$3 BILLION BIG AG LAND GRAB FREE FOR ALL - AFRICA

Obama's 'Poverty-Relieving' Plan for Africa a Profit Boon for Giant Agribusiness

$3 billion investment from BigAg leaves sustainable agriculture, small-scale farmers' voices behind

- Common Dreams staff

President Obama's announcement today of $3 billion in private investments in a poverty- and hunger-relieving plan for Africa is set to be a boon for giant agribusiness, a move critics say leaves small-scale farmers and agro-ecological methods in the dust.
“The rhetoric is all about small-scale producers, but they haven’t yet been a part of the G-8’s conversation,” Lamine Ndiaye of Oxfam said. (photo: Oxfam International)
The pledged investments come from agricultural behemoths including Dupont, Monsanto and Cargill.
The G8, now meeting in Maryland, has presented a view of private investments as a way of solving poverty.
“The G8 must not give in to the temptation to make bold and convenient assumptions about the private sector as a development panacea,” said Gawain Kripke, Director of Policy and Research at Oxfam America.
Raj Shah, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, argued that a public-sector solution to alleviating hunger is "highly unlikely." Kripke, however, dismisses that claim.
“There is no evidence that the growing focus on private sector engagement at the expense of other approaches will truly deliver for the fight against hunger,” said Kripke.
The planned investment does not bring the voices of small-scale farmers to the table, but does set a plan for massive profits to be reaped by giant agribusiness.  “The rhetoric is all about small-scale producers, but they haven’t yet been a part of the G-8’s conversation,” Lamine Ndiaye of Oxfam said. Giant agribusiness' "objective is not to fight against hunger; their objective is to make money” Ndiaye said.
Ronnie Cummins, Director of Organic Consumers Association, states that the Obama approach to alleviating hunger through the investment of corporations is "misguided." "To help the world’s two billion small farmers and rural villagers survive and prosper we need to help them gain access, not to genetically engineered seeds and expensive chemical inputs; but rather access to land, water, and the tools and techniques of traditional, sustainable farming: non-patented open-pollinated seeds, crop rotation, natural compost production, beneficial insects, and access to local markets."
"Bill Gates, Monsanto, and Barack Obama may believe that genetic engineering and chemical-intensive agriculture are the tools to feed the world, but a look at the 'fatal harvest' of modern agribusiness tells a different story. Not only can climate-friendly, healthy organic agriculture practices feed the world, but in fact organic farming is the only way we are going to be able to feed the world,” added Cummins.

* * *

Reuters: Obama to announce $3 billion from private sector to relieve hunger in Africa

U.S. President Barack Obama will announce a new public-private partnership program on Friday, seeking to spur this weekend’s summit of the wealthy G8 to focus on market methods to boost production, particularly among hardscrabble small-scale farmers in Africa who may hold the key to improved world food supplies. [...]
Other partnership projects include seed product packs tailored to African farmers from Swiss agrochemicals giant Syngenta, improved telecommunications access from British telecoms firm Vodafone and a potential African site for a proposed $2 billion fertilizer production facility planned by Norway’s Yara International.

* * *

McClatchy: Obama to announce Africa farm plan to relieve poverty

President Barack Obama will announce an alliance Friday with nearly 50 companies to boost productivity among small farmers in Africa with the goal of lifting 50 million people out of poverty.
Business executives from agricultural giants such as DuPont and Monsanto will join Obama, along with the leaders of three African countries who have pledged policy changes that U.S. officials say will improve business climates and encourage investment.

* * *

Statement from Ronnie Cummins, Director of Organic Consumers Association:

“Study after study has shown that organic, agro-ecological farming practices on small diverse farms can boost yields in Africa and the developing world from 100-1000% over the yields of chemical-intensive or genetically engineered mono-crop farms. To help the world’s two billion small farmers and rural villagers survive and prosper we need to help them gain access, not to genetically engineered seeds and expensive chemical inputs; but rather access to land, water, and the tools and techniques of traditional, sustainable farming: non-patented open-pollinated seeds, crop rotation, natural compost production, beneficial insects, and access to local markets. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) reduce crop yields, and increase pesticide use, even according to USDA statistics. Bill Gates, Monsanto, and Barack Obama may believe that genetic engineering and chemical-intensive agriculture are the tools to feed the world, but a look at the “fatal harvest” of modern agribusiness tells a different story. Not only can climate-friendly, healthy organic agriculture practices feed the world, but in fact organic farming is the only way we are going to be able to feed the world.”

Source:  http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/05/18-3

THE HIGH PRICE OF ORGANIC FOOD? CAN YOU SAY USDA SCAM, BOYS & GIRLS?

The Organic Watergate: Alarming Report Reveals USDA's Cozy Relationship with Corporate Agribusinesses in 'Organics'

- Common Dreams staff

Today, the Cornucopia Institute released a report titled The Organic Watergate, revealing widespread corruption in the USDA's organic food monitoring panel -- the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB).

The NOSB is supposed to monitor any synthetic ingredient used in organic farming or food production, to "assure that it is not a threat to human health or the environment"; however, as the report reveals, the USDA has been "stacking" the review panel with agribusiness executives who have "increasingly facilitated the use of questionable synthetic additives and even dangerous chemicals in organic foods."

The report charges the USDA with "violations of federal law, ignoring congressional intent, that has created a climate of regulatory abuse and corporate exploitation."

In one instance a large Dutch-based multinational conglomerate, Royal DSM N.V./Martek Biosciences, partnered with the nation's largest dairy processor, Dean Foods, to approve synthetic additives for use in infant formula, dairy and other products. The additives derive from genetically mutated vegetation and are processed with petrochemical solvents; yet, they were easily passed as 'organic' by the corporate interest stacked panel.

The report highlights countless instances such as this, stretching over the past three US administrations.

"I wish I was making this up, but one of the newest contractors to fulfill this review function is The Organic Center, the nonprofit offshoot of the Organic Trade Association, an agribusiness lobby group,” said Mark A. Kastel, Codirector of The Cornucopia Institute. "This is the proverbial fox watching the organic chicken coop."

"We implore consumers not to reject organics because a handful of corporations have acted recklessly and the USDA has failed to do their legally mandated job. Organic farmers, and their ethical processing partners, need your support now more than ever," Kastel added. "And health conscious families deserve authentic organic food."

* * *

The Cornucopia Institute: The Organic Watergate: Advocates Condemn Corruption and USDA's Cozy Relationship with Corporate Agribusinesses in Organics

The nation's leading organic farming watchdog, The Cornucopia Institute, is challenging what it calls a "conspiracy" between corporate agribusiness interests and the USDA that has increasingly facilitated the use of questionable synthetic additives and even dangerous chemicals in organic foods. In its new white paper, The Organic Watergate, Cornucopia details violations of federal law, ignoring congressional intent, that has created a climate of regulatory abuse and corporate exploitation. [...]
The Cornucopia report charges the USDA with "stacking" the NOSB with agribusiness executives that all too often have "sold out" the interests of organic farmers and consumers.
"The organic community came together and actually asked the government, in order to maintain a level playing field and organic integrity, to regulate our industry," said Mark A. Kastel, Codirector of The Cornucopia Institute. "How many other industries have ever asked the federal government for tough regulations and enforcement?"
In order to placate concerns of federal involvement in the nascent organic industry, Congress specifically earmarked the majority of the 15 seats on the NOSB for farmers, consumers, scientists and environmentalists as a way to balance the power of commercial interests involved in organic food manufacturing, marketing and retail sales. [...]
"We have seen the USDA, in the past, appoint an executive from General Mills, as an example, to a consumer slot on the board. This gross scoffing at the law Congress passed as a safeguard against corporate domination needs to end right now," Kastel said. "We expected better from the Obama administration. Either the USDA will immediately remediate this problem or we will defend the organic law in federal court."
Cornucopia’s white paper documents the long-term abuse of congressional intent, by stacking the board with agribusiness operatives, an illegal practice that has stretched over the past three administrations.
Another request in Cornucopia's letter to Secretary Vilsack was to reform the selection of independent scientists reviewing synthetics in organics, stating that the industry needs an impartial board and the board needs truly impartial expert advisors. [...]
The Cornucopia Institute is collecting signed proxies, downloadable from their website’s home page, asking organic industry stakeholders, including farmers and consumers, to sign the proxy and join in the demand that the USDA operate the organic program legally.

# # #

Source:    http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/05/18-5

OH, THE SWEET DUMBING DOWN

Sugar might make you stupid

By Sarah Laskow

At this point, the message about eating too much processed sugar is clear: That stuff screws up your body in serious ways. But a new study suggests that too much sugar could do more than that. It could mess up your brain, as well.

Technically, what this study found is that too much sugar can screw up rats’ brains. The study let rats OD on high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), and found that it disrupted their ability to learn, think, and remember. Here’s what Fernando Gomez-Pinilla, the UCLA neurosurgery professor who led the study, had to say about it:

“Insulin is important in the body for controlling blood sugar, but it may play a different role in the brain, where insulin appears to disturb memory and learning,” he said. “Our study shows that a high-fructose diet harms the brain as well as the body. This is something new.”

Happily, the study also found that supplemental doses of omega-3 fatty acids can mitigate the negative effects of a long-term sugar binge. So if you’re unwilling or unable to stay away from HFCS, you should try to eat a lot of flaxseeds — or just opt for a less mentally challenging job, like governor of Texas.

Source:   http://grist.org/list/sugar-might-make-you-stupid/

STOP PRIVATIZATION OF POULTRY INSPECTION!

Don't let USDA privatize chicken inspection!

Three chickens per second.

Under a new plan proposed by USDA, that's how fast inspectors would have to conduct quality control inspections in poultry factories -- six times the current rate.

Worse, USDA's proposed rules privatize these inspections, letting the industry police itself by replacing highly trained USDA food inspectors with poultry facility employees who have no required training.¹

Salmonella in our meat and poultry makes nearly a million people sick every year in the US -- it's our number one cause of food-borne illness. USDA's new plan could make the problem even worse, and we have just days to stop it.

Tell the USDA: Don't weaken poultry inspection standards!

Food safety groups are opposing the standards and veteran poultry inspectors are calling them "a big step back," and "a very, very bad idea."²

Current rules provide for three inspectors to examine 140 birds per minute. Under the new rules, inspections would speed up to 200 per minute - with only one inspector on the line. Even the professionals say that is way too fast.

With far less time to inspect each chicken, unsanitary, defective poultry meat has a higher chance of making it into our supermarkets. And while USDA says it would save less than $30 million per year on poultry inspection costs, it could cost the agency (and us) far more to deal with potential increases in foodborne illness.

Speeding up the poultry line isn't just hazardous to our health -- it's also hazardous to those who work in poultry factories. Poultry workers already have an alarming rate of workplace injury from conditions which include a workplace full sharp objects like knives and scissors, and from the repetitive nature of poultry factory tasks. Speeding up the chicken line will only make conditions even more hazardous.³

Tell the USDA: Don't weaken poultry inspection standards! Submit a comment before the May 29th deadline.

But while food and worker safety will undoubtedly suffer, the new rules are expected to result in a quarter of a billion dollar windfall to poultry companies.

The safety of our food, especially poultry which has such a high incidence of contamination, should be the highest priority of USDA. If their answer is less quality control inspection, more dangerous workplace conditions, and allowing an industry with a horrible safety record to police itself, it's probably time to go back to the drawing board.

1. "Poultry Inspectors Protest Inspection Proposal at USDA," Food Saftey News, April 3, 2012
2. Privatized Meat Inspection Experiment Jeopardizes Food Safety," Food and Water Watch, March 7, 2012
3. Civil rights group: Stop speedup in poultry plants!," People's World, May 10, 2012

WHAT IF THEY HAD AN UNCONTROLLED GENETIC EXPERIMENT AND...WE WERE ITS SUBJECTS?

By Clean Food Earth Woman May 18, 2012

What we don’t know is poisoning us. A few weeks ago, I saw Jeffrey Smith, Founder of The Institute For Responsible Technology (http://www.responsibletechnology.org/ ), featured speaker at last month’s April 21, 2012 Green Festival Conference at the Javits Center in Manhattan. Jeffrey began by polling the crowd, asking with a show of hands, how high they would rate themselves of their knowledge of GMO’s (genetically modified organisms). Most people were in the category of Zero-20%, zero being on the lowest end of knowledge, when he started his talk. A few hands went up for 80-100% right away, but most of the hands were in the lower 50th percentile.    

He went on to explain findings as early as 1998 by U.K.’s Dr. Arpad Pusztai, on rats, yielding organ failure, farmer’s suicides, cancers, and an explosion of allergic reactions, developmental and reproductive disorders, linked to GMO’s. He clearly defined how livestock animals provided a choice between GMO and Non-GMO feed consistently chose Non-GMO feed, and how the exposure of livestock animals grazing in GMO fields has yielded 100% death rate after grazing, along with skin lesions and other bodily skin and eye rashes. He identified 9 GMO food crops, the top two of which are corn and soy, followed by sugar beets, and explained how they are linked to dozens of human health and livestock disorders. When we eat the livestock fed with these crops, we are eating all the chemicals and drugs these animals were exposed to.

By the end of the talk, Jeffrey polled the audience once more and asked how they rated themselves on their new knowledge on GMO’s after the information he provided to them. The show of hands was drastically skewed up into the 80-100% category for those who believed that they were much better prepared to talk about GMO’s. This showed that over 50% of the audience had gained vastly better knowledge in just these few minutes. He also asked for a show of hands of those who would now avoid GMO’s, based on his talk. The response was nearly at 100%. He asked how many would feel comfortable telling their friends, co-workers and families about GMO’s, based on this information. Again, this yielded a strong majority of those in the 80-100% category of those who are planning on telling others about GMO’s.

A recent study conducted by a German University found very high concentrations of Glyphosate, a carcinogenic chemical found in herbicides like Monsanto’s Roundup ( http://naturalsociety.com/roundup/ ), in all urine samples tested ( http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin ). This news comes only one month after it was found that glyphosate, contained in Monsanto’s Roundup, is contaminating the groundwater  http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-carcinogenic-roundup-herbicide-contaminating-water-supply/ ) in the areas in which it is used. What does this mean? It means that toxic glyphosate is now polluting the world’s drinking water through the widespread contamination of aquifers, wells and springs.

Roundup Ready genes, the ONES SPICED INTO the cells of and SPRAYED ON GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) crops, no longer work. Resistant, stronger super weeds are taking over because their non-target natural predators have also been killed by these deadly chemicals. The remedy for super weeds? AGENT ORANGE 2,4D, and even deadlier chemical (YES....that's Vietnam War defoliant Agent Orange) This blanket poisoning is FDA and USDA approved as farmland and public health is being attacked. Why? The weeds that Roundup was supposed to kill have come back stronger than ever.

Glyphosate, a deadly chemical component of Roundup, is also leaving behind its residue on Roundup Ready crops, causing the now catastrophic Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) of bees (http://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/Bees&Pesticides_SOS_FINAL_May2012.pdf )and massive bat die-offs; both of which are needed to pollinate food crops all around our planet.  Glyphosate is now known to contributing to escalating rates of mental illness and obesity through the depletion of beneficial gut flora that directly regulates these functions. But it certainly doesn’t stop there.

These GMO crops, first introduced in 1996, have never been long term tested for environmental impact or human health damage. They all require deadly pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, by non-disclosure contracts the farmer keeps with sellers, such as Monsanto and Syngenta. And, by contracts, the farmer cannot use seed from last year to sow this year’s crop; the farmer is required by contract to buy new seeds or be sued.

Consider this: If you or I took a spin out on the local water body and were caught dumping a boatload of deadly chemicals into the water, what would happen to us? Would we be arrested and sent to the big house? What if that boatload of poison was the FDA, USDA approved Roundup used in GMO’s? Whether directly dumped into the bay or spliced into and sprayed over crops, it is all just plain deadly chemicals.

This is 84% of what we find in grocery stores is made of un-labled GMO ingredients, (along with many other chemicals and drugs, used in the production of GMO’s) all over the nation. This is the state of our American food supply, and none of it is required to be labeled by law. Is the message: If you’re gonna poison, poison BIG?

Sixteen years into this genetic experiment, peoples all over the globe have banned GMO’s (http://naturalsociety.com/banned-in-27-countries-monsanto-rbgh-dairy-milk-products/ ). Why not the USA? Is it because Monsanto spent $6.3 Million lobbying Congress in 2011, while enjoying over $11 Billion (yes, that’s BILLION) profit that year?

Connecticut Governor Molloy just caved on a Right to Know If It’s GMO law that 92% of the citizens of his state demanded, claiming Monsanto would sue the state. Twenty States have initiated Right To Know If It’s GMO Laws, and Monsanto is threatening to sue them. Why? Because they have $6.3 M to lobby Congress and $11B (yes, that’s still BILLION) to sue anyone they like. Like us. Polls all over the US show again and again that 98% of Americans want these food ingredients labeled. Who do Molloy and the rest of Congress work for, Monsanto or the 98% of us whose lives they are voted in by us to protect?

There is a Right To Know if It’s GMO Ballot Initiative in California, The Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act that Californians will vote on in the November national elections. It took a million signatures to get it on the ballot. If voted for approval, California (8^th largest economy in the world) will be the first state to demand by law that GMO ingredients in any food sold in that state – be labeled.  If you know anyone in California, you can check and be sure they know about this law that will start the labeling ball rolling ( http://www.labelgmos.org/ ). We can call and write our elected representatives (one letter is considered to be the equivalent to the voices of 50,000 voters).

Biologist Dr. Barry Commoner calls GMO’s, now writing a book on genetics, well into his 90’s, thinks that GMO’s are the largest uncontrolled genetic experiment in the history of mankind. Isn’t it time we demand the right to know and label these ingredients so we have the choice whether or not to buy and eat GMO’s?
Source: http://southampton.patch.com/users/kathleen-furey/blog_posts 
Hey, We've All Gotta Eat!