Approval of GE Sugar Beets Rescinded

Although the USDA had previously approved Monsanto's genetically engineered sugar beets, a Northern CA federal district judge issued a ruling that prohibits future planting and sale of "Roundup Ready" beets. The court found that the USDA had approved the beets without an Environmental Impact Statement. The beets are genetically engineered to resist Monstanto's Roundup herbicide. Other Roundup Ready crops have already let to increase herbicide use, herbicide-resistant weeds, and contamination of non-genetically engineered products. For more information, check out The Center for Food Safety.

Tell the USDA not to lower organic standards

The USDA wants to allow genetically engineered foods and the use of nanotechnology to be organic!

Here's the letter I sent to Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture:

I am concerned that the USDA is trying to degrade organic agriculture by trying to allow genetic engineering and nanotechnology into organic regulations. A May 2009 report issued by the USDA Foreign Agriculture Information Network, "The Unexplored Potential of Organic-Biotech Production," argues that "Governments should change their regulations to allow producers to gain organic certification for biotech crops grown with organic methods." Also in May, the National Organic Standards Board began talking about a ban on nanotechnology in organic, but felt stymied by their assumption that "Under the current definition, most nanotechnology would not fall into the category of excluded methods."

For organic consumers like myself, there is no question that these developing technologies have no place in organic agriculture--and I do not want them in the food and products I give my family. Genetically modified organisms are not safe. They have been linked to thousands of toxic and allergenic reactions, thousands of sick, sterile, and dead livestock, and damage to virtually every organ and system studied in lab animals. Nanotechnology is also very dangerous. Early scientific evidence indicates that some nanomaterials produce free radicals which destroy or mutate DNA and can cause damage to the liver and kidneys.

Every day, new evidence of the dangers of nanotechnology emerge: 

- Workplace nanoparticle exposure was linked to seven cases of serious and progressive lung disease in China - including two patient deaths.
- Nanoparticles present in a chemical found in sunscreens - titanium dioxide - are being studies for their connection to Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.

Genetically engineered and nanotech products are already unlabeled because the government refuses to acknowledge that genetically engineered and nanotech versions of natural substances are very different from the original. Buying food and personal care products that are certified organic is the only way for me to avoid these dangerous and untested technologies. Please do not lower the organic standards and allow these dangerous and unnatural technologies in organic products.

--------------------------

To get more info or to send a letter, go to the Organic Consumers Association Web site.

Unbelievable!

I just heard that the USDA wants genetically engineered food to be allowed to be called organic. This is completely outrageous. There has been so much evidence showing that GE foods are not equal to their non-GE counterparts and are causing both health and environmental problems. Read this article showing what the USDA is saying to justify their position.

Another sneaky attempt to weaken organic standards

The USDA has announced a proposal to allow 38 new non-organic ingredients in products bearing the "USDA Organic" seal. Most of the ingredients are food colorings derived from plants that they say are not "commercially available" in organic form. But at least three of the proposed ingredients, backed by beer giant Anheuser-Busch, pork and food processors, represent a serious threat to organic standards, and have raised the concerns of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as well as a number of smaller organic companies and organic certifiers. For example, they want to allow:
- Conventionally grown hops, produced with pesticides and chemical fertilizers, to be used in beers labeled as "USDA Organic"
- Conventionally raised factory-farmed animals' intestines (I'll spare you the gory details of what thes animals have been fed) as casing for sausages labeled as "organic."

Then the sneaky part - rather than the standard 30-60 days for public comment, the USDA has indicated they will only be accepting public comments for seven days.

If this concerns you, go to http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=11401 for more information or to write to the USDA.

No more raw almonds

Arg! This is so frustrating. Instead of demanding that big food processing facilities properly manage their operations so food is kept clean, the USDA wants to use pasterization and irradition to put a band-aid on the problem.

In response to 2 salmonella outbreaks within the last 10 years related to raw almonds, the USDA wants to now require all almonds to be pasturized using chemical and/or high temperature treatments. Not only will this expensive procedure force many small and family farms out of business, it is also upsetting to consumers (like me) who want raw, organic almonds free of chemicals and with all the nutrients and enzymes that would be killed by high heat intact. And even worse, these pastuerized nuts will still be labeled as "raw".

For more info and how to take action, go to: http://cornucopia.org/index.php/238