Is Just Label It Controlled Opposition? – Nick Brannigan

Source: NickBrannigan.com

From the start, I thought it was a bit useless to petition the FDA to label genetically modified food. There has been plenty of documented evidence of the FDA’s charge forward on releasing GMOs to the American public despite safety concern amongst FDA scientist when GMOs were first introduced into the food supply.

Regardless, I drank the Kool Aid that the Just Label It campaign was pouring. Why not? At least, it would be good for awareness.

When JLI submitted over 1 million signatures to the FDA asking them to label GMOs, and the FDA only counted them as 394 official comments, the people got pissed. What did you expect from the FDA? Did anybody really think they would implement immediate GMO labeling?

I first became suspicious of the man behind JLI, Gary Hirshberg, CEO of Stoneyfield, when I heard him in a radio interview say, “The national efforts [to label GMOs] ultimately will trump these state ones.” This was in July, 2012 when the California State Labeling Initiative, Prop 37, was really picking up steam.

Regarding Michael Taylor, the FDA food safety czar, who just happened to be the former VP of Monsanto, Hirshberg said, “It’s not really fair to pick on Michael. I happen to know Michael and he’s a very good guy.” It’s not really fair to unknowingly feed billions of people unsafe GMO food either, Gary. Continue reading

Superweeds linked to rising use of herbicides on genetically modified crops

October 1, 2012
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Brian Clark, Marketing, News, and Educational Communications
509-335-6967, bcclark@wsu.edu
Pesticide Use Rises as Herbicide-resistant Weeds Undermine Performance of Major GE Crops, New WSU Study Shows

A study published this week by Washington State University research professor Charles Benbrook finds that the use of herbicides in the production of three genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops — cotton, soybeans and corn — has actually increased. This counterintuitive finding is based on an exhaustive analysis of publicly available data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Statistics Service. Benbrook’s analysis is the first peer-reviewed, published estimate of the impacts of genetically engineered (GE) herbicide-resistant (HT) crops on pesticide use.

In the study, which appeared in the the open-access, peer-reviewed journal “Environmental Sciences Europe,” Benbrook writes that the emergence and spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds is strongly correlated with the upward trajectory in herbicide use. Marketed as Roundup and other trade names, glyphosate is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide used to kill weeds. Approximately 95 percent of soybean and cotton acres, and over 85 percent of corn, are planted to varieties genetically modified to be herbicide resistant.

“Resistant weeds have become a major problem for many farmers reliant on GE crops, and are now driving up the volume of herbicide needed each year by about 25 percent,” Benbrook said.

The annual increase in the herbicides required to deal with tougher-to-control weeds on cropland planted to GE cultivars has grown from 1.5 million pounds in 1999 to about 90 million pounds in 2011.

Herbicide-tolerant crops worked extremely well in the first few years of use, Benbrook’s analysis shows, but over-reliance may have led to shifts in weed communities and the spread of resistant weeds that force farmers to increase herbicide application rates (especially glyphosate), spray more often, and add new herbicides that work through an alternate mode of action into their spray programs.

A detailed summary of the study’s major findings, along with important definitions of terms used in the study, are available online at summary. Benbrook’s study, “Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. — the first sixteen years,” is available online at study.

Source: http://cahnrsnews.wsu.edu/2012/10/01/pesticide-use-rises-as-herbicide-resistant-weeds-undermine-performance-of-major-ge-crops-new-wsu-study-shows/

Why Is The GMO Hepatitis B Vaccine Given To Newborn Babies?

Source: Barbara H. Peterson – Farm Wars

In the United States, the Hepatitis B (Hep B) vaccine is scheduled to be given to babies at birth. Since babies do not normally go out and indulge themselves in high risk behavior such as tattooing, body piercing, IV drug use, sharing needles with others, having sex with multiple partners, or engaging in any high risk activity other than being born in a hospital, and “the duration of protection after hepatitis B vaccination of infants is unknown,” why give them the shot?
Please read the rest of Barb’s post at Farm Wars »

Toxic Botulism In Animals Linked To Monsanto RoundUp Herbicide

Dr. Mercola recently interviewed Dr. Don Huber, whose letter to the USDA warning that Monsanto’s RoundUp, a broad-spectrum herbicide that has been linked with spontaneous abortion in animals, continues to be ignored by food and environmental safety authorities. In this important two hour interview, Dr. Huber, a plant pathologist for over 50 years, explains how RoundUp is destroying our healthy soils by killing needed microorganisms.

GM Crops Could Send Food Prices Rocketing

Daily Express | UK News By Louise Barnett

Milk, meat and egg prices could rocket by 20 per cent because of foreign farmers growing more GM crops, experts warned yesterday.

UK animal feed, which is made mainly from soya, could quadruple in price within two years if growers in Brazil and Argentina produce more genetically modified soya, which is banned in Europe, according to government research.

Non-GM soya would rocket in price, making animal and poultry feed more expensive and ramping up UK meat and poultry costs by around a fifth. Farmers are worried they face unfair competition from countries which allow GM crops.

The National Farmers’ Union director of policy Martin Haworth warned: “There is a very real danger that livestock producers, both here and across the EU, will be unable to compete.”

The GM Crops And Foods report has been published jointly by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs and the Food Standards Agency. It says Britain’s livestock farms rely on Brazil and Argentina for 90 per cent of imported soya used in feed for poultry, cattle and pigs.

Defra’s research outlines a worst-case scenario in which British farmers cannot buy soya from either Argentina or Brazil if they only grow GM crops – the use of which is banned here.

Feed costs would soar by 300 per cent, while UK pork and poultry production would plunge by up to 68 per cent. As a result, the report suggests, shop prices for meat and poultry would jump by up to 20 per cent.