Organic Chickens Coming Home to Roost
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on Organic Chickens Coming Home to Roost
Earlier this summer, just as the nation was celebrating Vermont’s first-in-the-nation GMO labeling law going into effect on July 1, a handful of corporate-owned organic companies sold out the GMO labeling movement to get a few small protections for their own corporate profits.
They were joined in the sell-out by supposedly liberal stalwarts like Senator Al Franken and President Barack Obama. Obama, you may remember, even made it a campaign promise to promote GMO labeling.
At the time, Food Democracy Now gave a detailed analysis of exactly who was involved in this betrayal of the will of more than 90 percent of the American public. Now the fallout continues, as leading family farm and organic seed groups and top organic companies have announced their resignation from the Organic Trade Association and Just Label It for their active role in this outrageous betrayal on GMO labeling.
Just last week, Dr. Bronner’s announced its resignation from the Organic Trade Association ahead of the big organic industry event, the Natural Products Expo East, with Dr. Bronner’s CEO David Bronner denouncing the “betrayal of the consumer-led GMO labeling movement, and general drift away from the core principles that drive the organic movement.”
Food Democracy Now has announced that it’s making sure that everyone in the organic industry at Expo East knows exactly who was behind this sell-out by running mobile billboards at the industry event.
Dr. Bronner’s announcement comes on the heels of an announcement from the Organic Consumers Association that 60 leading non-profits and small organic businesses are calling on the small and mid-sized organic companies to leave the Organic Trade Association.
The corporate organic sell-outs who worked against the GMO labeling movement include Stonyfield Yogurt co-founder and Just Label It chair Gary Hirshberg, Whole Foods CEO Walter Robb, and Organic Valley lobbyist and Organic Trade Association President Missy Hughes.
Food Democracy Now is about to launch a boycott against these companies. Joining in the protest against the Organic Trade Association is the family farmer-run Organic Seed and Growers Association (OSGATA), which left the OTA in disgust earlier this summer.
***
RODALE INSTITUTE ANNOUNCES ORGANIC FARMERS ASSOCIATION
Rodale Institute, the world’s leading organic agriculture research organization, has launched a new membership organization for organic farmers. The new Organic Farmers Association will exist to provide a voice for organic farmers on policy issues, help organic farmers network and share information, and serve as a resource center for organic farmers.
Advocacy efforts will be led by Elizabeth Kucinich, Board Policy Chair for Rodale Institute. Kucinich has extensive policy experience in Washington, D.C., including serving as the former director of policy at the Center for Food Safety and former director of government affairs at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM). Elizabeth is an advisory council member of DC EFF, the world’s largest environmental film festival, and is a producer of GMO OMG and Organic Rising.
“We have a tremendous opportunity to bring organic farmers’ voices and their experience with agriculture to policymakers in Washington, D.C.,” said Kucinich. “Policymakers have not yet grasped the significance of organic agriculture for resilient, reliable, non-toxic food production, and its ability to mitigate climate change while restoring our nation’s soil health. We have an opportunity to benefit organic farmers, while positively impacting our nation’s health and mitigating our climate crisis.”
In addition to better representation for organic farmers on legislative issues, the Organic Farmers Association will provide resources for farmers such as webinars, online tools, discounts, and a subscription to Rodale Institute’s New Farm magazine, providing the latest research and news for organic farmers.
“A lot of people say they speak for farmers,” said Jeff Moyer, Executive Director, Rodale Institute. “But there are no national organizations that exist specifically for organic farmers, by organic farmers. A lot of organic farmers are still isolated in their communities. We’d like to unite the nearly 20,000 organic farms around the country to provide that voice, provide a network, and provide the resources that farmers need to be successful.”
To sign up for a membership, visit OrganicFarmersAssociation.org. There are two membership options. A “Farmer Membership,” which represents organic farmers and includes a vote on policy issues, and a “Supporter Membership” for individuals interested in supporting organic farmers. Both memberships are $100 per year. For farm members, the voting structure is simple. Each farm receives one vote on policy issues, so that large and small operations have an equal voice at the table.
The Rodale Institute is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to pioneering organic farming through research and outreach. The Institute has been researching the best practices of organic agriculture and sharing findings with farmers and scientists throughout the world, advocating for policies that support farmers, and educating consumers about how going organic is the healthiest option for people and the planet.
***
3.2 MILLION MOSTLY TOP PREDATORS KILLED BY THE FED IN 2015
The highly secretive arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture known as Wildlife Services killed more than 3.2 million animals during fiscal year 2015, according to new data released by the agency. The total number of wolves, coyotes, bears, mountain lions, beavers, foxes, eagles and other animals killed largely at the behest of the livestock industry and other agribusinesses represents a half-million-animal increase over the 2.7 million animals the agency killed in 2014.
Despite increasing calls for reform a century after the federal wildlife-killing program began in 1915, the latest kill report indicates that the program’s reckless slaughter continues, including 385 gray wolves, 68,905 coyotes (plus an unknown number of pups in 492 destroyed dens), 480 black bears, 284 mountain lions, 731 bobcats, 492 river otters (all but 83 killed “unintentionally”), 3,437 foxes, two bald eagles and 21,559 beavers. The program also killed 20,777 prairie dogs outright, plus an unknown number killed in more than 59,000 burrows that were destroyed or fumigated.
“Despite mounting public outcry and calls from Congress to reform these barbaric, outdated tactics, Wildlife Services continues its slaughter of America’s wildlife with no public oversight,” said Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity. “There’s simply no scientific basis for continuing to shoot, poison and strangle millions of animals every year — a cruel practice that not only fails to effectively manage targeted wildlife but poses an ongoing threat to other animals, including pets.”
Agency insiders have revealed that the agency kills many more animals than it reports.
The data show that the Department of Agriculture boosted its killing program despite a growing public outcry and calls for reform by scientists, elected officials and nongovernmental organizations.
“The Department of Agriculture should get out of the wildlife-slaughter business,” said Robinson. “Wolves, bears and other carnivores help keep the natural balance of their ecosystems. Our government kills off the predators, such as coyotes, and then kills off their prey — like prairie dogs — in an absurd, pointless cycle of violence.”
USDA’s Wildlife Services program began in 1915 when Congress appropriated $125,000 to the Bureau of Biological Survey for “destroying wolves, coyotes, and other animals injurious to agriculture and animal husbandry” on national forests and other public lands.
By the 1920s, scientists and fur trappers were robustly criticizing the Biological Survey’s massive poisoning of wildlife, and in response in 1928 the agency officially renounced “extermination” as its goal. Nevertheless it proceeded to exterminate wolves, grizzly bears, black-footed ferrets, and other animals from most of their remaining ranges in the years to follow. The agency was blocked from completely exterminating these species through the 1973 passage of the Endangered Species Act.
In 1997, after several name changes, the deceptive name “Wildlife Services” was inaugurated in place of “Biological Survey.”
The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
***
GREENPEACE UNCOVERS INDUSTRY BEE-KILLING PESTICIDE STUDIES
Joe Sandler Clarke, writing for Greenpeace, reveals how chemical giants Bayer and Syngenta commissioned private studies that showed their neonicotinoid pesticides causes serious harm to bees.
The company research—designed to reveal the level at which their products harm bees—was obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests to the U.S. environmental regulator. Publicly, the two firms have often sought to play down suggestions that their products can cause harm to honeybees.
However, the studies will cause little surprise in industry circles. Industry and scientists have long known that the products can harm bees. Instead, the research has been criticized by experts because it assumes a very narrow definition of harm to bee health and ignores wild bees, which evidence suggests are more likely to be harmed by neonicotinoids. It means the studies may substantially underestimate the impact of the two firms’ products on pollinators.
Due to commercial confidentiality rules, Greenpeace is not allowed to release the studies in full.
On its website, Syngenta states there is “no direct correlation between neonicotinoids use and poor bee health” and “the allegation that neonicotinoids-based pesticides are inherently damaging to bee colonies or populations is not true.”
In statements issued to Greenpeace last month, the firm added, “None of the studies Syngenta has undertaken or commissioned for use by regulatory agencies have shown that thiamethoxam (its neonicotinoid pesticide) damages the health of bee colonies and we stand by the integrity of our neonicotinoid product.”
The private research did not examine the impact of the product on bee colonies in “normal” conditions. However, other studies have done so.
Last month, a study by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology linked the long-term decline of wild bees in England to the use of neonicotinoids.
A major field study in Sweden last year found that wild bees were badly affected when exposed to fields treated with clothianidin (Bayer’s neonic), while honeybees proved more robust.
In a statement to Greenpeace, a Bayer spokesperson said:
“The study conducted in North Carolina is an artificial feeding study that intentionally exaggerates the exposure potential because it is designed to calculate a ‘no-effect’ concentration for clothianidin. Although the colony was artificially provided with a spiked sugar solution, the bees were allowed to forage freely in the environment, so there is less stress (which can be a contributing variable) than if they were completely confined to cages.
“This protocol was developed jointly by Bayer and the EPA several years ago and it is now being applied to other compounds. Based on these results, we believe the data support the establishment of a no-effect concentration of 20 ppb for clothianidin, which is consistent to that of other neonicotinoids.
“One of our research scientists will make a public presentation at the International Congress of Entomology meeting in Orlando, Florida, in which he will discuss the similarities of the findings of these studies, as well as the merits of the new test protocol.”
Responding to the Greenpeace story, a Syngenta spokesperson said:
“The EPA asked us to do this study and agreed with the methodology. A sucrose based mechanism was used on the basis that it was required to expose bees artificially to Thiamethoxam to determine what actual level of residue would exert a toxic effect.
“There were transient effects observed and the reported No Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) for this study was 50 ppb (parts per billion). It is accepted that residues of Thiamethoxam in pollen and nectar from seed treated crops are in the single ppb level. So this reported NOAEL of 50 ppb indicates that honeybee colonies are at low risk from exposure to Thiamethoxam in pollen and nectar of seed treated crops.
“This research is already in the process of being published in a forthcoming journal and is clearly already publicly available through the Freedom of Information process in the United States.”
***
TOWN NEAR GMO PLANTINGS SUFFERS BIRTH DEFECTS, CANCERS
The village of Avia Terai in Argentina is surrounded by GMO soy crops and Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is sprayed freely.
Here, children are born with birth defects and degenerative diseases of unknown origin. One little girl has large brownish-black spots all over her face and body—marks she’s had since birth. Another is slowly wasting away from an undiagnosed degenerative disease thought to be genetic, aggravated by exposure to herbicides. Many children are deformed in one way or another. Many elders are dying from cancer.
On October 15, Maria Liz Robledo, one of Monsanto’s victims in Argentina, and Damian Verzenassi, a public health doctor in Argentina, will tell the world how Argentinians have suffered from Monsanto’s Roundup. They are among the witnesses and experts who will testify before a panel of international judges at the International Monsanto Tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands.
###
Organic Chickens Coming Home to Roost
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on Organic Chickens Coming Home to Roost
Earlier this summer, just as the nation was celebrating Vermont’s first-in-the-nation GMO labeling law going into effect on July 1, a handful of corporate-owned organic companies sold out the GMO labeling movement to get a few small protections for their own corporate profits.
They were joined in the sell-out by supposedly liberal stalwarts like Senator Al Franken and President Barack Obama. Obama, you may remember, even made it a campaign promise to promote GMO labeling.
At the time, Food Democracy Now gave a detailed analysis of exactly who was involved in this betrayal of the will of more than 90 percent of the American public. Now the fallout continues, as leading family farm and organic seed groups and top organic companies have announced their resignation from the Organic Trade Association and Just Label It for their active role in this outrageous betrayal on GMO labeling.
Just last week, Dr. Bronner’s announced its resignation from the Organic Trade Association ahead of the big organic industry event, the Natural Products Expo East, with Dr. Bronner’s CEO David Bronner denouncing the “betrayal of the consumer-led GMO labeling movement, and general drift away from the core principles that drive the organic movement.”
Food Democracy Now has announced that it’s making sure that everyone in the organic industry at Expo East knows exactly who was behind this sell-out by running mobile billboards at the industry event.
Dr. Bronner’s announcement comes on the heels of an announcement from the Organic Consumers Association that 60 leading non-profits and small organic businesses are calling on the small and mid-sized organic companies to leave the Organic Trade Association.
The corporate organic sell-outs who worked against the GMO labeling movement include Stonyfield Yogurt co-founder and Just Label It chair Gary Hirshberg, Whole Foods CEO Walter Robb, and Organic Valley lobbyist and Organic Trade Association President Missy Hughes.
Food Democracy Now is about to launch a boycott against these companies. Joining in the protest against the Organic Trade Association is the family farmer-run Organic Seed and Growers Association (OSGATA), which left the OTA in disgust earlier this summer.
***
RODALE INSTITUTE ANNOUNCES ORGANIC FARMERS ASSOCIATION
Rodale Institute, the world’s leading organic agriculture research organization, has launched a new membership organization for organic farmers. The new Organic Farmers Association will exist to provide a voice for organic farmers on policy issues, help organic farmers network and share information, and serve as a resource center for organic farmers.
Advocacy efforts will be led by Elizabeth Kucinich, Board Policy Chair for Rodale Institute. Kucinich has extensive policy experience in Washington, D.C., including serving as the former director of policy at the Center for Food Safety and former director of government affairs at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM). Elizabeth is an advisory council member of DC EFF, the world’s largest environmental film festival, and is a producer of GMO OMG and Organic Rising.
“We have a tremendous opportunity to bring organic farmers’ voices and their experience with agriculture to policymakers in Washington, D.C.,” said Kucinich. “Policymakers have not yet grasped the significance of organic agriculture for resilient, reliable, non-toxic food production, and its ability to mitigate climate change while restoring our nation’s soil health. We have an opportunity to benefit organic farmers, while positively impacting our nation’s health and mitigating our climate crisis.”
In addition to better representation for organic farmers on legislative issues, the Organic Farmers Association will provide resources for farmers such as webinars, online tools, discounts, and a subscription to Rodale Institute’s New Farm magazine, providing the latest research and news for organic farmers.
“A lot of people say they speak for farmers,” said Jeff Moyer, Executive Director, Rodale Institute. “But there are no national organizations that exist specifically for organic farmers, by organic farmers. A lot of organic farmers are still isolated in their communities. We’d like to unite the nearly 20,000 organic farms around the country to provide that voice, provide a network, and provide the resources that farmers need to be successful.”
To sign up for a membership, visit OrganicFarmersAssociation.org. There are two membership options. A “Farmer Membership,” which represents organic farmers and includes a vote on policy issues, and a “Supporter Membership” for individuals interested in supporting organic farmers. Both memberships are $100 per year. For farm members, the voting structure is simple. Each farm receives one vote on policy issues, so that large and small operations have an equal voice at the table.
The Rodale Institute is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to pioneering organic farming through research and outreach. The Institute has been researching the best practices of organic agriculture and sharing findings with farmers and scientists throughout the world, advocating for policies that support farmers, and educating consumers about how going organic is the healthiest option for people and the planet.
***
3.2 MILLION MOSTLY TOP PREDATORS KILLED BY THE FED IN 2015
The highly secretive arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture known as Wildlife Services killed more than 3.2 million animals during fiscal year 2015, according to new data released by the agency. The total number of wolves, coyotes, bears, mountain lions, beavers, foxes, eagles and other animals killed largely at the behest of the livestock industry and other agribusinesses represents a half-million-animal increase over the 2.7 million animals the agency killed in 2014.
Despite increasing calls for reform a century after the federal wildlife-killing program began in 1915, the latest kill report indicates that the program’s reckless slaughter continues, including 385 gray wolves, 68,905 coyotes (plus an unknown number of pups in 492 destroyed dens), 480 black bears, 284 mountain lions, 731 bobcats, 492 river otters (all but 83 killed “unintentionally”), 3,437 foxes, two bald eagles and 21,559 beavers. The program also killed 20,777 prairie dogs outright, plus an unknown number killed in more than 59,000 burrows that were destroyed or fumigated.
“Despite mounting public outcry and calls from Congress to reform these barbaric, outdated tactics, Wildlife Services continues its slaughter of America’s wildlife with no public oversight,” said Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity. “There’s simply no scientific basis for continuing to shoot, poison and strangle millions of animals every year — a cruel practice that not only fails to effectively manage targeted wildlife but poses an ongoing threat to other animals, including pets.”
Agency insiders have revealed that the agency kills many more animals than it reports.
The data show that the Department of Agriculture boosted its killing program despite a growing public outcry and calls for reform by scientists, elected officials and nongovernmental organizations.
“The Department of Agriculture should get out of the wildlife-slaughter business,” said Robinson. “Wolves, bears and other carnivores help keep the natural balance of their ecosystems. Our government kills off the predators, such as coyotes, and then kills off their prey — like prairie dogs — in an absurd, pointless cycle of violence.”
USDA’s Wildlife Services program began in 1915 when Congress appropriated $125,000 to the Bureau of Biological Survey for “destroying wolves, coyotes, and other animals injurious to agriculture and animal husbandry” on national forests and other public lands.
By the 1920s, scientists and fur trappers were robustly criticizing the Biological Survey’s massive poisoning of wildlife, and in response in 1928 the agency officially renounced “extermination” as its goal. Nevertheless it proceeded to exterminate wolves, grizzly bears, black-footed ferrets, and other animals from most of their remaining ranges in the years to follow. The agency was blocked from completely exterminating these species through the 1973 passage of the Endangered Species Act.
In 1997, after several name changes, the deceptive name “Wildlife Services” was inaugurated in place of “Biological Survey.”
The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
***
GREENPEACE UNCOVERS INDUSTRY BEE-KILLING PESTICIDE STUDIES
Joe Sandler Clarke, writing for Greenpeace, reveals how chemical giants Bayer and Syngenta commissioned private studies that showed their neonicotinoid pesticides causes serious harm to bees.
The company research—designed to reveal the level at which their products harm bees—was obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests to the U.S. environmental regulator. Publicly, the two firms have often sought to play down suggestions that their products can cause harm to honeybees.
However, the studies will cause little surprise in industry circles. Industry and scientists have long known that the products can harm bees. Instead, the research has been criticized by experts because it assumes a very narrow definition of harm to bee health and ignores wild bees, which evidence suggests are more likely to be harmed by neonicotinoids. It means the studies may substantially underestimate the impact of the two firms’ products on pollinators.
Due to commercial confidentiality rules, Greenpeace is not allowed to release the studies in full.
On its website, Syngenta states there is “no direct correlation between neonicotinoids use and poor bee health” and “the allegation that neonicotinoids-based pesticides are inherently damaging to bee colonies or populations is not true.”
In statements issued to Greenpeace last month, the firm added, “None of the studies Syngenta has undertaken or commissioned for use by regulatory agencies have shown that thiamethoxam (its neonicotinoid pesticide) damages the health of bee colonies and we stand by the integrity of our neonicotinoid product.”
The private research did not examine the impact of the product on bee colonies in “normal” conditions. However, other studies have done so.
Last month, a study by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology linked the long-term decline of wild bees in England to the use of neonicotinoids.
A major field study in Sweden last year found that wild bees were badly affected when exposed to fields treated with clothianidin (Bayer’s neonic), while honeybees proved more robust.
In a statement to Greenpeace, a Bayer spokesperson said:
“The study conducted in North Carolina is an artificial feeding study that intentionally exaggerates the exposure potential because it is designed to calculate a ‘no-effect’ concentration for clothianidin. Although the colony was artificially provided with a spiked sugar solution, the bees were allowed to forage freely in the environment, so there is less stress (which can be a contributing variable) than if they were completely confined to cages.
“This protocol was developed jointly by Bayer and the EPA several years ago and it is now being applied to other compounds. Based on these results, we believe the data support the establishment of a no-effect concentration of 20 ppb for clothianidin, which is consistent to that of other neonicotinoids.
“One of our research scientists will make a public presentation at the International Congress of Entomology meeting in Orlando, Florida, in which he will discuss the similarities of the findings of these studies, as well as the merits of the new test protocol.”
Responding to the Greenpeace story, a Syngenta spokesperson said:
“The EPA asked us to do this study and agreed with the methodology. A sucrose based mechanism was used on the basis that it was required to expose bees artificially to Thiamethoxam to determine what actual level of residue would exert a toxic effect.
“There were transient effects observed and the reported No Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) for this study was 50 ppb (parts per billion). It is accepted that residues of Thiamethoxam in pollen and nectar from seed treated crops are in the single ppb level. So this reported NOAEL of 50 ppb indicates that honeybee colonies are at low risk from exposure to Thiamethoxam in pollen and nectar of seed treated crops.
“This research is already in the process of being published in a forthcoming journal and is clearly already publicly available through the Freedom of Information process in the United States.”
***
TOWN NEAR GMO PLANTINGS SUFFERS BIRTH DEFECTS, CANCERS
The village of Avia Terai in Argentina is surrounded by GMO soy crops and Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is sprayed freely.
Here, children are born with birth defects and degenerative diseases of unknown origin. One little girl has large brownish-black spots all over her face and body—marks she’s had since birth. Another is slowly wasting away from an undiagnosed degenerative disease thought to be genetic, aggravated by exposure to herbicides. Many children are deformed in one way or another. Many elders are dying from cancer.
On October 15, Maria Liz Robledo, one of Monsanto’s victims in Argentina, and Damian Verzenassi, a public health doctor in Argentina, will tell the world how Argentinians have suffered from Monsanto’s Roundup. They are among the witnesses and experts who will testify before a panel of international judges at the International Monsanto Tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands.
###
Bayer to Buy Monsanto for $66 Billion
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on Bayer to Buy Monsanto for $66 Billion
Ordinarily, the wheelings and dealings of large agribusiness corporations aren’t of much interest to organic farmers and consumers, but a new deal in the works should give us all pause because it involves two of the least environmentally-friendly Big Ag companies in the world, plus some of the banksters who gave us the Great Recession of 2008.
German drug and agricultural chemical maker Bayer makes the neonicotinoid pesticides that are decimating bee colonies around the world, and Monsanto is the company behind GMOs and Roundup herbicide. Bayer has clinched a $66 billion takeover of Monsanto, according to the Reuters News Service, ending months of wrangling with a third sweetened offer that marks the largest all-cash deal on record.
The $128-a-share deal, up from Bayer’s previous offer of $127.50 a share, has emerged as the signature deal in a consolidation race that has roiled the agribusiness sector in recent years, due to shifting weather patterns, intense competition in grain exports and a souring global farm economy.
“Bayer’s competitors are merging, so not doing this deal would mean having a competitive disadvantage,” said fund manager Markus Manns of Union Investment, one of Bayer’s top 12 investors.
Grain prices are hovering near their lowest levels in years amid a global supply glut, and farm incomes have plunged.
But the proposed merger will likely face an intense and lengthy regulatory process in the United States, Canada, Brazil, the European Union, and elsewhere. Hugh Grant, Monsanto’s chief executive, said the companies will need to file in about 30 jurisdictions for the merger.
Competition authorities are likely to scrutinize the tie-up closely, and some of Bayer’s own shareholders have been highly critical of a takeover that they say risks overpaying and neglecting the company’s pharmaceutical business.
If the deal closes, it will create a company commanding more than a quarter of the combined world market for seeds and pesticides in the fast-consolidating farm supplies industry.
What the newly-formed company would be named is unclear.
Grant said on a media conference call that the future of the Monsanto brand has not yet been discussed, but the world’s largest seed company is “flexible” about the name going forward.
The transaction includes a $2-billion break-up fee that Bayer will pay to Monsanto should it fail to get regulatory clearance. Bayer expects the deal to close by the end of 2017.
Bayer’s move to combine its crop chemicals business, the world’s second-largest after Syngenta AG, with Monsanto’s industry-leading seeds business, is the latest in a series of major agrochemicals mergers.
The German company is aiming to create a one-stop shop for seeds, crop chemicals and computer-aided services to farmers.
That was also the idea behind Monsanto’s swoop on Syngenta last year, which the Swiss company fended off, only to agree later to a takeover by China’s state-owned ChemChina.
U.S. chemicals giants Dow Chemical and DuPont plan to merge and later spin off their respective seeds and crop chemicals operations into a major agribusiness.
And Canadian fertilizer producers Potash Corp of Saskatchewan Inc. and Agrium Inc. agreed to combine to navigate a severe industry slump, but the new company’s potential pricing power may attract tough regulatory scrutiny.
Antitrust experts have said regulators will likely demand the sale of some soybeans, cotton, and canola seed assets.
Bayer said BofA, Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, and Chase JP Morgan had committed to providing the bridge financing.
BofA, Merrill Lynch, and Credit Suisse are acting as lead financial advisers to Bayer, with Rothschild as an additional adviser. Bayer’s legal advisers are Sullivan & Cromwell LLP and Allen & Overy LLP.
Morgan Stanley and Ducera Partners are acting as financial advisers to Monsanto, with Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen, & Katz its legal adviser.
***
TOXIC CHEMICALS IN HOUSEHOLD DUST LINKED TO CANCER, INFERTILITY
Household dust harbors a cocktail of toxic chemicals that have been linked to an increased risk of a range of health hazards, from cancer to problems with fertility, researchers in the US have found, according to a report in the Guardian newspaper in Britain.
The chemicals are shed from common products, from flooring to electrical goods as well as beauty and cleaning products.
“We think our homes are a safe haven, but unfortunately they are being polluted by toxic chemicals,” said Veena Singla, co-author of the study by the Natural Resources Defense Council in California.
The scientists cautioned that children were particularly vulnerable to the health effects of contaminated dust as they often play or crawl on the floor and frequently touch their mouths. “They end up having a lot more exposure to chemicals in dust and they are more vulnerable to toxic effects because their brains and bodies are still developing,” said Singla.
Writing in the Environmental Science and Technology journal, Singla and colleagues described how they analyzed 26 peer-reviewed papers, as well as one unpublished dataset, from 1999 onwards to examine the chemical make-up of indoor dust. The studies covered a wide range of indoor environments, from homes to schools and gymnasiums across 14 states.
“What emerged was a rather disturbing picture of many different toxic chemicals from our products that are present in dust in the home and [are] contaminating the home,” said Singla.
The researchers highlighted 45 toxic chemicals in indoor dust, 10 of which were present in 90 percent or more of the dust samples–these included flame retardants, fragrances, and phenols.
Among them is the flame retardant TDCIPP that is known to be cancer-causing and is frequently found in furniture foam, baby products, and carpet padding, as is TPHP, another flame retardant in the top 10 list that can affect the reproductive and nervous systems.
“They are just a bunch of letters – a lot of people might not recognise what those chemicals are, or what they mean, but they are really a number of bad actor chemicals,” said Singla.
Other toxic substances found in almost all of the dust samples include chemicals known as phthalates that are often found in vinyl flooring, food packaging, personal care products and have been linked to developmental problems in babies, hormone disruption, and are also thought to affect the reproductive system.
While some chemicals on the list have been banned from use in childcare products, or are being more widely phased out, Singla says many remain widespread in the home. “Especially for building materials there is not as much turnover of a lot of those products, like flooring,” she said, adding: “Unfortunately even though some of these phthalates have been banned from kids’ products, they are not banned from other kinds of products.”
In a separate, unpublished, analysis, Singla compared the levels of chemicals found in household dust with soil screening levels used by the Environmental Protection Agency in the US. “What we found–and we were shocked by it actually–is that the dust levels exceed those EPA screening levels for a number of the chemicals and again it is the phthalates and flame retardant chemicals that are standing out as the bad offenders here,” said Singla.
But, she adds, there are steps that can be taken to reduce exposure to contaminated dust. As well as vacuuming floors, hands should be washed with plain soap and water before eating, while cleaning with a wet mop and dusting with a damp cloth can help to reduce household dust levels.
While a wider policy change on the use of toxic chemicals is needed, Singla added, consumers could also take action by making careful choices about the products they buy. “It is really important for companies and regulators to get the message that people care about this and want and need safer products for their families.”
***
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT TO PRIORITIZE ECO-CRIMES
Just as the International Monsanto Citizens’ Tribunal is preparing to hold Monsanto accountable for its crimes in The Hague next month, comes this breaking news from the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The ICC, will for the first time in history prioritize crimes “committed by means of, or that result in the destruction of the environment, the illegal exploitation of natural resources, or the illegal dispossession of land.”
What does this mean for the Monsanto Tribunal?
It means that its work in The Hague will form the foundation for prosecuting companies like Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, and the rest of the corporate biotech criminals in the United Nations-backed International Criminal Court.
When the Monsanto Tribunal was being planned, the intent was to draw international attention to Monsanto’s crimes—all of them. The Tribunal wanted to change the rules so that corporations like Monsanto could be prosecuted for crimes against nature or the environment, not just crimes against humanity.
That’s why this news from the United Nations-backed ICC is breathtaking. It validates the work of the Citizens’ Tribunal. It means that finally, Monsanto and companies like it will have to answer for destroying the world’s soils, wiping out biodiversity, poisoning the world’s water and air.
The proposed takeover of Monsanto by Bayer doesn’t change the impact the Monsanto Tribunal will have. A corporate criminal by any other name is still a corporate criminal.
The Monsanto Tribunal is just one of the projects the Organic Consumers Association is working on. With Bayer’s proposed buyout of Monsanto, OCA plans to double down in 2017 on its work to expose Big Biotech’s efforts to monopolize seeds and the world’s food supply, and its rampant poisoning of our food, bodies, and our environment.
***
1.5 BILLION FEWER BIRDS IN NORTH AMERICA SINCE 1970, REPORT SAYS
North American skies have grown quieter over the last few decades by the absent songs of 1.5 billion birds, says the latest summary of bird populations, according to Bob Weber, writing in The Canadian Press.
The survey by dozens of government, university and environmental agencies across North America has also listed 86 species of birds—including once-common and much-loved songbirds such as the evening grosbeak and Canada warbler—that are threatened by plummeting populations, habitat destruction and climate change.
“The information on urgency is quite alarming,” said the summary’s co-author Judith Kennedy of Environment Canada. The summary is entitled, “Partners in Flight. “We’re really getting down to the dregs of some of these populations.”
The summary is the most complete survey of land bird numbers to date and attempts to assess the health of populations on a continental basis. It concludes that, while there are still a lot of birds in the sky, there aren’t anywhere near as many as there used to be.
Evening grosbeaks are down 92 per cent since 1970. Snowy owls have lost 64 per cent of their numbers. The Canada warbler has lost 63 per cent of it population.
Tally it all up and there should be another 1.5 billion birds perching in backyards and flying around in forests than there are, says the report.
Nor are the declines stopping. Among those 86 species, 22 have already lost at least half of their population since 1970 and are projected to lose another 50 per cent of their numbers within the next 40 years.
For at least six species, this “half-life” window is fewer than 20 years.
The culprits are familiar.
Agriculture disturbs habitat of grassland birds and introduces pesticides into the landscape. Logging fragments the intact forests birds use as refuelling stations as they migrate. Domestic cats are thought to kill more than two billion birds a year.
“It’s the death of a thousand cuts,” said Kennedy.
At stake is much more than the pleasure of a little bird song. The report says birds are crucial indicators of overall ecosystem health. Healthy forests and prairies need healthy bird populations, said Kennedy. “(They) only function because of that abundance.”
As well, birds — like bees — pollinate plants. And birds eat bugs. Lots of bugs. “We would be bitten by a lot more mosquitoes (with fewer birds).”
There are still up to five billion birds that leave Canada every winter. But Kennedy said the time to start thinking about their future is now, before some species start to decrease. “It’s too late for us to worry when we’re down to the last few hundred.”
The Partners In Flight report reinforces messages from several previous, related studies.
Earlier this year, the North American Bird Conservation Initiative found one-third of all North American bird species need quick help to stop them from disappearing, with more than half of all seabird species on the road to extinction without conservation action.
A 2014 study by the Audubon Society found climate change could cost 126 species more than half their current range by 2050.
A McGill University study in 2015 concluded more than 70 percent of global forests are within a kilometer of a road, field, town or other human disturbance—easily close enough to degrade forest habitat.
It seems that Rachel Carson was prescient indeed when she published Silent Spring in 1962.
###
You May Want to Avoid ‘Organic’ Food from China
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on You May Want to Avoid ‘Organic’ Food from China
The following article was written by Irene Luo and originally published in Epoch Times.
After numerous food scares in China, the Chinese have become disillusioned with the communist regime’s ability to properly regulate the food industry. The answer for some victimized Chinese is now organics—a guarantee that their food products will be produced in an environmentally responsible way and not be grown with pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, antibiotics, growth hormones, or other dangerous chemicals.
Organics, although only a small portion of China’s food market, are on the rise in China, with the consumption of organic food out of total consumption tripling between 2007 and 2012 according to Biofach, the world’s largest organic trade fair. More and more Chinese-produced organic food is being exported to the U.S.
But is China’s “organic” actually safe? And who does the guaranteeing?
It’s not too clear, considering China’s opaque system. Of course, not all organic food from China is problematic, and China is not the only violator of food safety regulations, but with China being the third greatest exporter of agricultural products to the United States, the situation does deserve attention.
Below are some of the major issues with China’s “organic” produce.
1. Environmental pollution in China is severe.
As a result of China’s rapid, largely unregulated industrial growth in the past few decades, China suffers dire environmental pollution. China’s soil and water sources contain large amounts of heavy metals, like lead and cadmium, released by industrial wastewater.
But the “organic” label fails to account for environmental pollution, as the system only certifies a process in which no harmful pesticides, fertilizers, etc. can be added when growing organic produce. But what about the heavy metals already contaminating the water sources and soil in China? According to Mike Adams, a natural health advocate and editor for Natural News, the USDA sets no limits on heavy metal contamination.
Chinese government data in 2011 showed over half of China’s large lakes and reservoirs were too contaminated for human use. And a groundwater pollution report by China’s Ministry of Land and Resources published in April of 2015 found 16 percent of the sampled water to be of “extremely poor” quality.
Furthermore, nearly one-fifth of China’s farmland is polluted, according to China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection and Ministry of Land Resources, with heavy metals that seeped into the soil through polluted irrigation water.
2. Fraudulent labeling regularly appears.
Since organic products sell at higher prices, food producers, and not just ones in China, may tack fraudulent “organic” labels on their products for a higher profit. As issues arise in all levels of the supply chain, Chinese authorities and the USDA find it hard to find all the violations. A 2010 USDA report said some producers purposefully avoid the annual certificate renewal process and continued using expired organic labels in order to reduce costs, while other retailers simply mislabeled conventional products as organic.
According to the USDA, out of 23 cases of fraudulent organic certificates between February of 2011 and June of 2013, nine involved Chinese companies. In September 2011, the USDA issued a warning to organic distributors and processors of fraudulent organic certificates on hibiscus, jasmine, and beet root extract powders from a Xi’an company.
In another case, Whole Foods Market had to stop selling Chinese ginger under its “365” label after the ginger was found to contain residues of aldicarb sulfoxide, an agricultural pesticide not approved for use on organic food.
3. Organics are often certified by third-party vendors.
The Chinese Organic Certification Center (COFCC), the agency supposedly in charge of certifying all organics, inspects only 30 percent of organic products, while the rest are certified by private firms, NGOs, and individual inspectors, all of which must be accredited by the Certification and Accreditation Administration (CNCA). But the same 2010 report by the USDA said there was no equivalency in organic standards and certification between the United States and China, as China did not recognize foreign organic standards. Therefore, serious discrepancies can occur between what chemicals and agricultural practices are allowed in organics from China in comparison to organics from United States.
Organics imported to the United States are all supposed to be certified by a USDA-accredited certifier, but as there are not enough certifiers, the USDA outsources to Chinese third parties. But in one instance, the USDA granted conditional accreditations to a certifier based only on paperwork and neglected to physically confirm they complied with all regulations.
4. No strong regulations are in place.
In 2010, the USDA reported that the Chinese regime failed to properly enforce organic standards, and no clear authority was given to any one governmental body, thus allowing abuses and illegal activity to occur. It also cited a Guangzhou Daily report about a consumer who reported fake organic vegetables and was directed to four different government departments before being told that none of them had enough authority to deal with the problem.
5. Corruption is rampant.
In communist-ruled China, authorities control the media and censor internet rumors to cover up food scandals, depriving them of the attention needed for reform to occur. Rather than focusing on eradicating food contamination problems, the Chinese regime spends more time concealing its wrongdoings and promoting a facade of stability and prosperity. Furthermore, an intricate web of corruption ties together the court system, the business and manufacturing sectors, and government officials. Bribes for licenses are common, with unethical practices regularly covered up by a cash offering.
All this is even more reason to buy food from local certified organic farmers and stores that you can trust.
***
GATORADE TO LAUNCH A SUGARY ‘ORGANIC’ VERSION
From The New York Times, September 2, 2016, Christopher Mele writes:
“Gatorade, the brightly colored sports drink marketed by professional sports figures in advertising targeted at amateur athletes, is introducing an organic version of its brand.
PepsiCo Inc., the maker of Gatorade, said the new product, which will be sold in select markets beginning this fall, would have seven ingredients: water, organic cane sugar, citric acid, organic natural flavor, sea salt, sodium citrate and potassium chloride.”
How does that ingredient list sound to you? Sounds like junk food to me—pretty much sweetened water with a little flavoring and a nice shot of potassium chloride.
Lindsay Moyer, a senior nutritionist with the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which promotes a food system that is healthier and more nutritious, was also skeptical about the changes.
Gatorade’s G Organic discontinues using the artificial food dyes found in nearly every one of its other drinks, which is “a step forward,” she said, adding, “G Organic is still a sugary drink — essentially, liquid candy — and organic sugar is no healthier than sugar.”
Each 16.9-ounce bottle of G Organic has seven teaspoons of added sugar, which is more than the six-teaspoon daily limit recommended by the American Heart Association, she wrote in an email.
***
WIDELY-USED HERBICIDE MAY POSE BREAST CANCER RISK
Atrazine is the second most commonly used herbicide in the U.S. Europe banned it in 2004 due to suspected environmental damage and health concerns.
Tyrone Hayes, a UC Berkeley professor, was hired by Syngenta to investigate the effects of atrazine on amphibians, but the company blocked the publication of his work when they didn’t like the results. Research shows atrazine triggers overproduction of estrogen and underproduction of testosterone, and it has been linked to deformities of the reproductive organs, several types of cancer, and birth defects.
In related reporting, the use of herbicides and chemical fertilizers on corn for cow feed on Vermont dairy farms nearly doubled between 2002 and 2012. These chemicals pose a threat to the environment, water supplies and human health. Up to 80 percent of herbicides used on Vermont dairy farms are atrazine-based — a chemical associated with estrogen overproduction, the feminizing of males, reproductive problems, several cancers (including breast), and birth defects.
***
ATTENTION SCOTCH LOVERS: THERE”S NOW AN ORGANIC SINGLE MALT
Benromach Organic is the first Speyside single malt Whisky to be certified “organic” by the UK Soil Association, which means that every step of production – from farm to bottle – is organic. According to its PR, “We can’t guarantee you’ll be able to taste ‘organic,’ but you’ll feel its handcrafted nature with plenty of toffee and spice. The dram is topped with a golden brown color, imparted from maturation in virgin oak casks. It costs about $70 for 750 ml.
###
What Else Is in Our Food Besides GMOs?
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on What Else Is in Our Food Besides GMOs?
You’ve heard a lot in the past few years about consumers’ right to know about GMOs. But what about your “right to know” about irradiated synthetic ingredients in “organic” baby formula? Or about Monsanto’s glyphosate in “100% Whole Grain” Shredded Wheat and “100% Natural” Nature Valley granola bars? And shouldn’t you have the “right to know” if the eggs you bought that had a “pasture-raised” label on them actually came from chickens that never spent a day outdoors, much less on a pasture?
Food manufacturers are lying to you. Every day.
That’s why the Organic Consumers Association is behind five lawsuits against food companies—and why they will soon announce several more.
The OCA has sent us the following information: Junk food makers spend millions of dollars studying consumer preferences. They know what you want—and what you don’t want. They know you don’t want food full of pesticides and hormones and other toxic chemicals. They know you care about the environment, about the welfare of farmers, and about the way animals raised for food are treated.
But rather than produce the food consumers want, companies like General Mills, Post, Earth’s Best, Handsome Brook—even a company that calls itself The Honest Co.—use false and misleading labels to trick you into thinking you’re buying the food you want.
And then they charge you a premium for it!
OCA announces our latest lawsuit, against Handsome Brook Farm. This egg producer was started by a husband and wife, on a “bucolic” farm in New York, according to a recent article in Forbes. When the company started out, its eggs probably came from “pasture-raised” chickens.
But like a lot of small companies, Handsome Brook has grown. According to Forbes, the company has contracts with 75 farms in six states, and its eggs are sold in more than 4,500 stores—including Kroger, Publix, Wegmans, and Sprouts Farmers Market.
Handsome Brook still labels its eggs “pasture-raised.” But it’s not true. And by lying about it, Handsome Brook is cheating you, and its competitors—those companies that are doing the right thing.
We’ve also recently sued Post Holdings (maker of Shredded Wheat), and General Mills and its subsidiary, Nature Valley, for claiming that their products that test positive for Monsanto’s glyphosate are “100% natural.”
In April, we sued two baby formula makers—The Honest Co. and Earth’s Best—for stating that some of their infant formula brands are “organic” when they in fact contain ingredients not allowed under federal organic standards.
Last month, we forced Colgate-Palmolive to take down a webpage that intentionally misled consumers into thinking Tom’s of Maine toothpaste, owned by Colgate, was organic. Fortunately, we didn’t need to sue—one letter from our attorney was enough to end the deception.
If Big Food companies refuse to label properly, OCA will sue them. You can support OCA by visiting its website (www.organicconsumers.org) for more information and how to donate.
***
35 WEED SPECIES NOW RESISTANT TO ROUNDUP
When nature is assaulted, she responds. If humans apply toxic chemicals to kill weeds, nature changes the structure of the weeds to resist the chemicals. That’s what’s happened with glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, Monsanto’s weed killer that has engulfed American farmland since the introduction of Roundup-resistant GMO crops 20 years ago, which allowed farmers to really pour on the Roundup. But the more of this herbicide you pour on the soil, the faster nature responds by making weeds resistant to it.
“After two decades of planting glyphosate-tolerant crops, resistant weeds have overtaken farm fields across the U.S., leaving farmers to battle an increasingly difficult situation,” according to Dr. Joseph Mercola. “At least 35 weed species are now resistant to glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Roundup.
“Studies have also linked glyphosate to increases in Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS), a deadly plant disease that causes plants to turn yellow and die — including crops that have never been sprayed with the herbicide but were planted in a field that received an application the previous season.”
In an effort to skirt disaster, Monsanto developed a new breed of genetically engineered seeds tolerant to other pesticides besides Roundup. This, they claim, is the answer to rising weed resistance — a side effect the company said would not occur from the use of their GE seeds in the first place.
There’s every reason to believe this next generation of GMO seeds will likely boost weed resistance, continue driving the increase in pesticide use, and make our food even more toxic.
***
CALIFORNIA FARM AWARDED TOP ANIMAL WELFARE CERTIFICATION
The flock of laying hens at Browns Valley Farm near Marysville, California, is now certified as Animal Welfare Approved. This certification and food label lets consumers know these animals are raised in accordance with the highest animal welfare standards in the U.S. and Canada, using sustainable agriculture methods on an independent family farm. Look for the AWA seal on your organic products.
Like other AWA farmers across the country, Dan and Asunta Presson recognize the growing consumer interest in how animals are raised on farms. Managing animals outdoors on pasture or range has known benefits for animals, consumers, and the environment. The Pressons raise Certified AWA laying hens on 15 acres of pasture and woodland in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains.
Asunta’s Browns Valley Farm’s 150 Rhodes Island Reds and Golden Sex Links chickens are free to move back and forth between the grasslands and wooded areas, where they feed on vegetation, grass seeds and insects, and can perform natural behaviors like running and dust bathing. The Pressons believe pasture-based management is not only better for the animals and the environment, but results in healthier, better tasting eggs for their customers. Scientific research shows that pasture-raised eggs contain three times as much vitamin E, seven times more beta-carotene, and twice the amount of omega 3 fatty acids as industrial eggs.
The Pressons are proud to be Certified AWA and hope it will highlight their high-welfare, sustainable farming practices: “After learning about AWA at a sustainable farming conference, we knew it was the right certification for our farm,” they explain. “The AWA logo also assures our customers that we really are raising our chickens according to the highest welfare standards, outdoors on pasture.”
AWA Program Director Andrew Gunther says, “The accountability and integrity offered by Animal Welfare Approved farmers like Dan and Asunta are unmatched in food production. We’re glad to have Asunta’s Browns Valley Farm in the AWA family.”
Certified AWA pasture-raised eggs from Asunta’s Browns Valley Farm are available at Briar Patch Coop Market in Grass Valley, and New Earth Market and Sunflower Natural Foods in Yuba City.
Called a “badge of honor for farmers” and the “gold standard,” AWA is the most highly regarded food label in North America when it comes to animal welfare, pasture-based farming, and sustainability. All AWA standards, policies and procedures are available on the AWA website, making it the most transparent certification available. AWA’s Online Directory of AWA farms, restaurants and products enables the public to search for AWA farms, restaurants and products by zip code, keywords, products and type of establishment. AWA has also launched AWA Food Labels Exposed, a free smartphone app guide to commonly used food claims and terms, available to download from the App Store or Google Play. A printable version is also available for download at www.AnimalWelfareApproved.org.
***
ZIKA SPRAYING DECIMATING BEE COLONIES
The first video, taken by a new bee keeper in Naples, Florida, shows a thriving hive. The second video, taken three days later, shows a mostly dead hive. The area was sprayed for Zika-carrying mosquitoes the day before the second video.
The poison they are using, Dibrom, is contains an organophosphate neurotoxin.
The Huffington Post has even done articles on the studies that show the spray can cause autism and microcephaly–the shrunken head syndrome attributed to the virus.
In tangential news, Florida Governor Rick Scott’s wife owns part of the mosquito spray company. One doctor claims that the microcephaly isn’t caused by Zika, but rather by the pesticide. Over 40 million people in the Southeast live in Zika-prone areas. Dibrom is morbid spelled backwards. It’s banned in many nations around the world. And it’s up for its 10-year renewal by EPA this year.
***
HAVE YOU HEARD OF GENE DRIVES? HERE’S WHAT TO KNOW
As thousands of government representatives and conservationists convene in Oahu for the 2016 World Conservation Congress, international conservation and environmental leaders are raising awareness about the potentially dangerous use of gene drives—a controversial new biotechnology intended to deliberately cause targeted species to become extinct.
Members of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), including NGOs, government representatives, and scientific and academic institutions, overwhelmingly voted to adopt a de facto moratorium on supporting or endorsing research into gene drives for conservation or other purposes until the IUCN has fully assessed their impacts.
A long list of environmental leaders, including Dr. Jane Goodall, genetics professor and broadcaster Dr. David Suzuki, Dr. Fritjof Capra, entomologist Dr. Angelika Hilbeck, Indian environmental activist Dr. Vandana Shiva, and organic pioneer and biologist Nell Newman have lent their support to an open letter: “A Call for Conservation with a Conscience: No Place for Gene Drives in Conservation.”
The letter states, in part: “Gene drives, which have not been tested for unintended consequences, nor fully evaluated for ethical and social impacts, should not be promoted as conservation tools.”
“Gene drives are basically a technology that aims for a targeted species to go extinct,” explains ecologist and entomologist Dr. Angelika Hilbeck, president of the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER). “While this may appear to some conservationist professionals to be a ‘good’ thing and a ‘silver bullet’ to handle complicated problems, there are high risks of unintended consequences that could be worse than the problems they are trying to fix.”
Both the leading developers of the technology and also those concerned about gene drives will be attending the Oahu Congress and holding events to raise awareness, hype promises, or highlight the potential hazards of gene drives.
One near-term gene drive proposal, promoted by U.S.-based non-governmental organization Island Conservation, intends to release gene drive mice on islands to eradicate the exploding mouse populations. Another, led by the University of Hawaii, would develop gene drive mosquitoes for use in Hawaii to combat avian malaria which affects honeycreeper birds. The debate around gene drives is likely to resurface later this year at the negotiations of the United Nations Biodiversity Convention in Cancun Mexico in December.
“Gene drives, also known as ‘mutagenic chain reactions,’ aim to alter DNA so an organism always passes down a desired trait, hoping to change over time the genetic makeup of an entire species,” explains Dr. Vandana Shiva. “This technology would give biotech developers an unprecedented ability to directly intervene in evolution, to dramatically modify ecosystems, or even crash a targeted species to extinction.”
“Genetic extinction technologies are a false and dangerous solution to the problem of biodiversity loss,” said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth. “There are real, sustainable, community-based conservation efforts that should be supported. We are concerned that genetic extinction technologies will allow new destructive agricultural practices and even use by the military. Speculative conservation claims are at best an unfounded diversion or smokescreen. We support those in the IUCN who recognize the gravity of irreversible and irresponsible technologies such as gene drives.”
Signatories of the letter, which include indigenous organizations and legal experts, raised legal and moral questions, citing an “ethical threshold that must not be crossed without great restraint.”
Some of the signing organizations will be holding a Knowledge Café event as part of the IUCN World Conservation Congress at 8:30 am HST (11:30 a.m. PDT; 2:30 p.m. (EDT) on Monday, September 5. The event will be live streamed at www.synbiowatch.org/gene-drives.
A short briefing outlining concerns about gene drives prepared by the Civil Society Working Group on Gene Drives is available at www.synbiowatch.org/2016/08/reckless-driving/.
A copy of the letter “A Call for Conservation with a Conscience: No Place for Gene Drives in Conservation” and a complete list of signatories is available at http://www.synbiowatch.org/gene-drives-letter/.
More details about the Island Conservation Project to release gene drive mice are available in this article: http://baynature.org/article/re-coding-conservation/. Plans to develop gene drives for Hawaii are being developed by the lab of Dr. Floyd A, Reed of Hawaii University: http://hawaiireedlab.com/wpress/?p=2270.
The IUCN Motion on Synthetic Biology and Conservation (motion No. 95) was supported by 71 Governments and 355 NGOs (out of a total of 544 votes cast). It includes the following amendment on gene drives: “CALLS UPON the Director General and Commissions with urgency to assess the implications of gene drives and related techniques and their potential impacts on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity as well as equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources, in order to develop IUCN guidance on this topic, while refraining from supporting or endorsing research, including field trials, into the use of gene drives for conservation or other purposes until this assessment has been undertaken.”
***
MEET BJORN LOMBORG, BUT HOLD YOUR NOSE
An Op-Ed entitled, “Organic food is great business, but a bad investment,” by Bjorn Lomborg published recently in USA Today has prompted a letter to the editor from The Organic Center that appeared in a subsequent edition. In the response published in the Opinion section, The Center’s Director of Science Programs, Dr. Jessica Shade, points out that the Op-Ed ignored the scientific evidence supporting the multitude of benefits of choosing an organic diet. Her letter calls out inaccuracies in the piece and cites the most up-to-date scientific literature demonstrating that organic food has an advantageous nutritional profile and allows consumers to avoid exposure to dangerous chemicals and antibiotic-resistant bacteria while supporting a healthy environment.
And who is Bjorn Lomborg? He’s a guy who says that the best way to help poor people is to convince the world to ignore the threat of climate change.
Among other activities, Lomborg runs the Copenhagen Consensus Center (CCC). Though long associated with his native Denmark, it actually registered as a US-based non-profit organization back in 2008. Lomborg took a cool $775,000 in pay from the CCC in 2012.
The only income for the CCC in its first year in the US came in the form of a $120,000 grant from the New York-based Randolph Foundation. The foundation gave CCC another $50,000 in 2012.
The Randolph Foundation’s long-time president and director is Heather Higgins, a former Wall Street Journal editorial writer who is Chairman of the Independent Women’s Forum, which is predominately funded by conservative U.S. foundations, including the Koch brothers’ Claude R. Lambe Foundation. She’s also a board member of the right-wing Philanthropy Roundtable, which awarded Charles G. Koch the William E. Simon Prize for Philanthropic Leadership.
Randolph’s board of trustees include Polly Freiss, the daughter-in-law of conservative businessman Foster Freiss, who helped bankroll Senator Rick Santorum in the 2012 GOP presidential primary and backs climate denialist news outlets like The Daily Caller. As ThinkProgress has documented, Foster and Polly Freiss — and Heather Higgins — all attended the Koch brother’s secretive 2010 conservative strategy meeting in Aspen.
The tax records of the Kansas-based Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation show it gave the CCC two $150,000 grants — one in 2011 and another in 2012. The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation is part of the Koch-funded group dedicated to “educating state and Federal judges,” as the Voter’s Legislative Transparency Project (VLTP) put it in a 2012 expose.
As VLTP explained, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and other Koch-backed groups are “interfering with our judicial processes by filing hundreds of ‘Amicus Briefs’ to state and federal courts in pending cases.”
Of course, somebody has to educate all the judges to appreciate the conservative arguments in those briefs — judges who, you won’t be surprised to learn, often decide against the Environmental Protection Agency and for ExxonMobil and Chevron USA.
That’s why we need all expense-paid trips for those judges to plush resorts for seminars run by academic centers like Northwestern University’s Northwestern Law Judicial Education Program and George Mason University’s Law and Economics Center.
Who funds those centers? For Northwestern, funders include the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation Donors Trust and the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. For GMU — whose judicial seminars were featured by ABC in a 20/20 expose— those two foundations were joined in the past by the Randolph Foundation.
So Bjorn Lomborg is funded by foundations that are part of the Koch empire of influence. And Lomborg is a big-time pundit who argues for inaction on climate change, who writes articles like “The Poor Need Cheap Fossil Fuels” and “Organic food is great business, but a bad investment,” and who asserts “global warming has mostly been a net benefit so far” and will be for decades.
Look, anyone who tries to delegitimize organic agriculture and foodstuffs has a secret agenda going on. After all, organics is simply a benign, sustainable, non-toxic way to grow our food and keep us free from toxic chemicals. What’s not to love? Lomborg’s agenda is to discredit organics on behalf of conservative billionaires like the Koch brothers, who make their billions from fossil fuels and other environmentally sketchy sources. What does Lomborg get in return? Three quarters of a million dollars ain’t bad.
***
LIKE RUSSIAN FOOD? TRY POPKOFF’S
I tried several Russian food favorites recently and was impressed. Pelmeni and vareniki are savory stuffed pierogies, made in San Francisco and flash frozen. They take five minutes to cook and are delicious. The vegetables are all locally grown in the Bay Area and the meats are antibiotic- and hormone-free. There are no artificial colors, flavors, or preservatives in any of the products. For more info, visit www.popkoffs.com
###
