NEWS: Canada, Corn, Canola and CODEX!!!!

Well, it seems Canada is of heavy importance to Monsanto at the moment… there’s a storm brewing between the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN - an umbrella organisation of 18 environmental and geneticly engineered food opposition groups) and Canada Health and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) - who are are responsible for approving new food products coming to market in Canada.
They have individually approved Monsanto’s latest Corn hybrid, a SmartStax Gentically Engineered Corn.
So called Smart Stax because it ‘stacks’ 8 different genetically modified gene traits in one crop. (6 insect resistant genes and 2 with resistence to weedkillers).
Up until now Monsanto have been selling products that have 3 genetic traits so 8 is quite a leap for them, and one they are excited about!

In Bloomberg:

“This is a big deal for Monsanto and Dow,” said Mark Gulley, a New York-based analyst for Soleil Securities. “They’re at least two years
ahead of Pioneer,” the agriculture unit of Wilmington, Delaware-based DuPont
Co.

In May Pioneer were sued by Monsanto what it calls “unlawful use” of Monsanto's herbicide-tolerant technologies in soybeans and corn. DuPont subsidiary, Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., isn’t allowed to combine, or stack, its technology with any soybeans already containing Monsanto’s Roundup Ready technology, Monsanto said.
DuPont countersued Monsanto in June, alleging that that Monsanto engages in “anti-competitive” conduct and that stacking is well within its rights under an existing license agreement with Monsanto.

The Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) plans to hold its annual conference Aug. 7 in St. Louis. They are holding it in St Louis because ‘the city is central to its membership, it’s a “good media market” and it’s the home of Monsanto’!
This year’s theme is “Confronting the Threats to Market Competition.”

So where do CBAN and CODEX come in?
Well, interestingly, CBAN says that the authorization of SmartStax seeds is against CODEX guidelines. And that while Canada Health and CFIA tests traits individually for approval, they do not see the need to test them in accumulation with each other, which is contrary to CODEX guidelines.

Lucy Sharrat from CBAN had the following to say:
Sharratt said the organization, which Canada chairs, has pointed to unintended affects from stacked organisms. Such affects can include new allergies or toxins, according to Dr. Michael Hansen with the Consumers Union in the United States."This GE crop should have gone through a new safety assessment, as recommended by Codex in its 'Guidelines for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants' adopted in 2003,” said Dr. Hansen in a press release.“Codex standards and guidelines are used to settle trade disputes and the lack of a new safety assessment for this GE corn means that other countries could reject 'SmartStax' without running afoul of WTO rules.”Sharratt said the divergence in Canada's regulations from those of Codex reveal a major regulatory omission.

From AsianTimes:
Combining many GE traits together can give rise to unintended effects which could adversely affect health, such as creating new allergies or toxins, or exacerbating existing allergies," said Michael Hansen of the Consumers Union, a US-based NGO and leading global expert on the potential health risks of GE. "This GE crop should have gone through a new safety assessment, as recommended by Codex," Hansen said in an interview. However, US regulations do not require any health and safety assessments because GE crops are considered the same as regular crops, even when novel traits are combined, he said. "The Food and Drug Administration didn't even take the slightest look at SmartStax," Hansen said.

Meanwhile, Monsanto has announced it will spend $15 million over the next two years on infrastructure projects in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
The agricultural biotechnology corporation unveiled plans to construct a new, state-of-the-art Monsanto breeding centre to be located adjacent to the current site of Monsanto's corporate Canadian head office.
Many of the canola hybrids developed by the breeding group will be tested and advanced at this facility, according to a Monsanto press release. As well, all canola trait development and field testing will be managed out of the CTRC.
"Canola is a key strategic commercial imperative for Monsanto's Canadian business and a significant crop for Western Canadian farmers," said spokesperson Ryan Baldwin.


Hmmmmm...

Thinking of my Canadian friends.... perhaps time to lend your support to CBAN?
Who'd have thought that the CODEX guidelines could come in useful in getting in the WAY of these Biotech giants? Not a reason for me to like 'em though!

Ad Astra per Aspera

NEWS: FSA Devalue Benefits of Organic Food

The Food Standards Agency have just come out with a report telling consumers that Organically produced food does not offer ay important nutritional benefits over non-organic.

From the FSA website:

The study, which took the form of a ‘systematic review of literature’, was carried out by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM).
LSHTM’s team of researchers, led by Alan Dangour, reviewed all papers published over the past 50 years that related to the nutrient content and health differences between organic and conventional food.

However, the report seems to entirely ignore the negative impacts of having increased amounts of chemicals in the form of herbicides and pesticides in non-organic foods.

Peter Melchett, policy director at the Soil Association in the UK, said:

"We are disappointed in the conclusions the researchers have reached. “The review rejected almost all of the existing studies of comparisons between organic and non-organic nutritional differences.“This was because these studies did not meet particular criteria fixed by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, which carried out the review.“Although the researchers say that the differences between organic and non-organic food are not ’important’, due to the relatively few studies, they report in their analysis that there are higher levels of beneficial nutrients in organic compared to non-organic foods.”
He also expressed the Soil Association’s disappointment that results of a European Union-funded study were not included.“There are limited studies available on the health benefits of organic versus non-organic food,” he added.

"The review identified 162 articles published between January 1958 and February 2008 and found a third met its quality criteria."

So the FSA have given us this recommendation based upon less than 60 articles that have been carried out since 1958? That's not much more than one article per annum?

The EU have been funding a new study on Organic Food which is due to have it's results released in the next few weeks. It appears that this FSA report has been wrapped up nicely before it could be influenced by any new info. A previous EU study carried out in 2007 clearly states the higher nutritional value of Organically produced food, and the coming study is expected to echo this.

In the wake of all the developments globally with crop failure, Monsanto's henchmen getting into positions of influence in the Obama Administration and the FDA... it appears the PR wheels of the FSA are now getting in quick with some propaganda of their own.
I'm sure the Bio-tech giants are rubbing their greedy hands together! The MSM are running away with this story and taking it everywhere without ANY proper analytical thought or balance.. just "parroting" to the people what the FSA have said!!!!

I was happy at least, to see that the BBC Breakfast tv show had someone with some ability to debate intelligently on their coverage of this story this morning. It made me REALLY swear into my coffee though to hear the moronic side-stepping of the FSA idiot who had been selected to be condescending to the masses on live television.
I don't know how she managed to avoid boxing the gormless twerp.

:-(

Monsanto has their fox guarding the chickens!

Well, much to my dismay, the FDA have appointed Michael Taylor as Senior Adviser to their commisioner Margaret Hamburg!
Michael has been recently a research professor from George Washington University but is no stranger to the FDA.

He previously began working as a litigating attorney for the FDA in 1976, serving as deputy commissioner for policy from 1991 to 1994 and as administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the Department of Agriculture from 1994 to
1996.

This was the period during which the FDA were constructing their GM policy (1991-1992) and GM foods were allowed onto the market without any required safety studies, despite warnings from scientists!!
While Taylor was at the FDA in the early 90's, he also oversaw the policy regarding Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (rbGH/rbST) -- injected into cows to increase milk supply.

• Taylor also determined that milk from injected cows did not require any special labeling.
• And as a gift to his future employer Monsanto, he wrote a white paper suggesting that if companies ever had the audacity to label their products as not using rbGH, they should also include a disclaimer stating that according to the FDA, there is no difference between milk from treated and untreated cows.
  Taylor's disclaimer was also a lie. Monsanto's own studies and FDA scientists officially acknowledged differences in the drugged milk. No matter. Monsanto used Taylor's white paper as the basis to successfully sue dairies that labeled their products as rbGH-free.

So WHY does Michael Taylor seem to have been so Pro-Monsanto?

He had been Monsanto's attorney before becoming policy chief at the FDA. Soon after, he became Monsanto's vice president and chief lobbyist.

WE really MUST get researching these and other articles and make some noise about this.

From an article on appomattoxnews.com, (Linked here):

The Organic Consumers Association is urging its members to contact President Obama, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (oversees FDA) to demand Michael Taylor’s resignation, and express their opposition to Dennis Wolff’s appointment.

Now, if you remember Tom Vilsack background in supporting GM crops... (here) and my old vlog here has more links on Mr Vilsack....
Well, I'm not sure how much interest he'll have in any petitions, but this only emphasises how tighter the situation is becoming. TIME TO ACT FAST!!!!

Since Agri-Pulse first reported in March 2009 that Michael Taylor was the leading candidate to staff the White House Food Safety Working Group, Organic Consumers Association members have sent 17,380 letters to the Obama Administration asking that the working group be kept free of former industry lobbyists and supporters of
genetically engineered foods.

Bad bad bad news indeed!
:-(

The Future of Food

StarrJaded uploaded this video on her YouTube channel, "The Future of Food"

It's a must watch film, please help to make it viral.

The entire film can be viewed and downloaded from here:

http://www.thefutureoffood.com/

Sign up for the 30 day challenge to avoid eating GMO foods, learn how to get GM free:

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/Home/index.cfm