Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support
> July 20, 2013
> by Christina Sarich
> July 20th, 2013
> Updated 07/20/2013 at 1:51 am
>
> [links in original]
>
> First India gives Monsanto a run for their ill-gotten money by refusing their patent applications, and now Italy, with the help of three Italian ministries, will try to undo Monsanto. A decree has been signed which will ban Monsanto’s MON810 maize, one of the two genetically modified crops currently legally grown in Europe and sold commercially. The decree is not yet binding as it has to be published in the official gazette, but the public stands behind the three Italian ministers who put forth the document with a resounding 80% against GMO and Monsanto, as evidenced in a public survey.
>
> The agricultural ministry rightfully addressed one of many problems with Monsanto’s GMO crops, stating that they have a ‘negative impact on biodiversity.’ The ban was also signed by the health and environment ministries. That makes three. The ministries stated:
>
> “Our agriculture is based on biodiversity, on quality, and those we must continue to aim for, without games that even from an economic point of view would not make us competitive.”
>
> The three ministries have also notified the European Commission and other states in the EU about this important precedent-setting move to oust Monsanto from the world food supply monopoly that the company is currently trying to browbeat the world with. The ministries have also requested a scientific basis for the final decision from the European Food and Safety Authority – Europe’s version of the FDA, the country’s food safety watch dog.
>
> Individual governments in the EU are able to introduce safeguards and recommendations if they feel the food supply is threatened, or there are environmental risks, however, the Commission must verify them and put them into action. Just last year French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayraul announced that the nation would maintain a key ban on the only remaining GMO currently allowed in Europe – the MON810 maize specifically.
>
> “The protection of Italian distinctiveness must be a policy priority since it determines the existence of ‘Made in Italy’, which is our engine, our future, our leverage to return to growth in the food industry,” Coldiretti’s president, Sergio Marini, said in a statement.
>
> Only five members of the European Union grew Monsanto’s MON810 maize last year, according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. Hopefully with the Commission’s approval of this new ban, Italy will kick Monsanto and all GMO crops out of the country completely going forward.
>
> From around the web: Other Popular Stories
> Report: GMO Activists and Independent Scientists Targeted by US Military
> Monsanto’s Fading Grasp – Group Calls on South Africa to Ban GMO Corn
> Monsanto Dishes Out 4.2 Million to Squash California GMO Labeling Initiative
> GMO Crops Continually Banned Around the World in Display of Health Freedom
> Grassroots: After GMO Labeling Shot Down, Citizens Start Labeling Themselves
> Monsanto’s GM Corn Approved Despite 45,000 Public Comments in Opposition
> Washington County Bans Growing of GMOs
> 6 New GMO Crops that May Soon Hit Your Dinner Table
> Peru Passes Monumental Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods
> USDA Steps Back and Gives Monsanto More Power Over GMO Seeds

Note all the articles in this collection- EVERY European and South American country is either scaling back or completely banning Monsanto GMO- the only country not doing it is the U.S. What the hell is wrong with this country? It cares more about money than people’s lives? What a surprise…… (NOT):

Lets not forget Asia and Australia too, since Asian countries like India and China are now banning GMO’s as well as Australia. Kudos to the rest of the world. I believe Canada has either banned them or severely restricted them also. The U.S. needs to catch up.

The people want these carcinogenic products banned (and are even taking the labeling into their own hands and picketing companies that still supply these products, it’s not their fault that this country is so backward. It’s the corrupt government that takes bribes from these companies that needs to be shoved out the door.)

http://naturalsociety.com/italy-ban-monsanto-gmo-corn-mon810-maize-80-percent-public-support/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.02.079
Get rights and content
Highlights

The cytogenetic effects of pesticide mixtures were evaluated on CHO cells.

A 20-fold enhanced activity was observed in mixture with the four pesticides.

It was 100-fold increased after light-irradiation, through oxidative stress.

It highlighted the importance of cocktail effects in environmental matrices.

It showed the limits of usual strategies to estimate environmental risks.
Abstract
The photo-inducible cytogenetic toxicity of glyphosate, atrazine, aminomethyl phosphoric acid (AMPA), desethyl-atrazine (DEA), and their various mixtures was assessed by the in vitro micronucleus assay on CHO-K1 cells.

Results demonstrated that the cytogenetic potentials of pesticides greatly depended on their physico-chemical environment. The mixture made with the four pesticides exhibited the most potent cytogenetic toxicity, which was 20-fold higher than those of the most active compound AMPA, and 100-fold increased after light-irradiation. Intracellular ROS assessment suggested the involvement of oxidative stress in the genotoxic impact of pesticides and pesticide mixtures.

This study established that enhanced cytogenetic activities could be observed in pesticide mixtures containing glyphosate, atrazine, and their degradation products AMPA and DEA. It highlighted the importance of cocktail effects in environmental matrices, and pointed out the limits of usual testing strategies based on individual molecules, to efficiently estimate environmental risks.

Keywords
Glyphosate; Atrazine; Pesticide mixture; Pesticide metabolites; Genotoxicity; Photoactivation

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2013.05.057
Get rights and content
Highlights

Glyphosate at 10−12 to 10−6 M promoted growth of T47D cells via estrogen receptors.

Glyphosate produced the activation of ERE which can be blocked by ICI 182780.

Glyphosate altered estrogen receptors by increasing expression ratio of ERα and ERβ.

Glyphosate had an additive effect with genistein on ERE activation and cell growth.
Abstract
Glyphosate is an active ingredient of the most widely used herbicide and it is believed to be less toxic than other pesticides. However, several recent studies showed its potential adverse health effects to humans as it may be an endocrine disruptor. This study focuses on the effects of pure glyphosate on estrogen receptors (ERs) mediated transcriptional activity and their expressions. Glyphosate exerted proliferative effects only in human hormone-dependent breast cancer, T47D cells, but not in hormone-independent breast cancer, MDA-MB231 cells, at 10−12 to 10−6 M in estrogen withdrawal condition. The proliferative concentrations of glyphosate that induced the activation of estrogen response element (ERE) transcription activity were 5-13 fold of control in T47D-KBluc cells and this activation was inhibited by an estrogen antagonist, ICI 182780, indicating that the estrogenic activity of glyphosate was mediated via ERs. Furthermore, glyphosate also altered both ERα and β expression. These results indicated that low and environmentally relevant concentrations of glyphosate possessed estrogenic activity. Glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used for soybean cultivation, and our results also found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. However, these additive effects of glyphosate contamination in soybeans need further animal study.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2012.11.069
Get rights and content
Abstract
A novel method was developed for the direct, sensitive, and rapid determination of glyphosate and its major metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), in fruit and vegetable samples by mixed-mode hydrophilic interaction/weak anion-exchange liquid chromatography (HILIC/WAX) coupled with electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (ESI-MS/MS). Homogenized samples were extracted with water, without derivatization or further clean-up, and the extracts were injected directly onto the Asahipak NH2P-50 4E column (250 mm × 4.6 mm i.d., 5 μm). The best results were obtained when the column was operated under mixed-mode HILIC/WAX elution conditions. An initial 10-min washing step with acetonitrile/water (10:90, v/v) in HILIC mode was used to remove potentially interfering compounds, and then the analytes were eluted in WAX mode with acetonitrile and water containing 0.1 mol L−1 ammonium hydroxide under gradient elution for the ESI analysis in negative ion mode. Limits of quantification of glyphosate and AMPA were 5 μg kg−1 and 50 μg kg−1, respectively, with limits of detection as low as 1.2 μg kg−1 for glyphosate and 15 μg kg−1 for AMPA. The linearity was satisfactory, with correlation coefficients (r) > 0.9966. Recovery studies were carried out on spiked matrices (6 vegetables, 3 fruits) with glyphosate at four concentrations and AMPA at three concentrations. The mean recoveries for glyphosate and AMPA were 75.3–110% and 76.1–110%, respectively, with relative standard deviations in the range of 1.1–13.8%. The intra-day precision (n = 7) for glyphosate and AMPA in vegetable and fruit samples spiked at an intermediate level between 5.9% and 7.5%, and the inter-day precision over 11 days (n = 11) was between 7.0% and 13%.

Highlights
► Glyphosate and AMPA levels were determined directly by LC–MS/MS. ► Samples were analyzed without time-consuming preparation or tedious derivatization. ► Mixed-mode HILIC/WAX elution removed interfering compounds and minimized matrix effects. ► Sensitivity was higher than GC–MS and similar to LC–MS/MS after FMOC derivatization.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.09.095
Get rights and content
Highlights

Addresses gap in information about glyphosate and AMPA in urban riparian groundwater.

Glyphosate and AMPA detected at most sites, 1 in 10 samples overall.

Detection frequency varied between sites – from none to found in most samples.

AMPA was correlated with glyphosate, not acesulfame, suggesting a glyphosate source.
Abstract
The herbicide glyphosate and its putative metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) have been found in urban streams, but limited information is available on their presence in urban riparian groundwater. Information is also lacking regarding the source of AMPA in these urban settings (glyphosate metabolite or wastewater), and whether, if present, glyphosate residues in urban riparian groundwater contribute significantly to urban streams. Glyphosate and AMPA were detected in shallow riparian groundwater at 4 of 5 stream sites in urban catchments in Canada and each were found in approximately 1 in 10 of the samples overall. Frequency of observations of glyphosate and AMPA varied substantially between sites, from no observations in a National Park near the Town of Jasper Alberta, to observations of both glyphosate and AMPA in more than half of the samples along two short reaches of streams in Burlington, Ontario. In these two catchments, AMPA was correlated with glyphosate, rather than the artificial sweetener acesulfame, suggesting that the AMPA is derived mainly from glyphosate degradation rather than from wastewater sources. Land use, localized dosage history, depth below ground and other factors likely control the occurrence of detectable glyphosate residues in groundwater.

Keywords
Glyphosate; AMPA; Urban groundwater; Riparian; Metabolite

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2013.12.009
Get rights and content
Highlights

Roundup® induced acute tubular and glomerular necrosis and apoptosis.

Urinary KIM-1 predicted kidney damage as early as 8 h after Roundup® intoxication.

Plasma Cys-C performed as well as pCr in indicating impaired kidney function in this Roundup® induced kidney injury model.
Abstract
Accidental or intentional ingestion of glyphosate surfactant-based herbicides, like Roundup®, leads to nephrotoxicity as well as death. In this study, a panel of kidney injury biomarkers was evaluated in terms of suitability to detect acute kidney injury and dysfunction. The Roundup® intoxication model involved oral administration of glyphosate to rats at dose levels of 250, 500, 1200 and 2500 mg/kg. Urinary and plasma biomarker patterns were investigated at 8, 24 and 48 h after dosing. Biomarkers were quantified by absolute concentration; by normalising to urine creatinine; and by calculating the excretion rate. The diagnostic performances of each method in predicting of acute kidney injury were compared. By Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis of the selected biomarkers, only urinary kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) best predicted histological changes at 8 h (best cut-off point > 0.00029 μg/ml). Plasma creatinine performed better than other biomarkers at 24 h (best cut-off point > 0.21 mg/dl). Urinary KIM-1 was the best early biomarker of kidney injury in this glyphosate-induced nephrotoxicity model.

Keywords
Glyphosate; Acute kidney injury; Kidney injury molecule-1; Cystatin-C; Creatinine; Roundup

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2014.03.001
Get rights and content
Highlights

Roundup® induces Ca2+ influx through L-VDCC and NMDA receptor activation.

The mechanisms underlying Roundup® neurotoxicity involve glutamatergic excitotoxicity.

Kinase pathways participate in Roundup®-induced neural toxicity.

Roundup® alters glutamate uptake, release and metabolism in hippocampal cells.
Abstract
Previous studies demonstrate that glyphosate exposure is associated with oxidative damage and neurotoxicity. Therefore, the mechanism of glyphosate-induced neurotoxic effects needs to be determined. The aim of this study was to investigate whether Roundup® (a glyphosate-based herbicide) leads to neurotoxicity in hippocampus of immature rats following acute (30 min) and chronic (pregnancy and lactation) pesticide exposure. Maternal exposure to pesticide was undertaken by treating dams orally with 1% Roundup® (0.38% glyphosate) during pregnancy and lactation (till 15-day-old). Hippocampal slices from 15 day old rats were acutely exposed to Roundup® (0.00005–0.1%) during 30 min and experiments were carried out to determine whether glyphosate affects 45Ca2+ influx and cell viability. Moreover, we investigated the pesticide effects on oxidative stress parameters, 14C-α-methyl-amino-isobutyric acid (14C-MeAIB) accumulation, as well as glutamate uptake, release and metabolism. Results showed that acute exposure to Roundup® (30 min) increases 45Ca2+ influx by activating NMDA receptors and voltage-dependent Ca2+ channels, leading to oxidative stress and neural cell death. The mechanisms underlying Roundup®-induced neurotoxicity also involve the activation of CaMKII and ERK. Moreover, acute exposure to Roundup® increased 3H-glutamate released into the synaptic cleft, decreased GSH content and increased the lipoperoxidation, characterizing excitotoxicity and oxidative damage. We also observed that both acute and chronic exposure to Roundup® decreased 3H-glutamate uptake and metabolism, while induced 45Ca2+ uptake and 14C-MeAIB accumulation in immature rat hippocampus. Taken together, these results demonstrated that Roundup® might lead to excessive extracellular glutamate levels and consequently to glutamate excitotoxicity and oxidative stress in rat hippocampus.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2013.06.043
Get rights and content
Abstract
Glyphosate is the primary active constituent of the commercial pesticide Roundup. The present results show that acute Roundup exposure at low doses (36 ppm, 0.036 g/L) for 30 min induces oxidative stress and activates multiple stress-response pathways leading to Sertoli cell death in prepubertal rat testis. The pesticide increased intracellular Ca2+ concentration by opening L-type voltage-dependent Ca2+ channels as well as endoplasmic reticulum IP3 and ryanodine receptors, leading to Ca2+ overload within the cells, which set off oxidative stress and necrotic cell death. Similarly, 30 min incubation of testis with glyphosate alone (36 ppm) also increased 45Ca2+ uptake. These events were prevented by the antioxidants Trolox and ascorbic acid. Activated protein kinase C, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, and the mitogen-activated protein kinases such as ERK1/2 and p38MAPK play a role in eliciting Ca2+ influx and cell death. Roundup decreased the levels of reduced glutathione (GSH) and increased the amounts of thiobarbituric acid-reactive species (TBARS) and protein carbonyls. Also, exposure to glyphosate–Roundup stimulated the activity of glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, glutathione S-transferase, γ-glutamyltransferase, catalase, superoxide dismutase, and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase, supporting downregulated GSH levels. Glyphosate has been described as an endocrine disruptor affecting the male reproductive system; however, the molecular basis of its toxicity remains to be clarified. We propose that Roundup toxicity, implicated in Ca2+ overload, cell signaling misregulation, stress response of the endoplasmic reticulum, and/or depleted antioxidant defenses, could contribute to Sertoli cell disruption in spermatogenesis that could have an impact on male fertility.

But here are some safer alternatives

http://www.gcbl.org/live/home/landscaping/is-there-a-safe-alternative-to-roundup

Note what is stated there that glyphosate does to aquatic life, and this isn’t just based on one study

http://www.gardensalive.com/product/round-up-your-weeds-without-nasty-chemicals?ai=463

http://www.instructables.com/id/Biodegradable-and-safer-alternative-for-commercial/

http://www.microbelifestore.com/blogs/kevins-korner/9037465-goodbye-roundup-hello-avenger-an-organic-weed-killer-that-works

http://althealthworks.com/762/natural-alternatives-to-roundup-are-quite-easy-to-make/

http://www.ehow.com/how_4863528_organic-alternatives-roundup-weed-killer.html

hmm linked to lymphoma?

http://weedcontrolfreaks.com/2014/06/salt-vinegar-and-glyphosate/

The link I posted was actually far more balanced, presented by a Ph. D. in molecular biology, talking about the pros and cons of both organic and conventional pesticides and talking about how GMOs have benefited the world, while at the same time admitting that having companies like Monsanto at the helm, was counterproductive to the cause

Well, I like the fact that even GMO supporters deride and despise Monsanto…..I’m not going to post the link since, let’s face it, most links dont post on here, but this is from scientific american, from a noted pro GMO’er:

The real problem is that although GMO technology can be used to produce large social and ecological benefits, most GM crops developed to date have been designed to benefit Big Ag. This trend will only continue if the public keeps its negative attitude towards GMOs. I don’t like Monsanto any more than you do – so why let them control how GM technology is used? If there was more public pressure and desire for socially and ecologically beneficial GMOs, more scientists could get involved and use the technology better.

I really like this article because it is exceptionally well balanced with no propaganda from either side.

/science-sushi/2011/08/15/organic_myths_revisited

okay so since the link isnt going through just append that to sciam blogs, and you can also see a series of articles published on this topic.

The link I posted was actually far more balanced, presented by a Ph. D. in molecular biology, talking about the pros and cons of both organic and conventional pesticides and talking about how GMOs have benefited the world, while at the same time admitting that having companies like Monsanto at the helm, was counterproductive to the cause

Well, I like the fact that even GMO supporters deride and despise Monsanto…..I’m not going to post the link since, let’s face it, most links dont post on here, but this is from scientific american, from a noted pro GMO’er:

The real problem is that although GMO technology can be used to produce large social and ecological benefits, most GM crops developed to date have been designed to benefit Big Ag. This trend will only continue if the public keeps its negative attitude towards GMOs. I don’t like Monsanto any more than you do – so why let them control how GM technology is used? If there was more public pressure and desire for socially and ecologically beneficial GMOs, more scientists could get involved and use the technology better.

I really like this article because it is exceptionally well balanced with no propaganda from either side.

/science-sushi/2011/08/15/organic_myths_revisited

okay so since the link isnt going through just append that to sciam blogs, and you can also see a series of articles published on this topic.

http://thethriftycouple.com/2014/05/31/diy-alternative-for-weed-b-gone-or-roundup-homemade-recipe-is-effective-and-safe/

I dont drink coca cola either (high fructose corn syrup- and the ads from the corn industry defending that product were just as comical and under fire), I grow my own vegetables, no pesticides, no hormones or antibiotics in the meat I consume either. I have a strong scientific background, I have zero problems in the science behind genetically modified food, my main problem is in the pesticides being used, and the backgrounds of companies like Monsanto, Bayer and Dow. The scientists who I spoke with directly also exercised the same concerns that way too much of the market is controlled by these three companies and they have way too much influence in the government. The wikileaks report, which indicated Bush was applying severe pressure on Europe on behalf of Monsanto is highly concerning, as is the number of shares owned by people like Bill Gates in the company and the backgrounds of regulatory people like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas. Monsanto’s origins lie in the pharmaceutical industry, and you see this kind of corruption there all the time (for example Vioxx, Avandia, Merck’s strong presence on the FDA), and you see drugs get banned far more quickly in Europe than you do here. I find these tv drug ads comical, and they are invariably followed by class action lawsuit ads for the same drugs. I hope you read the piece about one of Agent Orange’s active ingredients (2-4,D) being approved for use as a pesticide and the long list of scientists who are opposed to it, as there are far more viable alternatives. The aforementioned companies paid out a huge lawsuit for Agent Orange and were also found dumping PCBs and Mercury in the environment. (And dont even get me started on mercury in tooth fillings, something also banned in Europe, and was on its way to being banned here, but the ADA raised a stink because it would increase their costs. Plutocracy and money over well-being seems to reign supreme in America.) As glysophate is starting to find resistance in the field, we’ll have to invesitgate these. I attached a .pdf that had research indicating that chemical to breast cancer, as well as research from Stanford linking air born pollutants and consumption and accumulations of pesticides in pregnant women to the rise of autism. Genetic predisposition is already there, but the environment provides the trigger. The use of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, something that is banned in much of Europe, is also under fire from scientists.

I see some in here mentioned aspartame, splenda and other artificial sweeteners, over the years, I’ve been collecting research on that too. The commonality between the pesticides, the artificial sweeteners and the other additives under fire (hormones, antibiotics, etc- including superbug resistance) is that the studies they conduct on them aren’t of long enough duration to show what can happen after years of consumption, as they build up in our bodies.

Films of the Week

Evict Monsanto, Preserve Hawaii
For over 20 years, Hawai’i has been the global center for the open-field testing of GMO’s, including pharmaceutical crops. Over 5,000 experimental tests have been conducted that spray over 70 different chemicals.

Hawai’i has less than 3,000 acres of certified organic farmland, which is 0.27% of Hawaiian farmland. Kamehameha Schools is Hawaii’s largest private landowner with 363,000 acres of land. Despite Kamehameha’s public statements about sustainability and conservation, they lease substantial amounts of land for GMO open field tests and seed corn production. One of the participants in the film is Hawaiian musician and activist Makana, a longtime OCA member.

Watch

The Idiot Cycle
With the help of the public, JPS Films has decided to transfer the rights of the award-winning documentary The Idiot Cycle into the public domain. The film outlines the links between the chemical, GMO and cancer industries.

What does this mean? If the film is in the public domain, anyone, anywhere can distribute, copy, share and screen the film because it will belong to the public.

Because The Idiot Cycle was made with no commercial partnerships of any kind, no state funding and no distributor or television broadcaster, JPS Films financed the film completely independently. This was done to avoid financial conflicts of interest from anyone with agricultural, medical or other direct interests from swaying the content of the film.
13 minutes ago · Unlike · 1

BTW there’s a strong link between Monsanto and the Pharmaceutical Industry, the same industry that forges drug research, blacklists doctors who dont prescribe certain meds, injects healthy animals with growth hormones and antibiotics (that have led to increased resistant by germs as well as thyroid problems in teens and young adults) and has led to a rash of bills by state governments against whistleblowers, which we consumers have managed to fight off (nothing like the fear of a politician for being voted out of office, no matter how large bribes they are getting from the drug and agribusiness industry or how many industry insiders are put in charge of the USDA and FDA (fortunately America is finally waking up to the problem, as witnessed by the doctors in Fla who got arrested by taking bribes from the drug industry for overprescribing antidepressants and the FDA agents fired for taking paid vacations courtesy of the drug industry, and the problems that Merck and Astra Zeneca have faced (vioxx, avandia, and statins—– the latter when a Harvard prof was fired after berating a student for criticizing statins and it was found out he was in the pay of the drug industry, thats not any more of a surprise, when drug company sponsored research turns out to be false, which doctors are now finding out about and mobilizing against the industry and finding safer, more natural treatment methods that dont involve invasive chemical means, and its always fun to see drug ads on tv followed by lawyer ads for class action lawsuits against the same drug lol; I expect the same to happen soon with “corn sugar” ha, the industry always comes up with slick new ads to get around science and the letter of the law, but they cant get past consumer pressure and anger for their deceitful and corrupt ways.

Unlike your article that you posted which was published in a magazine which owns major stocks in Monsanto and by a writer who has always been biased, all of these are scientific studies and it’s why GMOs are now banned throughout Europe and starting to become labeled even here- Connecticut just passed a labelling law and New York is next! Monsanto doesn’t want labeling because they dont want people to know what they put in their so called “conventional” food- which isn’t conventional at all- it has dangerous pesticides, even more dangerous than the ones they originally used, because what they originally used doesnt work anymore because insects are now resistant to it, so now they’re using Agent Orange! And you do know what Agent Orange did during the Vietnam War right? So before you go spouting off about something you dont know and you read an article by someone who has a large bias, maybe you should come talk to someone who actually knows something about all this (ME)….
Dear New York MoveOn member, Last month, Connecticut became the first state in the country to require foods to have a clear label stating whether they contain genetically modified ingredients.1 Consumers beat Monsanto and the other agribusinesses that fought against their right to know what’s in their food. Families in New York have the same right to know whether the foods they eat have GMOs—as the evidence mounts suggesting that GMOs are unsafe. For example, recent studies have shown that many genetically modified food crops may have viral genes that are toxic to humans.2 That’s why Elaine B. Herlan, a fellow MoveOn member who lives in Rochester, started a petition calling on your governor and state legislature to require GMO labeling in New York. MoveOn members are working state by state to require GMO labeling—but to win in New York, we need to make sure lots of people in your area sign on. Click here to sign and share Elaine B. Herlan’s petition calling for GMO labeling in New York. Thanks for all you do.

Groundbreaking Study Links Monsanto’s Glyphosate To Cancer | Collective-Evolution http://t.co/HQa8vL1fxZ Groundbreaking Study Links Monsanto’s Glyphosate To Cancer collective-evolution.com Glyphosate is a major component of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. It was created and manufactured on a mass scale by Monsanto and is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. A number of scientific studies
Groundbreaking Study Links Monsanto’s Glyphosate To Cancer http://www.collective-evolution.com Glyphosate is a major component of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. It was created and manufactured on a mass scale by Monsanto and is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. A number of scientific studies surrounding glyphosate have shed light on the danger it posses to the human body. A…
3:42pm Alex Henry Monsanto GM maize may face Europe ban after French study links to cancer : http://t.co/3Dt1IirMJJ Monsanto GM maize may face Europe ban after French study links to cancer rfi.my FRANCE – France will ask for a Europe-wide ban on a genetically modified maize developed by US agribusiness Monsanto if the findings of tests made public Wednesday prove to be true. The study found…
Monsanto GM maize may face Europe ban after French study links to cancer http://www.english.rfi.fr FRANCE – France will ask for a Europe-wide ban on a genetically modified maize developed by US agribusiness Monsanto if the findings of tests made public Wednesday prove to be true. The study found…
3:42pm Alex Henry Corn Flakes With a Side of Cancer:http://t.co/bjHcMX3PQ3 via @PolicyMic Corn Flakes With a Side of Cancer: Why America Should Pay Attention to France’s GMO Research policymic.com Research in France reveals that GMOs have devastating health effects and can lead to cancer. Prop. 37, California’s GMO labeling bill, is an opportunity
Corn Flakes With a Side of Cancer: Why America Should Pay Attention to France’s GMO Research http://www.policymic.com Research in France reveals that GMOs have devastating health effects and can lead to cancer. Prop. 37, California’s GMO labeling bill, is an opportunity that should not be wasted.
3:42pm Alex Henry Peru Passes Monumental Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods http://t.co/THMJOg41Rk via @naturalsociety Peru Passes Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods naturalsociety.com In an act of defiance against biotech companies like Monsanto, Peru has officially passed a law banning genetically modified ingredients.
Peru Passes Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods naturalsociety.com In an act of defiance against biotech companies like Monsanto, Peru has officially passed a law banning genetically modified ingredients.
3:43pm Alex Henry GMO Crops Require More Pesticides, Create Resistant Insects http://t.co/dgWT6KOXtA via @naturalsociety GMO Crops Require More Pesticides, Create Resistant Insects naturalsociety.com Genetically modified crops are not only devastating to your health, but they are also wreaking havoc on the environment.
GMO Crops Require More Pesticides, Create Resistant Insects naturalsociety.com Genetically modified crops are not only devastating to your health, but they are also wreaking havoc on the environment.
3:43pm Alex Henry France Maintains Key Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize Crops http://t.co/i9LknUk4fh via @naturalsociety France Maintains Key Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize Crops naturalsociety.com France has upheld a decision to ban Monsanto’s GMO maize crops, the last remaining GMO allowed within Europe.
France Maintains Key Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize Crops naturalsociety.com France has upheld a decision to ban Monsanto’s GMO maize crops, the last remaining GMO allowed within Europe.
3:43pm Alex Henry Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support http://t.co/bgzBNK8QMZ via @naturalsociety Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support naturalsociety.com Italy is moving to ban one of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn maize crops, and 80 percent of the public is supporting the ban on GMOs.
Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support naturalsociety.com Italy is moving to ban one of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn maize crops, and 80 percent of the public is supporting the ban on GMOs.
3:44pm Alex Henry Greenpeace Tells the FDA: Stop Misleading the Public About GMOs http://t.co/gCToLKWuFh via @naturalsociety Greenpeace Tells the FDA: Stop Misleading the Public About GMOs naturalsociety.com Greenpeace is speaking up for the general public, by telling the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that they have no right to claim that GMOs are safe.
3:44pm Alex Henry Groundbreaking New Study Links GMO to Leukemia: When Will Monsanto Stop Lying to Us? http://t.co/SzI94pYFQc via @naturalsociety Groundbreaking New Study Links GMO to Leukemia naturalsociety.com A recent and concerning study shows the potential ‘leukemogenic’ properties of the Bt toxin biopesticides used in almost all GMO foods. GMOs are dangerous. Unlike your article that you posted which was published in a magazine which owns major stocks in Monsanto and by a writer who has always been biased, all of these are scientific studies and it’s why GMOs are now banned throughout Europe and starting to become labeled even here- Connecticut just passed a labelling law and New York is next! Monsanto doesn’t want labeling because they dont want people to know what’s in their food just like they didn’t want anyone to know about the PCBs and Mercury they were putting in the ground water of Anniston, Alabama for over 40 years! And this guy Henry Miller works for the FDA? Please. Both the FDA and USDA have been exposed countless times for letting companies like Monsanto go unregulated because the people who work for them (cough Michael Taylor cough) also work for that company- or used to. How stupid does this man think we are that he thinks he can hoodwink us? There’s a reason these so-called “conventional” GMO products are being outlawed throughout Europe, Asia and South America and we’re finally starting to label them here. Because the company behind them hides its research (and for good reason) and whenever unbiased scientific research is done, it shows exactly how the chemicals GMOs are treated with increase the likelihood of everything from leukemia to autism to birth defects. There is plenty of research even on the government’s own NIH website showing this, the above is just a small inkling of what I was able to find in a few minutes. So when you talk to a real scientist, that isn’t in the pay of the big corporations, a Monsanto lackey, you’ll here the truth. But you wont hear the truth from Henry Miller, because he wouldn’t know the truth if it slapped him in the face.

http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/​articles/PMC2952409/

Abstract

We summarize the major points of international debate on health risk studies for the main commercialized edible GMOs. These GMOs are soy, maize and oilseed rape designed to contain new pesticide residues since they have been modified to be herbicide-tolerant (mostly to Roundup) or to produce mutated Bt toxins. The debated alimentary chronic risks may come from unpredictable insertional mutagenesis effects, metabolic effects, or from the new pesticide residues. The most detailed regulatory tests on the GMOs are three-month long feeding trials of laboratory rats, which are biochemically assessed. The tests are not compulsory, and are not independently conducted. The test data and the corresponding results are kept in secret by the companies. Our previous analyses of regulatory raw data at these levels, taking the representative examples of three GM maize NK 603, MON 810, and MON 863 led us to conclude that hepatorenal toxicities were possible, and that longer testing was necessary. Our study was criticized by the company developing the GMOs in question and the regulatory bodies, mainly on the divergent biological interpretations of statistically significant biochemical and physiological effects. We present the scientific reasons for the crucially different biological interpretations and also highlight the shortcomings in the experimental protocols designed by the company. The debate implies an enormous responsibility towards public health and is essential due to nonexistent traceability or epidemiological studies in the GMO-producing countries.
Keywords: GMOs, Health risks, Pesticides, Regulatory toxicology, Animal testsDebate on GMOs Health Risks after Statistical Findings in Regulatory Tests
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
We summarize the major points of international debate on health risk studies for…See More

http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​pubmed/17356802

Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007 May;52(4):596-602. Epub 2007 Mar 13.
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity.
Séralini GE, Cellier D, de Vendomois JS.
Source
Committee for Independent Information and Research on Genetic Engineering CRIIGEN, Paris, France. criigen@unicaen.fr
Abstract
Health risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) cultivated for food or feed is under debate throughout the world, and very little data have been published on mid- or long-term toxicological studies with mammals. One of these studies performed under the responsibility of Monsanto Company with a transgenic corn MON863 has been subjected to questions from regulatory reviewers in Europe, where it was finally approved in 2005. This necessitated a new assessment of kidney pathological findings, and the results remained controversial. An Appeal Court action in Germany (Münster) allowed public access in June 2005 to all the crude data from this 90-day rat-feeding study. We independently re-analyzed these data. Appropriate statistics were added, such as a multivariate analysis of the growth curves, and for biochemical parameters comparisons between GMO-treated rats and the controls fed with an equivalent normal diet, and separately with six reference diets with different compositions. We observed that after the consumption of MON863, rats showed slight but dose-related significant variations in growth for both sexes, resulting in 3.3% decrease in weight for males and 3.7% increase for females. Chemistry measurements reveal signs of hepatorenal toxicity, marked also by differential sensitivities in males and females. Triglycerides increased by 24-40% in females (either at week 14, dose 11% or at week 5, dose 33%, respectively); urine phosphorus and sodium excretions diminished in males by 31-35% (week 14, dose 33%) for the most important results significantly linked to the treatment in comparison to seven diets tested. Longer experiments are essential in order to indicate the real nature and extent of the possible pathology; with the present data it cannot be concluded that GM corn MON863 is a safe product.

PMID:

17356802

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749?journalCode=crtoec

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637

This has nothing to do with “vaccines” It has everything to do with the corruption of the pharmaceutical industry and Monsanto which is WELL documented. And there have been several studies that have linked the rise in Autism to environmental toxins like air pollution, pesticides and other chemicals which are illegal in Europe (Autism is about 2/3 environmental and 1/3 genetic according to the Stanford studies I quoted), but legal here because of the connection with this government to corporations that care ONLY about profits. No one is disputing that vaccines do good, we (specifically I) am disputing your buying into companies with a corrupt history of damaging the planet, causing genocide on a massive scale (Agent Orange) and repeatedly doctoring medical studies and regulatory agencies like the FDA and USDA being run by the companies they are supposed to be regulating (Michael Taylor and Tom Wilcsak, as well as Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court). This has nothing to do with science and everything to do with the politics of power and the economics of greed. They were even testing unproven drugs on children in third world countries like Guatemala Dont believe me? The history of drug companies like Merck and Astra Zeneca with blacklisting doctors who dont prescribe enough of their products, doctoring research and trying to bribe doctors and companies like Monsanto poisoning the environment with PCBs and Agent Orange speaks for itself- even most doctors hate how these companies try to push their drugs on them, whether it’s constant drug ads or sl*tty drug reps. I’m an insider in this industry and I know exactly what goes on. Not antiscience here but antinonsense, antihypocrisy and antiplutocracy.

lots more studies in the NIH database, wake up people, this is the same thing the tobacco industry did to us in the 60s and Merck did with Vioxx.

And let’s not forget Monsanto’s checkered past with poisonining the ground water of Anniston, AL with PCB’s, Agent Orange (which is slated to being used as a pesticide now that glysophate resistant weeds are popping up) and people like Michael Taylor, who used to work for them in the FDA and USDA, and notorious supreme court judge Clarence Thomas. It’s this plutocracy that real scientists hate, just like how the tobacco industry paid “scientists” to tell the public what they wanted them to hear and just like what Merck did with Vioxx.

(1) Terminator/suicide seeds used by Monsanto et. al. to keep poor farmers (esp. Indian and African farmers) dependent on corporate purchases (there is a counterargument here on IP rights, but that can be taken to extremes);  
 
(2) Cross-pollination problems and monocropping practices associated with GMOs reduce genetic biodiversity of food crops and thus reduce the resiliency of farmer’s income supply and national food supplies to climate-related weather shocks (as well as diseases, particular pests, etc. that adapt to the GMO variety) – this is blithely dismissed in the article as “But these problems are not unique to genetic engineering. The history of agriculture is one of a never-ending battle between humans and pests.”  
 
Scientifically speaking, this problems are not unique, but when coupled with large corporate lobbies and heavy pressure into monocropping, they become a serious concern.  
 
(3) Poor studies of GMO feasibility as replacement crops, in conditions that vary significantly from those encountered in LDC/Southern situations. This critique (and critique 2) dates back to the first Green Revolution which, although increasing short-term yields, have had substantial (and ignored) long-term effects on groundwater tables, excessive fertilizer usage, and soil micronutrient loss.  
 
The real critiques have much more to do with the types of practices associated with the social and economic processes that GMOs are embedded in. These critiques focus much more on long-term food security issues and unforeseen social and environmental concerns that don’t appear in short-run technical trials. 
 
A couple examples:  
 
On typical GMO yields: http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/food_and_ag…  
 
On Long-Term problems with HYVs: 
http://www.foodfirst.org/files/DR15ABitterHarvest.pdf 
 
General (albeit loose) summary of some GMO Critiques: 
http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/EP124B.pdf

You’re a Monsanto lackey, that’s why you completely ignore the fact that they’ve dumped toxic waste in unsuspecting small towns for decades (PCBs in Anniston, AL) or the fact that they have a nice plutocratic arrangement with both the FDA and the USDA that even the American Medical Association finds alarming. 
 
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749?journalCode=crtoec 

As a citizen concerned about the health, environmental, ethical, and socio-economic hazards of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and industrial-scale factory farms or CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations), I feel strongly that consumers have an inalienable right to know whether the food we are purchasing likely contains GM ingredients or comes from animals confined in CAFOs.

Up to 90% of U.S. soybeans, corn, cotton, canola, and sugar beets are now genetically engineered and routinely inserted into human and animal foods with no labels or safety testing.

Approximately 80% of current grocery food items contain GMOs; while according to U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics, the majority of beef, pork, poultry, dairy, and eggs come from CAFOs.

Considering the growing concern over GMOs and CAFOs, all food packaging should clearly identify all non-organic ingredients containing soy, corn, cottonseed oil, canola, sugar beets, alfalfa or GM growth hormones with a label or shelf sign that says “May Contain GMOs” and identify all meat, dairy, and eggs that come from CAFOs with a label or shelf sign that says “CAFO.”

It was over the summer that an employee of Monsanto admitted to me they know the company has a horribly checkered past, but that they are now under “new leadership.” What I said to him was- I’ll believe that when the company leadership publicly admits that what they did was wrong, and not just settle class action lawsuits and hide behind a gag order. And that includes Dow and Bayer also, it’s not just Monsanto, though they bear the majority of the blame.

President Obama, I oppose your appointment of Michael Taylor, a former VP and lobbyist for Monsanto, the widely criticized genetically modified (GM) food multinational, as senior advisor to the commissioner at the FDA. Taylor is the same person who as a high-ranking official at the FDA in the 1990s promoted allowing genetically modified organisms into the U.S. food supply without undergoing a single test to determine their safety or risks. This is a travesty.

Taylor was in charge of policy for Monsanto’s now-discredited GM bovine growth hormone (rBGH), which is opposed by many medical and hospital organizations. It was Michael Taylor who pursued a policy that milk from rBGH-treated cows should not be labeled with disclosures. Michael Taylor and Monsanto do not belong in our government.

President Obama, Monsanto has been seen as a foe to family-based agriculture, the backbone of America, by introducing dangerous changes to plants and animals and by using strong-arm legal tactics against farmers for decades. Naturally occurring plant and animal species are permanently threatened by the introduction of DNA and hormonal modification, Monsanto’s core businesses.

FDA scientists once regarded genetic modification of the food supply as the single most radical and potentially dangerous threat to public health in history. As early as the 1991, a body of scientific research began to form which now includes articles in over 600 journals. As a whole, these offer scientific evidence that GM foods, hormones, and related pesticides are the root cause for the increase of many serious diseases in the U.S. Since GM foods were introduced, diagnosis of multiple chronic illnesses in the U.S. has skyrocketed. These illnesses include changes in major organs and in hormonal, immune, digestive, and reproductive systems. These modifications to foods and food production may also be contributors to colon, breast, lymphatic, and prostate cancers.

Experts are discouraged that regulators and GM companies systematically overlook potential side effects of GM. Monsanto’s objective to use biotechnology to change the world’s food supply is the opposite policy direction your administration should pursue. Your legacy of supporting Monsanto to have free rein in U.S. food policy is a nightmare scenario that is against the interest of all Americans and world citizens.
President Obama has appointed former Monsanto VP and lobbyist Michael Taylor to become senior advisor to the FDA’s commissioner. This unthinkable linkage between food safety and corporate interests that have little regard for the public health must be stopped. This example of a “fox watching the henhouse” is inexcusable. President Obama must reverse this unimaginably dangerous policy and isolate the FDA from corporate influence.

I am writing to urge you not to deregulate a new generation of genetically engineered crops designed to survive repeated spraying of the super-toxic herbicide 2,4-D, which was a major component of Agent Orange, the defoliant used by the U.S. in its herbicidal warfare campaign in Vietnam.

There is a large body of evidence indicating major health problems resulting from exposure to 2,4-D that include cancer, reproductive problems, neurotoxicity, and immunosuppression.

2,4-D contains dioxin, one of the dirty dozen group of extremely toxic chemicals that are resistant to environmental degradation through chemical, biological, or photolytic processes.

2,4-D has been banned in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Quebec and scores of Canadian municipalities after numerous epidemiological studies linked 2,4-D to non-Hodgkin s lymphoma.

Similarly, Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” corn, which was engineered to resist glyphosate, is responsible for new breeds of super-weeds that are toppling corn crops across the nation as well as the appearance of a deadly new micro-monster that attacks plants, animals and humans alike.

Please don’t make the same mistake of approving 2,4-D-tolerant GMO crops until definitive long-term testing proves beyond a reasonable doubt that these products are safe for animals and humans.

Once these novel genes are released into the environment it will be impossible to call them back. Do not approve another man-made environmental and human health disaster.

Anonymous Targets Biotech Giant Monsanto with Database Raid
By Gianluca Mezzofiore
International Business Times, March 1, 2012
Straight to the Source

Support Farmer Protection Legislation!

For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Genetic Engineering page and our Millions Against Monsanto page.

The Anonymous collective has staged an indirect attack on the Monsanto corporation by publishing material related to the agricultural biotech company’s database on Pastehtml.

In December 2011, Anonymous targeted the Bivings Group, which handles PR for Monsanto, following a previous assault on the corporation.

The hacktivists initially attacked Monsanto in July 2011 over the company filing lawsuits against a number of organic dairy farmers, who had labelled their products as not containing growth hormones, which the corporation used to manufacture.

On that occasion, Anonymous released the contact details of 2,500 Monsanto employees.

The new attack was announced by YourAnonNews, who tweeted: “HACKED: Monsanto pwnt once more by # Anonymous – Old DB lifted and leaked | http://pastehtml.com/view/bpvygosbp.html.”

The collective published a statement on Pastehtml, accompanied by rapper B Dolan performing a song that draws on fellow rapper Jay-Z’s Lucifer, along with the contents of a long list of email messages hacked earlier from the Bivings Group.

>>> Read the Full Article

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/307504/20120301/antisec-monsanto-anonymous-opmonsanto-emails-bivings.htm#ixzz1oNRB3WcM

Please sponsor the Genetically Engineered Technology Farmer Protection Act. This bill establishes a set of farmers’ rights in regards to genetically engineered organisms and the business practices of biotech companies.

The intent of the act is:

To provide additional protections for farmers and ranchers that may be harmed economically by genetically engineered seeds, plants, or animals, to ensure fairness for farmers and ranchers in their dealings with biotech companies that sell genetically engineered seeds, plants, or animals, to assign liability for injury caused by genetically engineered organisms, and for other purposes.

Thank you for your attention to the proposed Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay Alaska. I am writing today to encourage you to use your authority under the Clean Water Act to take a hard look at how this proposed mine will impact our nation’s biggest wild salmon fishery, the commercial fishermen and Alaska Natives who depend on it, and the local businesses who make their living off of this wild landscape in Southwestern Alaska.

If built, Pebble mine will produce between 2 and 10 billion tons of toxic waste that will have to be treated for hundreds of years. This waste will threaten Bristol Bay, an area widely recognized as one of the last remaining strongholds for healthy salmon populations in North America and the world. The region provides pristine spawning grounds for trophy rainbow trout and all five species of Pacific salmon, including the largest sockeye salmon runs on Earth, and a variety of other fish and wildlife species that depend on the nutrients from salmon, clean water, and undisturbed habitat.

I urge you to initiate a Clean Water Act 404(c) process in Bristol Bay immediately. Alaska Natives, sportsmen, commercial fishermen, churches, and conservation organizations deserve a public and science-based process to determine if the Pebble Partnership’s plans to build the biggest open pit mine in North America will harm one of our nation’s greatest fisheries.

Please cosponsor S.1717, the Prevention of Escapement of Genetically Altered Salmon in the United States Act.

The jury is still out on the long-term effects of genetically engineered salmon on humans – there simply isn’t enough data. But, what we do know is that these genetic changes increase allergy risk, and produce a salmon with lower levels of Omega-3 fatty acids – the “good” fat which has important health benefits.

I am also concerned by the elevated levels of growth hormone in this fish. This poses a cancer risk, as elevated IGF-1 levels are linked to prostate, breast and colon cancers.

GMO salmon isn’t safe and shouldn’t be approved for human consumption.

In addition to the human health concerns, there’s also the danger that genetically engineered salmon could escape its pens. This would have devastating effects on wild and farmed salmon stocks.

A December 15 hearing held by the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, titled Environmental Risks of Genetically Engineered Fish, covered many of the concerns related to the escape of GMO salmon.

But, news broke just after the hearing of yet another worry: that genetically engineered salmon could breed novel diseases.

AquaBounty’s genetically-engineered salmon tested positive for a new strain of Infectious Salmon Anaemia (ISA) in November 2009. ISA is a virus that has triggered devastating disease outbreaks (90% death rate) in stocks of farmed Atlantic salmon around the world.

Please protect human health and the environment by cosponsoring S.1717

Like most consumers, I want to avoid foods that contain genetically modified organisms, but they are not labeled.

In fact, the federal government does nothing to regulate, or guarantee the safety of, agricultural crops — and now food animals — that have been altered with foreign genes. There has never been a longitudinal scientifically rigorous health study on the impacts of eating genetically altered foods.

The little science there is shows that GMOs are more likely to trigger novel allergies, are less nutritious, sprayed with more herbicides, and contain elevated levels of hormones that correlate with common cancers. And, there’s no doubt that the most common GMO foods are linked to epidemic levels of obesity and diet-related diseases. These include artery-clogging meat and milk products from animals fed GMO grains, trans fats from GMO vegetable oils, and high fructose (GMO) corn syrup.

Public health depends on labeling GMO foods so consumers can avoid them. Mandatory GMO labels are popular with consumers, consistently earning polling numbers politicians dream of.

I am hoping that you and your colleagues in the state legislature can help. Please stand up for consumers’ right to know and truth in labeling by introducing a bill to label GMO foods this year.

I look forward to hearing from you on this important topic.

Heh, the government just doesnt want you to panic. Do you know that when radiation from the Fukushima plant made it into seafood and fruits and veggies, the Govt simply raised the level of what it considers a safe level of radiation? Do you really want to trust a government like that? How about a govt that conducted radiation experiments on its own people or injected them with LSD as a prelude to using that in torturing people? I think not. There are a ton of studies showing how bad Monsanto crops and pesticides are and linking them to cancer, birth defects, parkinsons, and thats why its banned in Europe. ALL of the research conducting in America was actually funded by Monsanto so you already know the outcome. BTW monsanto has lost multiple billions of dollars in lawsuits, for doing immoral things like polluting the groundwater of Anniston AL with PCBs for over 40 yrs. Why is this company even allowed to exist? Dont give me the science vs nonscience crap, most unbiased scientists (read: Europe) know how bad GMO and growth hormone in our foods is.

United States Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Gregory Parham, Administrator, APHIS
Tom Vilsack, Secretary, USDA

Re: Docket No. APHIS-2010-0103

Dear Secretary Vilsack and Administrator Parham,

We are writing to urge you not to deregulate a new generation of genetically engineered crops designed to survive repeated spraying of the herbicide 2,4-D. Simply put, 2,4-D resistant seeds are a bad idea. Allowing these seeds on the market will drive up use of an antiquated, dangerous herbicide that is associated with cancer, reproductive toxicity and endocrine disruption.

The history of glyphosate use in conjunction with RoundUp Ready crops tells us that widespread planting of 2,4-D resistant corn will lead inevitably to a surge in 2,4-D application.

2,4-D is well known to drift, both directly and through volatilization. This will devastate adjacent ecosystems and poses a very real threat to rural economies and farmers growing non-2,4-D-resistant crops. Conventional farmers will lose crops while organic farmers will lose both crops and certification, resulting in an economic unraveling of already-stressed rural communities.

2,4-D resistant corn follows the same short-sighted approach to farming taken by Monsanto’s “RoundUp Ready” corn, which was engineered to resist glyphosate. The RoundUp Ready seed line is responsible for new breeds of superweeds and superbugs that have afflicted millions of acres of farmland across the Midwest and South. Please don’t make the same mistake in approving 2,4-D-tolerant GE crops.

We urge USDA to reject Dow’s petition for approval of its 2,4-D resistant seed lines (whether corn, soy or cotton) and to devote more attention instead to research and development of safe and smart 21st century ecological approaches to weed management. These approaches can protect public health, conserve the environment and assure sustainable crop production by America’s farmers for generations to come.

Sincerely

Advertisements