BOXER-DEFAZIO INTRODUCE FEDERAL GMO LABELING BILL. WHAT TOOK YOU SO LONG?

Published on Friday, April 26, 2013 by Food & Water Watch Blog

Why Federal Labeling of Genetically-Engineered Food Matters

by Anna Ghosh

If we had to pick the most prevalent food issue of 2013 so far, the fight to get genetically engineered food labeled is probably it. Citizen-led campaigns have been successful getting legislation introduced in more than 20 states; inspired by California’s Prop 37, which suffered a narrow defeat in November after chemical and Big Food corporations poured millions into the campaign.
But consumer demand for GE labeling is not a new development. For years, polls have shown that the majority of Americans want GE food labeled, just as it is in more than 60 other countries including China, Japan and Russia.
Finally, it appears that Washington is beginning to listen. Yesterday, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) have introduced a bill to order the Food and Drug Administration to mandate the labeling of genetically engineered foods. The bill has bipartisan support with 20 combined co-sponsors between the Senate and the House.
Clearly, the statewide campaigns have played an integral role in getting Congress to pay attention to the fact that their constituents want to know whether or not they’re eating and feeding GE food to their families. And statewide initiatives continue to be critically important to ensure that consumers have the right to make informed choices about the food they buy. This is why Monsanto and its agrochemical colleagues will likely dump millions into misinformation campaigns to defeat Initiative 522 being voted on in Washington in November.
But even if Washingtonians prevail and I-522 makes GE food labels the law in their state, there will still be 49 other states where consumers will continue to be in the dark. This is why in the long run we need strong, uncompromising federal legislation to give all Americans the basic information they want about how their food was produced. Tell your Members of Congress to co-sponsor Boxer/DeFazio’s legislation if they haven’t already.

© 2013 Food & Water Watch

Anna Ghosh is a writer and activist for environmental causes and sustainable food. She is a co-founder of the Kitchen Table Talks discussion series and was on the Slow Food Nation communications advisory committee. She is currently the Western Region Communications Manager for the consumer advocacy non-profit Food & Water Watch.
Source:  http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/26-2

CHICAGO: SHUT 50 SCHOOLS IS GROOVY - JUST SO LONG AS YOU PARTNER ON RECYCLING WITH COCA-COLA

Published on Friday, April 26, 2013 by Common Dreams

Reduce, Reuse, Rebrand? Coca-Cola and Chicago Team Up to Greenwash

by Anna Lappé

What if you woke up one morning to learn that your community had become enlisted to advertise for Coca-Cola? You didn't have a choice. People in neighborhoods across your city were told the same thing. That's basically what happened in the city of Chicago this week when Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced a partnership with Coca-Cola. In the announcement on Monday, the City explained that the soft drink behemoth will pay for new recycling carts across the city of Chicago.
According to the Mayor's office, Coca-Cola is providing a $2.59 million grant to buy 25,000 recycling carts this year and 25,000 more over the next five years to replace damaged ones. But, at the press conference making the big announcement, the Chicago Tribune reported, neither the Mayor nor Coke reps mentioned that "photos of bottles of Coke and cartons of Coke-owned Minute Maid orange juice" will be part of the diagrams on the carts, showing what can and can't be recycled.
The city says this is a win-win. Residents get support in recycling, the city gets subsidized bins. But at what price? Call me old fashioned, but I thought we still lived in a country where you had a right not to be used as a marketing tool by multinational companies.
The new bins will be placed in the alleys that are found throughout the city. If you've ever spent time in Chicago you know what those alleys mean to the city. People hang out all the time on their back porches, which face the alleys. There's often more activity in the alleys than on the sidewalks out front of apartments and houses. My husband grew up on the South side of Chicago. "As a kid," he said, "I spent all my time playing in those alleys. That's where the city life exists, in the alleys."
When I told my friend who spent five years working with youth in Chicago about it, she said: "In a city where many neighborhoods don't have enough access to public space, plenty of kids play in alleys, set up b-ball hoops and pick up soccer games. It's as if Coke and the food industry has bought the rights to sponsor every step our youth take from school to home and everywhere in between."

No one will deny that the city--all cities--need revenue to support important programs, like recycling, but there are many other ways to generate it other than enlisting your residents to become advertisers.

As the Tribune points out, Coca-Cola "has been fighting government efforts around the country to place restrictions on its sugary beverages." It is no coincidence that this announcement gets Coca-Cola positive PR by linking them "to a large-scale environmentally friendly program in a big city," while the company fights efforts across the country that would protect public health.
Will you join me in letting Rahm know recycling bins should be commercial-free?

Anna is the author of Diet for a Hot Planet: The Climate Crisis at the End of Your Fork and co-author of Grub: Ideas for an Urban Organic Kitchen and Hope’s Edge. She is a founding principal of the Small Planet Institute.
Source:  http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/26

ROUNDUP HERBICIDE STUDY: KILLING ALL THE WAY UP THE FOOD CHAIN

Published on Friday, April 26, 2013 by Common Dreams

Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, may be "the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment," say authors

- Andrea Germanos, staff writer

The active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup herbicide may be "the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment," being responsible for a litany of health disorders and diseases including Parkinson’s, cancer and autism, according to a new study.
"Negative impact on the body" from glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup, "is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body," according to a new study. (Photo: astridmn/flickr) It's "the most popular herbicide on the planet," widely used on crops like corn and soy genetically engineered to be "Roundup Ready," and sprayed on weeds in lawns across the US.  But in the peer-reviewed study published last Thursday in the journal Entropy, authors Anthony Samsel, an independent scientist and consultant, and Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at MIT, crush the industry's claims that the herbicide glyphosate is non-toxic and as safe as aspirin.
Looking at the impacts of glyphosate on gut bacteria, Samsel and Seneff found that the herbicide "enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and environmental toxins," and is a “textbook example” of "the disruption of homeostasis by environmental toxins."
The researchers point to a potential long list of disorders that glyphosate, in combination with other environmental toxins, could contribute to, including inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, depression, ADHD, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, multiple sclerosis, cancer, cachexia, infertility, and developmental malformations.
The herbicide's "Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body," they write.
The authors conclude:

Given the known toxic effects of glyphosate reviewed here and the plausibility that they are negatively impacting health worldwide, it is imperative for more independent research to take place to validate the ideas presented here, and to take immediate action, if they are verified, to drastically curtail the use of glyphosate in agriculture. Glyphosate is likely to be pervasive in our food supply, and, contrary to being essentially nontoxic, it may in fact be the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment.

The new findings may add further momentum to concerns from food safety and food sovereignty advocates who have challenged Monsanto's grip on corporate agriculture and its genetically engineered crops.
In a "March Against Monsanto" in cities in the US and beyond, activists plan to gather on May 25 to highlight environmental and health concerns from genetically engineered crops and call out the corporatism that allows "Organic and small farmers [to] suffer losses while Monsanto continues to forge its monopoly over the world’s food supply, including exclusive patenting rights over seeds and genetic makeup.
To see more about the march, go to the action's Facebook page here.
The full article in Entropy is viewable here.

__________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
Source:  http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/26-3

LIKE FOOD? LOVE BEES! BAN DEADLY NEONICOTINOID PESTICIDE!

Published on Friday, April 26, 2013 by Common Dreams

'We Speak for the Bees': Marchers Urge EU-Wide Ban of Killer Pesticides

'This is not abstract theorizing. Bees are dying out. Now.'

- Jon Queally, staff writer

Bee-keepers and apiarists dressed in their protective suits demonstrate outside the Palace of Westminster as they ramp up their campaign to show public opinion ahead of the European Commission vote on the proposal to ban bee-harming neonicotinoid pesticides, in London, Friday, April, 26, 2013. (Photo: Alastair Grant)They came to speak for the bees.
Ahead of an expected EU vote on Monday that will determine a possible ban on a class of pesticides that scientists say are killing off the continents' bees and other pollinators, a coalition of beekeepers, conservationists, gardeners, and environmental activists marched on Parliament in London on Friday as a way to urge the UK to join other European nations in supporting the ban.
Yellow and black dominated the scene as many in attendance dressed as bees, wore their apiary suits and carried signs that read "Like Food? Love Bees" and "No to Neonic," referring to pesticide class called neonicotinoids that a number of recent studies have tied directly to the decline of bee populations.
The organizers of the so-called "March of the Beekeepers" included Avaaz, Friends of the Earth, Buglife, Environmental Justice Foundation, Greenpeace, Pesticide Action Network UK, Soil Association and the group 38 Degrees.
"Ministers can't ignore the growing scientific evidence linking neonicotinoid insecticides to bee decline," said Friends of the Earth's campaigns director Andrew Pendleton. "Their claims to be concerned about bee health will ring hollow if they fail to back European moves to restrict the use of these chemicals."
He continued: "If we lose our bees and other vital pollinators it'll have a devastating impact on our food, gardens and environment. We urgently need tougher pesticide restrictions and a British Bee Action Plan to tackle all the threats they face." Protesters came together to demand Environment Minister Owen Patterson back moves to ban the worst bee-harming neonicotinoid pesticides. European countries will vote on the issue on Monday.
Underlining the urgency of the threat on Friday, Greenpeace's Graham Patterson issued a stark warning: "This is not abstract theorizing. Bees are dying out. Now."
He explained:

In the US, bee numbers have halved in the last few decades, with a 30% decline in the last five years. Several countries in Europe have suffered similar declines, with nearly 80% of Spanish hives lost.
This is, at least in part, due to a phenomenon called colony collapse disorder (CCD), where the worker bees from a hive mysteriously disappear. There’s general agreement that CCD is caused by  combination of factors including the varroa mite (a bee parasite), disease, monocultural farming and weather impacts exacerbated by climate change. The disagreement comes over whether pesticides, and particularly neonicotinoids, are a contributing factor.

And as the Guardian reports:

Bees and other wild insects such as moths, ladybirds and hoverflies, pollinate three-quarters of all food crops, but have been in serious decline in recent decades. Scientific research published in the world's most prestigious journals is increasingly linking neonicotiniods, the world's most widely used insecticides, to severe harm to bee colonies. The chemical industry, which makes billions a year from their products, insist their products are safe and banning them would harm food production.

Those chemical companies, led by firms Syngenta and Bayer, are fighting aggressively against the pending EU vote, as the Center for Media & Democracy's Rebekah Wilce recently documented.
Wilce reported:

Private letters recently obtained and released by Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) reveal that Bayer and Syngenta have engaged in furious lobbying against these measures. [...]
In the wake of EFSA's and the European Commission's recommendations and the subsequent failure of the European Member States to reach a qualified majority to put the ban in place effective July 2013, Bayer and Syngenta then launched what CEO called a "charm offensive to be seen as part of the solution rather than of the problem." For Syngenta, this consists of an upgrade of its PR sting "Operation Pollinator," in which the company proposes to provide payments to a few farmers to grow strips of flowers and other plants attractive to bees alongside their neonicotinoid-treated crops.

Paul de Zylva, also from Friends of the Earth, points out that claims that neonicotinoids "are safe" are claims with no basis in scientific review. "It's notable," he said, "that the words of ministers and civil servants sound just like those from the pesticides industry."
As Wilce notes in her reporting, support for the pesticide ban varies from country to country, but many expect the ban to pass based on a growing public opposition and consensus from the scientific evidence. That support, however, has not been cleary seen in the UK.
Pushing to create that that political will, of course, is the whole basis of the protest in London today and those coming to the defense of the bees and other pollinators declared the support of over 2.6 million people who signed a global petition supportive of the ban, with a stated goal of attracting 3 million.
The language of that petition follows:

Quietly, globally, billions of bees are dying, threatening our crops and food. But in days the European Union could ban the most poisonous pesticides, and pave the way to a global prohibition that would save bees from extinction.

Four EU countries have begun banning these poisons, and some bee populations are already recovering. Weeks ago the official European food safety watchdog stated for the first time that certain pesticides are fatally harming bees. Now legal experts and European politicians are calling for an immediate ban. But, Bayer and other giant pesticide producers are lobbying hard to keep them on the market. If we build a huge swarm of public outrage now, we can push the European Union to put our health and our environment before the profit of a few.

We know our voices count! Last year, our 1.2 million strong petition forced US authorities to open a formal consultation on pesticides -- now if we reach 3 million, we can persuade the EU to get rid of these crazy poisons and pave the way for a ban worldwide. Sign the urgent petition and share this with everyone -- Avaaz will deliver our message ahead of the key vote next week in Brussels.Source:   http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/26-2

OY.....GMOs ARE SOOOOOOOO NOT KOSHER! ANOTHER NAIL IN THE FRANKENFOOD COFFIN

Kosher Certification Bans All GMO Ingredients New Hot

Please help support eatLocalgrown by sharing this article!

Author

Daisy Luther

One group after another is denouncing the genetically modified poison on grocery store shelves, adding to the chorus of voices demanding real untainted food.
Natural Food Certifiers has announced today that any food product that contains GMOs is no longer eligible to be certified as kosher under their “Apple K” kosher certification program.
A press release stated:

“NFC was very proud to introduce the first “Natural Only” kosher supervision,” said NFC Director Rabbi Reuven Flamer. “It’s a logical application of our principle, ‘Start Naturally. Stay that Way.’ Therefore, the Natural Apple K cannot be placed on a product that contains GMOs,” Flamer explained.

“While according to the strict letter of Kosher food law a GMO food ingredient is not prohibited, in our view it is not natural.  Additionally, there is a Torah (religious)-based law to ‘guard your health’. GMOs are the number-one growing concern among health-conscious consumers and for businesses in the natural and organic food market, as well as in the conventional food industry,” said Rabbi Flamer.

“Recent studies show that GMOs may cause various kinds of health problems from digestive disturbances to food allergies, and that GMOs require more herbicides, which is really the opposite reason why GMOs were touted to be so environmentally helpful in the first place,” Rabbi Flamer added. “For all of the many reasons that GMOs raise a red flag, consumers simply don’t want them in their foods, and our clients want to accommodate their customers.”

Over the next 12 months, the company will phase out the certification of any product that contains GMO ingredients, and will no longer accept applications for certification of products that contain GMOs.
NFC has numerous natural food certification programs, including USDA Organic certification, Kosher certification (under the “Apple K” label), Vegan certification, and Gluten Guard, a gluten-free assurance program.
Each product submitted by a manufacturer for approval is carefully analyzed. The press release explains the process for all of the certification categories.  ”The process may include, but is not limited to, a request and review of the ingredient deck including country of origin and certificate of analysis, product testing, as well as inspection of manufacturing facilities.”
Whether or not your faith requires you to follow the Kosher food laws, this news should be celebrated by anyone who hopes to see the demise of Monsanto and the products created by their mad scientists.  While countries across the world are banning GMOs, the wheels are moving slowly in North America to even have GMOs labeled so that consumers can make an informed decision.  To have a large demographic refuse to allow genetically modified material in their food is yet another volley against the corruption that is evident in the unholy alliance of the FDA and Monsanto.
Source:  http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/11364-kosher-certification-bans-all-gmo-ingredients.html

PCB, DDT, AGENT ORANGE MAKERS SAY GMO'S ARE ALSO SAFE - NO FRANKENLABELS NEEDED

U.S. GMO food labeling drive has biotech industry biting back

By Carey Gillam

CHICAGO | Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:43pm EDT

(Reuters) - New efforts to force labeling of foods made with genetically modified crops, including a bill introduced by U.S. lawmakers Wednesday, have struck a nerve with biotech crop developers who say they are rushing to roll out a broad strategy to combat consumer concerns about their products.
Executives from Monsanto Co., DuPont, and Dow Chemical, among the world's largest developers of biotech crops and the chemicals used to help produce them, told Reuters this week they are putting together a campaign aimed at turning the tide on what they acknowledge is a growing public sentiment against genetically modified organisms (GMOs) used as ingredients in the nation's food supply.
Last year, the industry spent $40 million to defeat a labeling measure in California. But similar initiatives are underway now in more than 20 states, and the move by the big biotech firms is designed to thwart the spread of such initiatives, which the companies say would confuse consumers and roil the food manufacturing industry.
"Even when we prevail, we lose," said Cathy Enright, executive vice president for food and agriculture for the global Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO,) which includes Monsanto, DuPont, Dow Chemical as members.
"To try to oppose this state by state, that is unsustainable," she said.
The big biotech firms are still working out details of their plan, but it will likely have a large social media component, the company executives said. The group will focus on conveying what it says are the many benefits of biotech crops. Participants have not yet set a budget for the campaign, Enright said.
The most popular gene-altered crops withstand dousings of weed-killing chemicals and produce their own insect-killing toxins. Biotech corn, canola, soybeans, and other crops are used in human food and animal feed around the world and biotech companies say they are heavily regulated and thoroughly tested.
Proponents of labeling for GMO foods said momentum is on their side. Various groups have held rallies over the last several weeks in Washington, D.C., and at several state capitols to press the issue.
"They should be worried," said Scott Faber, executive director of the Just Label It campaign, which has petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to require labeling of foods containing genetically engineered ingredients.
In fact, supporters of a Washington state measure similar to the failed California initiative said Tuesday they had raised more than $1 million from supporters.
In introducing a U.S. labeling bill Wednesday, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer and U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio said consumers have a right to know what type of ingredients are in their food.
"Consumers deserve to have clear, consistent, and accurate facts about the food products they purchase," Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said in a statement. Blumenthal was one of 31 lawmakers who co-sponsored the bill.
Law makers and anti-GMO activists are responding to growing public concern about possible health risks associated with GMO foods. While there is no scientific consensus that foods made with GMO ingredients are harmful, activists argue that people have a right to know what they are eating.
Last month, grocery retailer Whole Foods said that it would require suppliers to label any product made with genetically modified ingredients. And the Natural Products Association, which represents 1,900 food industry players, has called for a uniform standard for GMO labeling to apply nationwide.
"This is a rapidly growing movement," said Dave Murphy, a spokesman for Food Democracy Now, a group pushing for GMO labeling. "We're not giving up until we have labeling. We're just not going away."
Monsanto and other biotech crop companies say mandatory labeling would confuse consumers and could deter them from purchasing foods made with genetically modified ingredients.
Biotech companies also are concerned that consumer sentiment is causing regulators to slow down approvals of new GMOs, said Dow AgroSciences Brad Shurdut. Shurdut leads the company's government and regulatory affairs.
Dow had hoped to have a GMO corn product called "Enlist" on the market this year. But amidst opposition from farmers, consumers and public health officials, the company now expects a delay of at least a year.
"It is having a profound impact on our regulatory system," said Shurdut.
Monsanto, which in 1996 commercialized the first biotech crop, a soybean resistant to herbicide, wants to communicate how biotech crops help farmers produce food, said executive vice president Jerry Steiner. Despite the worst drought in 50 years, farmers last year still produced better-than-expected crops due in large measure to biotech improvements to corn, he said.
Steiner recognizes the industry faces an uphill battle.
"We fully respect that people make up their own minds," said Steiner. "But there is a fact gap that exists. It is our responsibility to do a better job of filling it."
(Reporting by Carey Gillam; Editing by Bob Burgdorfer)
Source:  http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/25/us-usa-gmo-labeling-idUSBRE93O18S20130425

SOUL-DEAD GMO SEED SELLERS GO HOLLYWOOD

Movie Review   A Heartland Without Soul

‘At Any Price,’ Directed by Ramin Bahrani

Matt Dinerstein/Sony Pictures Classics

From left, Zac Efron, Dennis Quaid and Kim Dickens as members of a Midwestern farm family in “At Any Price.”

By STEPHEN HOLDEN

Published: April 23, 2013

More About This Movie

• Overview
• Tickets & Showtimes
• New York Times Review
• Cast, Credits & Awards
• Readers' Reviews
• Trailers & Clips
  View Clip...
• 
  

Related

Ramin Bahrani Goes Big

By JEREMY EGNER

Ramin Bahrani discusses his new farm film, “At Any Price.”

Enlarge This Image

Hooman Bahrani/Sony Pictures Classics

Dennis Quaid in "At Any Price."

That ominous motto of Henry Whipple, a successful Iowa farmer in Ramin Bahrani’s new film, “At Any Price,” distills the business philosophy of a man driven by ambition. Henry, who farms more than 3,000 acres, is an aggressive, unscrupulous salesman for a company that markets genetically modified seeds. With a too-wide grin that threatens to crack the corners of his mouth and a backslapping friendliness that verges on obsequiousness, Henry is portrayed by Dennis Quaid as a warped caricature of a reassuring American archetype: the down-to-earth family man in the heartland with his feet firmly planted in the soil.

On one level “At Any Price” is a critical exploration of agribusiness and its cutthroat, hypercompetitive ways. On a deeper level it is a searching, somewhat ham-handed allegory of American hubris in the 21st century and a bleak assessment of the country’s wobbly moral compass.

Henry’s world is in danger of crumbling. He has a loyal, attractive wife, Irene (Kim Dickens), who tolerates his infidelities. And he has strained relationships with his two sons, the older of whom has signaled his lack of interest in the family business by fleeing the nest to climb mountains in South America.

Desperate for the business to remain in the family, as it has for four generations, Henry pressures his neglected younger son, Dean (Zac Efron), to show some enthusiasm for farming and eventually step into his shoes. But the focus of Dean’s life is stock car racing. Though he is a fierce, talented competitor with Nascar dreams of glamour and glory, Dean is also a hothead who unleashes contemptuous tirades at his father. During a race at a regional track, he flies into a blind rage at a competitor. When he is injured in a crash, he abruptly turns his back on the sport.

The movie traces an emotional line of descent from Henry’s stern father, Cliff (Red West), who disapproves of his son’s lack of ethics, to the volatile Dean. Each generation has less self-control and patience than the one before.

In an unnecessary subplot intended to underline their weaknesses, both father and son avail themselves of the charms of a former cheerleader (Heather Graham). The arrogant, impulsive Dean doesn’t even bother to conceal the fling from his smart, pretty girlfriend (Maika Monroe).

“At Any Price” pays close enough attention to the world of high-tech farming to provide a rough outline of its challenges and stresses. It shows how Henry’s breed of go-getter freezes small farmers out of their livelihoods. In an uncomfortable scene that demonstrates his ruthlessness, he crashes another farmer’s funeral and buys his land right then and there. The movie addresses the patenting of seeds and their illicit use, a clandestine activity that Henry practices only to find himself under criminal investigation.

“At Any Price” obliquely refers to the controversies surrounding the ownership of genetically modified superseeds developed by corporations like Monsanto. There is no mention of global warming and the worsening drought in America’s breadbasket. Henry’s cornfields are picture-perfect and his harvests bountiful.

His major competitor, Jim Johnson (Clancy Brown), is a neighboring farmer with a son Dean’s age (Ben Marten), who also races cars and whom Dean hates with a venomous passion. The rivalry between these two clans lends the movie a threatening undertone of violence.

Mr. Bahrani, who wrote the screenplay with Hallie Elizabeth Newton, was born in Winston-Salem, N.C., the setting of his last film, “Goodbye Solo,” which was the third of his small, indie, neorealist gems studying people struggling on the lower rungs of the economic ladder.

At the two-thirds point, the movie makes a giant leap of faith with a far-fetched, manipulative plot twist that binds Henry and Dean together, whether they like it or not. This turn of events makes allegorical sense yet defies credibility. But if “At Any Price” overstates its points, they are still worth making. And the hot-wired performances by Mr. Quaid and Mr. Efron drive them home in a movie that sticks to your ribs and stays in your head.

“At Any Price” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). It has sexual situations, strong language and some violence.

At Any Price

Opens on Wednesday in New York and Los Angeles.

Directed by Ramin Bahrani; written by Hallie Elizabeth Newton and Mr. Bahrani; director of photography, Michael Simmonds; edited by Affonso Gonçalves; music by Dickon Hinchliffe; production design by Chad Keith; produced by Teddy Schwarzman, Pamela Koffler, Kevin Turen, Justin Nappi, Christine Vachon and Mr. Bahrani; released by Sony Pictures Classics. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes.

WITH: Dennis Quaid (Henry Whipple), Zac Efron (Dean Whipple), Kim Dickens (Irene Whipple), Heather Graham (Meredith Crown), Clancy Brown (Jim Johnson), Chelcie Ross (Byron), Maika Monroe (Cadence Farrow), Red West (Cliff Whipple), Ben Marten (Brad Johnson) and Dan Waller (Larry Brown).

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: April 25, 2013
A movie review on Wednesday about “At Any Price,” a narrative exploring the lives of farmers in an era of modern agribusiness, described the legal protection of seeds incorrectly. They are covered through patenting, not copyrighting.

GATES GOING GMO BANANAS - AT COST OF PLANT'S BIODIVERSE HERITAGE

Published on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 by Asian Age

Tackling "Monoculture of the Mind"

Billionaires forgo iron-rich crops in push for GM bananas in India

by Vandana Shiva

Nature has given us a cornucopia of biodiversity rich in nutrients. Malnutrition and nutrient deficiency result from destroying biodiversity. The Green Revolution has spread monocultures of chemical rice and wheat, driving out biodiversity from our farms and diets. And what survived as spontaneous crops — like amaranth greens (chaulai) and chenopodium (bathua) that are rich in iron — were sprayed with (Photo: Fernando Stankuns/ Flickr)poisons and herbicides. Instead of cherishing them as iron- and vitamin-rich gifts, these vegetables were treated as “weeds”.
The “monoculture of the mind” treats diversity as disease and creates coercive structures to remodel this biologically and culturally diverse world of ours on the concepts of one privileged class, one race and one gender of a single species. As “the monoculture of the mind” took over, biodiversity disappeared from our farms and food. It’s the destruction of biodiverse rich cultivation and diets that has led us to the malnutrition crisis.
The latest insanity from genetic engineers is to push genetically modified bananas on India to reduce iron deficiency in Indian women. Seventy-five per cent of Indian women suffer from iron deficiency.
One rich man named Bill Gates is financing one Australian scientist James Dale who knows one crop, the banana, to impose inefficient and hazardous GM bananas on millions of people in India and Uganda.
The project is a waste of money, and a waste of time. It will take 10 years and millions of dollars to complete the research. Meanwhile, governments, research agencies and scientists will become blind to biodiversity-based low-cost, safe, time-tested, democratic alternatives that are in the hands of women.
Indian women have a wealth of knowledge about biodiversity and nutrition; they received it over generations, from their mothers and grandmothers. Any woman will tell you that the solution to malnutrition lies in growing nutrition, which means growing biodiversity.
To remove iron deficiency, iron-rich plants should be grown everywhere — on farms, in kitchen gardens, in community gardens, in school gardens. Iron deficiency was not created by nature and we can get rid of it by becoming co-creators and co-producers with nature.
But there is a “creation myth” that is blind to both, nature’s creativity and biodiversity as well as to women’s creativity, intelligence and knowledge. According to this “creation myth” of capitalist patriarchy, rich and powerful men are the “creators”. They can own life through patents and intellectual property. They can tinker with nature’s complex evolution over millennia and claim their trivial yet destructive acts of gene manipulation as “creating” life, food and nutrition.
India’s indigenous biodiversity offers rich sources of iron. For example, amaranth has 11.0 mg iron per 100 gm of food, buckwheat has 15.5, amaranth greens have up to 38.5, karonda 39.1 and lotus stem 60.6.
Bananas only have 0.44mg of iron per 100 grams of edible portion. All the effort to increase iron content of bananas will fall short of the iron content of our indigenous biodiversity.
Not only is the GM banana not the best choice for providing iron in our diet, it will further threaten biodiversity of bananas and iron-rich crops and introduce new ecological risks.
If adopted, the GM banana will be grown as large monocultures, like GM Bt cotton in the banana plantations of Central America. The government and other agencies will push this false solution, and our biodiversity of iron-rich foods will disappear.
Also, our native banana varieties will be displaced and contaminated. These include Nedunendran, Zanzibar, Chengalikodan and the Manjeri Nendran II variety.
The idea of “nutrient farming” of a few nutrients in monocultures of a few crops is already being pushed at the policy level. Finance minister P. Chidambaram announced a `200 core project for “nutri farms” in his 2013 Budget speech.
Humans need a biodiversity of nutrients, including a full range of micronutrients and trace elements. These come from healthy soils and biodiversity.
There is a perverse urge among the biotechnology brigade to declare war on biodiversity in its centre of origin. An attempt was made to introduce Bt brinjal in India which is the centre of diversity for brinjal. GM corn is being introduced in Mexico, the centre of diversity of corn. GM banana is being introduced to the two countries where banana is a significant crop and has large diversity. One is India, the other is Uganda, the only country where banana is a staple.
HarvestPlus is the corporate alliance pushing “biofortification” — breeding crops to increase their nutritional value. But experts say that fortification of nutrients in foods could lead to insurmountable problems: “(it) may deliver toxic amounts of nutrients to an individual and also cause its associated side effects (and) the potential that the fortified products will still not be a solution to nutrient deficiencies amongst low income populations who may not be able to afford the new product and children who may not be able to consume adequate amounts thereof”.
Australian scientists are using a virus that infects the banana as a promoter. This could spread through horizontal gene transfer. All genetic engineering uses genes from bacteria and viruses. Independent studies have shown that there are health risks associated with GM foods.
There is no need for introducing a hazardous technology in a low-iron food like banana when we have so many affordable, accessible, safe and diverse options for meeting our nutritional needs of iron.
We have to grow nutrition by increasing biodiversity, not by industrially “fortifying” nutritionally empty food at high cost, or put one or two nutrients into genetically-engineered crops.
We don’t need these irresponsible experiments that create new threats for biodiversity and our health; we don’t need nutrient solutions imposed by powerful men sitting in distant places, who are totally ignorant of the biodiversity in our fields and thalis, and who won’t have to bear the consequences of their destructive power. We need to put food security in women’s hands so that the last woman and the last child can share nature’s gifts of biodiversity.

© 2013 The Asian Age

Dr. Vandana Shiva is a philosopher, environmental activist and eco feminist. She is the founder/director of Navdanya Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Ecology. She is author of numerous books including, Soil Not Oil: Environmental Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis; Stolen Harvest: The Hijacking of the Global Food Supply; Earth Democracy: Justice, Sustainability, and Peace; and Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development. Shiva has also served as an adviser to governments in India and abroad as well as NGOs, including the International Forum on Globalization, the Women’s Environment and Development Organization and the Third World Network. She has received numerous awards, including 1993 Right Livelihood Award (Alternative Nobel Prize) and the 2010 Sydney Peace Prize.
Source:  http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/24-8

POISON COCKTAIL LINKED TO POLINATOR AND ENSUING FOOD COLLAPSE GLOBALLY

Published on Tuesday, April 23, 2013 by Common Dreams

Report: Deadly Human-Made 'Cocktail' Threatening World’s Pollinators

Decline of 'unsung heroes' will have drastic impacts on world's ecosystems, food supply

- Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer

A "cocktail" of human-made "pressures" are threatening insect pollinators across the world, whose decline will have "profound environmental, human health and economic consequences," according to a new report released Monday by the Insect Pollinators Initiative. 
(Photo via Flickr / Wood Thrower / Creative Commons License) Insect pollinators such as bees provide pollination for up to 75% of crops and enable reproduction in up to 94% of wild flowering plants, meaning their current decline greatly "threatens human food supplies and ecosystem function" around the world, the group urges.
According to the study Threats to an Ecosystem Service: Pressures on Pollinators, published in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, the steady disappearance of these essential creatures cannot be tied to one factor, but to a multitude of anthropogenic reasons such as "the loss of food resources in intensively-farmed landscapes," pesticides, climate change, and "the spread of alien species and diseases."
Dr. Adam Vanbergen from the UK’s Center for Ecology & Hydrology and science coordinator of the IPI led the review and stated:

There is no single smoking gun behind pollinator declines, instead there is a cocktail of multiple pressures that can combine to threaten these insects. For example, the loss of food resources in intensively-farmed landscapes, pesticides and diseases are individually important threats, but are also likely to combine and exacerbate the negative impacts on pollinators.

“Pollinators are the unsung heroes of the insect world and ensure our crops are properly pollinated so we have a secure supply of nutritious food in our shops," said co-author Professor Simon Potts from the University of Reading. "The costs of taking action now to tackle the multiple threats to pollinators is much smaller than the long-term costs to our food security and ecosystem stability. Failure by governments to take decisive steps now only sets us up for bigger problems in the future.”

_______________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
Source:  http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/23-5