Archive for the ‘News’ Category
A Parent’s Guide to GMOs
November 7th, 2011
| 
Author: 
A Parent’s Guide to GMOs and the Ballot Initiative
This is from a great brochure created by one of the people working on the campaign – let’s pass this along to all the moms we know and get the word out! Hope you have a great week. – Mom
Given the questions, we have a right to know what’s in our foods.
Stand with us. Join us to require integrity in food labeling.
What are GMO’S
Genetically Modified organisms, often called genetically engineered (GE). The correct scientific term is “transgenics.” This is a process whereby the genes of one species are inserted into another species. For the purposes of this initiative, the term does not include hybrids, selective breeding, grafting or MAS (Marker Assisted Selection)
What’s your Rush?
New studies point to increased health risks. Numerous vegetables, fruits and animal products are being developed and considered for approval. We are concerned with the recent deregulation of the high cross pollinator, alfalfa. We want to do all we can to ensure our children have the option of organic dairy and meats.
What has changed?
In the last 15 years, novel proteins, allergens and toxins have been introduced into the American food supply in order to enhance profitability for the food industry. No human trials were ever conducted to assess the safety of these chemicals on children, leading other developed countries to take a precautionary approach and these ingredients were not introduced into the food supplies in other developed countries. Increasing scientific evidence continues to demonstrate the impact that these chemicals are having on our health and particularly on the health of our children, their developing immune systems, nervous systems and gastrointestinal and digestive systems (in which 70% of a child’s immune systems is found).
Our Intimate Relationship with Food
In 1996, the United States adopted widespread use of genetically modified crops due to growing public concern over the health risks associated with the industrial spraying of insecticidal and pesiticidal toxins.
In an effort to reduce the spraying of these toxins, scientists began using biotechnology to engineer these pesticides and insecticides into the plants themselves.
As a result, chemical use has increased to an extreme amount of around 180 million more pounds per year being used.
As these ingredients were introduced around the world ten years ago, government agencies in Europe, Asia, Australia, Japan, Russia and over 30 developed countries required them to be listed on food labels, so that consumers could make informed choices when it came to feeding their families.
In the United States, our regulatory agencies do not require these genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled.
So, unlike other developed countries, we have not been informed that almost 70% of our corn, 90% of our soy and 75% of our processed food now contain neurotoxins, novel proteins and allergens.
Today one out of every three children suffers from allergies, asthma, autism or ADHD. It appears that we have unknowingly and without informed consent engaged our children in one of the largest human trials in history.
Ten years into this human trial, our children are trying to tell us something.
Shouldn’t we listen?
Worldwide Labeling
There are over 40 countries who require labeling of GMO’s. Many US companies sell them GMO-free versions of products sold in the US that contain them.
Number of Crops Worldwide
USA: Soy/93%, Corn 86%, Cotton 93%, Papaya 80%, Canola 93%, Zucchini 13%, Sugar beets (which can be listed as ‘sugar’ in any processed food) 95%
Why do we want them Labeled:
The main reason we want them labeled is that we see enough independent data to suggest possible health risks. We don’t want to eat them but we can’t know which foods they are in if they aren’t labeled. It’s a basic consumer right we are asking for– given the conflicting data and our mistrust in an industry that has been proven to hide negative findings, we have the right to know what we are buying and putting in our children’s mouths.
The Initiative
A grassroots movement to get an initiative that would require mandatory labeling of genetically modified food.
In the U.S., 24 states have an initiative process. What this means is that if the people want a law and they cannot get their legislators to enact it, the people can come together and get the law on the ballot to vote for it directly.
It’s time to send a strong, direct message to those who govern us, whether it be agency or elected, that we want genetically engineered foods labeled.
What can we do now?
Spread the word: Tell everyone you know. Especially everyone who lives in California.
Volunteer: If you live in CA: Sign the Pledge to gather Signatures for this Fall.
Join the Team: Visit the site to see what we want to create and if you see yourself wanting it.
Donate: We are a grassroots movement and need everyone’s support. Initiatives are very expensive. Those who want to see a labeling vote fail have tremendous resources to try and silence us. If you’re not in California, please donate! Even a few dollars will make a difference and getting labeling here will make it happen for the whole country.
Learn more at the links below
2012 Ballot Initiative Campaign Website:
You can also become part of our Facebook page to get the latest details and updates for our Community. https://www.facebook.com/labelgmos
Read more, great Monday Mania posts here: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/2011/11/monday-mania-1172011-2/
Read more, great Fat Tuesday posts here: http://realfoodforager.com/2011/11/fat-tuesday-november-8-2011/
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/11/real-food-wednesday-11092011.html
Read more, great Pennywise Platter Thursday posts here: http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2011/11/pennywise-platter-thursday-1110.html
Read more, great Simple Lives Thursday posts here: http://gnowfglins.com/2011/11/09/simple-lives-thursday-69/
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-november-11th/
GMOs in the News
Sunday, October 16th is World Food Day!
There will be rallies and events all over the U.S. Find one near you here:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/index.cfm
Some great stories in the news this week:
Gary Hirshberg, CEO of Stonyfield Farm, on fighting GMOs
“What people need to understand with GE, or genetically engineered, [aka GMO] crops is that the seeds are owned by chemical companies. When we sanction the unrestricted use of GE crops, we’re sanctioning the unrestricted use of these chemicals, which are already making us sick.
I’m hopeful. As I travel the country, I hear that people want freedom of choice. Eighty-seven percent of Americans say that genetically modified foods should be labeled and that they don’t want to buy GE crops and food grown from GE seeds. Consumers care, farmers care, even nonorganic farmers care because they don’t want to be told what kind of seeds to grow and they don’t want to pay the higher costs demanded by these companies.
Read more here: http://newhope360.com/non-gmo/know-your-gmos-hidden-ingredients-safe-labels-and-taking-action
In Free Market, No GMO
Jan 222011
Think. Should farmers & consumers in Vermont have as many rights as those in Europe, Australia and New Zealand?
The European Union (EU) countries implemented mandatory labeling requirements for genetically engineered soy and corn. By the end of 1998, nearly all the grocery chains and fast food restaurants in the EU had eliminated genetically engineered ingredients from their products.
Australian and New Zealand food manufacturers must label all processed food products that contain GMO (genetically engineered, or biotech) ingredients. As a result of this labeling requirement, Australia’s largest food conglomerate, Goodman Fielder, eliminated GMO from its product line. Other manufacturers and grocery chains are following suit.
In Vermont, however, we have a new governor who killed the 2000 GMO labelling act when he was a Senator. “…A measure mandating labels on genetically modified seeds and food, liability for the purveyors of the technology and registration of the location of transgenic crops with town clerks flew through the Senate Agriculture Committee. But its good fortunes ended in the Finance Committee. Democratic Sen. Peter Shumlin voted with Republicans to table the bill.”
“Shumlin told Sen. Cheryl Rivers (D), then chair of the Agriculture Committee, that he was “unwilling to support a bill requiring labeling of genetically modified foods because the Democrats had already lost the contributions of pharmaceutical companies, and he was not willing to sacrifice contributions from the food industry,” according to the Rutland Herald.
Read more here: http://senatorwagner.com/2011/01/in-free-market-no-gmo/
Buy No GMO t-shirts
This is the winning t-shirt from the contest sponsored by the Institute for Responsible Technology, 25% of the proceed go to them and it’s on sale until 10/11 for only $10.00 – I thought it was a great design!
http://www.threadless.com/product/3228/GMOS_OMG/
And one from Moms for Safe Food too! This is the Men’s T – there are women’s too.
They say:
My husband came up with a great slogan and I made them up for café press. We are not making any money on these, just selling them at Café Press’s base price.
I just like them (we all have one) and wanted to offer them to others.
Link:
http://www.cafepress.com/momsforsafefood
So many good things in the news this week! 🙂
Read more, great Monday Mania posts here: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/2011/10/monday-mania-10102011/
Read more, great Fat Tuesday posts here: http://realfoodforager.com/2011/10/fat-tuesday-october-11-2011/
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/10/real-food-wednesday-10122011.html
Read more, great Simples Lives Thursday posts here: http://gnowfglins.com/2011/10/12/simple-lives-thursday-65/
Read more, great Pennywise Platter posts here: http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2011/10/pennywise-platter-thursday-1013.html
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-october-14th/
GMOs in the News
GMOs in the News – Sept 2011 edition
Lots in the news about GMOs this month. Share this post with your friends and families. The more people that learn about GMOs, the better! Mom
Organic Versus Genetically Engineered Crops: Some Rays of Light
August 30, 2011
Recent court decisions may help. Plus, new research shows how dangerous Monsanto’s GMOs really are.
Natural organic crops need to be protected from potential contamination by synthetic, genetically engineered seeds—especially in the face of less government oversight of GMOs. Natural seeds face the same Catch-22 as supplements: they cannot be patented, whereas synthetic seeds (and drugs) can be—and are therefore huge profit centers for Big Agro and Big Pharma, not to mention the government agencies in bed with them. They also need protection from the increased use of pesticides used on GE crops, which are also carried by the winds.
Our colleagues at ANH International reported recently that two court cases in the US might be turning the tide in favor of organic farmers over GE crops:
- Last December, the California Court of Appeal found the Western Farm Service guilty of “negligence, trespass, and nuisance” against Jacobs Organic Farm and the Del Cabo Organic Cooperative. In 2006 Western Farm applied GE organophosphate (OP) pesticides to Brussels sprouts grown on land neighboring the organic farms. Winds carried these pesticides onto the organic produce and contaminated it—making it unsalable as organic. Even though Western Farm claimed to have taken precautions to avoid pesticide drift, it still happened—and fortunately the court found them guilty.
- Last month, after ten years of futile complaints to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, the Minnesota Court of Appeals found the Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Company guilty of negligence, trespass, and nuisance on Oluf and Debra Johnson’s organic farm. Once again the pesticides sprayed on the oil company’s farms spread to the Johnsons’ land.
One of the big problems with GE crops is that they are responsible for the greatly increased use of pesticides which can easily contaminate organic crops. Now organic farms have legal precedents to sue conventional farms (and those using GMOs) for pesticide contamination.
Read the rest of the article here: http://www.anh-usa.org/organic-v-ge-crops-rays-of-light/
Monsanto GM Corn in Peril: Beetle develops Bt-resistance
Rady Ananda, Contributing Writer
Nature herself may be the best opponent of genetically modified crops and pesticides. Not only plants, but insects are also developing resistance. The Western rootworm beetle – one of the most serious threats to corn – has developed resistance to Monsanto’s Bt-corn, and entire crops are being lost.
Farmers from several Midwest states began reporting root damage to corn that was specifically engineered with a toxin to kill the rootworm. Iowa State University entomologist Aaron Gassmann recently confirmed that the beetle, Diabrotica virgifera virgifera, has developed resistance to the Bt protein, Cry3Bb1.
Bacillus thuringiensis – Bt – is a bacterium that kills insects. Different proteins are engineered into cotton as well as corn plants.
Two-thirds of all US corn is genetically modified per the USDA, and the bulk of that is Bt-corn. Monsanto has the biggest market share in the US, reporting about 35% in 2009.
In response to the July 2011 study, Monsanto said only the “YieldGard® VT Triple and Genuity® VT Triple PRO™ corn products” are affected.
“It appears he has demonstrated a difference in survival in the lab, but it is too early to tell whether there are implications for growers in the field.”
However, Kansas State researchers summarized the study, indicating that the specimens tested came from fields suffering severe rootworm damage and compared them to those from unaffected fields. In other words, it was a field study.
Resistance developed where the same Bt corn had been grown at least three years in a row. Gassmann found “a significant positive correlation between the number of years Cry3Bb1 maize had been grown in a field and the survival of rootworm populations on Cry3Bb1 maize in bioassays.”
Ag Professional’s Colleen Scherer explains that “the Cry3Bb1 toxin is the major one deployed against rootworms. There is no ‘putting the genie back in the bottle,’ and resistance in these areas is a problem that won’t go away.”
Read the rest here: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/08/monsanto-gm-corn-in-peril-beetle.html
EU bans GM-contaminated honey from general sale
Bavarian beekeepers forced to declare their honey as genetically modified because of contamination from nearby Monsanto crops
- Leigh Phillips
- guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 7 September 2011 11.28 BST
Honey bees on a honeycomb in Germany. A European court has ruled that honey which contains traces of pollen from genetically modified crops needs special authorisation before it can be sold. Photograph: Heribert Proepper/AP
The European Union’s highest court on Tuesday ruled that honey which contains trace amounts of pollen from genetically modified (GM) corn must be labelled as GM produce and undergo full safety authorisation before it can be sold as food.
In what green groups are calling a “groundbreaking” ruling, the decision could force the EU to strengthen its already near-zero tolerance policy on genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
Bavarian beekeepers, some 500m from a test field for a modified maize crop developed by Monsanto – one of only two GM crops authorised as safe to be cultivated in Europe – claimed their honey had been “contaminated” by pollen from the plant.
The European court of justice found in their favour, a ruling that should offer grounds for the beekeepers to claim compensation in a German court.
But the court’s finding also potentially threatens recent EU legislation, introduced in July this year, that permits traces of GMOs in animal feed without a safety review.
Mute Schimpf, food campaigner for Friends of the Earth Europe, said that the ruling “would confirm that existing laws allowing traces of unauthorised GM contamination are insufficient and would need revising.”
French Green MEP José Bové, an ex-farmer well-known for his destruction of a McDonald’s franchise in the south of France and the uprooting of GM crops in Brazil, said that the only protection farmers can have is for a complete ban on GMOs in Europe. “Beekeepers are powerless to prevent the contamination of their honey by GM pollen, as farmers are for their crops, and thus powerless to prevent the tainting of the foodstuffs they produce and the integrity of their product.
“The only sure way to prevent this is by precluding the cultivation of GMOs.”
Greenpeace, describing the traces of pollen in the honey as “genetic pollution” said that Monsanto and the Bavarian state should be held liable for the beekeepers’ losses as a result of their product having to be labelled as containing GMOs.
However, agricultural specialists criticised the ruling, saying that the decision has no grounding in science.
Guy Poppy, the director of the centre for biological sciences at the University of Southampton, told the Guardian: “There is no safety issue. This honey is as safe as any other.”
(Note from Mom – if you read the rest of the article the Biotech ’employee’ says “they’ve been judged safe” – actually they haven’t…)
Read the rest here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/07/europe-honey-gm/print
And don’t forget:
It’s Our Right to Know
If you live in California (and forward this to those you know who do!)
There is a GMO Labeling 2012 Ballot Initiative in the works.
Go to the site, and sign up to help and/or give a donation.
Read more, great Monday Mania posts here: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/2011/09/monday-mania-9122011/
Read more, great Fat Tuesday posts here: http://realfoodforager.com/2011/09/fat-tuesday-september-13-2011/
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/09/real-food-wednesday-9142001.html
Read more, great Simple Lives Thursday posts here: http://gnowfglins.com/2011/09/14/simple-lives-thursday-61/
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-september-16th/
GMOs in the News
It’s Our Right to Know
If you live in California (and forward this to those you know who do!)
There is a GMO Labeling 2012 Ballot Initiative in the works.
Go to the site, and sign up to help and/or give a donation.
Can GMOs Help End World Hunger?
By John Robbins
Can genetically engineered foods help feed the hungry? Are anti-GMO activists and over-zealous environmentalists standing in the way of the hungry being fed?
The hope that GMO foods might bring solutions to malnutrition and world hunger was never more dramatically illustrated than when Time magazine ran a cover story titled “Grains of Hope.” The article joyfully announced the development of a genetically engineered “golden rice.” This new strain of GM rice has genes from viruses and daffodils spliced into its genetic instructions. The result is a form of rice that is a golden-yellow color (much like daffodil flowers), and that produces beta-carotene, which the human body normally converts into Vitamin A.
Nearly a million children die every year because they are weakened by Vitamin A deficiencies and an additional 350,000 go blind. Golden rice, said Time, will be a godsend for the half of humanity that depends on rice for its major staple. Merely eating this rice could prevent blindness and death.
The development of golden rice was, it seemed, compelling and inspiring evidence that GM crops are the answer to malnutrition and hunger. Time quoted former U.S. President Jimmy Carter: “Responsible biotechnology is not the enemy, starvation is.”
Shortly after the Time cover story, Monsanto and other biotechnology companies launched a $50 million marketing campaign, including $32 million in TV and print advertising. The ads, complete with soft focus fields and smiling children, said that “biotech foods could help end world hunger.”
Other ad campaigns have followed. One Monsanto ad tells the public: “Biotechnology is one of tomorrow’s tools in our hands today. Slowing its acceptance is a luxury our hungry world cannot afford.”
Within a few months, the biotech industry had spent far more on these ads than it had on developing golden rice. Their purpose? “Unless I’m missing something,” wrote Michael Pollan in The New York Times Magazine, “the aim of this audacious new advertising campaign is to impale people like me — well-off first-worlders dubious about genetically engineered food — on the horns of a moral dilemma … If we don’t get over our queasiness about eating genetically modified food, kids in the third world will go blind.”
The implication of the ads is that lifesaving food is being held hostage by anti-science activists.
In the years since Time proclaimed the promises of golden rice, however, we’ve learned a few things.
For one thing, we’ve learned that golden rice will not grow in the kinds of soil that it must to be of value to the world’s hungry. To grow properly, it requires heavy use of fertilizers and pesticides — expensive inputs unaffordable to the very people that the variety is supposed to help. And we’ve also learned that golden rice requires large amounts of water — water that might not be available in precisely those areas where Vitamin A deficiency is a problem, and where farmers cannot afford costly irrigation projects.
And one more thing — it turns out that golden rice doesn’t work, even in theory. Malnourished people are not able to absorb Vitamin A in this form. And even if they could, they’d have to eat an awful lot of the stuff. An 11-year-old boy would have to eat 27 bowls of golden rice a day in order to satisfy his minimum requirement for the vitamin.
Read the rest here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-robbins/gmo-food_b_914968.html
Voluntary non-GMO verification aids consumer choice in Boulder County
To label or not to label
By Cindy Sutter Camera Food Editor
Silk Soymilk and some of its other beverages recently completed the verification process of the Non-GMO Project.
Why the careful wording? Given the ubiquity of genetically modified organisms in some U.S. commodity crops — 93 percent of soybeans grown in the United State are genetically modified according to Craig Shiesley of Silk — no product is able to call itself completely free of GMOs. However, Silk and some other companies, such as Whole Foods with its 365 products, have sought to do is to get as close as possible, using a certification process from the non-profit Non-GMO Project, which holds products to a standard of 99.1 percent GMO free.
Shiesley, general manager of the Silk business, says the verification process for the company’s soymilk, coconut milk and almond milk took 12 to 14 months, a surprise for the company, which had always sourced non-GMO ingredients.
“The reason (the verification process) elevates this to another level if that it goes from verifying the ingredient to verifying the entire process,” Shiesley says. “For example, (it verifies) that there’s no cross contamination in the dehullers.”
GMO in the food supply
Currently labeling for GMOs is not required in the United States, as it is in European Union countries and Japan. The percentage of U.S. processed foods that include at least one genetically engineered food is estimated at about 60 to 70 percent, according to a 2010 fact sheet from Colorado State University. Even foods labeled as natural, a term that has no legal meaning, may contain genetically engineered crops; however, USDA certified organic foods forbid GMOs.
Do GMOs matter?
The answer depends on whom you talk to. Companies such as Monsanto, DuPont and Bayer that supply genetically engineered seed, say the crops, often engineered to be resistant to herbicides such as Monsanto’s Roundup, are nutritionally identical to non-modified crops. The U.S Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration agree with this position. They say the engineering allows them to grow crops more efficiently and with fewer, less toxic pesticides.
Opponents say the effects on human health and the environment have not been fully tested. They fear genetic modification may be involved in an increase in food allergies and other problems, and they say weeds may become resistant to herbicides, requiring more toxic herbicides to kill them.
Labeling
In addition, they argue that a U.S. decision not to require products with GMOs to be labeled has kept consumers in the dark about how deeply genetically-engineered crops reach into the food chain. Surveys have shown that many consumers don’t know that they regularly consume genetically engineered foods. For retailers with a consciousness about food and how it’s produced, the lack of labeling means they have no way to verify GMOs in products unless the items are certified organic.
Mark Retzloff, president and chairman of Alfalfa’s, says the grocery has worked hard to verify that the canola and other oils in its bulk dispensers are not from made from genetically modified seed crops. The store has verified that the dairy products it stocks are from cows not dosed with hormones. However, unless the product is certified organic or has the new Non-GMO label, the store can’t verify if cows have been fed genetically-modifed grain. He is particularly concerned about genetically modified alfalfa, which the U.S. approved for use earlier this year. While certified organic milk producers won’t use it, the possibility of contamination through the cross-pollination of organic and GMO crops, as has happened with corn and soy is concerning, he says. In addition, as the genetically engineered seed becomes available, farmers may have a hard time buying non-GMO seed.
“From my own experience at Aurora Dairy, we buy about 40,000 to 50,000 tons of alfalfa hay. It’s all organic. If we start having trouble doing that, it restricts our ability to produce organic milk,” he says, adding that milk is a gateway product into organics for many consumers.
Whole Foods is currently putting its 365 brand products through Non-GMO verification. The products don’t currently carry the label. However, customers can go to Whole Food website and click to find Non-GMO certified products.
“It’s a significant focus of the company right now to work on verification,” says Ben Friedland, regional marketing coordinator for the Rocky Mountain Region.
Asked about the company’s position on GMOs, Friedland says: “We believe in farmers’ right to farm non-GMO crops and our customers’ right to choose whether they want GMOs. We work to provide opportunities for both our stakeholders,” Friedland says.
Shiesley of Silk says the Non-GMO verification is extremely valuable to his company. For the Silk products that are not organic — the company switched some of its Silk line from organic to natural in 2009, Shiesley says because the company wanted to source soybeans domestically — the non-GMO verification offers assurances.
Shiesley says he also believes the label will raise awareness.
“I hope we’re at a tipping point with consumer understanding toward Non-GMO,” he says. “Unlike organic labeling which went through legislation and took eight-plus years, the industry can self-regulate … I don’t think we can wait five years plus with this.”
Read the rest here:
Read more, great Monday Mania posts here: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/2011/08/monday-mania-882011/
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/08/real-food-wednesday-8102011.html
Read more, great Simple Lives Thursday posts here: http://gnowfglins.com/2011/08/11/simple-lives-thursday-56/
Read more, great Pennywise Platter Thursday posts here: http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2011/08/pennywise-platter-thursday-811.html
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-august-12/
GMO’s in the News
GMO’s in the News
It’s been quite a while since I’ve put up a news update, so here it is. Hope everyone has a great week. Mom
Organic Consumer Association political director arrested
Tuesday May 17 at Whole Foods in Chicago over protests regarding the sale of unlabeled GMOs
This just in, forwarded by Michael Schmidt and Max Kane:
Alexis Baden-Mayer, political director of the Organic Consumers Association, and other activists were just arrested in Chicago at the Whole Foods Market in Lincoln Park where they were having a Food Dump to protest the sale of unlabeled GMOs.
Can you call the Lincoln Park Whole Foods, request the release of Alexis and her counterparts and ask that the charges be dropped? The number is 312-587-0648. The OCA and these activists would really appreciate your help!
Thanks!
OCA Staff
PS: After you call, please take action and tell Whole Foods to stop selling GMOs!
EU agriculture chief slams GMOs, expresses strong support for natural agriculture
by Jonathan Benson, staff writer
(NaturalNews) In a bold move that goes against the mainstream flow, European Union (EU) Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Ciolos recently denounced genetically-modified (GM) food crops, citing the fact that they fail to meet various “quality and diversity criteria” that consumers have come to expect, and their inherent lack of benefit for both farmers and consumers. Ciolos also expressed support for individual EU member nations having the freedom to ban GM crops if they so choose, emphasizing the notion that natural, local agriculture is the best route for European nations to take.
Acceptance of GMOs throughout Europe continues to be far lower than it is in the US, partly due to the fact that EU policy dictates that GMOs be properly labeled, while US policy has no labeling requirements. But European consumers have also been far more vocal against the use of GMOs than consumers in the US have been, and numerous other European leaders like Ciolos have publicly spoken out against GMOs, while most US politicians have remained silent on the issue (http://www.naturalnews.com/030422_G…).
In a recent interview, Ciolos properly identified traditional polyculture agriculture as beneficial to high food quality, diverse diets, and natural biodiversity. Sharply contrasted to GM crop cultivation, which represents a chemical-based system of monoculture, traditional agriculture represents a wide variety of unique food items that are not chemical dependent, and that do not put the environment and human health at risk (http://www.naturalnews.com/GMO.html).
Ciolos also stated that the US has been thrusting GMOs on the EU for quite some time now, which was also confirmed through a Wikileaks cable that was released late last year. In it, former US Ambassador to France Craig Roberts Stapleton was exposed for threatening the EU with retaliation if it did not accept the same open policy towards GMOs that the US currently holds http://www.naturalnews.com/032420_GMOs_agriculture.html
GMO products a failure
PHILLIP CHIDAVAENZI, SENIOR FEATURES REPORTER
Newsday, Zimbabwe
HARARE – May 17 2011
At the turn of the millennium, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were touted as an answer to food shortages haunting the globe, particularly in developing countries.
But a local agricultural policy expert Roger Mpande says this has turned out to be a false start and Zimbabwe’s best bet is to stick to local knowledge systems and resources.
He says the health, environmental and social impact of GMOs cannot be underestimated.
Mpande — who spoke during a Humanitarian Information Facilitation Centre knowledge brief for journalists in Harare last week on why Zimbabwe should refuse to licence the commercialisation of GMOs — says a look at the GM products leaves a lot to be desired.
“There is no drought-tolerant variety (among the GMOs), no vitamin enhancement, no medicinal traits and no yield increases,” he says.
Mpande, who works with the Zimbabwe Organic Producers and Promoters Association (Zoppa), says only two traits — herbicide tolerance and B toxin expression — have made it onto the market while only four crops have been commercialised. These are maize, soya beans, cotton and canola.
There has been extensive debates surrounding GMO issues in relation to organic farming in the country and Africa in particular and the subject of genetic modification has been contentious owing to various reasons. So much uncertainty still surrounds GMOs which can cause unpredictable health and environmental effects.
Zoppa Trust executive director Fortunate Nyakanda says her organisation is promoting organic agriculture which she defined as “a process that uses methods respectful of the environment from the production stages through handling and processing”.
She says organic farming systems are more beneficial as their practices combine science, tradition and innovation to benefit shared environment and promote fair relationships.
“As such they are highly relevant to smallholders although also applicable to big land holdings and offer an opportunity for every farmer to earn a livelihood,” she adds.
She says this agricultural system also establishes sustainable livelihoods for farming families and their communities.
“There is also low-cost production as most inputs are locally available and generated. It gives access to new market opportunities and premium prices in most cases,” she says.
According to Mpande, commercialisation of GM products increases the cost of production.
“The costs are incurred through procurement of seed annually, supported by high input production systems when you look at fertilisers, irrigation and regulatory requirements,” Mpande says. “It also displaces local seed industry and replaces it with multinational companies such as Monstanto and Cargill while there are cumbersome export permit requirements when you look at the need for labelling and other liabilities.”
Mpande says it is important to appreciate that Zimbabwe’s environment is best suited for healthy foods and the future of the food industry does not have to depend on GMOs as compared to Europe, Asia and the US. He says Zimbabwe is not ready for this kind of technology.
Major chemical companies are said to be against organic farming as it is regarded as a threat to the crop chemical industry in the world.
The organic market, says Nyakanda, is among the fastest growing market segments globally, with a growth of about an average of 20% in the last seven years.
Consumers, especially in international markets, are increasingly preferring products grown with natural methods and with due respect to environmental and social dimensions.
As a result, demand and marketing in products such as organic products, fair-trade products, and eco-friendly products is rising.
Organic agriculture, according to Nyakanda, is key as a livelihood because “it can replace agro-chemical inputs by multiple cropping, natural enemies and rebuilding of the soil in areas where there has been environment concerns on chemical overuse and building of pest resistance”.
She adds that this system can also stabilise the ecosystem and allow even poor farmers to earn a living from agriculture without input constrains.
GMOs allow for enhanced disease and pest resistance and also prevent heavy usage of herbicides as the crop will be able to outgrow and fight weeds just on application of single and moderate herbicide, thereby saving the environment.
Article source: http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/13170-gm-products-a-failure-zimbabwe-expert
Read more, great Monday Mania posts here: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/2011/05/monday-mania-5232011/
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/05/real-food-wednesday-52511.html
Read more, great Simple Lives Thursday posts here: http://gnowfglins.com/2011/05/25/simple-lives-thursday-45/
Read more, great Real Food Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-may-27th/
Moms for Safe Food is in a top moms blog contest
Moms for Safe Food is in a ‘Top Mom blogger contest’ here:
http://www.babble.com/babble-50/mommy-bloggers/nominate-a-blogger/
We’re at #84 at the moment, the middle of page 2, and if you could take a minute to vote, it would help to move us up in the rankings.
This is a great opportunity to get the word out to other moms about GMO’s.
You can also search for ‘moms for safe food’ on the pages.
Thanks and Happy New Year!
🙂
Sheri aka Mom
Is your Vitamin C on GMO’s
Photo: ZUMA Press
GMO’s in the news
I haven’t had a news update lately, there’s a lot to share!
Did you know that your Vitamin C is most likely made from GMO corn?
For more than a year now, supplements manufacturers have watched quietly as
an angry chorus has risen up against genetically modified organisms. So far,
though, GMO questions have stayed planted in the produce and grocery
sections of natural products stores.
But now one small but vocal retailer concerned about GMOs in the environment
has started asking his supplements suppliers if there are GMOs in the
vitamin C he sells. The answers he says he’s gotten have ranged from “we
don’t think so but we don’t know for sure” to “probably.” That’s not good
enough for Joe Lemieux, owner of the 2,500-square-foot Go To Health store in
Brooksville, Fla.
“People think that health food stores are a kind of haven from things like
GMOs,” Lemieux said. “That’s why this issue is so explosive, because I can’t
tell them that the vitamin C is made without GMOs.” He’s not saying the
products are unsafe, but he says that genetically modified crops are bad for
the environment, and the agriculture business needs to get that message from
consumers and retailers, which is why he’s taking a stand in his store.
Lemieux still stocks vitamin C but is telling his own customers not to buy
the products, and he’s letting others in the industry know about his
boycott–through word-of-mouth and a Web site that deals with organic
issues–until someone can make a non-GMO vitamin C.
You can read the rest, here: http://www.organicconsumers.org/Organic/vitccontro.cfm
And there are a few brands of Non-GMO vitamin C
Source Naturals is making one:
http://www.sourcenaturals.com/products/GP1475/
As is Cardiovascular Research. We’ve been using this one:
China rejects U.S. corn cargo, citing GMOs
China has rejected a cargo of U.S. corn after finding it contained an unsanctioned genetically modified strain, two sources familiar with the situation said on Friday.
“China only allows 11 varieties of GM corn to be imported to the country, and the cargo was found with GM material outside the 11 varieties,” said one source, who declined to be identified.
“The animal and plant quarantine department has barred it from entering China,” the source said. He said it was supplied by a Japanese trading house.
The cargo of 50,000-60,000 tonnes was shipped to a port in the China’s southern province of Guangdong in September. The problem was detected only in October, the same source said.
China’s first ever rejection of a U.S. corn cargo, if confirmed, risks deepening a trade spat with the United States and a bigger diplomatic row with Japan.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69S23U20101029
Top 10 ways to avoid GMOs
Maria Rodale explains how to stay away from genetically modified organisms.
This month, October, is Non-GMO Month. I find most people are really confused about what a GMO is and where GMOs are found. Some people tend to think that GMO seeds are similar to the type of hybridization that has been going on amongst gardeners for centuries. Not true! The type of genetic modification that happens to create GMO seeds involves the forceful insertion of things like E.coli genes or genes that produce glyphosphate (an herbicide) or cause Roundup resistance (allowing farmers to dump more Roundup onto the plants) into corn and soybeans and cotton.
GMOs exist for one reason only: for the chemical companies who make them to enable themselves to sell more chemicals to farmers. Do not, I repeat, do not fall for any marketing sales efforts that claim GMOs will help feed the world and save farmers from drought. It’s a lie!!!!
And remember, as I write in “Organic Manifesto,” the only safety testing on humans or animals for GMOs is happening right now, on you, on your kids, and on farm animals around the world. Early results are showing everything from digestive failure to kidney and liver failure and accelerated aging. Terrible stuff.
Here are 10 ways to avoid GMOs:
1. Buy USDA-certified organic food. It is currently the only official way you can avoid GMOs, since GMOs are not allowed to be used according to USDA organic regulations. THANK YOU, GOVERNMENT! (For once!)
2. Avoid all nonorganic soy products like the plague. That means things like nonorganic veggie burgers, tofu, tempeh, edamame, and miso products.
3. Don’t buy anything that claims to be “non-dairy” that isn’t organic. Soy is used to create everything from Cool Whip to Coffee-Mate…in addition to the obvious non-dairy soy treats in your health-food store freezer. Yup, they are filled with GMOs, too.
4. Don’t buy or eat anything with corn in it that isn’t organic. That means corn chips, cereals with corn (or soy, for that matter), or even corn bread!
5. At all costs, eliminate high-fructose corn syrup (a.k.a. “corn sugar”) from your diet. It is just an excuse for chemical companies to convince farmers they can keep growing GMO corn and poisoning you and your family.
6. Avoid biofuels and ethanol; they’re a toxic GMO festival. No one seems to care if corn is poisoned if it’s just going to drive our cars. Problem is, we are all being poisoned by it.
Read the rest here:
http://www.mnn.com/food/healthy-eating-recipes/stories/top-10-ways-to-avoid-gmos
We just finished the first ever Non-GMO month in October. Let’s make it a Non-GMO year!
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-november-5th/
Read more, great Pennywise Platter Thursday posts here: http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2010/11/pennywise-platter-thursday-114.html
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2010/11/real-food-wednesday-11310-2.html
Posted in Food Policy, GMO's, News, Uncategorized
| 
Tags: gmo news, gmos, vitamin c
| 
Comments Closed
What is the matter with the FDA
What is the matter with the FDA?
We’ve been drinking raw milk and eating raw milk cheese for years. We love it and it’s been very good for our health. I make kefir out of raw milk and I’ve made cheese on occasion as well. Thousands of people in my state drink raw milk legally and we are thriving, healthy and not getting sick. There are many other states where it’s legal as well, so what is going on?
It seems like Big Ag, and the large milk companies, are getting threatened by all the people who are clamoring for REAL FOOD. And it also seems like the FDA is more invested in protecting big Ag, then they are in protecting us. They are supposed to work for us, the American people!
We are tired of over processed junk and want to feed our families real food, from real farmers. The FDA is fine with allowing us to eat genetically modified food – food that’s not been proven safe – and won’t even allow us labeling. They’re fine with High Fructose Corn Syrup (soon to possibly be called Corn Sugar) and vegetable oils that have been processed using toxic chemicals, and they’re even fine with us eating raw fish. How come we can go eat sushi, raw fish, in every Japanese restaurant in the country but the FDA is cracking down on Raw Milk and Raw Milk products? Do you want to only be able to buy meat that’s been cooked? What right do they have to insert themselves into our food choices like this. Even if you don’t drink raw milk, this issue is important to everyone.
They talk about the dangers but we’ve been drinking raw milk for years, from a good farmer who tests his milk and we’ve never gotten sick. People around the world drink raw milk and have for thousands of years. Raw Milk is dangerous when the cows are raised in CAFO’s, or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, and fed genetically engineered grain – which has never been tested as safe for human consumption – and given antibiotics because the conditions are so unsanitary. Any food you eat has potential dangers. Like the recent outbreaks of Salmonella in Peanut butter.
If you are raising cattle on grass and using good practices, raw milk is very healthful and delicious as well. We see news stories about food related illnesses in the news all the time and it’s very rare to ever see a story about raw milk. Raw milk is legal in California, where I live. I buy it in my local store. We’re a big state. If raw milk was so terrible people would be getting sick and we’re not.
Here’s a great article about raw milk:
Drink it raw – Why is unprocessed milk the only illegal food in North Carolina?
by Suzanne Nelson
http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/drink-it-raw/Content?oid=1202527
The FDA has been raiding farmers and buying clubs for NO reason in the past month.
Here’s an article about the raid at a private buying club in Venice, CA.
Raw-food raid highlights a hunger
Some people balk at restrictions on selling unprocessed milk and other foods. ‘How can we not have the freedom to choose what we eat?’ one says. Regulators say the rules exist for safety and fairness.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/25/business/la-fi-raw-food-raid-20100725
And two farmers have recently been seriously harassed to the point where they are in danger of being put out of business.
The first is Joe and Denise Dixon, owner of Morningland Dairy whose cheese was one of the products taken from the Rawsome club raid.
http://hartkeisonline.com/2010/10/11/family-farm-ordered-to-destroy-50000-pounds-of-cheese/
http://morninglanddairy.webs.com/recallinformation.htm
http://www.ftcldf.org/aa/aa-22october2010.htm
The second just happened this week.
Another FDA Cheese Bust: Award-winning Artisan Raw Cheese Producer in Washington State.
http://www.ftcldf.org/news/news-25october2010.htm
Here’s a great article about why the media is not covering the FDA’s action by the brilliant David E. Gumpert,
Here’s a great article about raw milk by Pete Kennedy of the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund,
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/10/22/fdas-ace-in-the-hole/
What can we do? We all need to chip in, to protect our farmers and our food choices, join the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund: http://www.ftcldf.org/
We, the people, need to protect our access to healthy food, as the FDA seems to have no interest in doing it for us.
I am one outraged mom!
________________________________________________________________________________________
Read more posts about this issue at Farm Freedom Friday here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2010/11/save-farm-freedom-friday.html
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-october-29th/
Read more, great Pennywise Platter Thursday posts here: http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2010/10/pennywise-platter-thursday-1028.html
Read more, great, Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2010/10/real-food-wednesday-102710.html
Posted in Food Policy, News, Raw Milk, Uncategorized
|
Tags: farmers raided, FDA, raw milk
|
Comments Closed
Zombie Cattle
Zombie Cattle? GMO Meat Grown in a Vat? No Way!
By Stanley A. Fishman, Author of Tender Grassfed Meat
photo credit: MRyanTaylor.com, http://www.flickr.com/photos/13651999@N08/3877617646/
I celebrate the fantastic taste, texture and nutrient-dense qualities of grassfed meat, taken from animals eating the living grass they were meant to eat, roaming the pasture as they were intended to do. I have hoped and prayed for the day when all meat is grassfed; when the feedlot and the factory meat are abandoned for the disaster they turned out to be; when GMO feed is abandoned, along with all GMOs; and we go back to obeying nature’s laws by eating real meat.
The powers that be have different plans. They have already put cloned cattle in the food chain, with no labeling. They are taking the cells from dead cattle and cloning them to create zombie cattle that are literally raised from the dead.
They have developed a way of creating “meat” in a vat full of chemicals, possibly with GMO modification, “meat,” that, like Frankenstein, must be electrified before use.
Nobody knows how the human body will respond to these products, and we are all guinea pigs once again, without our consent. Do you want to be a guinea pig? I do not.
This month is No GMO month. We must be wary of the latest artificial abominations created, and aware of what they are so we can have the choice to avoid them.
Cloned Meat? No thanks!
Most Americans want no part of cloned meat. We know instinctively that this is contrary to the laws of nature, that this type of meat was never eaten before, not once in the history of our planet.
Cloned animals have been reported to have many health problems and abnormalities. Traditional peoples would not eat a sick or abnormal animal. But our protectors in the government have decided that meat from cloned cattle is substantially the same as other meat, and have pronounced it safe. Just because it is safe does not mean that it is best, or even desirable.
The way cloned cattle are usually created is unusual and abnormal, to say the least. Carcasses of dead cattle are examined for the perceived quality of the meat. If the meat is considered to be superior, cells are taken from the dead flesh, cloned in a laboratory, and used to create cattle. Cattle that are literally raised from the dead. To be honest, this creeps me out.
Because the process is expensive at this point, cloned cattle are created for breeding purposes. It is estimated that there are approximately 1,000 cloned cattle in American herds. When their breeding days are over, it is expected that they will be turned into meat. Our protectors do not require that meat from cloned cattle be labeled.
Since cloned cattle are used for breeding, they will pass many of their qualities into other cattle which will actually be bred the normal way. This meat also is not required to be labeled.
It is also likely that the cloning process could become much cheaper over time. If it becomes cheap enough, we could see the day when all beef comes from cattle that are cloned.
Fortunately, many ranchers and at least one major market chain have rejected cloned meat.
Now, more than ever, it is important to know where your meat comes from—unless you want to take a chance that you will be eating cloned meat.
Frankenmeat Grown in a Vat? No, No, NO!
The British Royal Society, an organization of scientists, reported that a way of growing meat in a vat has been developed. One writer even claimed that this vat-grown “meat” is needed “to feed the world.”
I find it very interesting that almost every GMO plant, artificial food, and technological process that modifies food from its natural state is justified by the claim that we need it “to feed the world” The real purpose of these changes is to make more money.
I find the creation of this Frankenmeat to be even more disgusting than cloning the dead. While all the details of the process are not disclosed, the creation involves putting pork tissue in a vat with chemicals, quite possibly including genetically modified substances, which results in a “meat” that has been described as having a texture similar to undercooked eggs.
Now comes the fun part. Remember those old movies where Frankenstein was brought to life by throwing a switch, which caused a huge electrical charge to bring him to life? Well, vat-grown “meat” also gets an electrical charge, a charge strong enough to change its texture into something that is described as similar to scallops.
Okay, we have pork tissue dumped in a vat with a bunch of chemicals and other substances that cause it to grow and expand into a runny egg like mass, which is then electrocuted, and served as food? Does anybody in the world seriously want to eat that?
Does anybody know what this substance, which has never been eaten in all of human history, could do to our bodies?
Do you want to be a guinea pig to test this artificial abomination? I sure don’t.
We Need the Natural Pastured Meat Our Ancestors Have Eaten for Thousands of Years, Not Frankenmeat
We have a much better alternative. We can eat the meat of pastured animals, who eat the plants and grasses they were meant to eat, living in the pasture as nature intended. Animals who breed and reproduce the natural way, rather than being created in a laboratory or a vat. Our bodies have evolved to use this natural food, which our ancestors have eaten for thousands and thousands of years. Our bodies are genetically programmed to thrive on this fine meat and its fat, which provides a wonderful foundation for nourishing our systems. Meat animals can be pastured on land that will not support the growing of crops, and the cropland that is used to grow plants for the feedlot could be used to grow crops for humans.
What We Can Do
We can demand that our representatives pass laws that will require full labeling and disclosure of all meat from cloned animals, and all meat descended from cloned animals. We can let all our food providers know that we will not purchase any meat that is cloned. We can demand that they provide natural, grassfed, and grass finished meat.
And we can let it be known that we will not purchase any so called meat grown in a vat.
Dr. Weston A. Price, the greatest nutritional researcher who ever walked the earth, said that “Life in all its fullness is nature’s laws obeyed.” We must get back to obeying the laws of nature, which govern our bodies and the natural food that nourishes them. Let us eat the food that nature has provided for us and reject the artificial products of the laboratory and vat. If we do so, we will thrive.
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-october-22nd/
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2010/10/real-food-wednesday-102010.html
You can visit Stan’s terrific website here: http://www.tendergrassfedmeat.com/
Here’s a link to Stan’s wonderful book, Tender Grassfed Meat. I use it all the time and highly recommend it. Mom
Posted in Food Policy, News, Stanley A. Fishman, Uncategorized
|
Tags: cloned beef, cloned cattle, zombie cattle
|
Comments Closed
The Next Food Revolution
We have a terrific guest post today, from my friend Joanie. Thanks Joanie!
Mom
The Next Food Revolution
By Joanie Blaxter
“A farmer friend of mine says ‘I don’t raise hogs any more. I manufacture pork. That’s my business and my buildings are like an assembly line at an automobile factory. And out of the end of those buildings actually come animals, but I’m not really interested in the animals. I’m interested in the attributes those animals have. I’m interested in the chop. I’m interested in the ham. The animals are just carriers of attributes the consumer wants.’ ”
Dr. Michael Boehlje, PhD, Professor
Center for Food and Agricultural Business
Purdue University
When you go to the supermarket and pick up those colorful boxes or bags marked “organic,” what images are evoked in your mind? A family farm with healthy vegetables and happy cows in the pasture lovingly guided by Mr & Mrs Farmer…? Well, to be honest, even if I don’t consciously believe that image, I still do feel good knowing there are no petrochemicals used in the growing of my food. What could be better?
Well, unfortunately, a lot…
Supermarkets excel at one thing: moving stuff long distances extremely cheaply. And supermarkets do this at a profit, a much better profit by the way, than the margin made by the small farmer at your local Farmers’ Market. Supermarkets can sell the same thing cheaper than a family farmer and still make money solely because their agri-business suppliers are gigantic producers of one single thing: beef, corn, oranges, etc.
Organic or not, by definition every time we purchase from a supermarket chain we have personally lined the pockets of Big Ag. Along with that organic but cheaper tomato comes all the problems inherent in a factory food system: increased risk of contamination (sewage sludge on the fields, mechanical harvesting and handling, etc), inhuman labor practices, a much larger carbon footprint due to being transported long distances, and most important, absolutely no sense of land stewardship. Monoculture, factory farms owned by agri-business have a single bottom line: profit. And none of this information is included in the lovely graphics on the package.
Have you purchased eggs at Trader Joe’s recently? Better check to see if they’ve been recalled due to salmonella contamination. TJ’s mega-supplier of Sunshine (like those hens ever see the light of day!) eggs is well known in the industry for repeated contamination violations and yet this company has never been shut down. Meanwhile the FDA is spending enormous amounts of their budget putting small farms out of business for selling clean, safe, raw milk with no record of any problems for their customers. Have you ever read that the FDA closed a restaurant for serving sushi that made customers ill? So why focus on one kind of producer and not the other? Sorry, that’s another story for another time (hint: follow the money…).
Joel Salatin is a farmer, author and leader in the eco-agriculture movement. And yet his farm is not certified organic simply because he refuses to go through the paperwork. Furthermore, he will not transport his product more than a 4 hours’ drive, so you’ll never see his superior, grass-fed beef carried in Whole Foods. Or any supermarket for that matter. Why? Salatin refuses to participate in a food system that he thinks is inherently structured incorrectly. He believes people should personally know who produces their food. The greatest guarantee of quality is relationship. If you can visit the farm where your food is grown, what better guarantee is there?
In his book Holy Cows and Hog Heaven, Salatin says ““Supermarkets, organic or otherwise, do not do a good job of creating food connections, maintaining integrity, or especially insuring that farmers get a living wage. Supermarkets are predicated on pitting all their suppliers against each other on price, paying their vendors up to 90 days after product delivery (this finances the store on the vendors’ money), and carrying no loyalty to local producers who must deal with seasonality and cash flow… Except for a few notable locally controlled exceptions, supermarkets cater to the empire builders. And any producer who aspires to sell there is starstuck, not customer struck.”
I think we in the Green movement have been somewhat lulled to sleep by the label “organic.” Back in the 70’s, all organic product came from small, diversified farms and was therefore synonymous with “locally and sustainably grown.” But for better or worse, that is no longer true. And just as we began the process forty years ago of educating consumers concerning the health benefits of eating organic, these times now require a new wave of consciousness about the critical importance of sustainable land stewardship designed to support local economies.
As Michael Pollan says, Vote with your fork! “Cheap” food is not cheap because what’s rung up at the cash register is not the true cost. The hidden bill is paid by bankrupt family farmers, by migrant farm workers, by our children and our children’s children. It’s paid by the earth. Can’t afford to buy direct from the farmer? Or can’t afford not to?
Read more, great Fight Back Friday posts here: http://www.foodrenegade.com/fight-back-friday-september-24th/
Read more, great Pennywise Platter Thursday posts here: http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2010/09/pennywise-platter-thursday-923.html
Read more, great Real Food Wednesday posts here: http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2010/09/real-food-wednesday-92210.html
Posted in News, Uncategorized
|
Tags: food politics, joanie blaxter, moms for safe food
|
Comments Closed