Category: Food Safety


Natural News : Urgent action alert: EPA about to raise allowable concentrations of glyphosate on food crops, edible oils and animal feed – comments needed by July 1

Filed under: Activism, Bioethics, Chemicals, Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health, Corruption, Food Production, Food Safety, Fraud, Freedom Of Choice, Fundamental Rights, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Geo Engineering, Government, Government Overreach, Greed, Human Experimentation, Human Rights, Hypocrisy, Medical Research, Poisons in Our Foods, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Special Interests, Unethical — 11 Comments
June 19, 2013

glyphosate

Tuesday, June 18, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) This is an urgent action alert from Natural News and the Health Ranger. Public comments are due by July 1 to object to new EPA regulations which are already in place, allowing glyphosate contamination of food crops, edible oils and waterways at concentrations which are thousands of times higher than the amount needed to cause cancer.

The new regulation, which can be viewed HERE, sets the following regulations regarding glyphosate residues on crops:

• It allows forage and hay teff to contain up to 100 ppm glyphosate (that’s over one million times the concentration needed to cause cancer according to a recent study). See PubMed source here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23756170

• Allows oilseed crops (flax oil, canola oil, soybean oil, olive oil, etc.) to contain up to 40 ppm glyphosate (which is over 100,000 times the concentration needed to cause cancer)

• RAISES the allowable glyphosate contamination level of root crops (such as potatoes) from 200 ppb to 6000 ppb.

• Allows glyphosate contamination of fruits at anywhere from 200 ppb to 500 ppb.

Importantly, the EPA says no one even commented on all this when it was initially filed! “There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.” Since then, a total of just 396 people have posted a public comment at the time of this story being published.

You can post your comments with the EPA at this page:

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0132-00…

EPA declares glyphosate to be perfectly safe

Borrowing a page right out of Monsanto’s quack science playbook, the EPA says:

A chronic feeding/carcinogenicity study in rats found no systemic effects in any of the parameters examined (body weight, food consumption, clinical signs, mortality, clinical pathology, organ weights, and histopathology).

The EPA even offers this utterly absurd, false statement as justification for its allowable contamination levels of glyphosate: “EPA has concluded that glyphosate does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.” (SOURCE)

Huh? Do you understand this? The EPA is saying glyphosate is so incredibly safe that it is not even necessary to study its possible carcinogenic effects in humans. No science needed! The EPA simply waves a magic (Monsanto) wand and says, “Shazam! Glyphosate is safe enough to EAT!”

The EPA, of course, is sadly mistaken. It is apparently not aware of two crucial facts to consider in all this:

1) The Seralini study released last year showed an alarming increase in cancer tumors in rats that were fed glyphosate in their drinking water.

2) Monsanto has already been found guilty of committing scientific fraud by altering the results of “scientific” studies in order to trick regulators.

The “scientific” data proving glyphosate to be “safe” has been fabricated! And the EPA is basing its conclusions on fabricated, corporate-quackified junk science that has one purpose: trick regulators into thinking the deadly poison is safe, thereby vastly increasing the usage of the chemical by farmers.

ACTION ITEM: Post your comments to protest the EPA’s glyphosate poisoning of the American people

It is crucial that We the People let the EPA know that raising the allowable levels of glyphosate in foods is unacceptable. This is especially true given the recent studies linking glyphosate to breast cancer, a disease that is ravaging women across America and has reached epidemic levels.

Post your comments in the following ways:

METHOD #1 – POSTING ONLINE

1) Go to this page:

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0132-00…

2) Click the “Comment Now!” button on the top right.

3) Enter your information and comment, then click “Submit.” Be sure to include reasons WHY you believe the EPA should not allow such high levels of glyphosate in foods, edible oils and animal feed. You can quote pages like GMOevidence.com:

http://gmoevidence.com/location/roundup-evidence/

You can also quote this excellent article from GM Watch which explains why the corporate-controlled media (and industry) so viciously attacked the Seralini rat study, trying to discredit it:

http://gmwatch.org/latest-listing/51-2012/14514

METHOD #2 – MAIL IT IN

1) Write your letter of protest. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0132 on the first page of your letter.

2) Mail it to: (all mail must be received by July 1st)
OPP Docket
Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T)
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.
Washington, DC 20460–0001

METHOD #3 – EMAIL ANDREW ERTMAN

Please use Method #1 or #2 if you want your comments to actually count. But if you also wish to email or phone the EPA person from the Office of Pesticide Programs, you may contact:

Andrew Ertman, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone number: (703) 308-9367
Email address: ertman.andrew@epa.gov

Note: If you choose to email Andrew Ertman, please be polite in your email. Do NOT send stupid things like death threats or emails full of profanity. Make your case clearly and politely, and ask him to review the full breadth of the scientific evidence now available instead of just the selected subset Monsanto wants EPA scientists to be aware of.

Over 200 million pounds of glyphosate poison is a chemical attack on America

The following map, compiled by the USDA, shows the use of glyphosate across America:

This is also a map of the mass poisoning of America with a chemical that has been scientifically linked to an increased risk of cancer.

Compare it to this map showing the rates of cancer by state:

By the way, Monsanto has already been caught committing scientific fraud in attempting to fake safety studies on glyphosate. The company also engaged in wildly false advertising, claiming RoundUp was “safer than table salt” (implying that it’s safe to eat in high doses).

Now the EPA is about to allow glyphosate in animal feed at concentrations that are one million times the concentration needed to cause cancer.

At the same time, the EPA continues to allow glyphosate at 700 ppb in public drinking water, too.

We are all being mass poisoned by this deadly chemical, and the EPA is actively conspiring with the chemical industry to downplay the real dangers of glyphosate, pretending it’s safe enough to eat in quantities that are orders of magnitude larger than should be allowed.

Allowing 100 ppm of glyphosate in animal feed is equivalent to allowing 1000 ppm of lead in children’s candy. It’s a deadly poison that inundates our food supply at such high concentrations that it’s guaranteed to cause deadly diseases in huge numbers of people.

EPA document is a blueprint for the mass euthanasia of Americans

This EPA regulation document is a blueprint for billions of dollars in profits for the cancer industry. It’s also a death sentence for America’s soils, farmers and food consumers. And it is insane policies like this that will ultimately lead to the downfall and collapse of modern human civilization… a civilization so stupid that it poisons its own food, water, soils and even its own children… all to make a quarterly profit on the selling of a deadly poison.

Humanity is being mass-euthanized by GMOs and glyphosate, and the EPA is standing by and openly allowing it to happen. This is an agency that did tremendous good back in the 1970′s but has since become nothing more than a corporate sellout and a purveyor of poison.

The EPA wants you to eat glyphosate. There’s no harm, they say. Lick it up!

What concentration of glyphosate should be allowed in foods? No more than 10 ppt

There is no safe level of exposure to glyphosate. The chemical has now been shown to promote cancer cell proliferation at ppt concentrations. This demands that glyphosate be eliminated from being sold in the USA — BANNED for life.

Remember: Glyphosate is the new DDT. But it’s much worse than DDT because its toxic effects kick in at far lower concentrations. If a “safe” level of glyphosate exposure were based on legitimate scientific studies that weren’t faked by Monsanto, it would have to be set no higher than 10 ppt.

In other words, it would need to be virtually undetectable even by the most precise laboratory equipment available today.

Glyphosate has no place in a civilized nation. I call it “Satan’s Molecule” because it is a destroyer of life and a destroyer of worlds.

No wonder it was invented by a scientist working for — guess who? — MonSatan.

Take action today. Comments are due by July 1, and if the EPA doesn’t hear from the People, it’s going to do whatever Monsanto tells it to do. Heck, it will probably do that anyway, but at least if you post a comment, when all of us die from cancer you will know that you did not willfully participate in the mass murder of Americans.

Related articles
About these ads
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Tender Beef, Without The Pathogens: USDA Proposes Labeling Rules

Filed under: Food Safety, Poisons in Our Foods, Holistic Health, Food Borne Illness, Health And Wellness Report, Food Labels — Leave a comment
June 14, 2013
NPR .'s profile photo

by Allison Aubrey

June 11, 2013 5:12 PM
Meat tenderized the old-fashioned way. The industrial method is a mechanized process involving needles.

Meat tenderized the old-fashioned way. The industrial method is a mechanized process involving needles.

iStockphoto.com

In order to make tough cuts of beef more tender, the industry uses a mechanical tenderizing process that involves piercing the meat with needles.

This is effective in breaking up the tough muscle fibers, but there’s a downside, too: a higher risk of surface bacteria making their way into the cut of meat, which can set the stage for food poisoning. That’s a particular concern when it comes to the center of meat cuts, which don’t get heated to the same temperatures as the exterior.

Since 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has learned about five foodborne illness outbreaks linked to mechanically tenderized beef.

And what was the common denominator in these outbreaks? Undercooked or raw beef.

So, the USDA has that would require new labels for mechanically tenderized meats, so that consumers know what they are purchasing. The thinking is that if you know your cut of meat has been mechanically tenderized, you’ll be inclined to cook it a little longer.

 

Read More Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Multistate outbreak of Hepatitis A infections potentially associated with “Townsend Farms Organic Antioxidant Blend” frozen berry and pomegranate mix

Filed under: Biological Hazard, Diseases, Earth Watch Report, Food Borne Illness, Food Safety — 1 Comment
June 12, 2013

This handout image provided by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) shows the label of Townsend Farms of Fairview, Ore., Organic Antioxidant Blend, packaged under the Townsend Farms label at Costco and under the Harris Teeter brand at those stores.
****************************************************************************

Viral Hepatitis

Posted June 12, 2013 12:15 PM ET

CDC is collaborating with public health officials in several states and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to investigate a multistate outbreak of Hepatitis A illnesses. Preliminary results from the ongoing investigation are highlighted below.

At a Glance:

  • Case Count: 99
  • States: 8
  • Deaths: 0
  • Hospitalizations: 38
  • Recall: Yes

Vaccine and IG Information:

More Information:

Latest Case Count Map
Persons infected with Hepatitis A virus, by State

Click map to view case count map.

Latest Epi Curve
Persons infected with Hepatitis A virus, by date of illness onset

Click graph to view epi curve graph.

Highlights

  • Read the Advice to Consumers »
  • As of June 11, 2013, we are investigating acute hepatitis A illnesses in 99 people in eight states: Arizona, California Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Washington.
  • Based on epidemiologic investigation of 73 cases:
    • 47 (64%) ill people are women
    • Ages range from 2 – 87 years
    • Illness onset dates range from 3/16/2013 – 6/1/2013
    • 38 (52%) ill people have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported
    • 63 of 73 (86%) ill people interviewed reported eating “Townsend Farms Organic Anti-Oxidant Blend” frozen berry and pomegranate mix
    • All ill people reported purchasing this product from Costco markets; however, the product was also sold at Harris Teeter stores. No cases have been identified that bought the product at Harris Teeter at this time.
  • Investigation by state and local health departments, FDA, and CDC is ongoing.  Costco notified its members who purchased this product since late February 2013, and has removed the “Townsend Farms Organic Antioxidant Blend” frozen berry and pomegranate mix from its shelves.
    • FDA has begun an inspection of the processing facilities of Townsend Farms of Fairview, Oregon.
    • The FDA is also finalizing a protocol to test berries for the Hepatitis A virus (HAV), and will be testing samples related to the outbreak, including the frozen blend for the presence of HAV.
  • On June 3, 2013, Townsend Farms, Inc. of Fairview, Oregon voluntarily recalled certain lots of its frozen Organic Antioxidant BlendExternal Web Site Icon because it has the potential to be contaminated with hepatitis A virus.
  • Preliminary laboratory studies of specimens from two states suggest the outbreak strain of hepatitis A virus (HAV) is genotype 1B. This strain is rarely seen in the Americas but circulates in the North Africa and Middle East regions.
  • This genotype was identified in a 2013 outbreak in Europe linked to frozen berries and another 2012 outbreak in British Columbia related to a frozen berry blend with pomegranate seeds from Egypt. However, there is no evidence at this time that these outbreaks are related.
  • According to the label, the “Townsend Farms Organic Antioxidant Blend” frozen berry and pomegranate mix associated with illness contained products originating from the U.S., Argentina, Chile, and Turkey.
  • Hepatitis A is a human disease and usually occurs when an infected food handler prepares food without appropriate hand hygiene.  However, food contaminated with HAV, as is suspected in this outbreak, can cause outbreaks of disease among persons who eat or handle food.

 

****************************************************************************

AP/ June 11, 2013, 9:53 PM

Hepatitis A linked to frozen berries sickens 87

This handout image provided by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) shows the label of Townsend Farms of Fairview, Ore., Organic Antioxidant Blend, packaged under the Townsend Farms label at Costco and under the Harris Teeter brand at those stores.

This handout image provided by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) shows the label of Townsend Farms of Fairview, Ore., Organic Antioxidant Blend, packaged under the Townsend Farms label at Costco and under the Harris Teeter brand at those stores. / FDA/AP

WASHINGTON The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says an outbreak of hepatitis A linked to a frozen berry mix sold at Costco has grown to 87 people with illnesses in eight states.

The CDC said Tuesday that illnesses have been reported in Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Washington.

Townsend Farms of Fairview, Ore., last week recalled its frozen Organic Antioxidant Blend, packaged under the Townsend Farms label at Costco and under the Harris Teeter brand at those stores. So far the illnesses have only been linked to the berries sold at Costco.

Craig Wilson, director of food safety at Costco, said the store is providing vaccinations for people who ate the berries within the last two weeks and is reimbursing others who have gotten the vaccine outside the store. The store has contacted about 240,000 people who purchased the berries at one of their stores, Wilson said. The company knows who bought the berries because purchases are linked to a membership card that customers present when they check out.

 

Read Full Article Here

****************************************************************************

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Exclusive: The agricultural revolution – UK pushes Europe to embrace GM crops

Filed under: Bioethics, Food Production, Food Safety, Freedom of Information, Fundamental Rights, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Geo Engineering, Greed, Health, Legislation, Medical Research, Poisons in Our Foods — 2 Comments
June 12, 2013

 

The Independent

 

Environment Secretary will urge EU to relax restrictions on crop licensing

Tom Bawden Oliver Wright

Tuesday 11 June 2013

Genetically modified maize in Shropshire

Britain is to push the European Union to relax restrictions on the licensing of genetically modified crops for human consumption amid growing scientific evidence that they are safe, and surveys showing they are supported by farmers. The Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson, is expected to use a speech next week to outline the start of a new government approach to GM to ensure Britain “is not left behind” in agricultural science.

The move comes as 61 per cent of UK farmers now say they would like to grow GM crops after a disastrous 12-month cycle of poor weather that is expected significantly to reduce harvest yields. Senior government officials said that ministers are increasingly concerned that the potential moral and ethical benefits of GM are being ignored by costly and bureaucratic licensing regulations.

With one-twelfth of global arable land under GM cultivation they have privately warned that Britain faces being left behind in an important technology that has the potential to improve crop yields, help the UK’s agricultural industry and provide benefits to human health through vitamin fortification.

Government sources added that GM also had applications beyond food including the potential to combat diseases such as ash dieback and in developing new medicines.

“The point about GM is not simply about food production,” they said. “There are wider potential environmental and economic benefits to the technology both in the UK and internationally.

“What we want to do is start a dialogue within Europe on GM based upon the science.”

Ministers are hopeful of building support in Brussels for a change of heart on GM, with Germany seen as a key swing voter. However, any attempts to relax the rules could face opposition from countries such as Poland which in April became the eighth EU member state to ban the cultivation of GM crops.

Mr Paterson is said to believe that Britain should take the lead in moving the debate on from the knee-jerk reaction against GM for much of the last decade.

Read Full Article Here

 

Related articles
Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

CDC Data: Raw Milk Safe During Pregnancy

Filed under: Food Safety, Health, Holistic Health, Medical Research, Nutrition — Leave a comment
June 12, 2013

Image Source

****************************************************************************

The Healthy Home Economist

by Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist on June 10, 2013

 

 

When I was first introduced to the benefits of raw milk nearly 12 years ago, I was newly pregnant with my second child. While I wanted to reap the benefits of this nutrient dense food, I was initially cautious to begin consuming it for fear it might harm my baby.

 

Everywhere I turned for research and information about the safety of raw milk during pregnancy was negative.

 

Numerous citations and sources I reviewed warned against consuming raw milk during pregnancy due to the risk of infection with Listeria monocytogenes, a deadly pathogen that can cause fetal death or premature birth.

 

 

 

While the research I uncovered contained dire warnings about infection with Listeria during pregnancy, I couldn’t actually find documentation about anyone who had actually contracted it from drinking raw milk let alone died or miscarried from it!

 

After much reading and thought, I concluded that the warnings against raw milk were unwarranted and the nutritional benefits to myself and my child vastly outweighed any risk.

 

I began to consume raw milk along with aged raw cheese, raw cream and raw butter late in the first trimester of my second pregnancy.  I continued this practice throughout my second and third pregnancy with no ill effects.  Both children were born healthy, full term and a normal weight.

 

Why Does the FDA Warn Against Raw Milk During Pregnancy?

 

In the 12 years since I began consuming raw milk while newly pregnant, the nonexistence of infection with Listeria monocytogenes for raw milk drinkers has continued.  Analysis of Centers for Disease Control data on raw milk outbreaks listed no cases whatsoever of food-borne illness from raw milk caused by Listeria during the entire 13 year period from 1993-2005.

 

Read Full Article Here

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

North Dakota – Herdshare Bill Signed into Law

Filed under: Food Safety, Freedom Of Choice, Freedom of Information, Fundamental Rights, Health And Wellness Report, Holistic Health, Legislation, Nutrition — Leave a comment
June 12, 2013

Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund

by Pete Kennedy, Esq. on June 7, 2013

litigation-milkHerdshares in ND now referred to as “Shared Animal Ownership”

A victory for grassroots efforts!
See Action Alert

NDDA prohibited from restricting herdshares

On April 29 herdshares become officially legal in North Dakota when Governor Jack Dalrymple signed Senate Bill 2072 into law. SB 2072 provides that “it is not a violation [of law] to transfer or obtain raw milk under a shared animal ownership agreement.”

Shared animal ownership is defined in the bill as “any contractual arrangement under which an individual:

      a. Acquires an ownership interest in a milk-producing animal;

b. Agrees to pay another for, reimburse another for, or otherwise accept financial responsibility for the care and boarding of the milk-producing animal at the dairy farm; and

c. Is entitled to receive a proportionate share of the animal’s raw milk production as a condition of the contractual arrangement.

The original version of SB 2072 did not contain a provision on herdshares; the bill only amended the state dairy code to adopt the latest revision of the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO), which governs the production and sale of pasteurized milk in the U.S.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

****************************************************************************

Rapid City Journal

Raw milk backers say proposed rules too burdensome

June 07, 2013 6:00 am  •  Bob Mercer Legislative correspondent

PIERRE | A public hearing Thursday served as the latest battleground over regulation of raw milk in South Dakota.

The state Department of Agriculture has proposed nine pages of rules regarding bottled raw milk for human consumption.

More than a dozen residents who believe in what they call the natural benefits of drinking raw milk showed up to oppose the regulations, as did several farmers who produce it.

There are five licensed raw milk producers in South Dakota.

Gena Parkhurst of Rapid City, who described herself as a raw milk consumer, said the proposed rules would prohibit consumption of bottled or packaged raw milk produced by anyone without the necessary state permit, whether or not the milk was free or for sale.

“They cannot offer it to their neighbor; they cannot offer it to their family; they cannot give it away to an informed consumer,” said Parkhurst, a volunteer coordinator for Dakota Rural Action in the Black Hills.

She also claimed that testing for tuberculosis and brucellosis was “unnecessary.”

That’s different than the view of state veterinarian Dustin Oedekoven, who spoke in support of the rules. He said raw milk can spread diseases such as tuberculosis.

The state Department of Health tracks illnesses linked to raw milk, while the Legislature allows its sales.

Mellette County raw milk producer Leland Schoon said the proposed requirement of disease testing would be “burdensome and cost-prohibitive” for him since his cows are in a multi-purpose pasture.

 

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Scientists Find Holes in Monsanto GM Wheat Denial

Filed under: Bioethics, Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health, Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It, Environmental, Food Safety, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Geo Engineering, Poisons in Our Foods — Leave a comment
June 9, 2013

Published on Thursday, June 6, 2013 by Common Dreams

- Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer

(Boris Grdanoski / AP)

Monsanto claimed Wednesday that the Oregon field found last week to be contaminated with Monsanto’s unapproved GM wheat was an “isolated” incident, and that it was likely either the result of an accident or “sabotage.” However, scientists warned Thursday that the biotech giant’s denial has many holes.

Monsanto claims that it has since tested 31,200 seed samples in Oregon and Washington and found no evidence of contamination—insisting there is no cause for concern in the world market.

However, researchers this week said that Monsanto’s tests are misleading and that the genetically modified gene, not yet approved for use in the U.S., will likely continue to be found in wheat seeds.

“We don’t know where in the whole chain it is,” said Carol Mallory-Smith, the weed science professor at Oregon State University who tested the initial wheat plants and determined they were the unapproved Monsanto seed.

“I don’t know how Monsanto can declare anything. We obviously had these plants in the field.”

“You introduce something into the environment, and genes move around in the environment, whether transgenic or not,” she added.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is currently investigating how the wheat gene, which was taken out of test fields eight years ago, is now showing up.

Monsanto claims that all of the tested seeds had been either destroyed or recovered and sent to a USDA facility in Colorado for storage.

However, David Andow, a professor of entomology at the University of Minnesota, said in an interview with Bloomberg that these claims are misleading and that the tests cited by Monsanto this week, which displayed clean wheat in the state of Washington, are shortsighted.

“Sure they tested it, but that doesn’t mean it’s all clean,” Andow said. “It just means it’s not so widespread that it could be detected easily.”

And Doug Gurian-Sherman, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, said that this is not the first time Monsanto has been less than forthcoming on the extent of its seed contamination: “In previous cases, such as during the outbreak of herbicide-resistant weeds in recent years, Monsanto has initially played down the risks.”

“The reality is that nobody knows what happened until extensive testing is done.”

Additionally, Bloomberg reported recently that even if Monsanto’s claims about this specific wheat strain were proven true, Monsanto has resumed trials of other and very similar GM wheat seeds, according to information posted in a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) database.

Monsanto planted 150 acres of GM wheat in Hawaii last year and 300 acres of GM wheat in North Dakota this year—meaning the risk of genetic pollution from unapproved Monsanto wheat is even greater than most people are aware.

Meanwhile, the discovery of the GM wheat in Oregon caused fast moving international backlash, with Japan suspending some imports of US wheat, South Korea testing all of its US wheat imports, and the EU urging its members to test some of its US wheat imports.

The extent of contamination from Monsanto’s GM wheat seeds in Oregon, let alone Hawaii and North Dakota, remain unknown.

_______________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Kraft Foods Denies GM Wheat but ADMITS GMO in Products

Filed under: Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health, Food Labels, Food Production, Food Safety, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Poisons in Our Foods — 2 Comments
June 6, 2013

TRUTHstreammedia TRUTHstreammedia

Published on Jun 5, 2013


http://truthstreammedia.com/kraft-foo
…
FoodBabe.com: Illegal GMO Wheat in Mac & Cheese?

http://foodbabe.com/2013/05/30/illega…

Truthstream Media followed up on a report a report by Vani Hari at Foodbabe.com that boxes of Kraft Macaroni & Cheese imported to the U.K. were showing up with a label warning the product contained genetically modified wheat. As no forms of GMO wheat are legally approved for cultivation or sale anywhere in the world, we investigated further, contacting both Kraft and the distribution company that placed the label to get the bottom of it.

We started by contacting the company’s customer service number. Listen as the representative admits their products have been ‘enhanced by biotechnology’ so some of their products ‘do contain ingredients from these crops’.

Although Kraft’s spokesperson responded to us in an official statement claiming there is no GMO wheat in their flagship Macaroni & Cheese product, the fact that the company refuses to remove potentially cancer-causing artificial dyes from the U.S. version of their product (dyes already absent from their international versions), in addition to the admitted presence of GMO in their food further proves that people need to take back control of what they are eating from these giant corporations who appear to be putting profits above people.

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Oregon GM Wheat Contamination Could Have Ramifications for Canada

Filed under: Bioethics, bureaucracy, Community, Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health, Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It, Food Production, Food Safety, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Genetics, Geo Engineering, Global Community, Government, Hypocrisy, Ineptitude, Lack Of Transparency, Medical Research, Research, Secrecy, Special Interests, Unethical, World News — 2 Comments
June 6, 2013

*******************************************************************************

The Epoch Times

USDA investigating source of contamination

Genetically engineered wheat discovered on an Oregon farm should be a wake-up call for Ottawa because similar contamination could have crippling market effects in Canada, says a consumer group.

Genetically engineered (often referred to as GE or GM) wheat, which is not legal anywhere in the world, was found by an Oregon farmer in his crops in April. Scientists tested the sample and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed last week that the wheat was a GM experimental strain developed and field-tested by seed giant Monsanto Co. more than a decade ago.

How the GM wheat ended up on the farm is under investigation by U.S. officials.

Lucy Sharratt, spokesperson for the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN), says Canadians should be concerned, since GM wheat has also been field-tested in Canada.

“It’s alarming, because this has the potential for a huge market impact on farmers, and we actually right now have no idea where this contamination came from,” she says.

“It’s alarming because we predicted that something like this would happen, and yet genetically modified crops continue to be field-tested and approved.”

Consumer Confidence on Shaky Ground

The USDA and Monsanto say the GM wheat does not pose a food safety concern. The market reacted nervously, however, and some importers were quick to shy away from U.S. wheat. Japan rejected nearly 25,000 tons of U.S. white wheat and countries in Asia and Europe have demanded further testing before allowing imports—making it clear that many consumers oppose GM foods.

“We are taking this situation very seriously and have launched a formal investigation,” Michael Firko, with the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, said in a statement.

“Our first priority is to as quickly as possible determine the circumstances and extent of the situation and how it happened. … USDA will put all necessary resources towards this investigation.”

Read Full Article Here

According to the USDA, 2005 was the last year GM wheat was tested in fields in the U.S. The last year Monsanto field-tested GM wheat in Canada was 2004.

If the contamination is found to originate from field-testing, the same dangers are present in Canada, where regulations are similar to the U.S., says Sharratt. Since wheat is one of Canada’s top exports—worth nearly $6 billion—a blow to the market would be deeply felt.

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Monsanto Baffled by the survival of GMO wheat , How could this happen? For a cadre of critics of biotech crops, the question is different: How could it not?

Filed under: Bioethics, bureaucracy, Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health, Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It, Environmental, Food Production, Food Safety, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Genetics, Geo Engineering, Government, Greed, Hypocrisy, Medical Research, Research, Unethical — 1 Comment
June 6, 2013

Monsanto can’t explain how GMO wheat survived

Published time: June 04, 2013 17:10
Edited time: June 05, 2013 14:13

An examiner demonstrates the process of analyzing a genetically modified wheat sample (Reuters / Lee Jae-Won)

An examiner demonstrates the process of analyzing a genetically modified wheat sample
(Reuters / Lee Jae-Won)

Monsanto claims it has no idea how its herbicide-resistant strain of wheat made its way onto an Oregon field. The global biotech giant based in Missouri says it abandoned research on it in 2004 and is mystified by its emergence nearly a decade later.

Monsanto tested the GMO varieties in 17 US states between 1998 and 2004. Although it also tested the GM wheat in Oregon, the company claims it destroyed all of the material upon the conclusion of the program and that it never grew the wheat strain on the farm where it was found last month.

“The company’s internal assessments suggest that neither seed left in the soil nor wheat pollen flow serve as reasonable explanations behind this reported detection,” the biotech giant said in a news release Friday.

The company claims that even if the wheat seed had been left in the ground, it would not have survived longer than one or two years in the soil. Monsanto also states that its seed varieties could not have possibly traveled across the state, since 99 percent of wheat pollen is deposited within 10 meters of the plant.

“This report is unusual since our program was discontinued nine years ago, and this is the only report after more than 500 million acres (200 million hectare) of wheat have been grown,” the company said in its statement.

Demonstrators hold up posters during a protest against U.S.-based Monsanto Co. and genetically modified organisms (GMO), in New York May 25, 2013 (Reuters / Eduardo Munoz)

Demonstrators hold up posters during a protest against U.S.-based Monsanto Co.
genetically modified organisms (GMO), in New York May 25, 2013
(Reuters / Eduardo Munoz)

Since May 29, the US Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has conducted a multi-state investigation to determine how the GM wheat reached the Oregon farm.

A local farmer discovered it after dousing his field with Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” pesticide and realizing that some of the wheat plants were resistant to it. He alerted the USDA, which soon determined that the herbicide-resistant wheat crop was the same variety Monsanto tested nearly a decade ago.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

*****************************************************************************

Renegade GM wheat confined to single Oregon field says agriculture secretary

Tom Vilsack said no indication that GM wheat had entered greater food supply with no threat to public health in US

A wheat field.

Monsanto carried out field trials of GM wheat in Oregon between 1998-2005. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian

The agriculture secretary, Tom Vilsack, moved to steady Asian and European nerves about US wheat exports on Wednesday, saying there was no indication that rogue GM wheat had entered into the greater food supply.

Vilsack said investigations so far suggested the renegade wheat, which was discovered last week, was confined to a single field in Oregon.

There was no threat to public health, he said. “This was a finding of a very small number of plants on 123 acres of land. There is no indication it has found its way into commerce, into flour or wheat that has been sold,” Vilsack said during an appearance at the National Press Club in Washington. “It has been limited at this point in time to this particular field.”

Nearly all of the soft white wheat grown in Oregon is sold for export, mainly to Asia, and the discovery of the GM seeds, which were developed by Monsanto, sent wheat prices falling and could imperil billions of exports.

Japan and South Korea immediately suspended shipments.

Vilsack, in his remarks to the press club, said he hoped investigations by the US Department of Agriculture would make sufficient progress to reopen those markets in a matter of weeks.

 

Read Full Article Here

*****************************************************************************

 

U.S. discovery of rogue GMO wheat raises concerns over controls

 

 

 

By Carey Gillam and Julie Ingwersen

Fri May 31, 2013 1:27am EDT

(Reuters) – For global consumers now on high alert over a rogue strain of genetically modified wheat found in Oregon, the question is simple: How could this happen? For a cadre of critics of biotech crops, the question is different: How could it not?

The questions arose after the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Wednesday that it was investigating the mysterious appearance of experimental, unapproved genetically engineered wheat plants on a farm in Oregon. The wheat was developed years ago by Monsanto Co to tolerate its Roundup herbicide, but the world’s largest seed company scrapped the project and ended all field trials in 2004.

The incident joins a score of episodes in which biotech crops have eluded efforts to segregate them from conventional varieties. But it marks the first time that a test strain of wheat, which has no genetically modified varieties on the market, has escaped the protocols set up by U.S. regulators to control it.

“These requirements are leaky and there is just no doubt about that. There is a fundamental problem with the system,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists who served on a biotech advisory subcommittee for the Food and Drug Administration from 2002 to 2005.

The discovery instantly roiled export markets, with Japan canceling a major shipment of wheat, a quick reminder of what is at stake – an $8 billion U.S. wheat export business.

Many fear the wheat most likely has been mixed in with conventional wheat for some time, but there are no valid commercial tests to verify whether wheat contains the biotech Roundup Ready gene.

“A lot of people are on high alert now,” said Mike Flowers, a cereal specialist at Oregon State University. “We can’t really say if it is or isn’t in other fields. We don’t know.”

A month has passed since U.S. authorities first were alerted to the suspect plants in Oregon, yet it remains unclear how the strain developed. Monsanto officials said it is likely the presence of the Roundup Ready genetic trait in wheat supplies is “very limited.” The company is conducting “a rigorous investigation” to find out how much, if any, wheat has been contaminated by their biotech variety. U.S. regulators are also investigating.

Bob Zemetra, one of the Oregon State University wheat researchers who first tested the mystery wheat when an unnamed farmer mailed a plant sample, said there is no easy way to explain the sudden appearance of the strain years after field tests ended.

Cross-pollination seems unlikely, Zemetra said, because the field where the plants were discovered was growing winter wheat, while Monsanto had field tested spring wheat. There hadn’t been any test sites in the area since at least 2004, making it unlikely the new genetic strain would have been carried on the wind.

“I don’t know that we are ever going to get a straight answer, or a satisfactory answer, on how it got there,” Zemetra said.

‘RIGOROUS TESTING PROTOCOL’

Government records show Monsanto conducted at least 279 field tests of herbicide-resistant wheat on over 4,000 acres in at least 16 states from 1994 until the company abandoned its field testing of wheat in 2004.

Zemetra participated in Monsanto wheat trials a decade ago, while working as a wheat breeder at the University of Idaho. When Monsanto decided to halt the testing, he said, the company had strict rules about handling test materials.

“Pretty much all that seed, and any program that was using it, either buried it, burned it or shipped it back to Monsanto, as part of the instructions for doing the field testing,” he said. “It was a very rigorous testing protocol.”

Researchers were requested to watch the plots for “volunteer” growth for at least two years after conclusion of the tests, Zemetra added.

Zemetra first became aware of the wheat found in Oregon when a farmer brought in what he described as several isolated wheat plants that had emerged after he sprayed Roundup on a fallow field in eastern Oregon. The farmer had last harvested a crop of white winter wheat from the field in 2012.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

 

*****************************************************************************

Related articles

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 844 other followers