Tag Archives: genetic engineering

Government Accountability, Health

Lawmakers Attempt to Add ‘Monsanto Rider’ to Government Budget Bill

Leave a comment

Critics of a food labeling bill recently passed by the House fear that it could be added as a last-minute provision to the looming federal budget bill.

Known as the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act to supporters and the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act by critics, the law would effectively nullify Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) labeling measures like the bill recently passed in Vermont. The Vermont law is scheduled to go into effect July 2016. Maine and Connecticut have also passed laws requiring labeling, but those measures will not go into effect until bordering states also pass legislation.

Genetically modified or engineered seeds are engineered to have certain traits, such as resistance to herbicides. The majority of the United States’ corn and soybean crops are now GE, including a large portion which goes to animal feed.

The labeling act would create a federal voluntary standard for GMO labeling and block mandatory labeling efforts by states. The AP reports that “the food industry wants the labeling to be voluntary, and it hopes to get a provision in a massive spending bill that Republicans and Democrats want to wrap up this week.”

“It is imperative that Congress take action now to prevent a costly and confusing patchwork of state labeling laws from taking effect next year and spreading across the country,” a coalition of groups representing growers and the food industry said in a letter to House and Senate leaders.

Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, told the AP, “We have a lot of folks on our side of the aisle that are very opposed.” Sen John Hoeven of (R-ND) said he is “trying to come up with a compromise that brings both sides together, and it doesn’t seem like we’ll have that by year-end.”

Reuters reports that a vote on the budget will happen on Friday before the midnight deadline for funding the federal government. According to Reuters, “lawmakers have been unable to reach agreement on a number of policy “riders” some lawmakers would like to add to the bill.” These “riders” include the DARK Act provision.

In response to the criticism of the DARK Act, the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture Nutrition & Forestry recently held a hearing titled Agriculture Biotechnology: A Look at Federal Regulation and Stakeholder Perspectives.

The committee heard testimonies from several speakers representing farmers, the GMO lobby, and consumer groups. Officials from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency also testified. The hearing was criticized for being one-sided and favoring corporations who will directly benefit from the passage of the bill.

As Reuters reported, “the Consumers Union and five other consumer organizations sent a letter to the Senate committee complaining that the lineup of speakers was not balanced and did not include a consumer representative.” Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives for Consumers Union said, “Time and again, a large majority of consumers have expressed strong support for GMO labeling.”

Ronnie Cummins, international director for the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) and a speaker at the hearing, released a scathing review of the events. “Today’s hearing on H.R. 1599 made a total mockery of democracy. Of the eight witnesses allowed to testify, only one could be remotely considered as someone who represents the interests of consumers and public health,” Cummins said. “The other seven have ties to the biotech and corporate food industries, and were there to represent the interests of corporations, not people.”

Please stay tuned to TruthInMedia.com for development on this story and the “government shutdown.”

Government Accountability, Health, Politics

FDA Approves Genetically Engineered Salmon as ‘Safe to Eat’

Leave a comment

Following several years of controversy surrounding the safety of genetically engineered (GE) salmon, the FDA has announced that AquAdvantage salmon is as safe and nutritious to eat as the non-genetically engineered variety.

The FDA stated, “The FDA scientists rigorously evaluated extensive data submitted by the manufacturer, AquaBounty Technologies, and other peer-reviewed data, to assess whether AquAdvantage salmon met the criteria for approval established by law.”

The FDA says the data shows “that the inserted genes remained stable over several generations of fish, that food from the GE salmon is safe to eat by humans and animals, that the genetic engineering is safe for the fish, and the salmon meets the sponsor’s claim about faster growth.”

Assessments of the environmental impact of the GE salmon found that “the approval would not have a significant impact on the environment of the United States.” Critics have long feared that GE salmon might escape from AquaBounty facilities and disrupt salmon in the wild. However, the FDA writes that “the multiple containment measures the company will use in the land-based facilities in Panama and Canada make it extremely unlikely that the fish could escape and establish themselves in the wild.”

Several consumer advocacy and anti-genetic engineering groups condemned the decision. The group Food and Water Watch has launched a petition asking President Obama to overturn the FDA’s approval.

A statement from the Consumers Union reads, “Unfortunately, the evidence of FDA’s evaluation of the AquAdvantage salmon suggests that FDA has set the bar very low.” The group accused the FDA of “sloppy science, small sample sizes, and questionable practices.” The organization also challenged the FDA’s analysis of growth hormone levels in the flesh, accusing the agency of making a decision “despite having no data at all on growth hormone levels due to use of insensitive test methodology.”

The FDA released two guidance documents discussing their position on labeling and outlining what types of voluntary labeling would be accepted for non-GE salmon. The agency said food manufacturers may use phrases like “Not genetically engineered,” “Not genetically modified through the use of modern biotechnology,” and “We do not use Atlantic salmon produced using modern biotechnology.”

Despite the FDA’s decision, AquaBounty has faced criticism and lawsuits for their products. On Tuesday the Guardian reported that several environmental groups are suing the Canadian government in an attempt to end the production of GE salmon eggs. The lawsuit claims AquaBounty is operating a “huge live experiment” with the genes of the wild Atlantic salmon. The Canadian government previously gave AquaBounty permission to create GE salmon eggs in Canada and ship them to Panama to be grown before selling them on the market in the U.S. and Canada.

In April 2013 Food and Water Watch reported:

“When FDA first announced its intent to approve AquaBounty’s application in the fall of 2010, the public sent more than 400,000 comments in opposition. Now that opposition has grown to nearly 1.5 million people.”

The following year Kroger and Safeway, the nation’s two largest grocery chains, announced they would not sell the genetically engineered salmon. The two chains joined Target, Whole Foods, and Trader Joe’s in their opposition to the GE salmon. So although the FDA has approved the fish for human consumption, it may be unlikely that Americans will encounter the product at their local grocer.

What are your thoughts? Will you eat the GE salmon?

Activism, Government Accountability, Government Corruption

Activists Prepare for 4th Global March Against Monsanto

Video 3 Comments

For the fourth time since 2013, the March Against Monsanto will take place in cities around the world. On May 23, 2015, concerned activists, urban farmers, and environmental activists will hit the streets of 428 cities spread across 38 countries.

The MAM movement was started in late 2012 in an effort to raise awareness to the potential dangers surrounding Monsanto’s genetically modified seeds, as well as the carcinogens present in the company’s top herbicide, Round-Up.

Within the decentralized protests there are a range of solutions offered. Some activists are taking part in campaigns calling for labeling of all food products that have been genetically engineered. Others are marching in support of community gardens and urban farms as a strategy to defeat Monsanto. There are even marchers that are in support of the technology but weary of the collusion between biotech companies and the government.

In September 2013 Ben Swann reported on Monsanto and Crony Capitalism:

Also, Truth In Media recently reported on a group of scientists blowing the whistle on corruption at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

“On May 5, 25 organizations representing farm workers, environment, and food safety organizations sent a letter to officials with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Environmental Protection Agency calling for an investigation into claims that scientists are facing pressure and retaliation for research that presents the controversial neonicotinoid insecticide in a negative light.

The groups say they are concerned with a report from Reuters detailing threats to scientists who speak out about the dangers of the pesticide. These threats included suspension without pay, and threats of damage to careers. The scientists filed a petition in March asking for more protection:

Jeff Ruch, executive director with the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, told Common Dreams that the petition was “based on the experiences of 10 USDA scientists” who allegedly faced backlash for research on neonicotinoid insecticides and glyphosate, an ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide, as well as other topics, including genetically modified crops.”

The letter highlights two issues with Monsanto. First, the increase in Genetically Engineered crops from Monsanto and other biotech companies has led to an increase in the use of pesticides and herbicides. Second, one of these herbicides is Monsanto’s Round-Up, which contains glyphosate.

Earlier this year the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a report in The Lancet Oncology detailing evaluations of organophosphate pesticides and herbicides. The report concluded that there was “limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.” The evidence for this conclusion was pulled from studies of exposure to the chemical in the US, Canada and Sweden published since 2001.

The researchers found “convincing evidence that glyphosate can also cause cancer in laboratory animals.” The report points out that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) had originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans in 1985. The IARC Working Group evaluated the original EPA findings and more recent reports before concluding “there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.” Despite the WHO’s findings, the EPA approved Monsanto’s use of glyphosate as recently as 2013.

Monsanto Co. said the study was based on “junk science” and at odds with the global consensus on glyphosate. The scientists are standing by the work. Aaron Blair, a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute and lead author of the study, told Reuters, “There was sufficient evidence in animals, limited evidence in humans and strong supporting evidence showing DNA mutations and damaged chromosomes.”

In 2014 Anti-Media reported on a study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health which claims to have found a link between glyphosate and the fatal Chronic Kidney Disease of Unknown origin (CKDu), which largely affects rice farmers in Sri Lanka and other nations. In response Sri Lanka has banned glyphosate and Brazil is considering doing the same.

Sri Lanka’s Minister of Special Projects S.M. Chandrasena stated that President Mahinda Rajapaksa issued a directive to ban glyphosate sales in the country. “An investigation carried out by medical specialists and scientists have revealed that kidney disease was mainly caused by glyphosate. President Mahinda Rajapaksa has ordered the immediate removal of glyphosate from the local market soon after he was told of the contents of the report.”

There is a growing resistance to Monsanto. Following the revelations from the WHO, a union of 30,000 doctors and health professionals announced efforts to eliminate the use of glyphosate-based herbicides.

“There’s no question that March Against Monsanto is the most powerful grassroots initiative we have in the fight to reclaim our food supply from the GMO seed juggernaut known as the Monsanto Company,” said Anthony Gucciardi, March Against Monsanto speaker and founder of the natural health website NaturalSociety.com.

“With the new admission by the World Health Organization that Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup is causing cancer worldwide, now is the most important time to join the movement and take a stand.”

What are your thoughts on Genetically Engineered foods? What do you think about Monsanto? Leave your thoughts below.

March Against Monsanto protests will begin May 23rd with extensive physical protests and related online coverage throughout the day on news media platforms as well as www.March-Against-Monsanto.com.