Give consumers a choice to opt out of GMO foods

More than 30 new crops are being developed, including apples and salmon

There is an ongoing debate about the use of genetically engineered ingredients in foods. Are there negative health risks or environmental impacts? Should our kids be eating them? While the debate ensues, shouldn’t we have a clear choice whether or not we want to purchase these products? Today we do not.

Genetically modified organisms can be found throughout our grocery stores and homes. At least 75 percent of processed foods contain GMOs, including nearly every major baby formula brand. As do many other common food items, such as salad dressing, breakfast cereals, and cooking oil. Indeed, while there are currently only nine commercial GMO crops — including corn, soy, canola, cottonseed, and sugar beets — more than 30 new engineered crops are currently being developed, such as apples, coffee, and salmon. Chances are, whether we know it or not, we could soon see them on store selves and our dinner tables.


Yet, despite the rapid growth in the use of GMOs in our food supply, there remains a lack of transparency for consumers. Unless a shopper researches individual brands before going to the grocery store, they currently can’t know by looking at the packaging if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. That’s because companies are not required to label GMO foods as such.

Opponents of GMO labeling include the chemical manufacturers and junk foods companies, which have spent millions to keep us in the dark about what’s in the foods we eat. They suggest that there is no evidence of harm from GMO foods. But, without labeling and tracking, scientists are unable to look for possible links between GMO food intake and many of the unexplained health problems facing Americans today. Nearly 300 scientists and doctors, including the developer of the first commercialized GMO crop, signed on to a recent statement citing serious safety concerns about GMOs. Independent studies have linked the consumption of GMO foods to digestive disorders, infertility, allergies, and even cancer. These studies warrant further research.

Ultimately, however, whether it’s for environmental, health, religious, or ethical concerns, the free market is supposed to give consumers the products they want. Without GMO labeling, the food economy is not able to do that.

In recent months, the effort to label GMO foods has received unprecedented attention across the United States. In the past year Connecticut and Maine both passed legislation requiring the labeling of GMO ingredients, both contingent upon other states passing similar legislation. Earlier this month, Vermont passed the nation’s first-ever no-strings-attached GMO labeling bill. Now 26 other states, including Massachusetts, are considering labeling legislation.

Under these laws, food producers — not retailers — are responsible for labeling foods that contain GMO ingredients. Dozens of countries have managed to achieve this standard without increasing food costs. In fact, the United States and Canada are the only two industrialized countries whose citizens cannot easily determine if their food is genetically engineered.


Here in Massachusetts, with the help of legislative champions, representatives Ellen Story of Amherst and Todd Smola of Palmer, the GMO labeling bill is quickly gaining support and momentum at the state house. According to a poll by the New York Times, 93 percent of Americans favor GMO labeling. More than 20,000 Massachusetts residents have signed a petition in support of the legislation, as have some 150 Massachusetts farms and more than 200 consumer, health, and community organizations.

At the end of the day, while ambiguity clouds the debate around GMO foods, we should give consumers the choice to opt out of this experiment. And all that it takes is a simple label on the side of a package.

LINK

Rosaryville and The Chimes- A Great Day

We had a very pleasant day on Wednesday.  We took the Corvette out and cruised country roads.

Our first stop was Rosaryville in Pontchatoula, LA.  A gorgeous property, loaded with HUGE pines and Live Oaks.

We strolled around the 2 cemeteries.  One was for nuns of the Dominican Order, and the other, for Dominican Friars.

Also stopped at the stations of the cross.  Very serene!

Hopped back in the car and took back roads to Covington and stopped at The Chimes for a late lunch.  LOVE that place!

Had to put the top up and the air conditioning on as it hit 92 degrees!

ROSARYVILLE

THE CHIMES

MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO TO SHOUT “HELL NO TO GMOS” FOR SECOND YEAR

 In 2013, Tami Monroe Canal founded March Against Monsanto because she believed it would protect her daughters’ health. Monsanto is an agricultural company that produces seed brands and herbicides (most famously, Roundup), some of which have been scientifically proven to cause health risks, such as birth defects, cancer, organ damage and auto-immune conditions. Monsanto is also one of the world’s leading producers of genetically modified organisms (better known as GMOs).

GMOs have been partially banned in several countries and foods containing GMO ingredients are currently labeled in 64 countries. Monsanto has spent millions in lobbying efforts opposing such laws in the United States. (Anti-labeling groups spent $22 million in an attempt to beat down labeling legislation in the state of Washington alone). The company has failed to make nice with independent farmers; early this year it won a lawsuit that allows the agri-giant to sue farmers whose fields are found to contain patent-protected Monsanto biotechnology, even if the farmers did not knowingly use such matter.

Despite the insistence from Monsanto that their company helps, not hurts, farmers, and the lack of credible scientific evidence proving that GMOs harm health and environment, Canal’s anti-Monsanto message is increasingly popular, evidenced by the 54 GMO labeling bills currently being discussed in 26 states, including Vermont’s signing such a bill into state law in early May.

March Against Monsanto (MAM) will gather on May 24 across “six continents, in 52 countries, with events in over 400 cities.” Participants demand Monsanto halt GMO use and the production of pesticides they believe are hazardous to human health and the environment, and support GMO labeling legislation as well. Locally, the march is organized by Cynthia Rose Kurkowski.

From the Farmers’ Perspective

OSGATA (Organic Seed Growers Association) v. Monsanto was filed by farmers and farm organizations in March 2011 to “invalidate Monsanto’s patents and protect organic and non-GMO family farmers from unwanted genetic contamination of their crops.” Monsanto sees it differently though, according to its website: “We understand the importance of planting and harvesting and always seek to minimize interfering with farmers’ normal activities.” However, unwanted seeds can blow into farmers’ crops, cross-pollinating with traditional crops, which ruins organic farms.

Since the GMO seeds are patented, this gives Monsanto the power to enforce their legal patents. Supporters of OSGATA argue that Monsanto harms independent farmers’ livelihoods worldwide with ruthless patent infringement legislation and its giant status as a near-monopoly means some crops, like corn and soybeans, are virtually impossible to guarantee as organic and GMO-free.

Agent Orange

Monsanto was the largest producer of agent orange during the Vietnam War and “half of agent orange’s chemical compound (2,4-D) and pesticides like Roundup are chemicals being sprayed on GMO crops,” allege The Children of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance and March Against Monsanto. The groups insinuate that this could negatively impact health, with CVVHA pointing to its members’ own myriad defects and chronic diseases; however, the EPA has said 2,4-D and Roundup are safe for farming.

Halting Influence on Government

Many MAM marchers are also concerned about Monsanto’s influence in government circles. There’s the ability to invest millions in lobbying efforts (as in Washington State) for one, but there’s also a more insidious dynamic at play, according to anti-GMO activists. In 1998, writing for progressive British journal The Ecologist, Jennifer Ferrera noted that several former Monsanto employees held key positions in the U.S.’ Food and Drug Administration. To the activists this creates a troubling conflict of interest in Monsanto and other biotech giants’ favor. Monsanto brushes this off as a logical progression for industry specialists.

MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO ON MAY 24th in a city near you!

LINK

Agent Orange: Have you or someone you know been affected by it?

FILE - This September 1965 file photo provided by the U.S. Air Force, shows four "Ranch Hand" C-123 aircraft spraying liquid defoliant on a suspected Viet Cong position in South Vietnam. During the Vietnam War, Air Force C-123 planes sprayed millions of gallons of herbicides over the jungles of Southeast Asia to destroy enemy crops and tree cover. The military stopped the spraying by early 1971, but some Air Force Reserve units continued to fly the former spray planes until the early 1980s. Some veterans who flew in those planes after the war have been getting sick, and like many Vietnam veterans, they€'™re blaming the herbicides they say still coated the planes for decades. Their crusade has been led by a former Oregon resident and Air Force veteran. (AP Photo/U.S. Air Force, file) (Anonymous)

Between 1962 and 1975, the U.S. deployed millions of tons of Agent Orange in Vietnam.

The powerful herbicide was used to defoliate forests, a hiding place for the Viet Cong, as well as a food source.

In the aftermath of the war, millions of veterans faced profound and debilitating medical complications as a result of exposure with the toxic substance. And even though in 1991 the government established broad and full compensation for veterans who had "boots on the ground," millions of others have continued to struggle to secure compensation for their medical needs as a result of Agent Orange.

PennLive is looking for veterans who may have been exposed to Agent Orange, whether or not they deal with health complications as a result. We are also looking for relatives of men and women who may were exposed to the defoliant.

If your father or grandfather - or even uncle or cousin or good friend - was a veteran who was exposed to the toxin, we would love to hear your story.

Share your story by filling out the form below, emailing us at submissions@pennlive.com or writing in the comments section below.

We will keep your story confidential unless you tell us you want to share it with others.

Are you dealing with the effects of Agent Orange?

JUMP TO PENN LIVE FORM HERE

Russia puts GMO genie back in the bottle (BRAVO, Mr. Putin!!!!!)

William Engdahl is an award-winning geopolitical analyst and strategic risk consultant whose internationally best-selling books have been translated into thirteen foreign languages.

Russia has some of the most precious uncontaminated top soil on the planet and if it is rigorously controlled to stay GMO-free and free from chemicals its productivity would increase as Europe declines, geopolitical analyst William Engdahl told RT.

Russian PMs have pondered a draft bill outlawing GMOs. A draft bill submitted to the Russian parliament likens GMO production and distribution to terrorism. After entering the World Trade Organization, Russia was expected to allow GM food production and distribution within its market. However, in March Russia’s President Putin said the country would stay GM-free without violating its obligations to the WTO.

RT: What do you think about this latest bill in Russia's parliament, which equates GM producers who flout the rules with terrorists. Is that a bit over the top?

William Engdahl: The language on Russian media blogs is [that] punishment for knowingly introducing GMO crops into Russia illegally should have a punishment comparable to that given to terrorists for knowingly hurting people. The direction of this is anything that stops, and puts the genie back in the bottle called genetic manipulation of plants and organisms is to the good for the future of the mankind. The comment about 20 percent of harvest increase in some GMOs is absolute rubbish. There is no long-term harvest gain that has been proven for GMO crops anywhere in the world because they are not modified to get harvest increases. So this is just soap bubbles that Monsanto, Syngenta and GMO giants are putting out to loll the public into thinking it is something good.

RT: Will this measure, if adopted, reduce the number of GM products on the market?

WE: I hope it does. I haven’t got access to the paragraphs of legislation but I think the direction that Prime Minister Medvedev indicated two-three months ago in terms of making this U-turn against GMO that seemed to have a green light after WTO. A year ago it was looking like GMO was a common thing in Russia which would be a catastrophe. I think the point is Russia has some of the most precious non-destroyed top soil on this planet and the richness of this top soil, if it is rigorously controlled to be GMO-free, to be free from chemicals, from Roundup or Atrazyne which is Syngenta's favorite poison, and is marketed on the world markets as certified organic. Russia has a huge export market in Germany, in Western Europe, the European Union and elsewhere because there is a tremendous lack of it. So anything that Russia does to block GMO, keep in mind, the EU has not certified for commercial planting any GMO for years. There is such a great popular opposition in the EU that Monsanto, despite all the proclivities of the corrupt European Commission in Brussels to go with it, or even some people in the German government. The population is absolutely adamant here, they do not want this in their food.

RT: How can consumers be better protected from inadvertently buying genetically modified food?

WE: They can quite easily. First of all, they can do what the State of California tried, and Monsanto spent millions of dollars to block it and will try again. The State of Washington tried it and the same thing with Monsanto spending millions of dollars to create false lobbying campaigns [ensued]. The State of Vermont tried and succeeded in getting labeling on products that contain above 0.9 percent of GMO, which is similar to the EU. That is labeled on the shelves, when you buy this box of Kellogg’s Cornflakes you make sure to look and see if this is not GMO corn in my Cornflakes that my child is going to eat or is it this GMO garbage that Kellogg’s would so lovingly like to get rid of. That is one step. The other thing is for people to become informed about what we eat. Support local farmers, it is not against technology. I have seen it directly in Germany and elsewhere in Europe that properly done organic farming creates greater harvest yields than industrialized agriculture. The productivity is better, the quality is finer. The animals that are range fed, grass fed cows, chickens, they are real cows and chickens, they are not these synthetic pseudo-meat that we buy on the supermarket shelves in the big chains in Europe and in the US. So that is something that Russia has a great positive contribution to make.

LINK