Doubling Down on Monsanto
Ronnie Cummins- Organic Consumers Assoc.
ESSAY OF THE WEEK
Doubling Down
As soon as the newswires lit up last week with the report from the World Health Organization (WHO) that glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, “probably” causes cancer in humans, Monsanto doubled down on its efforts to deny the truth about what’s in your food.
We doubled down, too. And so did an anonymous donor in New England who stepped up to match your donations to our March online fundraising campaign.
When the damning report on glyphosate broke, the Biotech Bully’s public relations flacks flatly denied the claims, and immediately set out to attack the report and the scientists who wrote it—just as they’ve attacked every other credible scientist and study questioning the safety of the world’s most widely used herbicide.
Meanwhile this week on Capitol Hill, a bill written by industry lobbyists to preempt states’ rights to pass GMO labeling laws, was reintroduced by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.). The bill, dubbed the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act, is a desperate attempt by Monsanto and Big Food to keep consumers in the dark about what’s in their food—including “accepted allowable” residues of cancer-causing glyphosate.
It is critical that we keep the pressure on Monsanto and the Junk Food Giants by continuing to launch state GMO labeling campaigns. That’s why OCA is leading the new GMO labeling campaign in Maine this legislative season, and lending background support to other New England states, including Massachusetts, whose grassroots coalitions are working fast and furiously to pass GMO labeling laws before Congress moves to stomp them out.
This latest report from WHO should have every consumer alarmed—and ready to fight back.
TOP NEWS OF THE WEEK
It's Back. And It's Worse.
Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) didn’t like the fact that consumer groups renamed his bill to kill state GMO labeling laws the "Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act." So, in order to appear to be on the side of consumers who want the right to know if their food contains GMOs, Pompeo has reintroduced the bill, [LINK TO COME] with a new plan.
The new-and-improved (but really much worse) DARK Act would still do what it set out to do—strip states of their century-old rights to pass food labeling laws. But the bill now also includes a scheme for a national, uniform standard for labeling products non-GMO—a new program that would be overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Really? Pompeo, a member of the Republican Party which purports to stand for states’ rights and is allegedly anti-big government, wants to create yet another federal government-run program? This time, to certify non-GMO? We fail to see how that's preferable to just requiring food manufacturers to do what they already do in more than 60 other countries—simply state whether or not their products contain GMOS?
The DARK Act 2.0 was introduced on the heels of a hearing held this week by the House Committee on Agriculture to, the committee said, examine the “Cost and Impacts of States Implementing Mandatory Biotechnology Labeling Laws.” During that hearing, industry trotted out all of its talking points, including false claims that labeling will cost food manufacturers millions of dollars, a cost they’ll have to pass on to consumers. Never mind that study after study has proven otherwise. That food manufacturers change their labels all the time. And that in countries where GMO labeling is required, costs have not been passed on to consumers.
Pompeo’s bill has nothing to do with protecting consumer or states’ rights, and everything to do with protecting the profits of those companies—like Monsanto and Coca-Cola—who have essentially written this law. It’s an outrage. And we will do everything in our power to stop it dead in its tracks.
BLOG POST OF THE WEEK
Sorry, Monsanto.
A few weeks ago, I spoke by phone with Cathleen Enright, executive vice president of the Biotech Industry Organization (BIO). (Long story).
During the course of our conversation, when we touched on the subject of the science behind the debate over whether or not GMOs are “safe” (me arguing that there’s no scientific consensus on safety) Enright said, “Then you must not believe in climate change, either.”
I glossed over that accusation, though it struck me as odd. And random. Until less than a week later, on March 9 (2015), an article appeared in the Guardian under this headline: “The anti-GM lobby appears to be taking a page out of the Climategate playbook.”
That’s when I realized what I should have known. Enright’s comment wasn’t random at all. It’s just a new twist on an old talking point—from an industry on the verge of crumbling under the weight of an avalanche of new credible, scientific evidence exposing not only the dangers of GMO crops and the toxic chemicals used to grow them, but the extent to which both Monsanto and U.S. government agencies like the EPA, FDA and USDA have covered up those dangers. (Side note: Turns out the authors of the Guardian piece all have ties to, surprise, the biotech industry).
Here are just a few examples of the latest reports, articles and books exposing the dangers of GMOs, Big Ag’s toxic chemicals and evidence of a decades-long cover-up to keep consumers in the dark.
ACTION ALERTIt Causes Cancer. Ban It. In 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raised the allowed limits of glyphosate residue for various crops, including soybean oil and potatoes. This despite a steady stream of new studies linking glyphosate to a long list of health concerns.
As for testing foods for glyphosate, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) doesn’t. Because, the agency says, it’s “too expensive.”
Now, an agency of the World Health Organization says glyphosate is “probably” causing cancer in humans. Yes, in fact, Monsanto is making us sick.
What will it take for the EPA and USDA to listen to the real science—not the “fake” science bought and paid for by Monsanto, which by the way sells $6 billion worth of glyphosate every year?
TAKE ACTION: Tell the EPA: Ban Monsanto’s Cancer-Causing Roundup Herbicide! |
|
||
ACTION ALERTWe're for It. Mostly. The people who advise the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on what to tell Americans to eat have issued their latest round of new recommendations. According to the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC), Americans should eat “less red and processed meat.” For two reasons. One, too much red and processed meat is unhealthy. And two, the production of red and processed meat is bad for the environment. We agree that Americans should eat less meat in general, including less red meat. We also agree that red and processed meat—when that meat comes from factory farms—is bad for your health, bad for the environment and has no place in the American diet. However, red meat derived from animals raised on pasture, using sustainable rotational grazing practices, is not only good for your health (when eaten in moderation), but also improves the environment. So where do we come down on the new dietary guidelines recommendations? We’re siding with the advisory committee because the committee didn’t look at the impact of grass-fed, pastured red meat—a growing market that the Organic Consumers Association fully supports. It only analyzed the impact of red meat from factory farms on human health and on the environment, and concluded, rightly so, that red and processed meat from factory farms is bad for both. Who isn’t siding with the new recommendations? The four factory-farm companies that produce nearly all of the meat eaten in the U.S.—Tyson Foods, JBS, Cargill and Smithfield—because those companies don’t want the new dietary guidelines to cut into their sales. |
|
||
VIDEO OF THE WEEKOh, but You Are You’ve seen the signs and social media posts: “I am not a science experiment.” But you are. We all are. And this new documentary, out on April 17, explains why. From actor Sean Penn and Emmy award-winning journalists Dana Nachman and Don Hardy comes a new documentary, "The Human Experiment." The film examines the personal stories of people who believe their lives have been affected by chemicals. “The Human Experiment” suggests that it’s not the big chemical spill we should be afraid of, but the insidious, much-lower levels of exposure to toxic chemicals, inflicted over generations and affecting every person on the planet. The Human Experiment' lifts the veil on this shocking reality—where untested chemicals are ubiquitous in our products and the health of future generations is on the line. The film follows a band of unlikely activists who are fighting back. What will it take to stop this vast human experiment before it’s too late? |
|
||
NEW STUDYAnother Reason to Ban RoundupWe know we have a problem with antibiotic-resistance in this country. According to 2013 statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at least 2 million people annually become infected with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics. Another 23,000 people will die from those infections. We know the reckless over-use of antibiotics on factory farms is a huge contributor to the growing resistance to antibiotics. Now, it seems, so is glyphosate, the key active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup. According to a study conducted at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, commonly used herbicides, including the world’s most used herbicide Roundup, can cause bacteria to become resistant to antibiotics. |
|
||
LITTLE BYTESEssential Reading for the Week E-Motion: Trapped Emotional Energy Is Linked to Disease
Roundup Herbicide Is Endocrine Disruptor in Human Cells at Drinking Water Levels
At White Oak Pastures, Grass-Fed Beef Is Only the Beginning
Exposure to Hormone Disrupting Chemicals Costs Billions in Lost Brain Power
Dr. Jane Goodall Condemns Supporters of GM Food as Being 'Anti-Science'
Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How GMOs Came Into Being - Part 2 |
