Environment & Climate, Genetic EngineeringRonnie CumminsOrganic Consumers AssociationMarch 29, 2017
2017 Spring $180k 1000x523
There's a principle in business, that everybody knows is sound,
It says the people with the money, make this ever-loving world go ‘round.
So I’m biggering my company, I’m biggering my factory,
I’m biggering my corporate sign.
Everybody out there can take care of yours,
And me? I’ll take care of mine mine mine mine mine. – Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Today Trump unveiled his vision for America: Let corporations pollute at will.
Trump’s plan to gut EPA and USDA regulations follows a previously announced plan to cut funding for medical research.
One of his prime targets? The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)—the agency that two years ago classified Monsanto’s Roundup as a probable human carcinogen.
With only three days to go, we’re about $60,000 short of our quarterly fundraising goal. Fortunately, Mercola.com, our ally in the battle against Monsanto, has stepped up with a triple match offer. Please help us take advantage of this generous offer by making a donation today.
There's no end to the grim news coming from Washington D.C. these days.
Chemicals in your food and water? Don’t worry.
Global warming? It doesn’t exist.
You may think the situation is hopeless. But you have more power than you think.
Corporations will cheer Trump’s plan to trade short-term corporate profits for your health, and your children’s future.
None will cheer more loudly than Monsanto.
As you know, Monsanto is hoping to “bigger its company” by merging with another of the world’s worst chemicals companies, Bayer.
But Bayer may not be so keen to buy Monsanto, if the lawsuits against the maker of Roundup keep piling up, if the number of acres planted in GMO crops continues to decline, and if the EPA decides against reregistering glyphosate because the agency can no longer deny the allegations that some of its own officials colluded with Monsanto to bury evidence that glyphosate causes cancer.
In the coming weeks and months, with your help, we will push for a Congressional investigation into the possibility that Monsanto and the EPA hid the truth from you about the health risks of Roundup.
We will call on you to visit your Congress members in their home offices, and demand to know the truth about what went on behind closed doors at the EPA.
You will help us bring victims of Roundup to Washington, where they will make the case that Monsanto knew about the link between Roundup and cancer. (More than 700 people have sued Monsanto because they, or a family member, developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after being exposed to Roundup).
You’ve probably reduced your own exposure to Roundup by avoiding GMO foods.
But it would be nearly impossible to avoid glyphosate altogether. Why? Because only 20 percent of GMO crops go into food. Twice as much goes into animal feed for factory farms. Another 40 percent are used to make ethanol.
History will no doubt rank glyphosate as one of the worst scourges unleashed on the human race.
Your relentless pursuit of the truth, and concern for the future, are our best hope for ridding the world of Roundup.
We're down to the wire, and we're still about $60,000 short of our quarterly fundraising goal. Fortunately, Mercola.com, our ally in the battle against Monsanto, has stepped up with a triple match offer. Please help us take advantage of this generous offer by making a donation today.
In Gratitude and Hope,
Environment & Climate, Health Issues, Politics & GlobalizationKatherine PaulOrganic Consumers AssociationMarch 23, 2017
handshake cartoon businessmen suits red cc 1000x523.png
“I have cancer, and I don’t want these serious issues in HED [EPA’s Health Effects Division] to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.”
It’s been four years since Marion Copley, a 30-year EPA toxicologist, wrote those words to her then-colleague, Jess Rowland, accusing him of conniving with Monsanto to bury the agency’s own hard scientific evidence that it is “essentially certain” that glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller, causes cancer.
Copley has since died. But her letter suggesting that EPA officials colluded with Monsanto to hide the truth about Monsanto’s flagship weedkiller has been given new life.
Thanks to the persistence of hundreds of plaintiffs in lawsuits alleging that they (or their deceased family members) were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after being exposed to Roundup, newly discovered internal emails and other documents are being made public. And they paint an increasingly troubling and sinister picture of corruption.
The Organic Consumers Association is calling on Congress to immediately and fully investigate these and any other revelations that may come to light.
A long history of deceit
For decades, Monsanto has enjoyed a revolving-door relationship with government agencies like the EPA and USDA, giving the chemical company unprecedented power to influence and manipulate the regulatory process.
Meanwhile, the biotech behemoth has attacked scientists’ claims that its flagship product, Roundup, causes harm to both humans and the environment, by discrediting scientists who raise concerns, coercing others into producing industry-friendly research, and manipulating corporate media into spinning a favorable narrative.
And while on the one hand clinging steadfastly to its claim that Roundup is “safe,” Monsanto strong-armed the junk food industry into joining forces against consumers who said fine, if your Roundup-sprayed GMO foods are safe, you should have no problem labeling them.
But just as the truth about DDT and Agent Orange came too late for many of its victims, so it appears to be the case for hundreds, or more likely tens of thousands of people—all over the world—who have been affected by Monsanto’s Roundup.
Here in the U.S., victims are fighting back through a wave of new lawsuits—more than 700, filed in St. Louis, Mo. (Monsanto headquarters) and Alameda, Calif.
As reported in EcoWatch, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., co-counsel in some of the lawsuits, told St. Louis Public Radio:
"We're bringing the lawsuit to address the injuries that have been caused by Roundup and glyphosate to mainly farmers and farm workers, but we think that consumers and home gardeners have also been affected."
Monsanto is sticking to its story, that “when used according to directions,” Roundup is safe. Farmers who spray it, consumers who use it in their yards needn’t worry, the Biotech Giant says. But as lawyers and reporters sift through and pore over thousands of pages of court documents, Monsanto’s claims of safety ring more and more hollow.
As reported in Alternet:
One of the documents unsealed by Judge Vince Chhabria was an email written by William F. Heydens, a Monsanto executive, giving his colleagues the green light to ghostwrite glyphosate research and then hire academics to put their names on the papers. He even cited an instance where the company had used this method in the past. "We would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak," wrote Heydens.
On March 21, officials at the New York Medical College (NYMC) in Valhalla, N.Y., told the American Association for the Advancement of Science they will investigate one of their faculty members, who according to the court documents, put his name on a paper partially ghostwritten by Monsanto employees.
Good to know that at least one institution is willing to uphold the integrity of science.
Tip of the sinking iceberg?
In the coming weeks and months, reporters and lawyers will continue to sift through and analyze the mountain of new documents that include emails between Monsanto and EPA officials.
What we’ve seen so far may be just the tip of the iceberg. But after all the evidence has been analyzed and exposed, will it be enough to bring down Monsanto?
Probably not—unless the public pushes back as never before. And unless Congress does its job.
Meanwhile, people like Yolanda Mendoza, who trusted Monsanto’s word that Roundup is safe, deal with the consequences of that trust. Mendoza, diagnosed with Stage IV non-Hodgkin lymphoma, told a Houston, Texas-based TV station:
“I have nerve damage, I don't feel the tips of my fingers,” said Yolanda Mendoza. “My jaw, its still, I still can't feel it.”
In 2015, 17 scientists with the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research (IARC) on Cancer unanimously concluded in 2015 (and since reaffirmed) that Roundup is a "probable carcinogen" to humans—and that people exposed to Roundup are most likely to get non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other hematopoietic cancers.
Last month, A report by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, presented to the United Nations Human Rights Council, stated unequivocally that the storyline perpetuated by companies like Monsanto—the one that says we need pesticides like Roundup to feed the world—is a myth. And a catastrophic one at that.
Since the EPA was established on December 2, 1970, to work for “a cleaner, healthier environment for the American people,” it has failed repeatedly to put public health above corporate profits, as documented in “Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA,” written by a 25-year veteran of the agency.
Roundup is the most widely used herbicide in the world. If anyone inside the EPA has colluded with Monsanto to bury evidence that this product—labeled “safe” and widely available today in stores like Home Depot, Walmart, TrueValue Hardware—causes cancer, Congress should investigate that collusion now.
Please ask your Congress members to investigate the truth about Monsanto and the EPA.
Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association.
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoAppetite for a ChangeCategory: Genetic Engineering, Health Issues, Politics & GlobalizationArea: USA
The New York Times reported Tuesday (March 14) that a former high-level EPA official collaborated with Monsanto to bury the truth about Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller.
According to the Times, and other news outlets, Monsanto and the EPA official may have conducted a cover-up in order to protect Monsanto’s billion-dollar flagship product from being taken off the market.
For decades, the evidence has been mounting that Roundup causes cancer. Yet even after a panel of 17 scientists with the World Health Organization unanimously agreed that Roundup is a “probably carcinogenic,” Monsanto has refused to acknowledge the evidence. Instead, the company continues to profit from sales of a product—a product sold both commercially and in retail stores—that is linked to cancer.
TAKE ACTION: Tell Congress: Investigate the collusion between Monsanto and the EPA to bury the truth about Roundup. And in the meantime, ban sales of Roundup until we know the truth!Read more
Environment & Climate, Genetic Engineering, Health IssuesRonnie CumminsOrganic Consumers AssociationMarch 14, 2017https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/p/salsa/donation/common/public/?donate_page_KEY=12139
2017 Spring $115k 1000x523
While farmers and children exposed to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide were dying from non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a high-level EPA official was colluding with Monsanto behind the scenes to hide the truth.
And he actually bragged about it
We're calling on Congress to launch an official investigation into how EPA officials colluded with Monsanto. Can you help us raise $200,000 by midnight, March 31 to meet our quarterly online fundraising goal. You can donate online, by mail or by phone, details here.
According to the New York Times, newly unsealed court documents reveal that former EPA official Jess Rowland let Monsanto ghostwriters write the toxicology reports that would form the basis for a government investigation into whether or not Roundup causes cancer.
“If I can kill this I should get a medal,” Rowland reportedly told a Monsanto executive, who shared the comment in an email.
As horrifying as this news is, even for those of us who aren't surprised, it gives consumers a little more leverage—and we intend to use it.
The only way we will stop Monsanto, and other corporations, from this kind of ruthless disregard for public health is to keep the pressure on—through boycotts, through relentless demands for accountability, and through the courts.
We may have lost the battle to label GMOs. But make no mistake—the years of educating consumers about the risks of GMO foods, and the poisons used to grow them, are paying off.
• Monsanto is facing more than 20 lawsuits from victims who say they, or a family member, have non-Hodgkins lymphoma because of exposure to glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup. Lawyers for the victims say Monsanto knew all along that its flagship herbicide causes cancer.
• Just this week, a California judge ruled that the state can require Monsanto to label Roundup sold in retail stores as a “possible carcinogen.”
• On April 18, judges who presided over the International Monsanto Tribunal will assemble in The Hague, Netherlands. They will tell the world what they found, after six months of poring over testimony delivered by more than 30 witnesses, including victims of Monsanto’s poisons, scientists, doctors and lawyers. The testimony was delivered during a 2-day citizens' tribunal, held in October, in The Hague.
• OCA, along with another organization, will soon file our own lawsuit against Monsanto—details to be made public soon.
None of these developments would be possible without people like you, who have fought tirelessly and relentlessly to expose Monsanto’s lies. Please help us raise $200,000 by midnight, March 31 to keep up the pressure on Monsanto. You can donate online, by mail or by phone, details here.
Last week, a new United Nations report estimated that pesticides kill at least 200,000 people a year.
But as this latest news about Monsanto’s back-room deals to hide the truth proves, chemical companies simply don’t care.
As the Trump administration rolls out plans to gut environmental regulations, including the already weak regulation of pesticides like glyphosate, we must work harder than ever to expose the lies and the risks.
We can’t do it without you. And every donation, no matter how small, adds up. Thank you!
P.S. More than 80 percent of our support comes from individual donors like yourself. Donations of $5 and $10 really add up! You can donate online, by phone or by mail, details here. Thank you!
March 9, 2017Organic Consumers AssociationKatherine PaulEnvironment & Climate, Genetic Engineering, Health Issues
tractor farm crops spray cc 1000x523.jpg
“How could we have ever believed that it is a good idea to grow our food with poisons?” – Dr. Jane Goodall
Two new reports published in recent weeks add to the already large and convincing body of evidence, accumulated over more than half a century, that agricultural pesticides and other toxic chemicals are poisoning us.
Both reports issue scathing indictments of U.S. and global regulatory systems that collude with chemical companies to hide the truth from the public, while they fill their coffers with ill-gotten profits.
According to the World Health Organization, whose report focused on a range of environmental risks, the cost of a polluted environment adds up to the deaths of 1.7 million children every year.
A report by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, presented to the United Nations Human Rights Council, focused more narrowly on agricultural chemicals. The UN report states unequivocally that the storyline perpetuated by companies like Monsanto—the one that says we need pesticides to feed the world—is a myth. And a catastrophic one at that.
The fact that both these reports made headlines, in mainstream outlets like the Washington Post and the Guardian, is on one hand, good news. On the other, it's a sad and discouraging commentary on our inability to control corporate greed.
Ever since Rachel Carson, in her book “Silent Spring,” so eloquently outlined the insanity of poisoning our environment, rational thinkers have warned that at the least, we ought to follow the precautionary principle when it comes to allowing the widespread use of poisons to be unleashed into the environment.
And yet, here we are, in 2017, facing the prospect, in what is unfolding as the most corporate-friendly administration in history, of dismantling what little remains of the government’s ability to stop the rampant poisoning of our soils, food, water and air—the very resources upon which all life depends.
In his book, “Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA,” published in 2014, E. G. Vallianatos, who worked for the EPA for 25 years, wrote:
"It is simply not possible to understand why the EPA behaves the way it does without appreciating the enormous power of American’s industrial farmers and their allies in the chemical pesticide industries, which currently do about $40 billion per in year business. For decades, industry lobbyists have preached the gospel of unregulated capitalism, and Americans have bought it. Today, it seems the entire government is at the service of the private interests of America’s corporate class.”
That was three years ago. And yet, as public opinion shifts toward condemnation of the widespread use of toxic chemicals on our food, here in the U.S., government officials entrusted with public health and safety appear more determined than ever to uphold the “rights” of corporations to poison everything in sight—including our children.
‘UN experts denounce 'myth' pesticides are necessary to feed the world’
The headline in the Guardian’s story on the report delivered this week to the UN Human Rights Council said it all.
From the Guardian:
A new report, being presented to the UN human rights council on Wednesday, is severely critical of the global corporations that manufacture pesticides, accusing them of the “systematic denial of harms”, “aggressive, unethical marketing tactics” and heavy lobbying of governments which has “obstructed reforms and paralysed global pesticide restrictions.”
The report says pesticides have “catastrophic impacts on the environment, human health and society as a whole”, including an estimated 200,000 deaths a year from acute poisoning. Its authors said: “It is time to create a global process to transition toward safer and healthier food and agricultural production.”
The UN report was authored by Hilal Elver, special rapporteur on the right to food, and Baskut Tuncak, special rapporteur on toxics. The report stated that chronic exposure to pesticides has been linked to cancer, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases, hormone disruption, developmental disorders and sterility. It said the populations most at risk are farmers and agricultural workers, communities living near plantations, indigenous communities and pregnant women and children, who are especially vulnerable to pesticide exposure and require special protections.
The Crop Protection Association, a lobbying group representing the $50-billion agri-chemical industry, fired back at the report with its standard false claim that pesticides “play a key role in ensuring we have access to a healthy, safe, affordable and reliable food supply.” But Elver told the Guardian:
“It is a myth. Using more pesticides is nothing to do with getting rid of hunger. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), we are able to feed 9 billion people today. Production is definitely increasing, but the problem is poverty, inequality and distribution.”
Sustainable Pulse also reported on the story, noting that the report warns that some pesticides can persist in the environment for decades:
The excessive use of pesticides contaminates soil and water sources, causing loss of biodiversity, destroying the natural enemies of pests, and reducing the nutritional value of food. The impact of such overuse also imposes staggering costs on national economies around the world.
The UN report, which mentioned (page 15, no 68) the efforts of the Monsanto Tribunal to raise global awareness about the dangers of pesticides, included a long list of recommendations for moving away from chemical-based agriculture. At the top of the list was a call out to the international community to work on a comprehensive, binding treaty to regulate hazardous pesticides throughout their life cycle, taking into account human rights principles. Such a treaty should:
• Aim to remove existing double standards among countries that are particularly detrimental to countries with weaker regulatory systems
• Generate policies to reduce pesticide use worldwide and develop a framework for the banning and phasing-out of highly hazardous pesticides
• Promote agroecology
• Place strict liability on pesticide producers.
‘Exposure to pollution kills millions of children, WHO reports find’
In a March 5 story, the Washington Post reported on two World Health Organization (WHO) reports how exposure to polluted environments is linked to more than one in four deaths among children under the age of five.
Worldwide, 1.7 million children's deaths are attributable to environmental hazards, such as exposure to contaminated water, indoor and outdoor pollution, and other unsanitary conditions, the reports found.
Weaker immune systems make children's health more vulnerable to harmful effects of polluted environments, the report says.
According to the WHO reports, which focused on a wide range of chemicals, including those found in food, electronics, contaminated water supplies, second-hand tobacco smoke, and others, one-fourth of all children’s deaths and diseases in 2012 could have been prevented by reducing environmental risks. From the WHO press release:
Children are also exposed to harmful chemicals through food, water, air and products around them. Chemicals, such as fluoride, lead and mercury pesticides, persistent organic pollutants, and others in manufactured goods, eventually find their way into the food chain. And, while leaded petrol has been phased out almost entirely in all countries, lead is still widespread in paints, affecting brain development.
Authors of the WHO report recommended:
• Housing: Ensure clean fuel for heating and cooking, no mould or pests, and remove unsafe building materials and lead paint.
• Schools: Provide safe sanitation and hygiene, free of noise, pollution, and promote good nutrition.
• Health facilities: Ensure safe water, sanitation and hygiene, and reliable electricity.
• Urban planning: Create more green spaces, safe walking and cycling paths.
• Transport: Reduce emissions and increase public transport.
• Agriculture: Reduce the use of hazardous pesticides and no child labour.
• Industry: Manage hazardous waste and reduce the use of harmful chemicals.
• Health sector: Monitor health outcomes and educate about environmental health effects and prevention.
What will it take?
If you find yourself unsurprised by the findings of these reports, or the recommendations that follow, it’s no wonder. Many organizations, including ours, have for decades been calling for reforms.
But we can’t let our lack of surprise translate into complacency. In an op-ed published this week in The Hill, Devra Lee Davis, president of the Environmental Health Trust, and author of “The Secret History of the War on Cancer,” draws the parallel between our failure to regulate the tobacco industry with our failure to regulate the chemicals that today are largely responsible for two sad statistics: 1) one in two of us will be diagnosed with cancer in our lifetimes; and 2) the rate of childhood cancer has increased by 50 percent since President Nixon declared a war on cancer, 40 years ago.
Davis, who says we’re fixated on “the wrong enemies, with the wrong weapons,” says we should ask ourselves this:
Why did we wait until nearly forty years after tobacco was understood to cause cancer and other diseases before mounting a major effort to curtail its production and use? What took us so long to reduce the amount of benzene in gasoline or toxic flame retardants in our waters, food, furniture, bedding, fabrics and breastmilk?
Unfortunately, we know why—corporate control of our regulatory system. Perhaps the better question is, having failed to rein in Congress’ loyalty to a handful of ruthless, emboldened corporations, can we elect new people, at every level of our government, who will work for us? More critically, can we do it in time to save ourselves?
Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association.
March 6, 2017Organic Consumers AssociationAlexis Baden-MayerAll About Organics, Environment & Climate
soil hands 100x523
Testimony given by OCA political director, Alexis Baden-Mayer, at the Visioning of U.S. Agriculture Systems for Sustainable Production Listening Session held by the USDA on March 2.
There are three interrelated challenges facing agriculture over the next 50 years.
The first is soil loss.
In the United States, soil is swept and washed away 10 times faster than it is replenished. That costs $37.6 billion every year. Globally, all of the world's topsoil could be gone within 60 years.
The second challenge is diet-related disease.
About half of all American adults have one or more preventable chronic diseases related to diet. Diet is now the number-one risk factor for disease. More than two-thirds of adults and nearly one-third of children are overweight or obese. This costs $190 billion a year. Obesity is the new malnutrition. Globally, a growing number of people have plenty to eat and yet remain malnourished.
The third challenge is climate change.
Floods, droughts, wildfires and extreme or unseasonable temperatures cause crop and livestock losses. In 2011, exposure to high temperature events caused over $1 billion in losses to U.S. agricultural producers.
Phasing out greenhouse gas emissions is important, but it won’t reverse climate change. Until we remove enough CO2 from the atmosphere to get back down below the dangerous tipping point of 350 ppm, the impacts of climate change will persist.
Luckily, there’s an inexpensive and easy-to-use technology for reliable carbon dioxide removal and sequestration. Soil.
Agricultural activities have removed roughly 660 GtCO2 from terrestrial ecosystems. The good news is we can put it back.
Shifting to agricultural practices that can draw that carbon back down to the soil would:
• Reduce atmospheric CO2 by 40-70 ppm by 2100,
• Build soil instead of losing it, and
• Improve resilience to drought and floods, while
• Producing more food that’s more nutritious, and
• Generating higher farm incomes from increased production of nutrient-dense food.
We need more research on the microbial communities in the soil that generate carbon storage. Plants give the carbon they get from photosynthesis to soil microorganisms in exchange for water and nutrients. It works best when there are lots of different plants exchanging lots of different nutrients with lots of different microbes. The greater the plant biodiversity, the more carbon gets stored. The best way to reverse soil loss and sequester carbon is to continuously cover soil with a diverse array of living plants.
Scientists are currently documenting microbial soil carbon sequestration using carbon-13 isotope pulse labeling. Using this method, they can track the carbon flows from plants to and through soil microorganisms and identify the plants and the microorganisms that store the most carbon.
Fence line comparisons have demonstrated greater resilience to droughts and floods in carbon rich soils. Now, scientists can measure water flows through soil in three dimensions and accurately document soils’ water infiltration and holding capacity.
Grazing and pasture-raised animals can be managed to increase plant biodiversity and microbial activity. Well-managed pastures can sequester even more soil carbon than cropping systems. But we need a deeper understanding of how methanotrophs in the soil utilize methane emitted from grazing animals.
Finally we need an assessment of the socio-economic impediments to, and opportunities for, realizing the full potential for soil carbon sequestration.
If increasing soil carbon can help produce more food than you ever thought possible on less land than you can imagine, as John Jeavons would say, then why don’t more farmers do it?
If increasing soil carbon produces food that is flavorful, aromatic, and so healthy and nutritious that it could cost-effectively reverse diet-related diseases, why aren’t more consumers demanding it?
Belong to campaign: USDA WatchSafeguard Organic StandardsCategory: Politics & GlobalizationArea: USA
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) wants to know what your vision is for the U.S. food and farming system over the next 50 years.
On March 2, the Organic Consumers Association presented testimony at the USDA’s “listening session” on the “Visioning of U.S. Agriculture Systems for Sustainable Production.” Now it’s your turn—the USDA has asked for public comments on what a “sustainable” food and farming system should look like.Read more
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoCategory: Politics & GlobalizationArea: USA
In an August 16, 2016, memo, then-candidate Donald Trump’s agricultural advisory committee promised to “strengthen our nation’s agricultural industry as well as provide support to our rural communities.”
Yet, just recently newly elected President Trump signaled a thumbs up for the proposed mergers of two of the largest (and worst) agrochemical companies in the world—Monsanto and Bayer.
If the U.S. Department of Justice approves the Monsanto-Bayer merger, and also approves mergers between Dow Chemical and DuPont, and Syngenta and ChemChina, U.S. farmers, consumers and rural communities will suffer devastating consequences.
Tell Attorney General Sessions: Protect U.S. Farmers and Consumers. Say ‘NO’ to Big Biotech Mergers!Read more
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoSafeguard Organic StandardsCare What You Wear!Protest StarbucksCook Organic Not the PlanetGrass-fed DairyCategory: Environment & Climate, Fair Trade & Social Justice, Farm Issues, Food Safety, Genetic Engineering, Health IssuesArea: USA
Consumers have wised up to the evils of GMO foods. But Monsanto’s GMOs aren’t just in our foods. Only about 20 percent of all GMO crops in the U.S. are used to make (junk) food for humans—the other 80 percent go into animal feed, ethanol and cotton. Globally, the overwhelming majority of all cotton, much of it used to make cheap clothes, is GMO.
By exercising our collective purchasing power, and using the power of boycotts, consumers can force corporations to transition from degenerative production methods that harm human health, degrade soils, pollute the environment, abuse animals, shift profits from small farmers to large corporations, destroy biodiversity, exploit “cheap labor” and promote global warming . . . to regenerative production methods that improve human health, restore soil health, respect the environment, treat animals humanely, reward responsible farmers, promote biodiversity, treat/pay food and clothing workers fairly; and combat global warming.
Want to be part of the #ConsumerRevolution? Sign the pledge! Read more
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoCook Organic Not the PlanetCategory: All About Organics, Genetic EngineeringArea: USA
This week, the GMO Arctic Apple is headed to grocery stores for a trial run. They’re being tested in the Midwest—if you’re a Midwesterner, please read this!
Who stands to benefit from the GMO apple? Not consumers like you. Definitely not apple growers, who have been opposing this apple all along. The only benefits will go to Intrexon, the synthetic biology company that owns the GMO salmon, the GMO mosquito and the GMO apple.
You can still disrupt the market for these apples and keep them off our plates and out of our environment. But we need you to act now during this trial run in grocery stores.Read more
All About Organics, Politics & GlobalizationRonnie CumminsOrganic Consumers AssociationFebruary 14, 2017
Smoke Man 1000x523
Over the past three decades, organic food, farming, and products in the U.S. have grown into a $50-billion-a-year powerhouse, representing more than 5 percent of all retail grocery sales. This growth has been achieved with little or no help from the White House, Congress or the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and that’s been true no matter which party, Democrat or Republican, has been in power.
At current rates of growth the majority of food sales in the U.S. will be organic or 100% grass-fed within three decades. Unfortunately these current levels of growth for organic, no matter how impressive they seem, will not be enough to prevent the current (food- and farm-related) public health, environmental and climate crises from metastasizing into a full-blown catastrophe within 25 years or less. That’s why my organization, the Organic Consumers Association is organizing for what we call a Consumer and Political Revolution 2017-2020.
Although the majority of consumers—no matter whether they voted for Hillary (65 million), Trump (62 million), or stayed home and didn’t vote (92 million)—tell pollsters that they know that organic food is superior to chemical/GMO food, in terms of nutrition and environmental impact, and that they believe that pesticides, synthetic hormones, antibiotic residues and GMOs are dangerous, Congress keeps subsidizing industrial agriculture, factory farms, processed food and GMO corn-derived ethanol to the tune of billions of dollars a year. At the same time, lawmakers show little or no support for organic or transition-to-organic farmers or programs.
100% grass-fed beef and dairy products are now the fastest growing segment of grocery store sales. Yet most grass-fed beef and cheese is imported from overseas (Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay) for the most part because here in the U.S., the USDA subsidizes factory-farm meat and animal products, rather than helping U.S. ranchers, farmers and processors move toward grass-fed, pasture-based, and regenerative production.
The Obama Administration behaved very much like the Bush Administration before it, providing little or no support for organic farming while touting the supposed benefits of GMOs, hi-tech agriculture, ethanol and agribusiness-friendly free trade agreements. Despite promises made in 2007 on the campaign trail that his administration would require mandatory labels on GMOs, Obama did nothing. In 2016, when Congress (including a number of recent Trump cabinet appointees) rammed through the controversial Roberts/Stabenow/Pompeo Dark Act, taking away the rights of states to require mandatory GMO labeling, Obama remained silent—instead of using his veto power.
Read more on Ronnie's Blog
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoSafeguard Organic StandardsCook Organic Not the PlanetCategory: Environment & Climate, Politics & GlobalizationArea: USA
Our health, our environment, our basic right to know—everything is under attack.
How do we unite the people working in our own communities on food, natural health, social justice and climate issues into a more powerful movement that can put an end to corporate crime and political corruption in the marketplace and in the political realm, while regenerating our health, our economy, our local communities and our democracy?
Sign up to join Ronnie and the Organic Consumers Association for this important call about how to launch both a #ConsumerRevolution and a #PoliticalRevolution.Read more
Environment & Climate, Health IssuesRonnie CumminsOrganic Consumers AssociationFebruary 5, 2017
As evidenced by the 2016 primary and general elections, Americans–Democrats, Republicans, Greens, and Independents–want real change, radical change, not just “business as usual.” That’s why Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) nearly won the Democratic Party nomination in 2016 with his call for a “Revolution,” including Medicare for All, reining in Wall Street, higher taxes on corporate profits, an end to wars in the Middle East, and free tuition for students at public colleges. Polls consistently indicated that had Sanders survived the dirty tricks of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, and actually won the Democratic Party nomination, he could have defeated Trump by a significant margin.
On the Republican side of the partisan divide, 63 million (mainly white),bitterly dissatisfied Americans cast their votes against Hillary Clinton and for Donald Trump, a self-proclaimed revolutionary, who promised to “Make America Great Again,” by reducing taxes, and by raising the living standards of everyday Americans. Trump’s platform included putting an end to Obamacare and providing a more effective and affordable system of healthcare by devolving power to the states.
Since his inauguration, Trump and his minions have unfortunately declared war on the majority of Americans with a divisive, indeed alarming, series of sexist, racist, authoritarian and homophobic policy pronouncements and executive orders. After declaring he would “drain the swamp” of lobbyists and special interests, Trump has instead hypocritically put forth the nominations of corporate millionaires, billionaires, Wall Street insiders, militarists and climate deniers to his Cabinet, along with an anti-abortion extremist to the Supreme Court, and has enacted a series of executive decrees on immigration, environmental pollution, and pipelines that have brought millions of protesters out into the streets.
According to the well-respected Institute on Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP),
“Trump has issued instructions to effectively gag government scientists, thus threatening continuity and public accountability in research, and is preparing to gut regulations across multiple sectors that were designed in the public interest. He is building a cabinet of powerful millionaires and billionaires, some of whom oppose the very purpose that their agencies are mandated to serve. He is perpetuating the idea that recognition of climate change is subject to a belief system rather than to scientific evidence. He is attempting to reverse the social-, economic- and environmental-achievement and promise of renewable energy. –IATP newsletter Feb. 4, 2017.
One of the most pressing crises we face, a major topic in the 2016 elections, is our rapidly deteriorating public health and healthcare system. See the linked article and video at the end of this article. Unfortunately, neither Establishment Democrats (Clinton et al) nor Republicans (Trump) appear ready to “bite the hand that feeds them” (Big Pharma, the American Medical Association, insurance companies, junk food conglomerates, corporate agribusiness, chemical polluters) and offer a real solution, in terms of effective and affordable healthcare and public policy that address the underlying causes of rampant disease and sickness, not just the symptoms.
The root causes of the world’s most expensive and ineffective system of healthcare—the U.S. healthcare system—are not only medical errors (failing to focus on prevention and nutrition for example) and malpractice (the third leading cause of death in America), but also the self-destructive lifestyle choices or addictions (junk food, alcohol, tobacco, drugs, and lack of exercise) of the majority of the population. The everyday behavior of consumers in our Fast Food nation, compounded by the routine “profit-at-any-cost” contamination of our environment, have not only degenerated public health, but have also raised healthcare costs ($3.3 trillion per year and rising) to the point where they are threatening to bankrupt our entire economic system.
February 13, 2017Organic Consumers AssociationEnvironment & Climate, Health Issues, Politics & Globalization
Girls on phones 1000x523
UPDATE: Click here to listen to OCA's national organizing call with director Ronnie Cummins!
Our health, our environment, our basic right to know—everything is under attack. We need everyone on deck.
How do we unite the people working in our own communities on food, natural health, social justice and climate issues into one powerful movement to end corporate and political corruption at the local, state and federal levels?
Join Ronnie and the Organic Consumers Association for a national call about how to launch both a #ConsumerRevolution and a #PoliticalRevolution.
Everyone is feeling it right now—the compulsion to get involved, to do something positive to protect our health and our environment. Can we regenerate our food and farming system? Can we regenerate our health? Our local economies? Even our democracy?
We think the answer is yes. But only if we give up single-issue organizing and start working together, from the grassroots up.
What do you think? We want to hear from you.
TAKE ACTION: RSVP for the call-to-action with OCA's Ronnie Cummins on Thursday, Feb. 16 at 8 p.m. Eastern/ 5 p.m. Pacific!
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoCook Organic Not the PlanetSave the BeesCategory: Environment & Climate, Farm Issues, Genetic Engineering, Politics & GlobalizationArea: USA
Remember the DARK Act vote last summer? When your Senators had to decide whether or not to block state laws requiring labels on genetically engineered food?
There’s a vote coming up in the Senate that’s even more important. It’s the vote on whether to confirm Sonny Perdue as the next Secretary of Agriculture.
Former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue is a Monsanto-funded politician who made millions selling fertilizer and gaming the farm subsidy system.
Tell Your Senators: Vote NO on Sonny Perdue for Agriculture Secretary! Read more
January 24, 2017Organic Consumers AssociationKatherine PaulEnvironment & Climate, Genetic Engineering, Politics & Globalization
Sonny Perdue 1000x523
In announcing his pick last week for Secretary of Agriculture, Trump heaped predictable praise on Sonny Perdue, promising that the former governor of Georgia will “deliver big results for all Americans who earn their living off the land."
We predict that Perdue will indeed deliver “big” results—but he’ll deliver them to his friends in Big Food and Big Ag, not to America’s rural farmers, and surely not to America’s consumers.
If it’s true that you can judge a man by the company he keeps, well, judge for yourself whose side Perdue is really on.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), that multi-billion-dollar lobbying group that represents Monsanto, Dow, Dupont, Coca-Cola, General Mills (you get the picture) rushed to praise Perdue’s nomination. In a statement, GMA’s president said her group “looks forward to working with [Perdue] on issues key to keeping America's food the safest and most affordable food supply in the history of the world.” Coming from the GMA, leader of the charge to keep labels off GMO foods, we know that “safest and most affordable food” is code for “industrial chemical GMO food.”
And by now, we also all know that Perdue, who was named 2009 Governor of the Year by the Biotechnology Innovation Organization, counts both Monsanto and Coca-Cola among his many corporate campaign donors.
What else do we know about Perdue? Here are some not-so-fun facts:
• Perdue hails from Georgia, which leads the country in poultry production, most of which comes from factory farms. Although he’s not related to the founders of Perdue Farms, Perdue helped the giant chicken-producing factory farm business expand its Georgia operations by $155 million. That might explain, as Grubstreet points out, why the National Chicken Council, which lobbies on behalf of the poultry industry, can’t wait for Perdue to be confirmed.
• A former fertilizer salesman, Perdue at one time owned Houston Fertilizer and Grain which, after its acquisition of Milner Milling Co., morphed into AGrowStar, a grain business with operations across Georgia and South Carolina. His supporters cite his business operations as proof that he’s qualified to lead the USDA. They fail to mention the role chemical fertilizers play in water pollution and global warming, much less the cost to farmers of relying on synthetic inputs instead of regenerative practices which rely on organic composting and that improve both crop yields and soil health, without the pollution side effects.
• Perdue has a degree in veterinarian medicine which, coupled with his professed disdain for regulations that he deems “unfriendly” to farmers, means he’s more likely to overlook (or overturn) existing regulations requiring veterinarians to cut back on the use of antibiotics in order to address the current health crisis—antibiotic-resistance—caused by the over-use of antibiotics, especially in animal feed.
• Perdue is a climate-denier who made headlines in 2007 when he prayed for rain during a drought. Alternet reported that “backed up by a choir singing ‘Amazing Grace,’ accompanied by three Protestant ministers, and twenty demonstrators from the Atlanta Freethought Society, Sonny Perdue, Georgia's Baptist governor, led a crowd of hundreds in prayers for rain.” Not that there’s anything wrong with praying, but how about also acknowledging the role healthy soils play in making crops resistant to drought, and even preventing it in the first place? We probably won’t get that acknowledgement from a man who once said this: “It’s become a running joke among the public, and liberals have lost all credibility when it comes to climate science because their arguments have become so ridiculous and so obviously disconnected from reality.”
• Perdue has no qualms about taking government handouts. Environmental Working Group (EWG) reports that between 1995 and 2014, he cashed in on $278,679 in taxpayer-funded subsidies for his various businesses. Will he be open to overhauling the current system which doles out $25 billion/year in subsidies (paid out mostly to large producers, not small farmers) for commodity crops, like wheat, GMO corn, GMO cotton and GMO soy? And instead support subsidies for organic and regenerative (and small) farmers who are reducing pollution, producing more nutrient-dense (and pesticide-free) foods while enhancing their soils’ capacity to draw down and sequester carbon? Again, not likely we think, given that Perdue is co-founder of Perdue Partners, a global trading company that specializes in trading goods and services, including commodities, and that he assured Trump that trade will be a big priority for him.
• Perdue apparently hasn’t made the connection between junk food and health (much less industrial ag and global warming). At a 2003 meeting organized by his wife (then first lady of Georgia) and sponsored by Coca-Cola and Chick-fil-A, Perdue praised the soda giant for its “ its continued effort to grow its business presence and invest in Georgia, as the Company prepares to open a $100 million plus expansion to its Atlanta production facilities.”
Before his nomination, Perdue served on Trump’s ag advisory committee whose talking points, as reported on November 15, by Politico, “offer a roadmap on how President-Elect Donald Trump's agriculture secretary could shape agricultural policies, including the sweeping promise to ‘defend American agriculture against its critics,’”. . (emphasis ours). Of course, what the committee means by “American” agriculture is industrial factory farm and GMO commodity agriculture. And we all know who the committee sees as its critics—that would be us and a host of other groups that advocate for healthy food and a clean environment.
For all the talk about sticking up for rural farmers and rural America, the plain fact is this: Perdue’s track record consistently reveals his support for corporate agribusiness—not small farmers or rural Americans. There are his aforementioned corporate campaign donations. And this—in 2009, Perdue signed a bill that blocked local communities in Georgia from regulating animal cruelty, worker safety and pollution related to factory farms. That’s hardly “looking out” for the little guy.
Given his known (real) priorities, we predict that right out of the gate, Perdue will go after new USDA regulations, passed under the Obama Administration in December 2016, that are designed to “expand small farmers’ ‘protections against the most egregious retaliatory practices’ used by big chicken companies like Tyson.” Those rules can’t go into effect until a 60-day comment period has passed—which gives Perdue plenty of time to quash them in order to protect his state’s $39-billion factory farm chicken industry. If he does go after the new regulations, it will be his way of confirming his support for the highly profitable Tyson-type corporations—not small farmers who currently suffer, financially and otherwise, under a system that is titled in favor of big corporations.
If confirmed, Perdue will oversee a budget of more than $140 billion and a staff of more than 100,000 people in an office that, as Civil Eats points out, executes “policy in a wide variety of areas, including food, agriculture, natural resources, rural development, and nutrition. The agency oversees the national school lunch program and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as well as food safety and farm policy programs, the Forest Service, and various land and water conservation efforts.”
And of course, Perdue will play a key role in negotiating the 2018 farm bill.
We’d love to see Perdue really support rural farmers and Americans, by supporting the farmers who are farming in a responsible way. But as Naomi Klein said, the Trump cabinet is a “corporate coup d’état. Perdue, from all appearances, fits right in with the rest of the millionaire and billionaire corporate cronies tapped by Trump to run the country. The last time he ran for governor, in 2006, financial statements showed he was worth about $6 million and his businesses about $2.8 million, according to Politico.
Perdue may have impressed Trump by showing up for his job interview wearing a backpack and a tie with little tractors on it. But most farmers are smart enough to see through Perdue's phony concern for rural farmers, no matter how he dresses it up. And it will sure take a lot more than that to convince us that Perdue will support the real future of agriculture—which is organic and regenerative.
Please call your Senators and ask them to reject Sonny Perdue for USDA secretary of agriculture.
Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association. Like this article? Sign up for OCA’s weekly online newsletter.
Environment & ClimateRonnie CumminsOrganic Consumers AssociationJanuary 20, 2017
revolution orange 1000x523.jpg
Today, Donald Trump was sworn in as president of the United States.
Today, I'm announcing our #ConsumerRevolution and #PoliticalRevolution 2017-2020 platforms.
If Hillary Clinton placed her hand on a Bible today, promising to protect the U.S. Constitution, we would be organizing a massive movement to change her positions on many issues, including war, Big Ag and GMOs.
If Bernie Sanders took the oath of office today, we would be celebrating his authenticity, and his solid track record (not just lip-service) of support for at least 90 percent of the issues we care about. Then we’d get to work on the other 10 percent—with hope and enthusiasm.
But today, we witnessed the swearing in of a president who has signaled loud and clear his intent to maximize the profits of giant corporations—like Exxon Mobil, BP, and Monsanto and Bayer (whose merger he's set to approve)—on a scale never before seen in our lifetimes. Public and environmental health be damned.
Trump has appointed a slate of millionaire and billionaire corporate cronies to key, powerful positions, with orders to immediately set to work rolling back any regulations or policies that even hint at cutting into corporate profits. We will have an EPA Administrator, an Energy Secretary and a head of the CIA who largely reject the international scientific consensus that human behavior is a contributing factor to global warming.
We will have billionaire bankers running the U.S. Treasury Department and the American economy.
And yesterday we learned, not surprisingly, that the new USDA Secretary of Agriculture will be former Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue. Another millionaire climate-denier, Perdue is a cheerleader for the worst of the worst agribusiness corporations. Based on his history, Perdue will have no interest in protecting the interests of rural farmers, farm workers or consumers from the routine poisoning of our food, water and air by factory farms, pesticides and GMOs.
We have our work cut out for us in the coming months and years. As Frances Fox Piven, a professor of political science and sociology, recently wrote, we’ll need to keep signing petitions, but that won't be enough. We’ll need to, as she said, “throw sand in the gears of everything” just to protect the most basic of human rights.
With that in mind, we have developed two platforms that will guide our work, beginning immediately.
#Consumer Revolution 2017-2020
Overarching goal: Force corporations that sell consumer products, including food, clothing, drugs and personal care products, to respond to consumer demand for truthfully labeled products that have a positive impact on human health and are produced using regenerative processes and practices that not only prevent harm to human health and the environment but also measurably improve soils and combat global warming.
(1) Move toward making organic, 100% grass-fed, and regenerative food and farming the norm, not just the 5-percent alternative in the marketplace, by doubling sales of organic to $80 billion by 2020, and by increasing sales of U.S. grass-fed meat and dairy, and organic and pastured poultry and pork by at least 400 percent by 2020.
(2) Achieve a 50-percent reduction in sales of GMO food and animal feed by 2020, with the aim of driving GMO animal feed off the market.
(3) Force major food brands and companies that fraudulently label their products as “natural,” “organic” or “GMO-free” to remove misleading labels and/or transition their products and production methods to organic and/or regenerative practices.
(4) Increase market share for clothing made from organic cotton, wool and other natural fibers through a high-profile “Care What You Wear” campaign that encourages consumers to boycott GMO cotton and synthetic fibers.
Overarching goal: Reform the current political process to create a democracy that works for all people, not just wealthy corporations and the 1%, by uniting the food, climate, economic and social justice, natural health and peace movements in a coordinated effort to support candidates, elected public officials and policies, at the local, state and federal levels, that support our common goals.
(1) Support the candidates and elected officials endorsed by the post-Bernie Sanders movements, including “Brand New Congress” and “Our Revolution.”
(2) Lobby candidates and elected public officials to support OCA’s #ConsumerRevolution platform
(3) Lobby candidates and elected public officials to support the “Our Revolution” platform, with the addition of:
• on climate: a focus on regenerative agriculture and soil carbon sequestration as a global warming solution, in addition to fossil fuel emissions reduction and renewable energy
• on healthcare: a focus on "Medicare for all" that includes coverage for preventive, natural and alternative healthcare solutions
• on food: a focus on food policy that supports consumer health and consumer right to know, and acknowledges the role food production plays in environmental and climate policy
• on living wage: a focus on raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour so that lower-income Americans can afford organic food
(4) Organize local grassroots meet-ups and coalitions to run candidates, for local and state offices, who support our issues.
(5) Oppose any candidates or policies that promote racism, sexism, homophobia, militarism and all forms of discrimination, whenever and wherever they arise.
(6) Oppose any laws or illegal attempts to disenfranchise voters.
(7) Support the decriminalization of drug use, including the legalization of marijuana, and oppose the war on drugs.
(8) Combat climate change by promoting candidates and policies that advance regenerative food, farming and land use, in addition to fossil fuel emissions reduction and renewable energy, as solutions for achieving zero emissions, for reversing global warming by sequestering excess CO2 and greenhouse gases in soil and forests, and for addressing our public health, water and environmental crises.
Why do we need a revolution?
Our democracy is broken. Under the Trump Administration, we could witness the final collapse.
The handful of corporations that control our food, farming, energy and pharmaceutical industries have corrupted the marketplace to the point that it generates enormous profits for CEOs and shareholders at the expense of workers, consumer choice, human health and the environment.
Our political process no longer works for a majority of people in this country, much less for the future of the common good. The failure of this process can be traced to the disproportionate influence of corporations and the uber-wealthy (1%) on policymaking, either through direct lobbying or by using generous campaign contributions to buy the loyalty of incumbent and/or future politicians.
These systemic failures originated and are perpetuated from the top down. They will be corrected only by a bottom-up grassroots rejection of the status quo, by a critical mass of citizens who hold a new, more hopeful vision for a healthier, safer, more equitable future.
What can you do?
Today, I call on you personally to get involved in our consumer and political revolutions. OCA and our allies will be organizing as never before at the local and state levels, pulling together the energy and talents of people young and old, from environmental, social justice, peace—every movement that shares our vision.
We’ll need people who live in and understand the needs of rural communities. We’ll need city dwellers. We’ll need lawyers and accountants. Farmers and factory workers. Moms and Dads.
We will have to work together, for each other. Because it's clear that our elected officials will not be working for us.
It’s time to get out from behind our laptops and cell phones, to break out of our silos, to break the pattern of single-issue organizing.
Please follow our communications as we roll out critical new consumer and political campaigns. Please share our messages far and wide. Please attend the community meetings and house parties we will soon be organizing.
And if you can, please support our critical work with a donation today—or better yet, become a monthly donor. Thank you!
P.S. We are raising money for the Organic Consumers Fund (OCF), our 501(c)(4) lobbying arm. Contributions to OCF are not tax deductible. But OCF funding is critically needed for our political work. You can donate online, by mail or by phone—details here. Thank you!
January 11, 2017Organic Consumers AssociationMelinda SuelflowFood Safety
girl talk 420x280
Lake View Natural Dairy, Grand Marais, MN
A local Minnesota dairy farm is locked in a costly legal battle with the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) over its right to sell raw milk and other dairy products directly to consumers.
Lake View Natural Dairy in Grand Marais, Minn., is just an hour north of OCA’s home office. The farm, which was settled in the 1880s by owner David Berglund’s ancestors, sells unpasteurized dairy products to friends, family and neighbors.
Since 2013, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) has been threatening to shut down Lake View Natural Dairy farm, unless Berglund agrees to let the state inspect his farm.
But Berglund says that under the state constitution, the farm can sell its products directly to consumers who come to the farm, without the threat of state inspection and regulation. The Minnesota Constitution guarantees that, “Any person may sell or peddle the products of the farm or garden occupied and cultivated by him without obtaining a license thereof."
And Berglund is saavy enough to understand that inspection is simply a vehicle to enforce regulation. In Minnesota, there are no regulations on the books for raw milk other than a brief statute that says raw milk can be “occasionally secured or purchased for personal use by any consumer at the place or farm where the milk is produced.”
To be clear, Lake View Natural Dairy runs a very sanitary and clean operation. And because consumers have to come to the farm to purchase products directly, the farm’s customers know this.
Berglund’s very real concern is that allowing the MDA to inspect his farm will lead to an unlawful attempt by the MDA to impost statutes meant for pasteurized milk production on the dairy’s production of raw milk. This would require Lake View Natural Dairy to pasteurize its milk, something neither the farmers, nor customers, want. Plus the costs of pasteurization equipment and a bottling plant would quickly put this small family farm out of business.
On November 16, Lake View’s case was heard by the Minnesota Court of Appeals in St. Paul. Earlier this year, the local district court upheld the state’s inspection order, and Berglund appealed it. If the Court of Appeals affirms the district court’s decision, Berglund and Lake View Dairy will appeal that decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Because there is a patchwork of state laws regarding the sale of raw milk and raw milk products across the country, Lake View’s case could set a national precedent. Minnesota is the only state that guarantees a farmer the right to “peddle” his or her products on the farm.
Implicit in this constitutional right of farmers to directly “peddle” their products to consumers is our right as consumers to purchase foods directly from farmers, without government interference.
Recent studies have debunked the myth that raw milk is a high-risk food. In fact, the numerous health benefits of raw over pasteurized dairy products are becoming more widely recognized, and consumer demand for these products is increasing.
Why is the MDA so intent on shutting down Lake View Dairy? It likely has something to do with the fact that the Big Dairy lobby sees small dairy farms, especially those selling raw milk, as a threat to their business.
Personally, as a consumer who purchases raw milk from Lake View Natural Dairy, I am appalled at the aggressive nature of the MDA’s threats against David Berglund. In its attempt to force Berglund to submit to a farm inspection, MDA threatened Berglund with jail time and exorbitant daily fines and inspection costs. As a tax-paying citizen, I am also appalled at the thousands of tax payer dollars being spent by the MDA to deny my right to purchase healthy foods directly from a local farmer.
Luckily for me and all of the rest of Lake View’s customers, David Berglund and his family are willing to stand up to the MDA and defend their rights and our rights. Let’s stand with them.
As a small family farm, Lake View Natural Dairy needs our help to fund its legal battle. You can make a tax-deductible donation to help support the farm and cover the family’s legal costs here.
More information on Lake View’s case here.
Genetic Engineering, Health IssuesRonnie CumminsOrganic Consumers AssociationJanuary 11, 2017http://ronnie.organicconsumers.org/monsanto-and-their-minions-are-poisoning-us-how-can-we-defend-ourselves/
Restaurant person food 1000x523
Monsanto (soon to be Bayer) and their minions are poisoning us. Yet another independent peer-reviewed scientific study (article linked below) has confirmed that Monsanto’s notorious weedkiller, Roundup, sprayed on most major agricultural crops and animal feed, including corn, soy, canola, sugar beets, cotton, wheat, alfalfa, and beans–contaminating the majority of the non-organic foods in U.S. grocery stores, restaurants, and school lunch cafeterias–is toxic, even at the routine parts per billion or trillion level ingested by most Americans everyday.
Roundup is everywhere, in our food, in our cotton clothing, in our urine, in our breast milk, in the rain, in our drinking water, rivers, fish, and wildlife. Following up on the declaration of a respected scientific panel of the World Health Organization in 2016 that Roundup (active ingredient glyphosate) likely causes cancer, compounded by numerous studies linking Monsanto’s top-selling herbicide to hormone disruption, birth defects, kidney damage, and other diseases, the question we should be asking today is not whether we need more proof that the Biotech Bully of St. Louis is deliberately poisoning us for profit, aided and abetted by indentured scientists, media hacks, and politicians; but rather how do we drive Monsanto’s Roundup and Roundup-tainted foods off the market?
Hint number one: don’t hold your breath for the Trump administration, Congress, or the regulatory agencies to ban or even restrict the use of Roundup and the thousands of other pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and chemical fertilizers contaminating our food and water and destroying our soils’ ability to sequester carbon and re-stabilize our dangerously out of control climate. Trump’s new regime is filled with “business as usual” Monsanto cheerleaders, Wall Street bankers, and corporate cronies who love industrial agriculture and America’s fossil fuel suicide economy.
Hint number two: don’t expect Big Food companies, fast food giants, retail supermarket chains, school cafeterias and institutional food providers to voluntarily remove Roundup and other agri-toxics from their product lines and menus.
Hint number three: don’t rely on the fraudulently labeled “natural,” “all natural,” or “non-GMO” brands of companies such as Ben and Jerry’s, Dannon, General Mills, Kellogg’s, or Whole Foods’ 365 brand, to keep Roundup and other poisons out of your food.
The only way to protect yourself and your family from toxic pesticides such as Roundup, as well as the other poisons laced into your food, is to buy certified organic and 100% grass-fed foods today and everyday, or else buy organic and transition to organic (certified or not) products from farmers and ranchers in your local area that you know and trust. Or better yet, grow your own, or at least some of your own food.
It’s important in terms of consumer self-defense to understand that most GMOs and toxic herbicides such as Roundup end up, not only in non-organic fruits and vegetables, but also, in fact predominately, as ingredients in processed food, cooking oils, and animal feed. Ninety percent of U.S. corn and soybeans for example, most of which is Monsanto’s “GMO Roundup Ready,” is used to produce high fructose corn syrup (a common junk food ingredient), low grade cooking oil, animal feed, and ethanol.
Most U.S. consumers don’t yet fully understand that the poisons such as Roundup, atrazine, dicamba, neonicotinoids, and “Agent Orange” 2,4 D, coated on seeds or sprayed on crops for animal feed end up in your milk, your ice cream, your hamburger, your eggs, or your fried chicken. Don’t believe “natural” or “non-GMO” claims unless the product is organic or 100% grass-fed, We are what we eat. But we are also what our farm animals (and fish) eat. Boycott factory farmed foods, not only in the grocery store, but in restaurants as well.
If we can’t trust the government or the large corporations, we need to take matters into our own hands, today and everyday. Take control of your health and your diet. Protect our common home, the Earth’s environment and the climate. We need a #ConsumerRevolution and we need it now. Join up with the Organic Consumers Association and Millions Against Monsanto to drive Roundup and other poisons off the market. Together we can begin to organize a food and political revolution in 2017-2020 that will move us toward a food, farming, and land use system that is not only healthy and just, but Regenerative and climate-friendly as well.
Source: Britain’s most used pesticide is linked to a serious liver disease which can be fatal, shocking new study claims.
Belong to campaign: Millions Against MonsantoThe Myth of NaturalCategory: Food Safety, Genetic EngineeringArea: USA
If there were an award for “greenwashing,” it would likely go to Ben & Jerry’s, the iconic Vermont-based ice cream brand, now owned by Unilever.
Ben & Jerry’s has done a brilliant job of selling consumers on the idea that the company cares about social justice, the environment, the climate, and its customers—the company even brags about its "Caring Dairy" program and its commitment to using non-GMO ingredients.
But behind that greenwashed façade lies the tale of a company that relies on a #dirtydairy industry that has poisoned Vermont’s waterways, that abuses animals, that is bankrupting farmers and is contributing to global warming by stripping the soil of its ability to draw down and sequester carbon.
TAKE ACTION: Tell Ben & Jerry’s: Stop Defrauding Consumers—It’s Time to Go Organic! Read more