Apr
23
New GMO Wheat May ‘Silence’ Vital Human Genes
Filed Under Main Content, Other News | Leave a Comment
By Dr. Mercola
Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) has developed a type of genetically modified (GM) wheat that may silence human genes, leading to disastrous health consequences.
Last year, University of Canterbury Professor Jack Heinemann released results from genetic research he conducted on the wheat, which showed with “no doubt” that molecules created in the wheat, which are intended to silence wheat genes to change its carbohydrate content, may match human genes and potentially silence them.
University Professor Judy Carman agreed with Heinemann's analysis, stating in Digital Journal:1
"If this silences the same gene in us that it silences in the wheat -- well, children who are born with this enzyme not working tend to die by the age of about five.”
Over 770 Pages of Potential Genetic Matches
Heinemann reported that his research revealed over 770 pages of potential matches between two GM genes in the wheat and the human genome. Over a dozen matches were “extensive and identical and sufficient to cause silencing in experimental systems,” he said.
Experts warned that eating the wheat could lead to significant changes in the way glucose and carbohydrates are stored in the human body, which could be potentially deadly for children and lead to serious illness in adults.
Since this adverse effect is extremely plausible, long-term studies are needed before the wheat is released into the environment and the human food chain – but a new review states that the risks are still not being adequately assessed.
A New 'Breed' of GM Crops
RNA is one of three major macromolecules, like DNA. Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) is responsible for regulating well over one-third of human genes.
In a new risk assessment, Heinemann and colleagues explained that while all commercial GM plants are currently created through in vitro DNA modification typically to create a new protein, a “growing minority” are designed to change their RNA content in order to regulate gene expression.2
The technique, known as RNA interference or RNA knockdown, essentially turns off or “knocks down” certain genes. It was first used commercially in 1994 for the development of the Flavr Savr tomato, which was later withdrawn from the market, and has been applied in various GM crops since. As reported in The Atlantic:3
"Researchers have been using this phenomena to their advantage in the form of small, engineered RNA strands that are virtually identical to miRNA. In a technique called RNA interference, or RNA knockdown, these small bits of RNA are used to turn off, or 'knock down,' certain genes.
RNA knockdown was first used commercially in 1994 to create the Flavr Savr, a tomato with increased shelf life. In 2007, several research teams began reporting success at engineering plant RNA to kill insect predators, by knocking down certain genes. As reported in MIT's Technology Review on November 5, 2007, researchers in China used RNA knockdown to make:
'...cotton plants that silence a gene that allows cotton bollworms to process the toxin gossypol, which occurs naturally in cotton. Bollworms that eat the genetically engineered cotton can't make their toxin-processing proteins, and they die.'
And: 'Researchers at Monsanto and Devgen, a Belgian company, made corn plants that silence a gene essential for energy production in corn rootworms; ingestion wipes out the worms within 12 days.' Humans and insects have a lot in common, genetically. If miRNA can in fact survive the gut then it's entirely possible that miRNA intended to influence insect gene regulation could also affect humans."
The Risks of GM Crops Containing dsRNA
According to Heinemann’s analysis, dsRNA-mediated silencing is becoming the basis of novel traits in GM plants, including biopesticides and altered nutritional characteristics. “Changing the nature, kind and quantity of particular regulatory-RNA molecules through genetic engineering can create biosafety risks,” the review reported,4 noting that, “we find evidence that the risks are not considered by some regulators.” They continue:
“While some GMOs have been designed to make new dsRNA molecules, in other GMOs such molecules may occur as a side-effect of the genetic engineering process. Still others may make naturally-occurring dsRNA molecules in higher or lower quantities than before.
Some dsRNA molecules can have profound physiological effects on the organism that makes them. Physiological effects are the intended outcomes of exposure to dsRNA incorporated into food sources for invertebrates; biopesticides and other topically applied products, and could be the cause of off-target effects and adverse effects in non-target organisms.
A daunting outcome is raised, that each [dsRNA] formulation might have its own risks.…Production of intended dsRNA molecules may also have off-target effects due to silencing genes other than those intended. Unanticipated off-target adverse effects can be difficult to detect and they are not possible to reliably predict using bioinformatics techniques. Regulatory bodies are not adequately assessing the risks of dsRNA-producing GM products. As a result, we recommend a process to properly assess the safety of dsRNA-producing GM organisms before they are released or commercialized.”
Risks of RNAs of Plant Origin Already Uncovered
One type of dsRNA is microRNA (miRNA). MicroRNA are basically small pieces of RNA that interact with your genes, essentially stopping certain genes from being expressed. MiRNA exists in human body fluid naturally; however, microRNA also exists in plants, and research has shown that eating the wrong plants may transfer this plant miRNA to humans -- with potentially devastating implications.
The study, published in 2011, determined that microRNA from cooked plant foods like rice, wheat and potatoes can in fact collect in your blood and tissue, leading to a number of potential health problems.5 The study further revealed that microRNA remains completely stable after not only cooking, but through the digestion process as well. Most importantly, the researchers found a significant quantity of microRNA in the human body, concluding that:
"… plant miRNAs are primarily acquired orally, through food intake."
MicroRNA has been widely shown to alter many critical biological processes, including apoptosis – the process of programmed cell death and DNA fragmentation. As a result, the dysregulation of microRNAs has been linked to cancer and various other diseases. And, as noted, plant miRNA has been shown to interfere with human microRNA by mimicking it and binding to the receptors, and also potentially through alterations in gene expression.
Most Consumers Unaware of GMO Risks
The biotech industry, led by Monsanto, is increasing their propaganda efforts to reshape their public image, and sway your opinion against the need to label GM foods. As The Atlantic reported:6
“Given its opposition to the labeling of GM foods… it seems clear that Monsanto wants you to close your eyes, open your mouth, and swallow."
Indeed, many consumers are still in the dark about the very real risks that GM crops pose. The Canadian news station CBC News recently reported that despite warnings that GM foods could destroy the environment and pose risks to agricultural diversity, most Canadians have “no strong views on the matter.” Andreas Boecker, an associate professor at the University of Guelph who has researched consumer acceptance of GM foods, told CBC News:7
"These concerns among farmers and informed groups of consumers do not translate to the average consumer. They are too far removed from the concerns of the farming community… And if you go by shopping behavior most foods that they buy have some share of GMOs."
This is precisely what the biotech industry wants, even as increasing research demonstrates GM crop dangers. One recent study found that rats fed a type of genetically engineered corn that is prevalent in the US food supply for two years developed massive mammary tumors, kidney and liver damage, and other serious health problems. This was at dietary amounts of about 10 percent. Does 10 percent or more of your diet consist of GM ingredients?
At present, you can't know for sure, since GM foods are not labeled in the US. But chances are, if you eat processed foods, your diet is chock full of GM ingredients you didn't even know about – causing equally unknown consequences to your health.
Related Articles:
These Foods Have 'Invisible Thorns' Which Can Rip Apart Your Insides Viral Gene in Genetically Engineered Foods Could Promote Disease GE Crops and Unsustainable Agricultural Practices are Destroying our Planet’s Soil and Food SupplyFeb
4
Eating Smart When Dining Out
Filed Under Main Content, Other News | Leave a Comment
By Dr. Mercola
Do you regard eating out as a bit of a respite from your daily life? A time to let someone else do the cooking, and perhaps treat yourself to something more indulgent that you don’t normally eat?
Restaurant chains are on to this sentiment, and they’ve responded by offering customers increasingly decadent dishes that are simply not good for your health. I’m talking about:
- A milk shake that has a slice of apple pie blended in (Johnny Rockets)
- Country fried steak served with pancakes, potatoes, gravy and syrup (nearly a days’ worth of calories in one meal, thanks to IHOP)
- A massive portion of macaroni and cheese that has two days’ worth of sodium (Uno Chicago Grill)
- A slice of chocolate cake that weighs nearly one pound and contains 26 teaspoons of added sugar (Maggiano’s Little Italy)1… and the list goes on and on
Media reports often focus on the calorie content of such massive meals, along with the saturated fat and sodium. Clearly, overeating to this extent can easily pack on the pounds, especially if your eating out is not just a “treat” but more of a daily routine … But there’s more to these meals than simply extra calories, fat and salt …
Do You Know Where Most Restaurant Food Comes From?
Eating the food at nearly every fast food chain (except maybe Chipotle and a few other restaurants committed to sustainable, organic suppliers) and even most sit-down restaurants means you are likely consuming feedlot animal meat – flesh that comes from animals raised in crowded unsanitary conditions, fed massive doses of antibiotics and unnatural "frankenfeed" full of genetically modified (GM) crops and some other truly disturbing ingredients.
This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to all the decidedly unhealthy practices that go on at a CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation).
The problem begins at the massive CAFOs where the beef, chicken or pigs are fed genetically modified corn and soybeans and excessive grains in general (which are not the natural diet of these animals), along with the following almost unbelievable feed ingredients:
- Plastics -- for the many animals whose digestive systems need roughage to pass food through them, the CAFOs now use plastic pellets.
- Meat from members of the same species -- CAFOs turn farm animals into cannibals. Scientific research has linked this practice to the spread of both mad cow disease and avian bird flu.
- Manure and animal feces-- this can include cattle manure, swine waste, and poultry waste. It also includes wood, sand, rocks, dirt, sawdust and other non-food substances.
- Roxarsone -- more commonly known as arsenic, which until recently was put into chicken and pig feed to control intestinal parasites that might cause them to eat less and grow slower. Chicken litter (containing the arsenic that passes through the birds) is also collected from chicken CAFOs and fed to feedlot cattle, for some apparent reason that defies common sense.
- Animal byproducts -- categorized as "animal protein products," this includes rendered feathers, hair, skin, hooves, blood, internal organs, intestines, beaks and bones, dead horses, euthanized cats and dogs, and road kill.
Chemical-Laden Food is the Norm, Not the Exception
A burger or a chicken sandwich from a fast-food restaurant is not equal, nutritionally, to the equivalent you would make at home … nearly always the fast-food version will contain a staggering variety of additives, flavoring, coloring, and other chemicals that give it that “fast-food” flavor …For instance, only about half of a Chicken McNugget is actual chicken. The rest is a mix of corn-derived fillers and additives (most likely genetically modified), along with a slew of synthetic chemicals, including:
- Dimethyl polysiloxane, a type of silicone with anti-foaming properties used in cosmetics and a variety of other goods like Silly Putty
- Tertiary butylhydroquinone (TBHQ), a petroleum-based product with antioxidant properties
You probably expect this from McDonald’s, but toxic unknowns like high-fructose corn syrup, preservatives and MSG can lurk in food from even the finest of restaurants. Many restaurants actually buy processed frozen foods that are simply heated or cooked in the microwave, and then passed off as "home cooked." This is something you'd expect from a cafeteria or fast-food joint, but it occurs even at five-star eateries.
Other tricks of the restaurant trade not specifically mentioned above include passing off inexpensive fish such as pollock as something more expensive, like cod. Or, Maryland-style crab cakes made from crab that came from Vietnam. Most fish in restaurants is also farm-raised, which you definitely want to avoid.
Due to all of the added sugars and other ingredients, studies have shown that eating fast food just twice a week can make you gain 10 pounds, but even more shocking it DOUBLES your risk of developing insulin resistance.2 Insulin resistance, as I've discussed on many occasions, is one of THE primary driving factors behind many chronic diseases, including diabetes, cancer and heart disease.
Ask Questions BEFORE You Go …
Many restaurants have their menus online and it can be helpful to identify what you want to eat before you go to the restaurant. If possible, choose a restaurant known for their high-quality standards, such as buying produce locally and in season, or serving raw and/or organic foods.
Ideally, you'd want to opt for wholly organic- or raw food restaurants, but they can be few and far in between. At the other end of the spectrum are fast-food chains, which should be avoided at all costs.
For restaurants that fall somewhere in the middle, call ahead and speak to a manager, chef or owner ahead of time. Most servers are typically clueless about where the food they are serving actually comes from, or what’s in it, which is why calling ahead is so important. If you wait until you’re already there, the server will likely head into the kitchen to get your questions answered, but you’ll have no way of truly verifying their responses. Some questions to ask ahead of time would include:
- Where does the bulk of their food come from (A CAFO? A food wholesaler? An organic farm?)
- Is the beef grass-fed?
- Do they use organically raised, free-range chicken?
- Is the fish wild-caught?
- Are organic ingredients available?
- Are full ingredients lists for menu items available?
- Do they use MSG?
- Does the sauce (or any other condiment) contain high fructose corn syrup?
- Do they use genetically modified (GM) ingredients? (Remember, typically anything containing corn, soy, canola, or any of their derivatives are GM varieties UNLESS certified organic)
More Tips for Eating Out at a Restaurant
I urge you to take your health to the next level and seek out the restaurants in your area that are making a commitment to using seasonal, sustainable ingredients and preparing meals in a healthy way. These restaurants are out there, and the more people who support them the more they will continue to grow. Calling ahead and asking questions is even an excellent way to open up a discussion about the need for a truly high-quality restaurant in your area. If your goal is simply to avoid overeating or taking in excess calories, you can use some of these common tips:
- Ask your server to put half of your meal in a to-go box before they bring it to the table
- Split an entrée with a friend
- Avoid entrees described as “crispy,” “breaded,” “fried,” or “smothered” and opt for those that are steamed instead
- Order first so you’re not influenced by your dining companions’ choices
- Tailor your meal how you want it, such as swapping a potato side for a veggie or asking for your fish to be steamed instead of fried
Many local businesses would be glad to hear about your concerns over food quality and your desires for a higher standard, and will work with you to come up with a solution – especially if they get calls like this often …
Ideally Prepare Most of Your Meals at Home
I have long stated that if you want to be optimally healthy, you, a family member or someone you hire needs to take the time to prepare your meals from scratch. This way, you can be sure you're getting unprocessed, high-quality food made with ingredients you trust.
I am also fond of saying that if you fail to plan you are planning to fail, so each night before bed, plan what you're going to eat the following day so you can avoid having to rely on purchasing unhealthy restaurant meals. Even better, make a weekly meal plan each weekend, and buy all the ingredients you need for that week's meals ahead of time so you’re prepared.
Related Articles:
Did You Have ANY Idea this Happens at Fast Food Restaurants You Eat At? The Worst Possible Place to Eat if You Want to Stay Healthy Why is it Suddenly Cheaper to Eat Out?Oct
30
By Dr. Mercola
One week from today California voters will vote on Prop 37 and we will see if truth will win out over corporate greed, and hopefully people will finally be given the right to know what is in their food.
The state of affairs in India with respect to GM foods is further validation of the importance of labeling GM foods with Prop 37 in California.
Over the past 16 years, it's estimated that more than a quarter of a million Indian farmers have committed suicide after being convinced to plant Monsanto's genetically modified (GM) seeds (especially Bt cotton), then having their crops fail, leaving them in financial ruin.
Earlier this year, India's National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), a government agency, sued Monsanto, the world leader in GM crops and seeds, and their collaborators, the Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company, for biopiracy, accusing them of stealing local varieties of eggplant to develop a genetically modified version.
It seems now that the country may have had enough, and is citing the precautionary principle in their announcement that all GM field trials should be stopped until certain conditions have been met.
India to Ban Field Trials of GM Crops
In October 2012, a five-member Technical Expert Committee (TEC) appointed by the Supreme Court of India unanimously recommended that all GM field trials in India should be stopped until the following conditions have been met:1
- Specific sites for conducting field trials have been designated and certified and sufficient mechanisms for monitoring the trials put in place.
- A panel of scientists, qualified in evaluation of the biosafety data of GM crops, has been engaged for scrutiny and analyses of the safety data.
- Conflict of interest in the regulatory body has been removed.
- The requirement for preliminary biosafety tests prior to field trials including sub-chronic toxicity in small animals has been included.
Two other noteworthy recommendations were also included in the TEC report:
- A 10-year moratorium on field trials of all Bt food crops, based on the overall status of current food safety evaluations for these crops (including data on Bt cotton and Bt eggplant)
- A moratorium on field trials of herbicide-tolerant crops until an independent assessment has evaluated its "impact" and "suitability"
It seems India is poised to join the ranks of those countries who do not want to use their population and land as guinea pigs to test out GM crops... others who have said "no" to GMOs (genetically modified organisms) include:2
New Zealand: No GM foods are grown there Switzerland: No GM crops, animals and plants until 2013 Germany: No GM corn Madeira: This small Portuguese island has a ban on GM crops Ireland: GM crops were banned for cultivation in 2009, and foods containing GM foods can be voluntarily labeled as such Japan: No GM seeds are planted in the country (but wild contamination from imported GM canola have been found growing near ports) France: Asked the European Commission to suspend Monsanto's authorization to plant GM MON 810 corn, but the EU stepped in and blocked the ban Austria, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria and Luxembourg: All have bans on both cultivation and sale of GMOs
An Inside Look at India's Struggles With GM Crops
The film Bitter Seeds looks at the beginning of the consumer goods' supply chain – the raw materials – shedding much-needed light on the crisis created by Monsanto's genetically engineered Bt cotton.
The film features Manjusha Amberwar, an 18-year-old Indian village girl who wants to become a journalist in order to expose the severity of the problems caused by Monsanto's seed monopoly scheme. Farming debts claimed the life of her own father, a respected village leader. Manjusha interviews several families of local farmers who resorted to drinking pesticide. One of the village elders told her:
"In my time there were no suicides. Even the poor could survive by working hard. But there are no other seeds available now. Traditional seeds have disappeared. We farmers are illiterates. We follow false advertising like a dog follows bread."
What many still do not know is that farming has changed dramatically over the past few decades. Seeds have traditionally been saved and shared between farmers from one harvest season to the next. You rarely ever had to buy new seed. Nature, when left alone, provides you with the means to propagate the next harvest in a never-ending cycle.
In the 1970's, hybrid seeds were introduced into India, promising better yields using chemical fertilizers and insecticides. But it didn't take long before yields began to drop as the agricultural chemicals took their toll on the soils. Farm debts began driving Indian farmers to suicide in 1997, and it hasn't stopped since. In fact, matters have quickly gotten worse in the decade since Monsanto introduced its "revolutionary" Bt cotton, which cannot be saved or shared from season to season, but must be continually repurchased.
Genetically engineered seeds also require expensive agricultural chemicals, and more water – a commodity few farmers have access to unless it rains. Buried in debt and struggling against the rising cost of GM seeds and the chemicals required, combined with failing yields and GE-created super weeds and resistant pests, one Indian farmer now commits suicide every 30 minutes.
Are You Being Fed Lies?
You've probably heard that GM crops are safe and represent the "future of food" – a way to increase crop yields and feed the world. (That is, if you've heard anything at all... many people have heard precious little about GM foods, even though they're already in up to 80 percent of processed foods in the United States.)
Well, the authors of the report GMO Myths and Truths3 (who include Michael Antoniou, PhD, a 28-year veteran of genetic engineering technology who has himself invented a number of gene expression biotechnologies, as well as John Fagan, PhD, a leading authority on food sustainability, biosafety, and GMO testing) took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, and came to the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increase yield potential do not support the claims made at all. In fact, the evidence demonstrates that the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown; they simply aren't true... The authors concluded GM crops:
- Are laboratory-made, using technology that is totally different from natural breeding methods, and pose different risks from non-GE crops
- Can be toxic, allergenic and less nutritious than their natural counterparts
- Are not adequately regulated to ensure safety
- Do not increase yield potential
- Do not reduce pesticide use but increase it
- Create serious problems for farmers, including herbicide-tolerant "superweeds," compromised soil quality, and increased disease susceptibility in crops
- Have mixed economic effects
- Harm soil quality, disrupt ecosystems, and reduce biodiversity
- Do not offer effective solutions to climate change
- Are as energy-hungry as any other chemically-farmed crops
- Cannot solve the problem of world hunger but distract from its real causes – poverty, lack of access to food and, increasingly, lack of access to land to grow it on
According to their report, there are three potential sources of adverse health effects from genetically engineered foods:
- The genetically modified gene product – for example, the Bt toxin in GM insecticidal crops may be toxic or allergenic
- The GM transformation process may produce mutagenic effects, gene regulatory effects, or effects at other levels of biological structure and function that result in new toxins or allergens and/or disturbed nutritional value
- Changes in farming practices linked to the use of a genetically modified organism may result in toxic residues – for example, higher levels of crop contamination with the herbicide Roundup are an inevitable result of using GM Roundup Ready® crops
Do You Eat These Common Sources of GM Foods?
If you live in the United States and want to avoid GM crops, it isn't easy because they are already in commercial production – and GM crops are not labeled. According to the Non-GMO Project, GM crops already in production in the U.S. include:4
Alfalfa (first planting 2011) Canola (approx. 90% of U.S. crop) Corn (approx. 88% of U.S. crop in 2011) Cotton (approx. 90% of U.S. crop in 2011) Papaya (most of Hawaiian crop; approximately 988 acres) Soy (approx. 94% of U.S. crop in 2011) Sugar Beets (approx. 95% of U.S. crop in 2010) Zucchini and Yellow Summer Squash (approx. 25,000 acres) Animal products (milk, meat, eggs, honey, etc.) because of contamination in feed
Common ingredients derived from these ubiquitous GM crops, which are added to the majority of U.S. processed foods, include:5
Amino Acids Aspartame Ascorbic Acid Sodium Ascorbate Vitamin C Citric Acid Sodium Citrate Ethanol Flavorings ("natural" and "artificial") High-Fructose Corn Syrup Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein Lactic Acid Maltodextrins Molasses Monosodium Glutamate Sucrose Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP) Xanthan Gum Vitamins Yeast Products
Time is Running Out to Help Support GM Labeling With Proposition 37
Currently, a major problem facing Americans is forced ignorance. Even though many are undoubtedly concerned about the environment and the future of their children, they can't opt to avoid GM foods even if they want to, simply because the U.S. refuses to label them.
This must change – and California stands poised to decide the fate of Proposition 37, which would require genetically engineered foods to be identified on the label, on November 6.
Although many organic consumers and natural health activists already understand the importance of Proposition 37, it cannot be overemphasized that winning the battle over Prop 37 is perhaps the most important food fight Americans – not just Californians – have faced so far. But in order to win this fight for the right to know what's in our food, we need your help, as the biotech industry is spending tens of millions of dollars for their propaganda.
Please remember, the ONLY reason they're spending this amount of cash to "inform" you in this debate is because they want to PREVENT you from ever knowing that the foods you buy contain genetically engineered ingredients – and this includes trusted organic and all-natural brands! Ask yourself WHY?
Could it be because dozens of studies have now provided scientific evidence that GE foods cause severe health problems, including multiple organ damage and massive cancerous tumors in the first-ever lifetime feeding study?
The failure or success of this ballot initiative is wholly dependent on your support and funding! There are no major industry pockets funding this endeavor. In order to have a chance against the deep pockets of Big Biotech and transnational food corporations, it needs donations from average citizens.
So please, I strongly encourage you to make a donation to this cause. You can also contact EVERY person you know that lives in California and encourage them to view some of these videos and get educated on the issues so they can avoid succumbing to the propaganda, as Monsanto and company are paying tens of millions of dollars to deceive the voters in California.
We need EVERY vote we can to win in November.
The election is just over ONE week away.
It's important to realize that getting this law passed in California would have the same overall effect as a national law, as large companies are not likely going to label their products as genetically engineered when sold in California (the 8th largest economy in the world), but not when sold in other states. Doing so would be a costly PR disaster. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state you live in.
For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
- Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, through the Organic Consumers Fund.
- If you live in California and want to get involved, please contact CARightToKnow.org. They will go through all volunteer requests to put you into a position that is suitable for you, based on your stated interests and location.
- No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see CARightToKnow.org.
- Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to label genetically engineered foods.
Related Articles:
The Bitter Seeds of Monsanto's Legacy: Debt, Death, and Global Destruction The Lies You’re Told about Genetically Engineered Foods Monsanto to Face Biopiracy Charges in IndiaJul
10
Monsanto Promises Pain to EU, Assault Underway
Filed Under Main Content, Other News | Leave a Comment
By Dr. Mercola
The European Union (EU) has historically taken a strict, cautious stance regarding genetically modified (GM) crops, much to the chagrin of Monsanto and in stark contract to the United States.
For instance, while GM crops are banned in several European countries, and all genetically modified foods and ingredients have to be labeled, this is in stark contrast to the U.S., where Monsanto has effectively restricted any unfavorable legal actions because of the massive conflict they have with federal regulatory agencies.
Recently Connecticut and Vermont were ready to pass statewide GMO labeling requirements but backed out at the last minute when biotech giant Monsanto threatened to sue them if it was passed.
As a result, the U.S. has only recently begun passing legislation that protects the use of GM seeds and allows for unabated expansion, in addition to the fact that GM ingredients do not have to be labeled.
It's quite clear that the U.S. government, which is closely tied to Monsanto, has been aiding and abetting Monsanto's tireless and often ruthless quest to control the world's food crops.
U.S. diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks, showed the government even conspired to find ways to retaliate against Europe for refusing to use GM seeds, mainly by engaging in aggressive trade wars against reluctant nations.i As you might suspect, the EU has been under heavy pressure to add some slack to their GM regulations ? and it seems they are about to cave ?
EU Proposes to Drop Zero Tolerance Policy
The European Commission has issued a proposal to drop the policy of zero tolerance for unapproved and untested GMOs in food. The proposal suggests setting a threshold below which contaminated imports could enter Europe?s food chain.
This is similar to the EU?s move in 2011 ? they once had a zero tolerance policy regarding GM contamination from unapproved GMOs in animal feed, but last year decided to allow contamination with up to 0.1 percent of such materials. At the time, Greenpeace EU agriculture policy adviser Stefanie Hundsdorfer said:ii
?If the safety of a GM crop has not been tested in Europe, it should not be allowed. Setting a tolerance threshold, however low, is a sign that Europe is losing control over its own food production to please American exporters. The danger now is that EU countries come under pressure from the pro-GM lobby to also allow GM contamination in food products for direct human consumption.?
And, alas, that moment has come, just over one year later. Several GM opponents are urging the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Secretary of State Caroline Spelman to reject the proposals, noting:iii
?Pressure to drop the zero tolerance policy comes from the US government, the WTO and the biotech industry.?
EU Blocks France?s Ban on GM Corn
France recently asked the European Commission to suspend Monsanto's authorization to plant genetically modified MON 810 corn, citing "significant risks for the environment" shown in recent scientific studies (Germany has also banned the cultivation of MON 810 corn).
The EU stepped in and blocked the ban, which was an unsettling move to put it mildly, considering that in a leaked cable from 2007, Craig Stapleton, who was the U.S. ambassador to France at the time, commented on France's plan to ban the cultivation of GM corn, and stated that retaliation would occur:
"Europe is moving backwards not forwards on this issue with France playing a leading role, along with Austria, Italy and even the [European] Commission... Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voice.
... Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory."
UK Also Moving Full Steam Ahead with GMOs
Meanwhile, in the UK the Agriculture Biotechnology Council (ABC) published a new report "Going for Growth," which, according to GMWatch, ?calls for GM to be put at the heart of agricultural development in the UK.? But ABC is not a government authority; it?s a GM industry lobby group that represents the interests of Monsanto, Bayer, DuPont, Syngenta and other biotech giants.
However, the ABC is meeting with key UK government officials to present their case, and reportedly ?the industry?s push for GM is already being welcomed.?
Ironically, around this same time, a leading supporter of GM foods in the UK, George Freeman, has been touting a supposedly ?healthier? broccoli that fights heart disease as GM, and using it to show how ?GM food can improve health.? But it turns out the broccoli, sold under the brand Marks & Spencer is not GM at all, but is produced using natural plant breeding methods!
Freeman, who has received money from the biotech industry, is now in hot water with Marks & Spencer, who has banned GM foods for more than 10 years, and was one of the first UK retailers to put such a ban in place!
This type of thing has actually happened before. In 2008, retired chief government scientist in the UK, Professor Sir David King made claims that drought-resistant crops that have increased yields by 30% were being planted in South Africa ? even though the plants were only in a trial period, and effectiveness had yet to be proven. And as reported in the Guardian:iv
?King has been wrong before about new crops in Africa, claiming that a successful project near Lake Victoria was benefiting from GM technology, before having to admit the crops involved were not GM at all.?
GM Soy Linked to Illnesses in Farm Pigs
As you probably know the reason why there?s such heated controversy over the allowance of GM crops is due to their many health dangers, and the fact that their genes are capable of transferring to non-GM plants ?horizontally,? which means you cannot contain them. They absolutely WILL contaminate their conventional and organic counterparts, so one day soon there may be no such thing as ?GM-free,? because everything will be contaminated ? especially with the recent approval of GM alfalfa.
Jeffrey Smith, author of Seeds of Deception and Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, provides overwhelming evidence that genetically engineered foods are unsafe and should never have been introduced. Smith has documented at least 65 serious health risks from GM food products.
Among them:
- Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce
- Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells
- The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning
- Many US farmers report sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed GM corn
- Investigators in India have documented fertility problems, abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues, including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products
There are countless examples of GM crop failures, as well as GM-associated toxicity being observed in animals fed the plants. For instance, a farmer in Denmark became frustrated because his pigs were sick. The pigs had chronic diarrhea, birth defects, reproductive problems, reduced appetite, bloating, stomach ulcers, weaker and smaller piglets, and reduced litter sizes ? and they were being fed GM soybeans.
The farmer looked into the effects of GM foods and their associated herbicides, and stopped feeding his 450 sows GM soy, giving them non-GM fishmeal instead. It only took two days for him to see noticeable results -- for the better.v
GM Crops are Not All They?re Cracked up to Be
Virtually all of the claims of benefit of GM crops ? increased yields, more food production, controlled pests and weeds, reductions in chemical use in agriculture, drought-tolerant seeds ? have not materialized. The Global Citizens' Report on the State of GMOs states: vi
- Contrary to the claim of feeding the world, genetic engineering has not increased the long-term yield of a single crop.
- Herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) crops were supposed to control weeds and Bt crops were intended to control pests. Instead of controlling weeds and pests, GE crops have led to the emergence of super-resistant weeds and super-resistant pests ? Herbicide resistant crops such as Roundup Ready cotton can create the risk of herbicide resistant "superweeds" by transferring the herbicide resistance to weeds.
- Despite claims that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) will lower the levels of chemicals (pesticides and herbicides) used, this has not been the case. This is of great concern both because of the negative impacts of these chemicals on ecosystems and humans, and because there is the danger that increased chemical use will cause pests and weeds to develop resistance, requiring even more chemicals in order to manage them.
- Monsanto has been claiming that through genetic engineering it can breed crops for drought tolerance and other climate-resilient traits. This is a false promise.
Among the false claims made by Monsanto and the Biotechnology industry is that GE foods are safe. However, there are enough independent studies to show that GE foods can cause severe health damage.
Learn More about Genetically Engineered Foods
Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what genetically engineered foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about genetically engineered foods and helping your friends and family do the same.
To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
Your BEST strategy for now, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit genetically engineered ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the genetically engineered organisms (GMOs) you're exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you're not inadvertently consuming something laced with altered ingredients.
When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.
To learn more about genetically engineered foods, I highly recommend the following films and lectures:
Important Action Item: Support California's Ballot Initiative to Label GMO's!
In 2007, then-Presidential candidate Obama promised to "immediately" require GM labeling if elected. We?re still waiting...
Fortunately, 24 U.S. states have (as part of their state governance) something called the Initiative Process, where residents can bring to ballot any law they want enacted, as long as it has sufficient support. California has organized just such a ballot initiative to get mandatory labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. Michigan and Washington are also starting similar campaignsvii. Since California is the 8th largest economy in the world, a win for the California Initiative would be a huge step forward, and would likely affect ingredients and labeling nation-wide.
A coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals has already submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Actviii to the State Attorney General. They needed 800,000 signatures to get the Act on this year's ballot, and they succeeded! The next step is the campaigning. Remember, if California can get the law passed in November, it?s going to have the same impact as national law, because large companies are not likely going to label their products as genetically engineered when sold in California, but not when sold in other states. Doing so would be a PR disaster. So it?s going to have an impact on national labeling, even if other states do not create initiatives of their own.
Thousands of volunteers have already been enlisted, but more are needed. It?s going to be an enormous battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda.
Needless to say, the campaign needs funds. So if you have the ability, I strongly encourage you to make a donation. But they also need more volunteers, because that?s how we?re going to win this battle. The biotech industry may outdo us in funding ability, but we as consumers still outnumber them. Pamm Larry, the California grandmother who created the initiative, is correct when she says we need to reach every single California community?large and small.
I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can. Be assured that what happens in California will affect the remainder of the U.S. states, so please support this important state initiative, even if you do not live there!
- If you live in California and want to get involved, please contact LabelGMOs.org. They will go through all volunteer requests to put you into a position that is suitable for you, based on your stated interests and location
- No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see LabelGMOs.org?s ?Spread the Word!? page
- Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, either through the LabelGMOs.org, or the Organic Consumers Fund
- Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to label genetically engineered foods.
- Distribute WIDELY the Non-GMO Shopping Guide to help you identify and avoid foods with GMOs. Look for products (including organic products) that feature the Non-GMO Project Verified Seal to be sure that at-risk ingredients have been tested for GMO content. You can also download the free iPhone application that is available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
- For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
- Look for in-depth coverage of the issue at the Institute for Responsible Technology, subscribe to Spilling the Beans, and check out their Facebook or Twitter.
References:
Related Articles:
Opting for This "Cheaper Food" Could Make You Age Faster Take Heed - Nearly Every Processed Food You Eat is Contaminated with this Material The Hidden Email the White House Hopes to Keep Under WrapsJul
7
Monsanto May Lose Billions in Brazil Over ?Monsanto Tax?
Filed Under Main Content, Other News | Leave a Comment
By Dr. Mercola
Brazil, the second-largest producer of genetically modified (GM) crops (after the U.S.), is the latest country to take a stand against biotech giant Monsanto, which could end up handing over at least $2 billion as a result.
A war has been waging against Monsanto in Brazil for nearly a decade, virtually ever since the country legalized farming of GM crops in 2005.
Since then, Monsanto has been charging Brazilian farmers double ? once for their seeds, and again when they sell their crops.
Farmers Have Had Enough With Monsanto?s Royalty Taxes and Penalties
In case you?re wondering how Monsanto has risen to the ranks of a superpower, a major reason is their patent on GM seeds, like the GM soya seeds in Brazil, which account for nearly 85 percent of the country?s total soybean crop. Each GM seed is patented and sold under exclusive rights.
Therefore, farmers must purchase the GM seeds every year, because saving seeds (which has long been the traditional way) is considered to be patent infringement. Anyone who does save GM seeds must pay a license fee to actually re-sow them.
But that?s not all.
In Brazil, Monsanto has charged farmers a 2 percent royalty fee on all of their Roundup Ready sales since 2005! And, they test all of the soy seeds marketed as ?non-GM? to be sure they don?t contain any Monsanto seeds. If they are found to contain the patented seeds, the farmer is penalized close to 3 percent of his sales!
The issue with the latter penalty is that GM soy is very hard to contain, and often contaminates nearby fields. So farmers are forced to pay a penalty for having their fields contaminated with GM crops, through no fault of their own ? and likely against their wishes entirely!
For years now, farmers have been taking Monsanto to court over their excessive fees and taxes, and in 2009, a group of farmers sued the company, claiming the Monsanto tax was illegal because it was impossible to keep the GM seeds away from the non-GM varieties.
A judge ruled that the tax was illegal, especially since the patents on Roundup Ready seeds in Brazil already expired. Monsanto was ordered to stop collecting all royalties ? and to return all the royalties collected since 2004 ? an amount that could add up to a minimum of $2 billion!
Monsanto appealed, but in June 2012 the Supreme Court dismissed it, so it looks like Monsanto is going to be getting their just deserts.
France, India Also Find Monsanto Guilty
Earlier this year, a French court found Monsanto guilty of chemical poisoning in a case involving a French farmer, who suffered neurological problems after exposure to Monsanto?s Lasso weed killer. A few years before that, a French court again found Monsanto guilty, this time of falsely advertising its Roundup herbicide as "biodegradable," "environmentally friendly" and claiming it "left the soil clean."
France has also recently asked the European Commission to suspend Monsanto's authorization to plant genetically modified MON 810 corn, citing "significant risks for the environment" shown in recent scientific studies (Germany has also banned the cultivation of MON 810 corn).
Meanwhile, India's National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), a government agency, is suing Monsanto and their collaborators, the Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company, for stealing local varieties of eggplant to develop a genetically modified version.
India requires that any entity attempting to use a native plant for commercial or research purposes must first get approval; Monsanto, however, neglected to do this, opting instead to essentially steal the native plants in order to modify them for their own commercial gain
The case marks the first time a government has accused Monsanto of biopiracy, and the results could set an important precedent for the future of the food supply.
Monsanto Involved in Lawsuits Over Mass Contamination, Illnesses
Monsanto is also facing a class-action lawsuit involving tens of thousands of residents from Nitro, West Virginia, where a Monsanto chemical plant produced the herbicide 2,4,5-T, a component of Agent Orange; the suit alleges the company spread toxic substances, primarily carcinogenic dioxins, all over the city.
And in Anniston, Alabama, a Monsanto plant produced toxic chemicals called PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls, from 1929 until 1971, and they heavily contaminated soil and waterways in the area. Even though PCBs were banned in the United States in the late 1970s, they persist in the environment for decades and possibly even for centuries. In other words, almost all of the toxic PCBs that Monsanto released are still there.
Class-action lawsuits ? to the tune of $600 million ? were settled and paid, and an additional $100 million went toward cleanup, but still area residents are struggling with health issues as a result. Recently, research revealed that Anniston residents, who are one of the most highly exposed populations to PCBs in the world, have a significantly higher rate of diabetes, for instance.i
It?s No Secret: Monsanto?s Behavior is Unconscionable
The cat is out of the bag, so to speak, and it is now becoming common knowledge why Monsanto is top on list of immoral and destructive corporations. City Watch recently put together a tidy list of some of the ?highlights? of Monsanto?s controversial past:ii
- ?Contributed to the research on uranium, for the Manhattan Project, during WWII.
- Operated a nuclear facility for the U.S. government until the late 1980s.
- Top manufacturer of synthetic fibers, plastics and polystyrene (EPA?s 5th ranked chemical production that generates the most hazardous waste).
- A top 10 US chemical company.
- Agriculture pesticides producer.
- Herbicide producer - herbicides 2,4,5-T, Agent Orange, Lasso, and DDT.
- Agent Orange (used in Vietnam), had the highest levels of dioxin and contaminated more than 3 million civilians and servicemen of which only partial compensation awarded.
- Nearly 500,000 Vietnamese children were born deformed and never compensated.
- Lasso was banned in USA, so weed killer ?Roundup? is launched in 1976.
- A major producer of both dioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which generated many law suits and environmental cleanups
- $180 million settlement for Vietnam War veterans exposed to Agent Orange
- Fined $1.2 million for concealing the discharge of contaminated waste water
- Ordered to pay $41.1 million due to hazardous waste dumping
- Paid $600 million in settlement claims to more than 20,000 Anniston residents [for PCB contamination].
- Produced GM cattle drug, bovine growth hormone (called rBGH or rBST)
- Acquiring seed companies from the 1990?s and forward.
- Monsanto Filed 144 lawsuits against struggling farmers and settled out of court with 700 farmers, for reportedly violating seed patents. A full time staff of 75 Monsanto employees investigates patent infringement. They are dedicated solely to finding farms that have been contaminated by their unwanted seed. As of 2007, Monsanto was awarded in 57 recorded judgments against farmers a total of $21,583,431.99.?
Of course, Monsanto?s foray into genetic engineering is perhaps their biggest insult of all, threatening the very future of the food supply. For a concise explanation of many of the problems surrounding GM crops, watch the video below.
Monsanto Has a Firm Grip on the U.S. Government
Once you realize just how many of Monsanto's employees have shifted into positions of power within the federal government, it suddenly becomes a lot easier to see how this biotech giant managed to rake in a net income of $126 million for the first quarter of fiscal year 2012,iii despite being the mastermind behind some of the most dangerous products known to man.
Even if you have friends in high places, it never hurts to spend millions of dollars lobbying the U.S. government just to make sure legislation goes in your favor, and Monsanto does just that.
In the first quarter of 2011, for instance, Monsanto spent $1.4 million on lobbying the federal government -- a drop from a year earlier, when they spent $2.5 million during the same quarter. If we all had several million to drop solely on lobbying efforts, suffice it to say the world would be a very different place. Unfortunately, it's primarily multinational corporations like Monsanto that have this type of clout, and they use it to increase their power, wealth and control -- not only in the United States, but throughout the entire world.
FDA Eliminates 1 Million Signatures for GMO Labeling on ?Technical? Reasons
Mandatory labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the U.S., but simple petitions will likely fail. We strongly support state initiatives, such as California?s ballot initiative to get mandatory labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. A recent story highlights why state initiatives in particular are so vitally important.
It?s a brazen example of how the FDA completely ignores the people it?s supposed to listen to and protect ... The agency actually decided to eliminate and disregard over a million U.S. citizens? signatures and comments collected by the Just Label It campaigniv. Organizers of the campaign said they gathered more than 1 million signatures of people who want to know what?s in the foods they?re eating. But the whole effort ended up being for naught as the FDA declared that signatures on form letters don?t count.
According to the Chicago Tribunev:
?The agency says that if 35,000 people, for instance, sign their name to the same form letter it only counts as one person or ?comment.? And if tens of thousands sign a petition, they are only counted as one ?comment,? too.?
Therefore, under the FDA counting method, the 1 million signatures were whittled down to a measly 394 people asking for labeling ... The FDA says it?s still considering the issue, and that they would let the Just Label It group know if, and when, they make a decision on whether they would mandate labeling of genetically engineered foods.
Proof Positive that GMO Labeling WILL Change the Food Industry
Many don?t fully appreciate the strategy of seeking to have genetically engineered foods labeled in California. The belief is that large food companies would refuse to have dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be very expensive, not to mention a logistical nightmare. To avoid the dual labeling, many would likely opt to not use genetically engineered ingredients in their product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones.
This is why we are so committed to this initiative, as victory here will likely eliminate most genetically engineered foods from the US.
Powerful confirmation of this belief occurred in early 2012 when both Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo Inc. chose to alter one of their soda ingredients as a result of California?s labeling requirements for carcinogensvi:
?Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas as a result of a California law that mandates drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label. The companies said the changes will be expanded nationally to streamline their manufacturing processes. They've already been made for drinks sold in California.?
This is a PERFECT example of the national impact a California labeling mandate can, and no doubt WILL, have. While California is the only state requiring the label to state that the product contains the offending ingredient, these companies are switching their formula for the entire US market, rather than have two different labels. According to USA Today:
?A representative for Coca-Cola, Diana Garza Ciarlante, said the company directed its caramel suppliers to modify their manufacturing processes to reduce the levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, which can be formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. "While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning," Garza-Giarlante said in an email.?
Learn More about Genetically Engineered Foods
Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what genetically engineered foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about genetically engineered foods and helping your friends and family do the same.
To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
Your BEST strategy for now, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit genetically engineered ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the genetically engineered organisms (GMOs) you're exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you're not inadvertently consuming something laced with altered ingredients.
When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.
To learn more about genetically engineered foods, I highly recommend the following films and lectures:
Important Action Item: Support California's Ballot Initiative to Label GMO's!
In 2007, then-Presidential candidate Obama promised to "immediately" require GM labeling if elected. We?re still waiting...
Fortunately, 24 U.S. states have (as part of their state governance) something called the Initiative Process, where residents can bring to ballot any law they want enacted, as long as it has sufficient support. California has organized just such a ballot initiative to get mandatory labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. Michigan and Washington are also starting similar campaignsvii. Since California is the 8th largest economy in the world, a win for the California Initiative would be a huge step forward, and would likely affect ingredients and labeling nation-wide.
A coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals has already submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Actviii to the State Attorney General. They needed 800,000 signatures to get the Act on this year's ballot, and they succeeded! The next step is the campaigning. Remember, if California can get the law passed in November, it?s going to have the same impact as national law, because large companies are not likely going to label their products as genetically engineered when sold in California, but not when sold in other states. Doing so would be a PR disaster. So it?s going to have an impact on national labeling, even if other states do not create initiatives of their own.
Thousands of volunteers have already been enlisted, but more are needed. It?s going to be an enormous battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda.
Needless to say, the campaign needs funds. So if you have the ability, I strongly encourage you to make a donation. But they also need more volunteers, because that?s how we?re going to win this battle. The biotech industry may outdo us in funding ability, but we as consumers still outnumber them. Pamm Larry, the California grandmother who created the initiative, is correct when she says we need to reach every single California community?large and small.
I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can. Be assured that what happens in California will affect the remainder of the U.S. states, so please support this important state initiative, even if you do not live there!
- If you live in California and want to get involved, please contact LabelGMOs.org. They will go through all volunteer requests to put you into a position that is suitable for you, based on your stated interests and location
- No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see LabelGMOs.org?s ?Spread the Word!? page
- Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, either through the LabelGMOs.org, or the Organic Consumers Fund
- Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to label genetically engineered foods.
- Distribute WIDELY the Non-GMO Shopping Guide to help you identify and avoid foods with GMOs. Look for products (including organic products) that feature the Non-GMO Project Verified Seal to be sure that at-risk ingredients have been tested for GMO content. You can also download the free iPhone application that is available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
- For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
- Look for in-depth coverage of the issue at the Institute for Responsible Technology, subscribe to Spilling the Beans, and check out their Facebook or Twitter.
References:
Related Articles:
Monsanto Guilty of Chemical Poisoning in France Monsanto to Face Biopiracy Charges in India Opting for This "Cheaper Food" Could Make You Age Faster