(Beyond Pesticides, June 29, 2009) Last week the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit re-affirmed its previous decision upholding a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically-engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa pending a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Court determined that the planting of genetically modified alfalfa can result in potentially irreversible harm to organic and conventional varieties of crops, damage to the environment, and economic harm to farmers. Although the suit was brought against the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Monsanto Company and Forage Genetics entered into the suit as Defendant-Intervenors. In September 2008 the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s ruling, but the Intervenors continued to press the appeal alone, requesting the appellate court to rehear the case. Last weeks decision denied that request and re-affirmed the earlier decision in full. “This ruling affirms a major victory for consumers, ranchers, organic farmers, and most conventional farmers across the country,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety. “Roundup Ready Alfalfa represents a very real threat to farmers’ livelihoods and the environment; the court rightly dismissed Monsanto’s claims that their bottom line should come before the rights of the public and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 5, 2009) Farmers, consumers and civil society organizations in Australia, Canada and the U.S. released a joint statement confirming their collective commitment to stop commercialization of genetically engineered (GE) wheat. In 2004, global pressure prevented biotechnology company Monsanto from pushing GE wheat onto an unwilling market. The statement, “Definitive Global Rejection of Genetically Engineered Wheat,” was released to counter the May 14 “Wheat Commercialization Statement,” released by industry lobby groups in the three countries. The industry pledged to “work toward the goal of synchronized commercialization of biotech traits in our wheat crops.” The joint statement was released by 15 groups in Australia, Canada and the U.S., including the National Farmers Union, the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, the National Family Farm Coalition in the U.S. and the Network of Concerned Farmers in Australia, and counters the six stated industry arguments in favour of GE wheat. “GE wheat is a potential disaster of huge proportions,” said Terry Bohem, Vice President of the National Farmers Union in Canada. “We refuse to allow Monsanto and industry groups to restart any campaign to commercialize GE wheat.” The group statement centers on the pledge: “In light of our existing experience with genetic engineering, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 26, 2009) On May 19, 2009, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) released a position paper on genetically engineered (GE) foods stating that, “Genetically engineered foods pose a serious health risk,” and calling for a moratorium on GE foods. Citing several animal studies, the AAEM concludes “there is more than a casual association between genetically engineered foods and adverse health effects” and that “GE foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health.” The AAEM’s position paper on genetically engineered foods can be found on its website. “Multiple animal studies have shown that GE foods cause damage to various organ systems in the body,” said Amy Dean, M.D., public relations chair and board member of AAEM. “With this mounting evidence, it is imperative to have a moratorium on GE foods for the safety of our patients’ and the public’s health.” The AAEM calls for: — A moratorium on GE food, implementation of immediate long term safety testing and labeling of GE food. — Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community and the public to avoid GE foods. — Physicians to consider […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 20, 2009) For years, the biotechnology industry has trumpeted that it will feed the world, promising that its genetically engineered crops will produce higher yields. That promise has proven to be empty, according to a new report by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). Despite 20 years of research and 13 years of commercialization, genetic engineering has failed to significantly increase U.S. crop yields. Increases over the last decade are largely due to traditional breeding and agricultural improvements. “The biotech industry has spent billions on research and public relations hype, but genetically engineered food and feed crops haven’t enabled American farmers to grow significantly more crops per acre of land,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a biologist in the UCS Food and Environment Program and author of the report. “In comparison, traditional breeding continues to deliver better results.” The report, “Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops,” is the first to closely evaluate the overall effect genetic engineering has had on crop yields in relation to other agricultural technologies. It reviewed two dozen academic studies of corn and soybeans, the two primary genetically engineered food and feed crops grown in the United States. Based on those […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 15, 2009) Stating that it represents a danger to the environment, Germany’s Federal Minister for Nourishment, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, Ilse Aigner, announced an immediate ban on Monsanto’s MON810 genetically engineered (GE) maize yesterday. Claiming the decision is based on science and is an individual case, not a broad banning of all GE crops, Ms. Aigner stated, “Genetic engineering must include a complete guarantee of the security for person, animal, plant and environment.” Environmentalists, scientists and farmers opposed to GE crops have argued that the corn, which confers resistance to pests, could pollute other crops and pose a threat to the environment and human health. The debate over the use of GE crops in Europe has been ongoing for at least a decade. MON810 maize, brand name YieldGard, is the only GE crop currently cultivated in the European Union (EU). Under EU laws, countries are allowed to ban individual GE crops for environmental and health reasons. Currently, Hungary, France, Austria, Greece and Luxembourg ban MON810 maize. In March, EU environment ministers overwhelmingly rejected a European Commission proposal to force Austria and Hungary to lift their bans on the controversial cultivation of varieties of genetically modified (GM) corn. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 17, 2009) Earlier this month, European Union environment ministers overwhelmingly rejected a European Commission proposal to force Austria and Hungary to lift their bans on the controversial cultivation of varieties of genetically modified (GM) corn. Over 20 member states voted against the Commission proposal. Hungary can maintain its ban on Monsanto’s GM maize MON810, and Austria on MON810 and Bayer’s T25. “This is a victory for the environment, farmers and consumers, and a major embarrassment for the Commission. For the fourth time, EU governments have rejected a Commission proposal to lift national bans on GM crops. What part of ‘no’ does the Commission not understand?” said Marco Contiero, Greenpeace EU GMO policy director. Austrian and Hungarian scientific authorities have recently supplied new evidence supporting their national bans showing that MON810 maize – the only GMO currently cultivated in the EU – is likely to have harmful environmental effects. Helen Holder, European GMO campaign coordinator at Friends of the Earth Europe said, “The European Commission has once again failed to force countries to lift their national GMO bans. Today’s vote is a clear message that European countries will not be bullied into taking unsound decisions regarding their environment, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 27, 2009) Twenty-six leading corn insect scientists at public research institutions submitted a comment to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which charges that patent-holding companies, including Monsanto, Syngenta, and others, interfere with their genetic engineering (GE) research on crops. The statement says, “Technology/stewardship agreements required for the purchase of genetically modified seed explicitly prohibit research. These agreements inhibit public scientists from pursuing their mandated role on behalf of the public good unless the research is approved by industry. As a result of restricted access, no truly independent research can be legally conducted on many critical questions regarding the technology, its performance, its management implications, IRM, and its interactions with insect biology. Consequently, data flowing to an EPA Scientific Advisory Panel from the public sector is unduly limited.” The names of the 26 scientists were withheld from the public docket “because virtually all of us require cooperation from industry at some level to conduct our research.” The stewardship agreements, which are intended to ensure that farmers honor the companies’ patent rights, do not allow planting GE crops for research. These have been in place for years, but according to the New York Times, scientists have now spoken out […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 13, 2009) The Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF) has ended its organic certification program, which was established in 2000, two years before federal organic standards. The state’s effort to save itself an unknown amount in its budget will force organic farmers to pay significantly more for out-of-state certification. Larry Lewis, UDAF spokesman, said there was not enough time after Governor Jon Huntsman called for spending cuts to determine how to run the program profitably. As of January 29, UDAF’s website carried a message from Clair Allen, director of UDAF’s Plant Industry department, saying, “The Utah Department of Agriculture and Food’s Organic Certification Program is in a state of flux at this time. Its future is dependent on action by the Utah Legislature as they consider which programs to continue funding during out economic downturn. Please do not download or send in documents relating to our Organic Certification Program until the issue is resolved. We expect to have this issue resolved by the end of the 2009 Legislative Session.” Since the shuttering of the program, organic farmers have had to pay up to 10 times as much for private certification, often from California. UDAF typically charged […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 12, 2009) Genetically modified (GM) crops are benefiting biotech food giants instead of the world’s hungry population, which is projected to increase to 1.2 billion by the year 2025 due to the global food crisis, according to a report released yesterday by the Center for Food Safety and Friends of the Earth International. The report, “Who Benefits From GM Crops: Feeding the Biotech Giants Not the World’s Poor,” explains how biotech firms like Monsanto are exploiting the dramatic rise in world grain prices that are responsible for the global food crisis by sharply increasing the prices of GM seeds and chemicals they sell to farmers, even as hundreds of millions go hungry. The findings of the report support a comprehensive United Nations’ assessment of world agriculture in the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), which in 2008 concluded that GM crops have little potential to alleviate poverty and hunger in the world. IAASTD experts recommended instead low-cost, low-input agroecological farming methods. “U.S. farmers are facing dramatic increases in the price of GM seeds and the chemicals used with them,” said Bill Freese, science policy analyst at the US-based Center for Food Safety […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 9, 2009) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently soliciting comments on Monsanto’s second application to extend its experimental use permit for soybeans genetically engineered (GE) with the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). This will be the new administration’s first test on how it handles the issues surrounding GE crops. Among a number of concerns regarding GE crops, crops engineered to contain Bt threaten the long-term efficacy of Bt, which is an approved insecticide in organic farming. Monsanto’s permit on these GE soybeans was first granted by EPA in September 2007 and then extended in April 2008. Under the permit, plantings are permitted through July 31, 2009. Monsanto is requesting to extend the experimental program until December 31, 2010 and amend it by conducting tests with up to 0.466 pounds of Bt Cry1Ac protein in soybeans on 1,362 acres, according to the February 4th Federal Register notice. The testing trials will take place in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, and Virginia. Following the review of the application and any comments and data received in response to this solicitation, EPA will decide whether to issue or deny the EUP request, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 5, 2009) On November 10, 2008, the Austrian government released a report of long term research showing genetically engineered (GE) corn fed to mice significantly reduced their fertility over three to four breeding cycles within one generation. Similar effects were found in mice fed GE corn and bred over four generations. The study, “Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice,” was sponsored by the Austrian Ministry of Health, Families, and Youth, and led by Dr. Jürgen Zentek, Professor of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Vienna. Three series of experiments were done. The first was a multigeneration feeding trial in which the mice were fed and bred for four successive generations, beginning with the parents that were fed the diets from birth. The second was a multi-cycle breeding trial lasting 20 weeks in which breeding pairs of mice were fed beginning one week prior to co-habitation until the end of experiment, and allowed to go through four breeding cycles in the same generation. The third was a life-term trial involving feeding the mice without breeding from conception (via the pregnant mothers) to their eventual death. The researchers report that it […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 6, 2008) Agricultural biotech seed and chemical giant Monsanto will acquire Aly Participacoes Ltda., a Brazilian company involved in breeding sugar cane, and has already begun work to develop genetically engineered (GE) Roundup Ready (herbicide resistant) sugarcane. The deal for $290 million comes at the same time grain giant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) is set to invest $375 million in a joint venture with a Brazilian firm to produce sugarcane-based ethanol. Amidst numerous other concerns with the widespread adoption of GE crops and the proliferation of crops grown for biofuels around the world is the threat of increased pesticide use. Roundup Ready crops, which are genetically engineered to be resistant to Monsanto’s best selling herbicide Roundup (active ingredient glyphosate https://www.beyondpesticides.org/gateway/pesticide/glyphosate.htm) have been a boon to Monsanto’s profits, but not without environmental costs. Currently grown Roundup Ready crops include soy, corn, canola, cotton, and sugar beets. The crops’ resistance to glyphosate enables the use of the herbicide during the growing season without harming the crop itself. Glyphosate is now the number one herbicide in the United States. This has serious implications for public health and the environment, as glyphosate has been linked to cancer, reproductive effects, kidney and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 7, 2008) After months of grassroots pressure by the Genetic Engineering Policy Project, Center for Food Safety and others, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 541, The Food and Farm Protection Act, on September 27, 2008. Under this law, farmers that are unknowingly contaminated by genetically engineered (GE) crops in California are now protected from liability. Monsanto, which has aggressively litigated to protect its seed patents, must now use a protocol to investigate farmers and sample their crops under legal standards that require notification. “We’re pleased to see that this bill will give farmers new protections from legal implications related to GE crops,” said Rebecca Spector, West Coast Director for Center for Food Safety. “While it is a compromise, it’s still an important step in the right direction.” AB 541 protects California farmers who have not been able to prevent the inevitable – the drift of GE pollen or seed onto their land and the subsequent contamination of non-GE crops. Farmers with crops that become contaminated by patented seeds or pollen have been the target of lawsuits brought by biotech patent holders, most notably Monsanto. Further, if their contaminated crops cause harm to other farmers, the environment or consumers, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 4, 2008) On September 2, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically-engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa pending a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Court determined that the planting of genetically modified alfalfa can result in potentially irreversible harm to organic and conventional varieties of crops, damage to the environment, and economic harm to farmers. Beyond Pesticides is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit. Although the suit (Geertson Seed Farms, et al. v. Johanns) was brought against U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forage Genetics and Monsanto entered into the suit as Defendant-Intervenors. In her opinion, Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder held that, “Monsanto and Forage Genetics contend that the District Court disregarded their financial losses, but the district court considered those economic losses and simply concluded that the harm to growers and consumers who wanted non-genetically engineered alfalfa outweighed the financial hardships to Monsanto and Forage Genetics and their growers.” “This ruling affirms a major victory for consumers, ranchers, organic farmers, and most conventional farmers across the country,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, lead plaintiff and counsel in the lawsuit. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 21, 2008) As the debate over how to solve the global food crisis heats up, experts criticize many in the mainstream media for promoting pesticides and genetically engineered seeds as solutions to global hunger. In a recent critique, Francis Moore Lappe, author of the famous book Diet for a Small Planet and co-founder of Food First and the Small Planet Institute, says the media, in this case NPR, are off the mark in identifying the underlying causes of the food crisis and fail to look at the hopeful stories of farming communities that are succeeding with agro-ecological methods. Ms. Lappe writes, “On every continent one can find empowered rural communities developing GM-free, agro-ecological farming systems. They’re succeeding: the largest overview study, looking at farmers transitioning to sustainable practices in 57 countries, involving almost 13 million small farmers on almost 100 million acres, found after four years that average yields were up 79 percent.” As an example, she points to what may be the “pesticide capital of the world,” Andhra Pradesh, India,where “pests developed insecticide resistance and genetically modified (GM) cotton failed to live up to Monsanto’s promises.” After significant crop losses and farmer suicides there, many communities […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 5, 2008) Under pressure from activists and shareholders to change its chemical dependent lawn care practices, TruGreen””the world’s largest lawn and landscape care company, has joined the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program (PESP). Although the voluntary move comes with a pledge to reduce pesticide use, the company’s reformed practices will still fall short of organic land care, which does not utilize toxic pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. Organic land care is effective, affordable and better for human health and the environment, but TruGreen has failed to commit to organic methods. The PESP is a voluntary program started in 1994. According to the EPA, “By joining PESP, organizations pledge that environmental stewardship is an integral part of pest management, and they commit to working toward innovative practices that reduce risk to human health and the environment.” One of the benefits of joining the PESP for companies, according to the EPA website, is that “Membership may enhance public perception of your organization, constituent support, and employee morale.” Underneath this enticement to join is the clear potential for “greenwashing,” or the promotion of a product or service as environmentally friendly when the veracity of such claims is dubious. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 18, 2008) A recent New York Times report on current U.S. Department of Agriculture research shows weeds flourishing from increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Lewis Ziska, PhD, and his team of researchers, have found “noxious” weeds to be more adaptable to changing conditions than crops, predicting further growth of their productivity and range in urban and rural areas. Dr. Ziska’s latest research focuses on weeds uniformly grown at three sites in Maryland: an organic farm in the western side of the state, a park in a Baltimore suburb, and a reclaimed industrial area in Baltimore’s inner harbor. The last was chosen because the city acts as a “heat island,” with temperatures averaging three or four degrees above those outside the city. Dr. Ziska’s team took soil from the organic farm, which already contained seeds from 35 weed species, and transplanted them into identical plots at the three locations, beginning the experiment in 2002. The resulting plants tended to grow much larger closer to the city. Lambs-quarters grew six to eight feet on the farm and ten to 12 feet in Baltimore. Ailanthus grew five feet tall on the farm, compared to one in the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 9, 2008) High food prices, climate change and increasing concern over fresh water supplies are helping to fuel interest in new genetically modified (GM) technology in the European Union (EU), which has long been wary of foods derived from tinkering with the genetic make-up of plants. The European Commission has said it believes GM crops can alleviate the current crisis in food supply, although it added in June that expediency should not overrule strict scientific scrutiny of the use of GM technology. A European Commission-sponsored Eurobarometer opinion poll last month showed a slight increase in knowledge and acceptance of the technology. New consumer interests in GM seed varieties, which are likely to be more resistant to drought and able to produce reasonable yields with significantly less water, have increased. In a similar opinion poll conducted in March, the number of EU respondents saying they lacked information on GMs fell to 26 percent, compared with 40 percent in the previous, 2005 survey.  Fifty-eight percent were apprehensive about GM use and just 21 percent in favor, down from 26 percent in favor in a 2006. The European Union has not approved any GM crops for a decade and the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 25, 2008) Pesticides manufactured by Bayer (Germany), Syngenta (Switzerland), Monsanto (USA), BASF (Germany) and Dow Chemical (USA) pose the biggest threat to human health and the environment, according to a new Greenpeace Germany report, “The Dirty Portfolios of the Pesticides Industry.” The report provides the first-ever ranking of the world’s leading agrochemical companies based on the hazards and risks of their pesticides on human health and the environment. These five companies together account for 75 percent of the world market and 46 percent of the pesticides they sell worldwide are particularly hazardous substances. Monsanto has the portfolio with the highest proportion, 60 percent, of pesticides that are particularly toxic to humans and the environment. However, Monsanto only ends up in the middle of the overall ranking due to its small share of the market. The overall ranking not only takes into account the hazardous properties of the various pesticides, but also the quantities that are sold worldwide. Pesticides manufactured by Bayer pose the biggest threat to human health and the environment, according to the report. “Our ranking shows how toxic the business of the leading agrochemical companies still is,” said Greenpeace chemicals expert Manfred Krautter. “Politicians must […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 5, 2008) While the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) High Level Conference on Food Security in Rome convenes June 3-5, 2008, some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are trying to shed light on the fact that as hundreds of millions of people throughout the world are hungry, agrochemical companies that make pesticides and genetically engineered seeds are making record profits. Although UN chief Ban Ki-moon has declared the summit a success with “a clear sense of resolve, shared responsibility and political commitment among member states to making the right policy choices and investing in agriculture in the years to come,” many NGOs fear that the policies will only continue in the model of the green revolution, which ushered in the widespread use of pesticides and fertilizers in farming. This model favors large agrochemical companies that manufacture pesticides and genetically engineered seeds and perpetuates the environmental and social devastation that goes hand in hand with industrial agriculture. The Food Summit in Rome follows the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development (IAASTD) (also sponsored by the FAO) conference held in April of this year, which stressed the importance of agroecological and organic approaches to farming in order […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 26, 2008) The sowing of gene-altered corn, called MON810, in France this spring will not be allowed until further scientific evidence on its safety is reviewed. This ruling came after growers argued that they faced serious economic harm if the ban on genetically modified crops was not immediately released before the start of the spring planting season. The French Conseil d’État last week upheld the ban instituted February 7 of this year, after concerns were raised by French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, on the heath and environmental benefits of genetically modified (GM) crops. In the ruling, presiding Judge Jean-Marie Delarue pointed out that the safety of the product needs further study. The ban would therefore be upheld until a ruling could be made on the scientific underpinning. Hearings are expected to be held in the coming months. The French Ministry of Agriculture initially imposed the ban on GM products, stating that it should remain in place until European authorities completed a review of the product. Review is required every ten years. Efforts to overturn the ban were led by the General Association of Maize Growers in France and several biotechnology companies, including Monsanto, which engineered MON810, and Pioneer, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 15, 2008) Two studies have just been released, one by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), a promoter of genetically-engineering crops,  and the other by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and Friends of the Earth, each with differing conclusions on the impact of genetically engineered (GE) crops on the health of our food systems. The debate is one that has existed for years, particularly as GE seeds have spread worldwide, now accounting for 280 million acres of cropland in 23 countries. Reports have historically provided significant documentation of herbicide-resistant weeds developing as a result of heavy reliance on the chemicals crops are bred to tolerate. Insect resistance has also been recently discovered. Legislators have recognized the need to protect farmers from GE contamination and resulting lawsuits from seed developer Monsanto. Concerns over a litany of health and environmental risks from GE crops continue. The timing of these two studies highlights the disparity between how the GE industry represents its product and how public interest groups evaluate the effects and risks they see to farmers and consumers alike. The ISAAA study, entitled Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007, celebrates the first twelve […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 14, 2008) Researchers have found what they are calling the first insect resistance in the field to genetically engineered plants that are modified to produce an insecticide called Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt. The University of Arizona (UA) researchers, who have previously received research support from Monsanto and Cotton, Inc., are supportive of bioengineered crops and dismiss the findings of resistance, given that they are only in cotton and no other crops. The report, “Insect resistance to Bt crops: evidence versus theory,” is due out in the February issue of Nature. Concern about resistance has raised fears in the organic community that Bt, derived from natural soil bacterium, would be rendered ineffective as insect resistance spreads and this natural control collapses over time.In organic systems, composted manures and cover crops replace synthetic fertilizers, innovative weeding strategies are used instead of herbicides, beneficial insects and trap crops control insect pests, and alternatives to toxic defoliants prepare plants for harvest. Bt-resistant populations of the insect bollworm, Helicoverpa zea, were found in more than a dozen crop fields in Mississippi and Arkansas between 2003 and 2006. The bollworm resistance to Bt cotton was discovered when a team of University of Arizona […]