Loc: Waterloo, NY
Federal Court Overturns Epa Approval Of Bee-Killing Pesticide
Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected U.S. EPA’s approval of the neonicotinoid insecticide “sulfoxaflor.” The Court concluded that EPA violated federal law when it approved sulfoxaflor without reliable studies regarding the impact that the insecticide would have on honeybee colonies.
Jim Gerritsen: "EXCELLENT NY TIMES ARTICLE USES THE STORY OF WHEAT AND THE EXTRAORDINARY DR. STEVEN JONES TO EXAMINE INDUSTRIAL AG'S HIJACKING OF OUR AGRICULTURAL HERITAGE. Ten years ago when Jim was President of Washington-based Organic Seed Alliance, Dr Steve Jones served with him on the Board. At that time, Steve still was the Washington State University wheat breeder in Prosser. Steve remains one of the best representations of what good science used to - and should - be: a dedicated and honest scientist with unquestioned integrity and genuine humility who both deeply respected the work performed by those before him and maintained an uncompromising devotion to the best interests of the people. Back then, as the ultimate expert, Steve knew that the introduction of GE wheat would contaminate and ruin the foundation wheat collection at WSU Prosser - and thereby jeopardize the wheat industry within and without Washington. He stuck to his guns and flat out refused to allow GE wheat into the wheat collection. The fact is Steve took a lot of heat for standing up for the people's interest. Steve is incredible and an inspiration to everyone around him. This NY Times article does justice to a great man."
Bread Is Broken By FERRIS JABR - OCT. 29, 2015
Industrial production destroyed both the taste and the nutritional value of wheat. One scientist believes he can undo the damage.
At first, he was ecstatic, but disillusionment soon followed. The essence of plant breeding is innovation — the prospect of creating something truly novel. Yet in his first official role as a wheat breeder, Jones felt stifled. He was tasked with improving the yield and disease-resistance of wheat cultivars that had been designed for industrial milling. Prioritizing qualities the food industry considered superfluous was discouraged. When he tried breeding wheat with higher levels of nourishing minerals, like iron, zinc and magnesium, he was told those characteristics were unimportant. When he proposed working with a healthier wheat that still made excellent bread flour — albeit of a somewhat yellow tint — the university expressed no interest, he says.
GMO Makers, Their Puppets in Academia, and The New York Times
Monsanto et al Mislead Public Using Every Trick in the Book
Are GMOs dangerous? For answers to such questions, we normally turn to reputable scientists associated with reputable universities. Surely we can trust them to give us objective information. Or can we? It turns out that biotech heavyweights like Monsanto, Bayer et al have been paying reputable people from reputable institutions to swing the debate in their favor.
Wildflowers serve as reservoir for controversial pesticides
A team from Sussex University in the UK found that the pollen of wildflowers, such as hogweed and poppies, within one to two metres of an oilseed rape crop, contained neonicotinoid concentrations up to 86 parts per billion (ppb) in pollen. The maximum pesticide residue recorded in crop pollen was 11.1ppb.
One teacher was willing to recognize his own shortcomings in the classroom: “I teach so biased,” he chuckled at himself, picking up a copy of our advisor’s packet with Jack Kitteredge’s “Soil Carbon Restoration: Can Biology do the Job?” article and OCA, Regeneration International and MOSES leaflets. “But I want the kids to be able to make their own decisions.”
It seems that at least some of the students are doing just that. When asked why they are interested in organic food and farming, students stopping by our booth had this to say:
Gates Foundation Plots Ways of Profiting from Africa’s Seed Systems 3/23/15
Today, Monday, March 23, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are sponsoring a secret meeting in London to promote a recent report detailing in clear terms how to privatize the seed and agricultural markets of Africa– without African stakeholders having a seat at the table.
Two New GE Pigs Want to Go To the Market - Posted on November 11, 2015
It’s important to note that these animals aren’t “transgenic” like many of the GE crops on the market. That is, they do not contain genes from other species or kingdoms like bacteria. Biotech involves more than GMOs, and some methods currently fall outside of regulation or definition. However, we are still talking genetic engineering.
Their goal wasn't scientific improvement, but regulatory avoidance. “In terms of science, our approach is just another improvement in the field of genome editing,” one of the scientists told the journal Nature. “However, in terms of regulations and public acceptance, our method could be path-breaking” because the new organisms “might be exempt from current GMO regulations.”
If this sentence doesn't bother you, it should. The researchers were openly acknowledging that the point of their efforts is to work around existing GMO regulations.
The FDA requests comments on use of the term “natural” on food labeling.
The FDA is taking this action in part because it received three Citizen Petitions asking that the agency define the term “natural” for use in food labeling and one Citizen Petition asking that the agency prohibit the term “natural” on food labels. We also note that some Federal courts, as a result of litigation between private parties, have requested administrative determinations from the FDA regarding whether food products containing ingredients produced using genetic engineering or foods containing high fructose corn syrup may be labeled as “natural.”
The FDA is accepting public comments from November 12, 2015 through February 10, 2016.
“Wake Up Before it is Too Late: Make Agriculture Truly Sustainable Now For Food Security In A Changing Climate,” Published by the United Nations Commission on Trade and Development (UNCTAD); 2013 (338 pages)
For twenty years the federal government, through the USDA and FDA, has stated unequivocally that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are safe and can help feed the world and save lives. However, over the last two decades independent scientists have brought forth challenges to the prevailing dogma on this important issue. The response of the GMO industry to any critic–irrespective of their credentials or the scientific evidence they provide–is that they are wrong. To determine where the truth lies, we have set about reviewing all available scientific literature on the safety and efficacy of GMOs. The results of our independent investigation are stated in the following 44 reasons to ban or label GMOs. All of the information is footnoted and fully referenced.