Food Bytes #15 "Special Issue on Monsanto"
Ronnie Cummins (alliance@mr.net)
Wed, 9 Dec 1998 12:46:41 -0600 (CST)
>FOOD BYTES #15 December 7, 1998
>News and Analysis on Genetic Engineering & Factory Farming
>by: Ronnie Cummins, Campaign for Food Safety/Organic Consumers Action
>alliance@mr.net http://www.purefood.org
>http://www.icta.org
>___________________________________________________________
>Special Issue on Monsanto
>
>*** "Cremate Monsanto"-- Global Opposition Intensifies
>___________________________________________________________
>Coming up in the next issue of Food Bytes:
>Organic Standards: USDA Strikes Again--Organic Community Regroups
>____________________________________________________________
>
>"Monsanto's [Bt Cotton] field trials in Karnataka [India] will be reduced
>to ashes in a few days. These actions will start a movement of direct
>action by farmers against
>biotechnology, which will not stop until all the corporate killers like
>Monsanto, Novartis, Pioneer etc. leave the country. We know that stopping
>biotechnology in India will not be of much help to us if it continues in
>other countries, [but] if we play our cards right at the global level and
>coordinate our work, these actions can also pose a major challenge to the
>survival of these corporations in the stock markets. Who wants to invest in
>a mountain of ashes, in offices that are constantly being squatted (and if
>necessary even destroyed) by activists?"
>
>Prof. Nanjundaswamy <swamy.krrs@a world.net>
>President, Karnataka State Farmers Association, November, 1998
>================================
>
>As reported in Food Bytes #13 ("Monsanto Under Attack") things have not
>been going so well for the gene engineers at Monsanto. In fact lately their
>situation seems to have degenerated from bad to worse. Besides slipping
>stock prices and persistence rumors of an unfriendly takeover by Dupont or
>another corporate giant, the Biomasters of Biotech have suffered from a
>rash of recent reversals including:
>
>* Destruction of several heretofore secret test plots of Monsanto's Bt
>"Bollguard" Cotton in India. On Nov. 28 and again on Dec. 2 contingents of
>Indian farmers in the Karnataka region, chanting "Cremate Monsanto" and
>"Stop Genetic Engineering," uprooted and burned Bt cotton fields in front
>of a bank of TV cameras and news reporters. Once again Indian national and
>provincial governments came under fire for secretly collaborating with
>Monsanto and other agri-chemical transnationals. In the wake of the
>controversy, government officials in New Delhi were forced to reiterate
>that "Terminator Technology" seeds--patented by the USDA and Monsanto--will
>not be allowed into the country. NGOs (non-government organizations)
>including the Karnataka State Farmers Association have called on Monsanto
>to get out of India, and for the government to ban field tests and imports
>of genetically engineered seeds and crops. On Dec. 3 the Andhra Pradesh
>provincial government was forced to ask Monsanto to halt all field trials
>of Bt "Bollgard" cotton going on in seven districts in the state.
>
>* Informed sources in Thailand and South Korea report that government
>advisors and officials have begun discussions and deliberations to require
>mandatory labeling and safety-testing of genetically engineered foods and
>crops, despite anticipated objections from the US Embassy. On November 6
>the influential Thailand Biotech Centre admitted that "genetically
>engineered foods and agricultural products may pose a health hazard." Dr.
>Suthat Sriwathanapong, of the National Centre for Genetic Engineering and
>Technology, said that to "protect consumers against this possible health
>risk," the Thai Food and Drug Administration should issue a more
>comprehensive rule to regulate genetically engineered drugs and products.
>
>* The Consumers Union of Japan and other NGOs continue to call for
>mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods and crops. With several
>million petition signatures already in their hands, Japanese government
>officials are finding it increasingly difficult to ignore the demands of
>consumers. In a national survey in 1997, 91% of Japanese consumers stated
>their desire for "safety information" on GE foods. Despite Japanese
>consumers concerns, US trade officials have repeatedly warned Tokyo that
>mandatory labeling of GMOs is unacceptable, and could lead to a US/Japan
>trade war.
>
>* The Southeast Asia Regional Institute for Community Education
><searice.c@philoline.com.ph> and 12 other environmental NGOs organized a
>militant mass demonstration outside of Monsanto's corporate offices, near
>Manila, on Dec. 8 under the slogans of "Stop the Terminator Seeds" and "Put
>a Face on the Enemy." The genetic engineering controversy has recently been
>covered prominently in a number of major Phillipines newspapers, and two
>senators have introduced government resolutions to hold hearings and
>investigations on field trials and imports of GE foods and crops into the
>country.
>
>* In New Zealand, a major controversy has developed over revelations that a
>US government official threatened serious economic reprisals if the country
>went forward with a law on mandatory labeling. Former associate Health
>Minister Neil Kirton revealed in an interview in the national press that
>the United States Ambassador, Josiah Beeman, visited him twice in February
>and March and "bullied" him over the testing and labeling of genetically
>modified food. Kirton was later fired and replaced by another government
>official who was willing to go along with the US "no labeling" position.
>Polls in New Zealand and Australia show that consumers overwhelming support
>mandatory labeling. In one 1993 poll in Australia, a full 89% of citizens
>said they wanted labeling and would reject foods that were unlabeled. A
>recent nation-wide
>survey conducted by Central Queensland University researchers found strong
>resistance to genetically altered food among Australian consumers,
>particularly women.
>
>* In mid-November the Pesticide Action Network (PAN) of Asia and the
>Pacific launched a Safe Food Campaign at the Asia Pacific People's Assembly
>in Kuala Lumpur. PAN is collaborating with its network partners in the
>region to carry out this campaign. "Growing concern over these 'miracle'
>foods and the lack of information has prompted coordinated action over this
>issue", said Jennifer Mourin, the Campaign coordinator. Indian activist
>Dr. Vandana Shiva, speaking in Kuala Lumpur, described Monsanto, the
>biggest player in the ag biotech industry, as a "global terrorist,"
>forcing "hazardous food" on countries, using "tremendous pressure and
>misleading promotional campaigns" to prevent people from choosing "the food
>they want," and refusing to segregate and label genetically engineered
>foods and crops.
>
>* In Mexico City, national parliamentary representatives of the Green Party
>have begun work on federal legislation that would require mandatory
>labeling and safety-testing of GE foods and crops. The Greens expect to
>receive support from other opposition political parties as well.
>
>* In Brazil, one of the nation's largest supermarket chains, Carrefour, has
>come out against the commercialization of Monsanto's herbicide-resistant
>"Roundup Ready" soybeans. Brazil is the second largest producer of soy in
>the world, second only to the United States. At this time, Brazilian
>soybean growers are benefiting from the higher prices that many buyers in
>the U.S. and Europe are willing to pay for non-genetically engineered
>crops. A lawsuit filed earlier this year by the Brazilian Institute for
>Consumer Defense (IDEC) <idec@uol.com.br> has temporarily halted the
>Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture's approval of Monsanto's "Roundup Ready"
>soybeans. Brazilian NGOs including Greenpeace are gearing up to make their
>presence felt at the final session of the Convention on Biodiversity's
>Biosafety Protocol negotiations in mid-February in Cartagena,
>Colombia--where citizen groups and developing nations will try to push
>through a legally binding international treaty to regulate genetically
>engineered organisms.
>
>* At a November international conference of IFOAM (International Federation
>of Organic Agriculture Movements) <ifoam@t-online.de>, at Mar del Plata,
>Argentina, delegates from more than 60 countries, representing the world's
>leading organic farming organizations, called for governments and
>regulatory agencies throughout the world to immediately ban the use of
>genetic engineering in agriculture and food production because of threats
>to human health, the environment, and farmers rights.
>
>* In Europe the controversy over gene foods continues unabated. Consumer
>studies by Monsanto's American polling firm recently leaked to Greenpeace
>International showed that public opinion in Great Britain and Germany has
>turned even more strongly against GE foods in recent months. According to
>the poll, conducted by Stanley Greenberg, "the broad climate is extremely
>inhospitable to biotechnology acceptance. Over the past year, the situation
>has deteriorated steadily and is perhaps even accelerating, with the latest
>survey showing an ongoing collapse of public support for biotechnology and
>genetically modified (GM) foods." The report goes on to state that even the
>"media elites are strongly hostile to biotechnology and Monsanto. They
>think the Government is being too lax and believe they must expose the
>dangers..."
>
>* In Ireland a major row has developed after a national television network,
>RTE, ran a program entitled "Safe Harvest," critical of genetic
>engineering. Monsanto and the Irish biotechnology industry immediately
>complained that the program was "unfair and inaccurate," and demanded a
>retraction. Although threats by Monsanto will undoubtedly force Irish TV to
>grant "equal time" to biotech proponents on a later program, the incident
>has once more served to discredit Monsanto, already notorious in Europe for
>their strong-arm tactics in trying to suppress dissent.
>
>* In October SPAR and all of Austria's major supermarket chains declared
>that they will not sell GE-derived products and intend to take them off
>their shelves. Meanwhile Greece has decided to ban the import of GE
>rapeseed (canola). In addition the Scientific Committee on Plants of the
>European Commission ruled against the release of a GE potato containing
>antibiotic-resistance marker genes.
>
>* On Oct. 12 the European Parliament's Environment Committee called on the
>EU Commission to impose a moratorium on new GMO releases across the
>continent. Shortly thereafter the UK government announced a de-facto
>three-year moratorium on insect-resistant plants (e.g. Bt crops) and a
>de-facto one year moratorium on herbicide-resistant plants. The British
>government has apparently come to an agreement with the biotech industry in
>the UK that they will not apply for authorisation of Bt or
>herbicide-resistant plants during this time period.
>
>* In late-October Greenpeace Germany released an internal memo issued by
>the Raiffeisen Co-operative in Baden Württenberg. Raiffeisen, one of the
>EU's biggest grain merchants, announced that they will refuse to accept
>deliveries of genetically modified maize from farmers. Grain handlers,
>animal feed dealers, and cooking oil suppliers all over Europe are coming
>under increasing pressure from supermarkets, consumer groups, and food
>producers to supply them with guaranteed "GMO-free" ingredients.
>
>* In a speech delivered at a sugar industry trade meeting in the U.K.
>experts warned that the forthcoming export of non-segregated (GE mixed with
>non-GE) sugar from the US by Cargill and other commodity traders will
>likely set off a major controversy. "Current regulations in the sugar
>trade Associations make no mention of genetically modified quality," said
>Jonathan Drake, of Cargill's Geneva-based sugar trading office. In a speech
>prepared for an International Sugar Organization seminar, Drake warned that
>"Whether it [American sugar] will be freely accepted at destination is
>still unknown and perhaps dependent on labelling restrictions. EU officials
>may be quick to impose some restrictions in the wake of all the food scares
>in Europe."
>
>* Hungarian protesters took to the streets on November 18, in front of the
>Ministry of Agriculture to pressure government authorities drafting final
>implementation legislation
>for Hungary's genetic engineering law (coming into force January 1, 1999).
>Chanting "Ne Kukoricazz a Kukicoret!" ("Don't Cream the Corn!),
>Environmental activists from five NGOs (including ELTE Nature Conservation
>Club and Energy Club) inflated a 6-meter high helium balloon of a corncob
>with bar-code, in front of the Ministry of Agriculture. Protesters are
>demanding a complete moratorium on the growth, use, and importation of
>genetically-modified plants, animals, and foodstuffs in Hungary.
>
>* In the United States there are recent reports among agronomists of
>problems with Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" Cotton in Mississippi, North
>Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and Arizona. In addition informed sources in
>Arizona report that Bt cotton is failing to repel pink bollworms, a major
>cotton pest. Lagging sales of Monsanto's Bt corn seeds in the Midwest have
>already forced the company to slash prices by 30%.
>
>* In the US, according to the April 1998 journal, Cotton Grower, Bt-cotton
>growers in Arkansas had less than a banner year last season. A University
>of Arkansas study of several Bt and non-Bt cotton fields showed that on
>average Bt cotton yielded fewer pounds and lower income per acre. One farm
>showed a remarkable difference in yield--Bt cotton produced 168 fewer
>pounds per acre than the non-Bt variety. Bt cotton, on the farms studied,
>yielded an average of 24 fewer pounds per acre. Also, the new varieties
>required more growth regulator to synchronize plant development and had to
>be picked twice. Non-Bt cotton is typically picked only once.
>
>Also in Arkansas, on Nov. 24, seven farmers filed legal complaints against
>Monsanto, claiming that they were sold soybean seed with low germination
>rates. The complaints, filed with the Arkansas State Plant Board, involve
>several seed varieties that utilize Monsanto's Roundup Ready gene
>technology.
>
>* In Maine on Nov. 20, pressure from the Green Party and other citizens
>groups caused Monsanto to withdraw its application to register and grow its
>genetically engineered corn in the state.
>
>* Beginning October 31, more than 140 restaurants nationwide joined
>Greenpeace USA in calling on the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to
>require labels on genetically engineered foods. These restaurants will
>distribute information on the dangers of transgenic foods, including a
>postcard that customers can send to the FDA to support a lawsuit calling
>for labeling.
>
>"As a chef who is concerned about food quality, I want to be able to serve
>my customers the purest foods I can find," said Peter Hoffman, chef of the
>New York restaurant Savoy and board member of the national organization
>Chefs Collaborative 2000. "This means locally grown food from farmers I
>trust, not untested foods which may harm my customers." Chefs Collaborative
>is a non-profit membership organization of 1500 chefs across America who
>are dedicated to the ethic of sustainable cuisine.
>
>* On Nov. 26 activists calling themselves the "California Croppers"
>destroyed a test plot of Novartis Bt corn on the campus of the University
>of California at Berkeley. In a communique the Croppers warned Novartis and
>other biotech companies that further GE test plots were likely to come
>under attack. The Biotic Baking Brigade also struck again on November 23,
>throwing pies at a University of California official and an executive from
>Novartis.
>
>* On November 18, the industry journal Chemical Week reported that
>cash-strapped Monsanto is trying to sell its controversial chemical
>sweetener, NutraSweet. Although the artificial sweetener has generated
>enormous profits for Searle, Monsanto's drug subsidiary, over the years, it
>has also generated thousands of complaints from consumers who claim that
>NutraSweet has damaged their health. Chemical Week also cited Wall Street
>analysts who report that Monsanto is also trying to sell its even more
>controversial genetically engineered animal drug, the recombinant Bovine
>Growth Hormone. So far there are no companies willing to buy rBGH.
>
>* In yet another public relations setback for Monsanto (and Rupert
>Murdock's Fox Television network), fired Florida investigative reporters
>Jane Akre and Steve Wilson were presented a prestigious Ethics Award from
>the US Society of Professional Journalists for their investigative
>reporting on Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone. Akre and Wilson were fired
>by the Fox network last year after Monsanto claimed the two had produced a
>bias report on the controversial animal drug. On December 16, Wilson and
>Akre will be receiving the Joe Callaway Award from the Shafeek Nader Trust
>for "civic courage" in Washington, D.C.
>
>* In addition to receiving continuing adverse publicity in the US from
>harassing and prosecuting 480 farmers for the "crime" of saving seeds (see
>Food Bytes #13) Monsanto now faces an a potentially even more explosive
>situation in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. According to a
>Saskatchewan newspaper, the Western Producer, Monsanto has filed legal
>charges against a Saskatchewan farmer, Percy Schmeiser, for growing Roundup
>Ready canola without a license. But Schmeiser claims he's innocent and that
>Monsanto is the guilty party. He says that his farm has been contaminated
>by genetic material which has drifted from the fields of adjoining farmers
>who are growing genetically engineered canola. "It's in the ditches and the
>roadsides; it's in the shelter belts; it's in the gardens; it's all over,"
>said Schmeiser. If Schmeiser ends up facing Monsanto in court, he says he
>going to be putting the company's genetically altered crops and patents on
>trial.
>
>* And finally in Canada, the government announced on December 4 that it
>will not be giving approval to Monsanto's rBGH--at least for the
>foreseeable future. In an enormous controversy that will simply not go
>away, federal Health Canada officials have been exposed in the national
>media for conspiring with Monsanto to get the drug approved, despite
>objections by the government's own scientists--who warn that the drug has
>not been proven safe--and strenuous objections by farmers and consumer
>groups. Previous reports in the media have pointed out that Monsanto
>offered two million dollars to government health officials in exchange for
>speedy approval of rBGH, while shortly thereafter dissident scientists
>files' were burglarized and documents damaging to Monsanto were stolen.
>Several years ago Monsanto threatened to pull all investments out of Canada
>if rBGH were not approved, and has threatened the Canadian Broadcasting
>Corporation for airing stories critical of the company's strong-arm tactics.
>
>Pressure continues to build across the globe for an internationally
>coordinated anti-Monsanto Campaign. Stay tuned to Food Bytes for further
>details.
>
>### End of Food Bytes #15###
>
>
>
>
>
>Ronnie Cummins
>Campaign for Food Safety/Organic Consumers Action
>860 Hwy 61
>Little Marais, Mn. 55614
>Tel. 218-226-4164
>Fax 218-226-4157
>email alliance@mr.net
>http://www.purefood.org
>To subscribe to the free electronic newsletter, Food Bytes, send an email to:
>majordomo@mr.net
>with the simple message:
>subscribe pure-food-action
>
>
>--------------
>If you no longer wish to receive information, please send email to:
>majordomo@mr.net with the command:
>unsubscribe pure-food-action
>in the body of the message.
>
Ronnie Cummins
Campaign for Food Safety/Organic Consumers Action
860 Hwy 61
Little Marais, Mn. 55614
Tel. 218-226-4164
Fax 218-226-4157
email alliance@mr.net
http://www.purefood.org
To subscribe to the free electronic newsletter, Food Bytes, send an email to:
majordomo@mr.net
with the simple message:
subscribe pure-food-action
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".