Meta-analysis claiming to demonstrate on-farm benefits of GM crops critiqued

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15789-meta-
analysis-claiming-to-demonstrate-on-farm-benefits-of-gm-crops-critiqued

28 November 2014.

A heavily promoted meta-analysis claiming to demonstrate the benefits of GM crops, especially in developing countries, does no such thing, writes Prof Jack Heinemann
EXCERPT: It is very difficult to get solid indicators of the actual contribution GM cropping makes in places in which it is being used. This is why I question the unequivocal statements made by some scientists about benefits. Their conclusions appear to be uncoupled from the strength of the data.    [Find the three charts at the original link.]

Correlation is not causation

Jack Heinemann
Rightbiotech, 27 Nov 2014
http://rightbiotech.tumblr.com/post/103665842150/correlation-is-not-causation

* A heavily promoted meta-analysis claiming to demonstrate the benefits of GM crops especially in developing countries does no such thing.
* It fails to separate from the GM trait the effects of confounding variables that are known to dramatically affect all measured parameters.
* Commentators are presenting misleading interpretations.

GRAIN report: How does the Gates Foundation spend its money to feed the world?

http://www.grain.org/article/entries/5064-how-does-the-gates-
foundation-spend-its-money-to-feed-the-world

GRAIN | 04 November 2014 | Against the grain

“Listening to farmers and addressing their specific needs. We talk to farmers about the crops they want to grow and eat, as well as the unique challenges they face. We partner with organizations that understand and are equipped to address these challenges, and we invest in research to identify relevant and affordable solutions that farmers want and will use.”

First guiding principle of the Gates Foundation's work on agriculture.1

At some point in June this year, the total amount given as grants to food and agriculture projects by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation surpassed the US$3 billion mark. It marked quite a milestone. From nowhere on the agricultural scene less than a decade ago, the Gates Foundation has emerged as one of the world's major donors to agricultural research and development.

Bill Gates at Cornell University, trying to cross-pollinate wheat. (Photo: Cornell University)

The Gates Foundation is arguably the biggest philanthropic venture ever. It currently holds a $40 billion endowment, made up mostly of contributions from Gates and his billionaire friend Warren Buffet. The foundation has over 1,200 staff, and has given over $30 billion in grants since its inception in 2000, $3.6 billion in 2013 alone.2 Most of the grants go to global health programmes and educational work in the US, traditionally the foundation's priority areas. But in 2006-2007, the foundation massively expanded its funding for agriculture, with the launch of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and a series of large grants to the international agricultural research system (CGIAR). In 2007, it spent over half a billion dollars on agricultural projects and has maintained funding at around this level. The vast majority of the foundation's agricultural grants focus on Africa.

A junior business advisor for TechnoServe discusses farming techniques with a Ugandan farmer. Technoserve is the NGO receiving the most funds from the Gates Foundation. It's a US based NGO that develops “business solutions to poverty”. Running on an $80 million annual budget, it received a total of $85 million from the Gates Foundation during the last decade. Over half of these funds came through a 2007 grant “to help entrepreneurial men and women in poor rural areas of the developing world build business”. Technoserve carries out this work through partnerships with food corporations such as Cargill, Unilever, Coca Cola and Nestlé, who bring “world-class business and industry expertise” and who are offered, through the programme, "new market and sourcing opportunities”.

******

We could find no evidence of any support from the Gates Foundation for programmes of research or technology development carried out by farmers or based on farmers' knowledge, despite the multitude of such initiatives that exist across the continent. (African farmers, after all, do continue to supply an estimated 90% of the seed used on the continent!) The foundation has consistently chosen to put its money into top down structures of knowledge generation and flow, where farmers' are mere recipients of the technologies developed in labs and sold to them by companies.

Venezuela: La semilla no nos pertenece, nosotros y nosotras pertenecemos a la semilla

Biodiversidad en América Latina | Venezuela: La semilla no nos pertenecen, nosotros y nosotras pertenecemos a la semilla

Por Ignacio Denis del Rosario  

Tenemos un reto inmenso: apropiarnos del sentir de que la agroecologia es la vía de la verdadera emancipación en el marco de una economía rentista petrolera que sigue mercantilizando la naturaleza con sus prácticas extractivistas. Reconocemos que la transformación de este modelo vendrá cargada de tensiones y contradicciones, y por tanto entendemos la necesidad de comenzar lo antes posible. Es urgente, inevitable y es en este contexto que invitamos al país a asumir la semilla campesina e indígena como fundamento para la construcción del Eco socialismo, a través del rescate de las prácticas ancestrales de producción, custodia y multiplicación de las mismas.

Altering Wild Populations through “Gene Drives” – Weighing the Risks

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1117

November 24, 2014

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE     “Gene drives” enable traits to spread rapidly through wild populations over many generations. The use of genetically engineered gene drives has, to date, remained largely theoretical due to technical constraints. However technological advances have meant that powerful and efficient techniques for genome engineering can be applied to enable the development of an increasing number of tools well-suited to rapidly building and testing gene drives.  Because gene drives offer the prospect of manipulating many generations of a wild species, the risks have to be very carefully weighed against the potential benefits. In a paper published in the journaleLife, scientists from Havard call for public debate on gene drives. Given the potential for gene drives to alter entire wild populations and therefore ecosystems, they affirm that the development of this technology must include robust safeguards and methods of control. Another paper simultaneously published in the journal Science, written by the same authors together with others including policy experts, outlines the limitations of the technology as well as regulatory gaps that need to be first addressed. The scientists recommend that regulators adopt “a function-based approach that defines risk in terms of the ability to influence any key biological component the loss of which would be sufficient to cause harm to humans or other species of interest.” They caution that “gene drives present environmental and security challenges” and cite 10 steps to manage these risks, stressing that “It is crucial that this rapidly developing technology is evaluated before its use outside the laboratory becomes a reality”.   An article on this issue is reproduced below as Item 1 while the abstract and excerpts from the two journal papers appear as Items 2 and 3, respectively.   With best wishes  Third World Network 131 Jalan Macalister 10400 Penang Malaysia Email: twnet@po.jaring.my Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/ To unsubscribe: reply ‘unsubscribe’ to news@biosafety-info.net To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net Item 1 http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/science/2014/07/17/harvard-scientists-propose-gene-technology-that-could-alter-organisms-wild/Ae4XBtXhwOLOeKPQlabbcP/story.html Harvard scientists want gene-manipulation debate  By Carolyn Y. Johnson The Boston Globe, July 17, 2014 A powerful new technology could be used to “edit” the genomes of organisms in the wild, enabling researchers to block mosquitoes’ ability to spread malaria, for example, or make weeds more vulnerable to pesticides, Harvard scientists proposed Thursday. Item 2 http://elifesciences.org/content/early/2014/07/17/eLife.03401  Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations  Kevin M Esvelt, Andrea L Smidler, Flaminia Catteruccia, George M Church  DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03401 Published July 17, 2014 Abstract  Gene drives may be capable of addressing ecological problems by altering entire populations of wild organisms, but their use has remained largely theoretical due to technical constraints. Here we consider the potential for RNA-guided gene drives based on the CRISPR nuclease Cas9 to serve as a general method for spreading altered traits through wild populations over many generations. We detail likely capabilities, discuss limitations, and provide novel precautionary strategies to control the spread of gene drives and reverse genomic changes. The ability to edit populations of sexual species would offer substantial benefits to humanity and the environment. For example, RNA-guided gene drives could potentially prevent the spread of disease, support agriculture by reversing pesticide and herbicide resistance in insects and weeds, and control damaging invasive species. However, the possibility of unwanted ecological effects and near-certainty of spread across political borders demand careful assessment of each potential application. We call for thoughtful, inclusive, and well-informed public discussions to explore the responsible use of this currently theoretical technology. Item 3 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6197/626.full REGULATING GENE DRIVES  Kenneth A. Oye, Kevin Esvelt, Evan Appleton, Flaminia Catteruccia, George Church, Todd Kuiken, Shlomiya Bar-Yam Lightfoot, Julie McNamara, Andrea Smidler, James P. Collins  [EXCERPTS]  Genes in sexually reproducing organisms normally have, on average, a 50% chance of being inherited, but some genes have a higher chance of being inherited. These “selfish” genes can increase in relative frequency in a population even if they reduce the odds that each organism will reproduce. Aided by technological advances, scientists are investigating how similar methods might be used to alter populations by adding, disrupting, or editing genes and to suppress populations by propagating traits that reduce reproductive capacity. Potential beneficial uses of such “gene drives” include reprogramming mosquito genomes to eliminate malaria, reversing the development of pesticide and herbicide resistance, and locally eradicating invasive species. However, drives may present environmental and security challenges as well as benefits.

OCA on Starbucks

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_31550.cfm

Organic Consumers Association Statement on Starbucks Participation in Grocery Manufacturers Association’s GMO Labeling Lawsuit against Vermont

Organic Consumers Association, November 25, 2014

FINLAND, Minn. –  The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has called on Starbucks to withdraw from the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), an industry lobbying group that is suing Vermont to overturn the state’s GMO labeling law, and is behind H.R. 4432, a federal bill to preempt states’ rights to pass laws requiring the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in food ingredients.

GRACE Consortium cannot invalidate criticism of feeding trials

https://www.testbiotech.org/en/node/1115

Tuesday, 18. November 2014

The EU project GRACE, has published a first response to Testbiotech’s exposure of flaws in a rat feeding study with genetically engineered maize. In an open letter to Testbiotech, Joachim Schiemann, coordinator of the GRACE Consortium, rejected the objections raised by Testbiotech. At the same time, he neither rebutted Testbiotech’s critique nor did he address the network of vested interests around the publication. In regard to the toxicological data, he mostly repeated what was already stated in the study and therefore criticised by Testbiotech. Consequently, the GRACE Consortium cannot invalidate the evidence presented by Testbiotech.

Breeder annoyed GM given credit for yield hikes

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15772-
breeder-annoyed-gm-given-credit-for-yield-hikes

 20 November 2014.

Brian Rossnagel is tired of proponents of genetically modified crops attributing all the yield increases in corn, soybeans and canola to GM

The plant breeder interviewed in the article below isn't the only one to express annoyance at GM wrongly being credited with yield increases in staple crops.

Earlier this year, a wheat breeder complained that GM is oversold as a plant development method.

The article below contains the misconception that GM is expensive because of regulatory costs. But in fact regulatory costs only amount to 25% of the cost of bringing a GMO trait to market – the rest is basic R&D cost.
---

Breeder annoyed GM given credit for yield hikes

Sean Pratt
The Western Producer, 13 Nov 2014
http://www.producer.com/2014/11/breeder-annoyed-gm-given-credit-for-yield-hikes/

Charting the GMO threat

TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE:
http://ejfood.blogspot.com/2014/11/geo-watch-data-base-for-gmo-crop.html

Charting the transgenic threat

A TOOL FOR ACTIVISTS AND FARMERS

Devon G. Peña | Seattle, WA | November 4, 2014

Note: In the world of seed saving and plant breeding, this is the biggest news all year. A new peer-reviewed scientific journal, Food Contamination, has just published a meta-analysis of the GM Contamination Register that was compiled over the past ten years by Genewatch and Greenpeace.  Janet Cotter (Greenpeace) and Becky Price (Genewatch) were the lead compilers of this important database. Here is my take on the significance of this sort of data mapping for  farmers concerned with protecting the genomic integrity and organic or biodynamic status of their land race and heirloom crop varieties.

Image courtesy of Transgenic Study Blog

One of the most significant issues in the debate over the environmental impacts of transgenic[1] crops is the irrefutable scientific fact posed by gene flow.  As a farmer, seed librarian, and plant breeder, I am deeply concerned with the threat of genetic contamination posed by transgenic crops to center of origin land race varieties grown across all of the indigenous First Nation territories of Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Other farmers and scientists who share this concern have been presenting evidence of this transgenic threat since 2001 when Ignacio Chapela and David Quist of the University of California-Berkeley documented introgression of transgenes in native land race populations of Zea mays (maize) in Oaxaca, Mexico.

It has been a challenge to keep track of the growing number of such events in which genetic materials from GMO/GE cropsintrogress[2] (contaminate) the native genome of land race crop varieties. Transgenic introgression is a real, verified, direct, and immediate threat to the genomic integrity of center of origin land race varieties.

NO a la Ley "Monsanto" de Semillas en Argentina

"La modificación de la actual legislación equivale a avanzar aún más en la privatización de las semillas, prohibiendo la reutilización que los productores hacen de aquellas que obtienen en sus propias cosechas. De este modo se viola el derecho fundamental de los agricultores a seleccionar, mejorar e intercambiar las semillas libremente. Y si las transnacionales avanzan sobre el control de las semillas, también lo harán en la monopolización del mercado y el control corporativo de los alimentos de todo el pueblo argentino."

Poorly Tested Gene Silencing Technology to Enter Food Supply with Simplot Potato

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/3594/poorly-tested-
gene-silencing-technology-to-enter-food-supply-with-simplot-potato

November 7th, 2014

A New Form of Genetic Engineering will soon be sold to unsuspecting consumers

November 7, 2014 (Washington, DC)--Center for Food Safety (CFS) is today warning consumers about a new genetically engineered (GE) potato that may soon enter the food supply. Because GE foods are not required to be labeled, the new GE potato will be sold to consumers without their knowledge. The GE potato was one of two new crops approved today by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that uses a new, little understood form of genetic engineering called RNA interference (RNAi). The other is a newlow-lignin alfalfa from Monsanto. Despite the unprecedented nature of these approvals, USDA has inexplicably failed to undertake the legally required rigorous and overarching analysis of the GE crops’ impacts or reasonably foreseeable consequences.

“We simply don’t know enough about RNA interference technology to determine whether GE crops developed with it are safe for people and the environment.  If this is an attempt to give crop biotechnology a more benign face, all it has really done is expose the inadequacies of the U.S. regulation of GE crops.  These approvals are riddled with holes and are extremely worrisome,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, Ph.D., CFS director of sustainable agriculture and senior scientist.

Life or death over seeds – worldwide seed war rages

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15762-
life-or-death-over-seeds-worldwide-seed-war-rages

 14 November 2014.

Over half the global seed market is controlled by 3 agrochemical corporations (Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta)
New legislation is threatening to criminalise the ability of farmers to freely save and exchange seeds (see item 1 below).

For example, Ghana is passing a new seed law because of pressure from rich governments, including that of the UK, and big corporations (see item 2 below).

The new law, if passed, will restrict small-scale farmers and food producers from freely saving, exchanging and selling seeds. This will sideline traditional varieties and push farmers towards buying seeds from big business like Monsanto year after year. And small-scale farmers could even face criminalisation for saving seeds that corporations lay claim to.

Take action (UK only): Write to your MP asking that the UK government cease pressuring Ghana to pass the new seed law:
http://action.wdm.org.uk/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1784&ea.campaign.id=32583

Meanwhile in Europe, the TTIP free trade deal between the US and EU threatens to flood Europe with GMOs.

EXCERPT (item 1): Lobby[ing] from US large corporations has been intense and aimed at attacking those EU restrictions on imports of GM food, including the removal of EU requirement of labelling and traceability for GM crops and food. As a result thousands and thousands of citizens are mobilising throughout Europe and in the UK to say NO TTIP! Already the EU has had to halt part of the negotiations for three months to allow for proper democratic consultation.

1. Life or death over seeds – a worldwide seed war is now raging
2. The fight for seed sovereignty in Ghana

1. Life or death over seeds – a worldwide seed war is now raging

War on Want, 23 Oct 2014
http://www.waronwant.org/news/latest-news/18235-life-or-death-over-seeds-a-worldwide-seed-war-is-now-ragging-

2. The fight for seed sovereignty in Ghana

The Climate Coalition, 6 November 2014
http://www.theclimatecoalition.org/news/2014/11/06/fight-seed-sovereignty-ghana

Semillas: "Hay Vida después del agronegocio"

http://www.comambiental.com.ar/2014/11/semillas-hay-vida-despues-del.html

Algunas de las organizaciones presentes en el Congreso. Fuente de la imagen.

EXTRACTO:

"El planteo de la coexistencia es una burla", aseguró Carlos Vicente (GRAIN) durante la audiencia. Recordó los casos de conflictos por la tierra, como ocurre en diversos parajes del norte argentino, sobre todo. El contexto actual nos habla también del juicio por el asesinato de Cristian Ferreyra del MOCASE.

El domingo pasado en una columna en Página/12, Norma Giarracca, del Grupo de Estudios Rurales (IIGG-UBA), puso en perspectiva histórica este debate para concluir: "Por razones agronómicas, económicas, antropológicas, históricas, la Agricultura Familiar no puede coexistir con el agronegocio". El agronegocio pone en peligro al actor histórico que representa el campesinado, heredero en estas tierras de los pueblos indígenas.

En el mismo sentido, durante la Audiencia, Fernando Frank (Asociación Campesina del Valle de Conlara) enfatizó justamente la importancia de la "identidad campesina" porque tiene una historia de siglos. Llamó entonces a contraponer el modelo del agronegocio con la agroecología. Y se lamentó al decir que "parece mentira que haya que explicar la importancia de las semillas libres luego de 12 mil años de producción. Pero parece que hay gente extraviada". 

Monsanto settles with wheat growers over GM contamination

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15763-
monsanto-settles-with-wheat-growers-over-gm-contamination

 15 November 2014.

GM wheat developed by Monsanto was discovered on farmland in Eastern Oregon

EXCERPT: Soil Association Policy Director Peter Melchett said, "No one could possibly believe that GM crops would benefit English farmers when they see the extraordinary costs that GM brings in unwanted contamination. Only an ideological fixation on GM, disregarding economic realities and more modern and effective crop breeding technologies… can explain why some English farming organisations and politicians continue to promote this out of date and dangerous technology."

Monsanto settles with wheat growers over GM contamination

Farming Online, 13 November 2014
http://www.farming.co.uk/news/article/10642

Syngenta facing dozens of lawsuits over GMO seed

http://www.thonline.com/news/iowa-illinois-wisconsin/article_
fcfbdd88-9297-5b5e-891d-40facd993b9f.html

Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Associated Press |

DES MOINES -- Agrochemicals giant Syngenta is facing a growing number of lawsuits challenging its release of a genetically modified corn seed that China had not approved for import, with losses to farmers estimated to be at least $1 billion.

More than 50 lawsuits have been filed in 11 major corn-growing states, including Illinois, Iowa, Missouri and Nebraska with hundreds more being prepared. Some suits are from farmers represented by individual attorneys, others are class-action lawsuits representing hundreds more.

Pharma corn in California's Monterey County

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15759-pharma-corn-in-monterey-county

14 November 2014.

Ag Commissioner claims "virtually no risk of cross-contamination"

From amid the fog of pro-GMO hype in this article, the unmistakeable truth emerges: GMO pharma corn is being planted in California and the local authorities have adopted an evidence-free belief that the crop will not get into food and feed supplies.

Ironically, the accusation of "terrorism" is applied to those who would try to prevent such contamination by uprooting the crop.

Monterey County is poised to get its first GM crop: corn for pharmaceuticals

by Sara Rubin
Monterey County Weekly, 23 Oct 2014
http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/local_news/monterey-county-is-poised-to-get-its-first-gm-crop/article_19f33dce-5a29-11e4-9cb5-001a4bcf6878.html

World scientists and academics demand halt to GMO field trials in Thailand

http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15766-world-scientists-
and-academics-demand-halt-to-gmo-field-trials-in-thailand

on 17 November 2014.

Accountability needed in case of contamination
A group of scientists and academics has written to the Prime Minister of Thailand to ask him not to go ahead with GMO field trials.

EXCERPT: Existing academic literature suggests that while it is unproven that genetically modified seeds are higher yielding, there are causes to be extremely concerned by genetically modified crops' negative ecological, social, health, and economic impact.

An open letter to the Prime Minister of Thailand from concerned scientists and academics around the world regarding the open-field testing and commercialisation of genetically modified crops in Thailand

9 November 2014
http://www.biothai.net/node/24597
[website in Thai]

Manifiesto de la 37º Asamblea de la RENACE - Red Nacional de Acción Ecologista de Argentina

http://www.biodiversidadla.org/Principal/Secciones/Documentos/Manifiesto_de_la_371_
Asamblea_de_la_RENACE_-_Red_Nacional_de_Accion_Ecologista_de_Argentina

Rechazamos el empeño en seguir promoviendo como política de estado la megaminería hidroquímica y radioactiva, la energía nuclear (desde la minería del uranio, creación de nuevas centrales nucleares sin repositorios nucleares), la promoción y explotación de hidrocarburos con la técnica de fractura hidráulica, el plan agroalimentario argentino 2020 (PEA) y su correlato con la creación de nuevos eventos transgénicos, la nueva ley propuesta de semillas y la ley de agronómicos.

******

RENACE lamenta las declaraciones de quienes señalan que los ecologistas basamos nuestros reclamos en estudios que no son científicos. Afirmamos que los que no son serios ni científicos son los estudios e investigaciones que esgrimen quienes promueven el sistema agroalimentario basado en cultivos transgénicos, la explotación no convencional de petróleo, la megaminería, la energía nuclear, la incineración de residuos, y otras prácticas insustentables y contaminantes.

La ciencia deja de ser ciencia cuando prioriza los intereses de las empresas y el capital privado concentrado, con investigaciones propias confidenciales, realizadas por laboratorios o personas vinculadas a las mismas empresas, para fundamentar el impacto a la salud y la vida, amparados en un estado ausente que no ejerce el control sobre la integralidad de los riesgos y daños, que omite el principio precautorio y se maneja por fuera de las necesidades humanas y a la licencia social.

NO a la Nueva Ley "Monsanto" de Semillas en Argentina II

Sigue ARA con su campaña pro transgénicos

El pasado 5 de noviembre recibí de Acción y Reforma Agrícola (ARA) una pequeña porquería de Caitlin Kennedy titulada "5 Arguments from the GMO Debate That Have Lost Their Gusto". ARA (http://arapr.org/) es el lobby de los transgénicos y agrotóxicos de Puerto Rico. Esta organización que pretende representar a los agricultores lleva el mensaje de Monsanto y demás compañías agroquímicas y de biotecnología transgénica.

Miren quienes son: ARA - Acción & Reforma Agricola

		ARA - Acción & Reforma Agricola Pedro J. Vivoni - Presidente Agrónomo y Agricultor.
		View on arapr.org	Preview by Yahoo

Como pueden ver, algunos de sus directivos trabajan o han trabajado en negocios de insumos agrícolas como Ochoa, Panamerican Fertilizer, Panamerican Grain y Agroservicios. Los intereses de los agricultores y de los vendedores de insumos NUNCA serán los mismos. 

¿Y quién es la autora de ese artículo? Caitlin Kennedy no es académica ni profesional del periodismo. Ella es relacionista pública y trabaja como oficial de comunicaciones (propaganda) de la Biotechnology Industry Organization, el gremio corporativo más grande de la industria de biotecnología (https://twitter.com/IhrtBiotech).

Kennedy cita favorablemente a Tamar Haspel (http://www.washingtonpost.com/pb/unearthed), una periodista supuestamente objetiva que le hace las relaciones públicas a Monsanto desde las páginas de Washington Post con artículos supuestamente objetivos y balanceados. (http://bioseguridad.blogspot.com/search/label/Haspel)

- Carmelo Ruiz Marrero
8 de noviembre 2014

Monsanto and Dow sue Maui County over GMO cultivation ban

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15760-
monsanto-and-dow-sue-maui-county-over-gmo-cultivation-ban

 14 November 2014.

Law imposes moratorium on the growing of GM crops until scientific studies are conducted on their safety

Monsanto and Dow are suing Maui County, Hawaii to block its new law banning GMO cultivation (item 1 below).

In June this year, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, an industry association funded by Big Food, sued the State of Vermont for instituting its GMO labelling law (item 2).

And last year, Syngenta and Bayer sued the EU for placing a limited ban on their neonicotinoid pesticides, which are implicated in the decline of bees and other beneficial insects.

GMO/chemical companies suing governments is a growing trend that's likely to continue as long as company budgets far exceed the resources of government authorities – and as long as corporations continue to be given the rights of individuals with none of the responsibilities.

The trend will increase exponentially if the TTIP free trade agreement between the US and the EU goes ahead as planned.

1. Two developers sue Hawaii county to halt GMO law
2. Lawsuit challenges Vermont's GMO labeling law
---

1. Two developers sue Hawaii county to halt GMO law

Associated Press via The Daily Mail, 14 Nov 2014
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-2834249/2-developers-sue-Hawaii-county-halt-GMO-law.html

2. Lawsuit challenges Vermont's GMO labeling law

Nancy Remsen
The Burlington (Vt.) Free Press via USA Today, 12 June 2014
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/12/lawsuit-challenges-vermonts-gmo-labeling-law/10402301/

Global GMO Free Coalition Set to Help Fund World’s Largest GMO Safety Study

http://www.gmofreeglobal.org/en/news/post/global-gmo-free-
coalition-helps-fund-worlds-largest-gmo-safety-study

Fri 7 Nov, 2014

The Global GMO Free Coalition welcomes the launch of the largest ever study on GMO and pesticide safety – Factor GMO. This is the type of study that should have been carried out on all GM foods before they were released into our food and feed supplies.

Factor GMO will include three arms: carcinogenicity, toxicity and multi-generational. These arms will give clear information on the health impacts of the Roundup Ready GM maize variety being studied and the glyphosate herbicide with which it is grown.

Glyphosate-based herbicides are the most widely used pesticides in the world. Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is just one of these glyphosate-based herbicides and it accounts for 20% of Monsanto’s net profits every year. Factor GMO will give a clear idea of what level of harm glyphosate-based herbicides cause to human health and will also identify whether Roundup (which includes glyphosate and other ingredients) is more harmful to human health than glyphosate on its own.

The Global GMO Free Coalition (GGFC) urges governments and regulatory authorities worldwide to use the precautionary principle regarding GM crops and glyphosate / Roundup until the results of this comprehensive study are released over the next 3 years. Any other decision by regulatory authorities will leave them open to future accusations of endangering public health based on a lack of comprehensive evidence on the safety of GM crops and their associated pesticides.

What is Synthetic Biology?: Engineering Life and Livelihoods

OCA: Will we win in Oregon?

http://www.organicconsumers.org/bytes/ob448.html

Subscribe & Read Past Issues | OCA Homepage | Donate  TOP NEWS OF THE WEEK 6634 Votes from a Win in Oregon! Don’t believe everything you read in the papers. We have not yet lost Measure 92, Oregon’s initiative to label GMOs. According to the YES on 92 campaign, we are only 6634 votes (as of 5 p.m. Wednesday, November 12) from a win. If we get to within a margin of 49.80 percent (we're currently at 49.78!), we’ll trigger an automatic recount, paid for by the state. But here’s the thing. The only way we can win in Oregon is to contact every voter whose vote hasn’t been counted, because it was “challenged” due to a technical problem. There are enough of these “challenge” ballots—about 13,000—yet uncounted, to swing the election in our favor. We need hundreds of organizers on the ground beginning today, to reach out to voters to resolve problems with their ballots, and make sure their votes are counted. And the only way we can make that happen is to hire professional organizers, and pay travel expenses for volunteers. We are so close. There is no guarantee we will win, but a win is definitely still within reach. If we can get all of the votes counted by the deadline, 5 p.m. November 18. We know you’ve already dug deep into your pockets to help this movement. But today, we are asking again. Through our 501(c) 4 lobbying arm, we have promised to rush another $25,000 to the YES on 92 campaign to make sure we don’t lose this critical GMO labeling battle. If you can help, click here for details on how to donate online now, or by phone or mail. Thank you! ESSAY OF THE WEEK Giving Thanks, Organically In two weeks, families, friends and communities will gather around dinner tables to celebrate Thanksgiving. Leaving aside for now the nuanced political, historical and cultural complications that underlie the holiday, and taking into consideration the different meanings individuals assign to Thanksgiving, there will be one universal thread running through everyone’s celebration on Thursday, November 27: Food. For millions of Americans, unfortunately, the food on their tables will take the form of a turkey raised in filthy, crowded conditions on a diet of antibiotics and genetically engineered corn and soy, with side dishes made from potatoes and beans and other produce heavily contaminated with pesticides, accompanied by highly processed white-bread dinner rolls slathered with butter made from milk produced by cows pumped full of growth hormonesand raised in conditions no animal should be forced to endure. Thankfully, as the market for organic food grows, consumers have greater access to organic alternatives, whether they plan a traditional Thanksgiving dinner, or opt for something other than turkey, potatoes and pumpkin pie. They also have plenty of motivation: better health and nutrition; a cleaner environment; more humane treatment of animals; and a cooler planet. According to reports by the Rodale Institute, the United Nations and the Soil Association, modern, chemical-intensive industrial farming has stripped the soil’s natural ability to take carbon back out of the atmosphere, through photosynthesis, and store it where nature intended—in the soil. By returning to small-scale organic farming, say researchers at the Rodale Institute, more than 40 percent of annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could be captured in the soil. And if the world’s pasture and rangelands were managed using regenerative techniques, an additional 71 percent of GHG emissions could be sequestered. This Thanksgiving, we ask you to pledge to Cook Organic, not the Planet not just on Thanksgiving, but every day. Because as consumers, we have the power to shift the market—and save the planet. Read this week’s article on why organic is the only way to go for turkey, potatoes, green beans, pumpkin, bread, dairy and wine. Read the essay How to buy a turkey Where to buy organic ingredients TAKE ACTION: Take the Cook Organic, not the Planet Pledge! Post photos and recipes from your organic Thanksgiving ACTION ALERT Innately Wrong About 15 years ago, consumers successfullypressured McDonald’s Corp. to stop buying New Leaf potatoes, a potato varietygenetically engineered (by Monsanto) to produce its own insecticide. Last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved a new GMO potato. The “Innate” brand is made by the J. R. Simplot Company—the largest supplier of potatoes to McDonald’s restaurants. (The USDA alsoapproved a new genetically engineered alfalfa last week). Simplot wants consumers to believe that its new GMO potato is not only harmless, it provides consumers with several benefits. Among those benefits are the fact that the potato is bruise-resistant (which is really a benefit to commercial buyers and growers, not consumers), and that when heated to a temperature required for frying, the potato produces less asparagine, a naturally occurring amino acid that at high temperatures reacts with some sugars to oxidize into acrylamide. Acrylamide is recognized as a potential carcinogen. In other words, the maker of the Innate GMO potato says it’s not only safe (the same claim Monsanto and Dow make about their GMO corn and soy products), it’s actually better for you than a non-GMO potato. What Simplot doesn’t tell you is that the technology used to create the Innate potato—RNA interference, or RNAi—is considered by some scientists to be even more dangerous than the DNA manipulation technology used to create Roundup Ready and Bt crops. TAKE ACTION: Please Ask McDonald’s CEO Donald Thompson to reject Simplot’s “Innately Wrong” GMO Potato! Photo Credit: arbyreed via Compfight cc