with rising resistance.
    The United States now uses about 1.1 billion pounds of pesticides each year,1,2and mounting research has linked pesticides to an array of serious health problems. What we need is not a new breed of chemical-resistant crops, but that’s exactly what we’re getting…
    Even More Toxic GE Crops and Herbicide Receive Approval

    Instead of taking a proactive approach to save the environment and human life, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently decided to deregulate Dow Chemical’s next-generation GE crops.
    These crops are not only resistant to glyphosate, but also carry resistance to toxins like 2,4-D, a component of Agent Orange, and Dicamba, which has been linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The chemical 2,4-D and other herbicides of this class have also been linked to:


    • Immune system cancers
    • Parkinson’s disease
    • Endocrine disruption
    • Reproductive problems

    Then, on October 15, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced3 its final decision to register Enlist Duo—a new herbicide manufactured by Dow Chemical, to be used on corn and soybeans genetically engineered to tolerate both 2,4-D and glyphosate.
    This was the final barrier standing between this new generation of GE crops and their widespread commercialization. According to the EPA:4
    “The agency’s decision reflectsa large body of science and an understanding of the risk of pesticides to human health and the environment… EPA scientists used highly conservative and protective assumptions to evaluate human health and ecological risks for the new uses of 2,4-D in Enlist Duo.
    The assessments confirm that these uses meet the safety standards for pesticide registration and, as approved, will be protective of the public, agricultural workers, and non-target species, including endangered species.
    The agency evaluated the risks to all age groups, from infants to the elderly, and took into account exposures through food, water, pesticide drift, and as a result of use around homes. The decision meets the rigorous Food Quality Protection Act standard of ‘reasonable certainty of no harm’ to human health.”
    EPA Thinks a Few Restrictions Will Safeguard Against Resistance…

    To “ensure that weeds will not become resistant to 2,4-D,” the approval of Enlist Duo comes with certain restrictions. For example, Dow is required to search for resistant weeds and report any occurrences of resistance to the EPA.
    Farmer education and remediation plans are also part of these additional requirements that must be met. To prevent drift, farmers will not be permitted to spray Enlist Duo from the air, or apply it when the wind speed exceeds 15 miles per hour.

    Farmers must also leave a 30-foot “no spray buffer zone” around treated crops. The registration is set to expire in six years, at which time the EPA will evaluate the emergence of resistance.
    I do not believe in these assurances of safety. Nor do I think adding a different set of toxins to the growers’ mix will ameliorate resistance. Instead, what we’ll end up with is simply an increasingly toxic food supply and further environmental destruction. As noted by Pesticide Action Network:5
    USDA predicts 2,4-D use in corn and soybean production to increase between 500 percent and 1,400 percent over the course of nine years, depending on farmers’ practices and changes in Dow’s share of corn and soybean seed markets.
    In making this decision, EPA officials failed to consider several important health and safety factors.
    By ignoring the potential synergistic effects of 2,4-D and glyphosate, not addressing the cumulative impacts of the expected increase in 2,4-D use, and failing to implement an appropriate 10-fold safety factor to limit exposures — as required under the Food Quality Protection Act — EPA has given Enlist Duo an unjustified approval, based on a flawed and inadequate review of the chemical’s harms.
    In addition, neither USDA nor EPA have looked at the economic impact that Enlist Duo drift will have on surrounding farms and communities.” [Emphasis mine]
    Center for Food Safety also cites a 2012 study published in the journalBioscience, which concluded that this new generation of GE crops “will trigger still more intractable weeds resistant to both glyphosate and 2,4-D.”
    We Need a New Direction, Not More Toxins

    A lot of harm can be done in six years, and we simply don’t have the time to sit back and wait to see how bad it can get. Just how bad does it have to get before our government starts taking these problems seriously?
    What we need is a whole new direction for our agricultural system. We need a system that is NOT reliant on chemicals—one that is not only sustainable, but also regenerative.
    Toxic chemicals form the very basis of GE agriculture. Chemicals are added into the soil, on the seed, on the plant, and on some crops herbicides are also added right at harvest, to increase seed release. This technique is calleddesiccating.
    For example, desiccating non-organic wheat crops with glyphosate just before harvest came in vogue about 15 years ago, and Dr. Stephanie Seneff suspects this practice may be the reason why we’ve seen such a dramatic increase in celiac disease since then… It’s important to realize that agriculture today is not driven by true agricultural companies. Patented seeds are actually a creation of the pesticide industry. While they try to portray themselves as “biotechnology” companies, they’re really chemical technology companies, and they have no financial incentive whatsoever to discontinue or even reduce the use of chemicals.
    Research Bias Is a Direct Threat to Human Health

    As for the “large body of science” the EPA claims to base its foolhardy decision on, it’s worth noting that the vast majority of this research has major conflicts of interest as it is done by the company selling the chemicals. This fact was directly addressed in a January 2014 report6 on 2,4-D, jointly published by Testbiotech, GeneWatch UK and Pesticides Action Network Europe:
    “Many of the publications are authored by the manufacturers’ scientists or are sponsored by the manufacturers of 2,4-D. This leads to large confusion, because on the one hand these papers are scientific, peer reviewed papers, but on the other hand, it can be assumed that the financial interest leads to a bias towards studies showing no negative effects. A recent study by Diels et al. (2011) has shown that in studies with genetically engineered crops, there is a strong relation between funding and outcome.
    Some industry financed publications leave out important information, for example Ross et al. (2005), who do not mention results which show a high dermal uptake of 2,4-D… Basically, the industry funded/authored studies lead to a ‘dilution’ of information—a tactic also applied by the tobacco industry. The parallels between the tobacco industry and the pesticide industry are manifold, not only in their argumentation and strategy, but also in the final results – despite the evidence – cancer causing agents are not prohibited.”
    All Available Legal Options Will Be Pursued to Stop These Dangerous Crops

    Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, PhD, senior scientist with Pesticide Action Network, has called the lack of protection from the EPA and USDA “shocking,” saying:7“It’s time for real reform in these agencies. We need a new system of government oversight that is powerful enough to say ‘No’ to Dow and Monsanto when their products will harm the health and livelihoods of our farmers and rural communities.”

    In response to the USDA’s and EPA’s complete failure to protect the American public against the growing threat of a toxic food supply and devastating pest resistance that could decimate our natural resources, the Center for Food Safety has announced8 it will “pursue all available legal options to stop the commercialization of these dangerous crops.” Sixty members of Congress have signed a letter opposing the approval and release of 2,4-D tolerant corn and soybeans. On June 30, 35 prominent doctors, scientists, and researchers also issued a letter of opposition to the EPA.9 According to Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR):10
    For years, the scientific community has been sounding the alarm about the increased use of herbicides and the link to a multitude of health problems. It’s shocking that EPA thinks it’s a good idea to allow the widespread use of a toxic chemical once found in Agent Orange on this nation’s farm fields. EPA should be working to reverse the trend of chemicals that poison our food supply, water and soil. It will be just a matter of time before weeds develop a resistance to 2,4-D, and the chemical industry comes up with an even more dangerous and potent product.”
    Indeed, there’s already a lineup of new GE crops with built-in resistance to a variety of toxic chemicals awaiting federal approval (below). In addition to 2,4-D and Dicamba, each and every one of these will eventually cause resistance. And more than likely, we’ll end up seeing multi-chemical resistance, just as we now have antibiotic-resistant bacteria with multiple-drug resistance:

    • ALS-tolerant crops (Pioneer Hi-Bred)
    • Bromoxynil-tolerant crops (Calgene)
    • Imidazolinone-tolerant crops (BASF)
    • Isoxaflutole-tolerant crops (Bayer)
    • Sulfonylurea-tolerant crops (DuPont)

    The Way Out of This Nightmare Starts at Home

    The way off this out-of-control chemical treadmill will decimate profits for the chemical technology industry, and THAT is why they do not want you to know which foods contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). If Americans started making dramatically different food choices, it could quickly revolutionize the US agricultural system because farmers will grow that which sells. If people want uncontaminated organic foods, that’s what farmers will grow—and there’s already evidence that biodynamic farming can be done even on the large scale. In fact, using biodynamic principles, you can grow a lot more food on fewer acres.
    Real solutions are available. What’s lacking is the political will to stand up to the chemical technology industry and break its iron grip on our food supply. But we can still get it done, by making conscious choices each and every time we shop for food. Remember, your money either goes to support the chemical-based system that threatens the survival of the earth and your descendants, or it supports a system that can regenerate and revitalize the soil and the environment so that healthy food and healthy people can thrive. To make conscious choices, we need information, and that is why GMO labeling is so crucial.
    I recently named the GMA “the most evil corporation on the planet,” considering the fact that it consists primarily of pesticide producers and junk food manufacturers who are going to great lengths to violate some of your most basic rights—just to ensure that subsidized, genetically engineered and chemical-dependent, highly processed junk food remains the status quo.
    The insanity has gone far enough. It’s time to unite and fight back, which is why I encourage you to boycott every single product owned by members of the GMA, including natural and organic brands. To learn more about this boycott, and the traitor brands that are included, please visit TheBoycottList.org. I also encourage you to donate to the Organic Consumers Fund. Your donation will help fight the GMA lawsuit in Vermont, and also help win the GMO labeling ballot initiative in Oregon in November.

    Voting with your pocketbook, at every meal, matters. It makes a huge difference. By boycotting GMA Member Traitor Brands, you can help level the playing field, and help take back control of our food supply. And as always, continue educating yourself about genetically engineered foods, and share what you’ve learned with family and friends.

    http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/10/30/new-toxic-breed-genetically-engineered-crops-gain-approval/

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546
    BREAKING NEWS: HUMBOLDT COUNTY VOTERS PASS GMO CROP BAN. Humboldt County, California becomes the third CA county to ban GMO crops with a vote of 60% Yes to 40% No. Humboldt now joins bordering Mendocino & Trinity Counties in prohibiting the growing of GMO crops, expanding the GMO-Free Zone in Northern CA. These CA counties share good company - not too far to the north, Jackson and Josephine Counties of Southern Oregon just passed their own GMO crop bans this past May. GREAT WORK, HUMBOLDT!

    Voting results can be found in the final election report here: http://www.humboldtgov.org/Archive.aspx?ADID=937

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546
    The Monsanto 71: Senators Who Betrayed Constituents in Favor of Biotech Dollars





    Support Local Food! Please Share...

    Once upon a time, a system was designed in which “the people” elected delegates to go to Washington DC. These members of Congress had the specific duty of representing the wishes of their constituencies when laws were being voted upon.

    The success of last weekend’s March Against Monsanto should have made it very clear that a great many people wish to see, at the very least, labels on toxic GMO foods. The fact that this success was covered up by the media does NOT mean that the members of Congress were unaware of it – just the opposite. Our success was frightening, and that is why it was covered up.

    Despite that, the day before the event, an amendment to the farm bill that would have allowed the individual states to pass laws protecting consumers from unlabeled GMOs was quietly shot down in the Senate with a vote of 71-27 against this right. The timing of this betrayal, right before a long weekend, goes along with the general modus operandi of sliding through things that will meet with objections from the public when they are otherwise distracted.

    A Conflict of Interest?

    The failure to pass this amendment was due in part to Monsanto mouthpiece Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), the chair of the Agriculture Committee. Stabenow, incidentally, received over three quarters of a million dollars from agribusiness interests ($739,926 to be exact) in agribusiness donations. Stabenow utilized the propaganda that is being dispersed by the likes of Monsanto and the Gates Foundation to argue her point:
    Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), the chair of the Agriculture Committee, spoke on behalf of the biotech giant seizing the opportunity to focus primarily on the myth that genetically modified ingredients feed the hungry people of the world, ignoring the fact that 64 countries now require GMO labeling.
    “This particular amendment would interfere with the FDA’s science-based process to determine what food labeling is necessary for consumers,” Stabenow said.
    “It’s also important to note that around the world now we are seeing genetically modified crops that have the ability to resist crop diseases and improve nutritional content and survive drought conditions in many developing countries,” she added.
    Unable to make the connection with how allowing states to label GMO foods would interfere with corporate biotech operations abroad, she instead took the opportunity to show that the chair of the Agriculture Committee is marching lockstep with the Gates Foundation.
    “We see wonderful work being done by foundations like the Gates Foundation and others, that are using new techniques to be able to feed hungry people,” she said. (Source)

    Monsanto is the number one donor in the agricultural lobby...

    This puts Stabenow right up there on the list with Senator Roy Blunt (R- Mo), the inextricably-linked congressman from Monsanto’s home state of Missouri who slipped the rider in for the Monsanto Protection Act last March. But Stabenow and Blunt are not the only enemies. Monsanto is the number one donor in the agricultural lobby, having spent nearly 6 million dollars in 2012, ($5,970,000) as well as more than $925,000 directly to political candidates. ($541,854 as Monsanto, $384,890 as Scott’s Miracle Gro, which is an agent for Monsanto’s “Round-up” ). Any politician who took money from them and then voted in favor of them is equally guilty of betraying their offices and the trust placed in them by voters.
    There is simply no excuse for voting against the individual state’s rights to allow consumers to make informed choices about the food they purchase. The sponsor of the failed bill, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, said:
    “…the concept we’re talking about today is a fairly commonsense and non-radical idea.
    “All over the world, in the European Union, in many other countries around the world, dozens and dozens of countries, people are able to look at the food that they are buying and determine through labeling whether or not that product contains genetically modified organisms.”
    Sanders also noted that in the past he has helped pass laws in his home state of Vermont that would require GMO labeling but hasn’t seen those laws actually be enacted over fears that Monsanto would sue the state. This bill would allow states to do what they want without fear that the company that brought us agent orange could end up having more power than an entire state government. (Source)
    The saying goes, “The friend of my enemy is also my enemy.” By this rationale, those who are in the back pocket of Monsanto are the enemies of those of us who demand proper oversight of the evil corporation through the checks and balances that are SUPPOSED to be in place to protect consumers. Therefore, it is patently clear that those in Congress who vote in favor of Monsanto are the enemy.
    US Senators who voted AGAINST our right to know

    Let’s out the politicians who voted against the amendment last Friday that would have allowed the states to choose whether or not GMOs should be labeled. As long as these politicians are in office, GMOs will NOT be labeled at a national level, because these politicians will not allow legislations to pass that might harm the bottom line of their puppet-master, Monsanto. Real Farmacy put together a list of the US Senators who voted AGAINST our right to know what we are eating:

    Alexander (R-TN)
    Ayotte (R-NH)
    Baldwin (D-WI)
    Barrasso (R-WY)
    Baucus (D-MT)
    Blunt (R-MO)
    Boozman (R-AR)
    Brown (D-OH)
    Burr (R-NC)
    Carper (D-DE)
    Casey (D-PA)
    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coats (R-IN)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Collins (R-ME)
    Coons (D-DE)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Cowan (D-MA)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    Cruz (R-TX)
    Donnelly (D-IN)
    Durbin (D-IL)
    Enzi (R-WY)
    Fischer (R-NE)
    Franken (D-MN)
    Gillibrand (D-NY)
    Graham (R-SC)
    Grassley (R-IA)
    Hagan (D-NC)
    Harkin (D-IA)
    Hatch (R-UT)
    Heitkamp (D-ND)
    Heller (R-NV)
    Hoeven (R-ND)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Johnson (D-SD)
    Johnson (R-WI)
    Kaine (D-VA)
    Kirk (R-IL)
    Klobuchar (D-MN)
    Landrieu (D-LA)
    Lee (R-UT)
    Levin (D-MI)
    McCain (R-AZ)



    McCaskill (D-MO)
    McConnell (R-KY)
    Menendez (D-NJ)
    Moran (R-KS)
    Nelson (D-FL)
    Paul (R-KY)
    Portman (R-OH)
    Pryor (D-AR)
    Risch (R-ID)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Rubio (R-FL)
    Scott (R-SC)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Shaheen (D-NH)
    Shelby (R-AL)
    Stabenow (D-MI)
    Thune (R-SD)
    Toomey (R-PA)
    Udall (D-CO)
    Vitter (R-LA)
    Warner (D-VA)
    Warren (D-MA)
    Wicker (R-MS)


    Despite the vast campaign donations the politicians receive from special interest groups, the recent grassroots movements like Occupy Monsanto and March Against Monsanto have proven that activism works without the huge budget. Even though Monsanto has a kennel full of obedient pet congress members, we can defeat the biotech enemy by spreading information. Teaching the public about the dangers of consuming GMOs, the environmental and health tolls of Monsanto’s farming methods, and the unscrupulous business practices that are designed to put small farmers around the globe out of business, is our most powerful weapon.
    This is a call to action. Use the list above to make it clear that we will not stand idly by while our elected representatives betray us for the benefit of Monsanto.

    • Find the email addresses and phone numbers of your Senator HERE. Write them a polite letter or make a polite phone call. Firmly and courteously demand answers.
    • Use public forums provided to you on your local level to share information about the selling out of our health by these elected officials. Write letters to the editor, post on social media, and hand out fliers, being sure to follow local ordinances. Always be courteous to encourage dialogue.
    • Find your senator’s page on Facebook. Actively post in the comments sections and post on their timelines about your displeasure regarding their betrayals.
    • Use the power of social media to spread the word that these senators are the friends of Monsanto, and thus the enemies of food freedom and GMO labeling.



    Support Local Food! Please Share...

    About the Author



    Daisy Luther

    Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor who lives in a small village in the Pacific Northwestern area of the United States. She is the author of The Pantry Primer: How to Build a One Year Food Supply in Three Months. Daisy is a co-founder of the website Nutritional Anarchy, which focuses on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Her other website is The Organic Prepper. Daisy's articles are widely republished throughout alternative media. You can follow her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca


    http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/11524-the-monsanto-71-senators-who-betrayed-constituents-in-favor-of-biotech-dollars.html

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Food industry front groups exposed in new report: Monsanto, Coke, Pepsi and more
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-05-2013, 06:43 AM
  2. March Against Monsanto Is The Beginning of The End For Monsanto
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-14-2013, 09:53 PM
  3. Big Ag, Monsanto take over research universities and turn them into pro-industry prop
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-21-2012, 09:28 AM
  4. France Defeats Monsanto: Monsanto Forced Out Of Costa Rica
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-09-2012, 09:22 PM
  5. One ton of weed seized
    By FedUpinFarmersBranch in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-02-2008, 06:51 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •