Poland wins against Monsanto!!

[onawah]

Monsanto's Mon810 corn, genetically engineered to produce a mutant version of the insecticide Bt, has been banned in Poland following protests by beekeepers who showed the corn was killing honeybees.

Poland is the first country to formally acknowledge the link between Monsanto's genetically engineered corn and the Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) that's been devastating bees around the world. Many analysts believe that Monsanto has known the danger their GMOs posed to bees all along. The biotech giant recently purchased a CCD research firm, Beeologics, that government agencies, including the US Department of Agriculture, have been relying on for help unraveling the mystery behind the disappearance of the bees.

Now that it's owned by Monsanto, it's very unlikely that Beeologics will investigate the links, but genetically engineered crops have been implicated in CCD for years now.

Learn & Take Action: http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=22033501

EtI3TlPPA4g
http://www.causes.com/causes/62120-stop-monsanto/actions/1650396

[Hervé]

Finally!

Thanks to this tenacious people, the first breach in the dam has been achieved... may it turn into a flood!

[Positive Vibe Merchant]

Just goes to show you. They are not invinvible.

[sdv]

Excellent news.

Unlike many people on this forum, I think that the scientists who invented GM seeds did so with the best of intentions. The financial control of seeds that has been a result of this invention (poor farmers cannot harvest seed from this year's crop for next year's planting but must buy new seed every year) was a corruption of those good intentions.

However, scientists must now acknowledge that GM seeds do not solve the problems they were supposed to, and have simply created new problems. Here, we have found that the diseses and bugs quickly adapt and thus the GM crops become ineffective against them. (Planting GM seeds that are disease and pest resistant stopped farmers using DDT and other toxic checmicals, but now the GM crops are no longer resistant to the diseases and pests, so ...). Strip away the emotionalism and that's basically the situation: the solution to a problem has failed to solve it and has simply increased the problems.

[Corncrake]

Why do Monsanto not care about Colony Collapse Disorder and the decimation to natural plant life that GM foods could bring to the Earth? Monsanto employ thousands of people who must care about what they eat and indeed if they eat. Are they all in the plot? Or are they secretly eating organic? I know greed and the desire for money is for some an all driving force but what is the point if ultimately we lose everything that is good about our planet.

I agree with sdv that there probably are scientists who believe that GM is a good thing - my daughter's biology teacher who is a highly educated and spiritual person barely acknowledges the downside of GM. Despite what has happened in India she sees it as a way to feed the starving masses. (http://www.vandanashiva.org/)

[conk]

:cheer2::target::juggle::becky::lol::israel::llama::drum::whoo::grouphug

[onawah]

Read more about the current fight against Monsanto, which is growing in momentum here:
http://organicconsumers.org/bytes/OrganicBytes328.pdf
Here is an excerpt from their current email newsletter:

We need your help today to raise $1 million for the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act. If we reach our goal by May 26, we will receive a matching $1 million gift from Mercola.com, Nature’s Path, Lundberg Family Farms, Eden Foods and a number of public interest organizations.

I’ve had the pleasure of speaking directly with some of you who have called in to make donations. Many of you have thanked OCA for bringing so many groups together around this cause. Twenty years ago, when the FDA outrageously declared that genetically modified foods were “substantially equivalent” to unmodified foods, and therefore would not be labeled, we and our allies didn’t have large email lists, Internet fundraising capabilities, or social media. We couldn’t have waged a massive campaign like this.

Today, we can almost instantly connect millions of people – and potentially raise millions of dollars – in order to fight back.

And it’s working. Groups like Food Democracy Now!, Mercola.com, Natural News, Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, Mother Earth News, OccupyMonsanto360, Alliance for Natural Health, the Farm Food Freedom Coalition, Real Food Media, FoodFreedomGroup.com, Institute for Responsible Technology, and many more are reaching out to their grassroots networks, in a massive show of solidarity.

Since May 1, we have raised over $600,000, which will go directly toward winning the campaign in California, as well as supporting other state GMO labeling campaigns. With your help, we will raise another $400,000 - plus a $1 million matching gift - by May 26.

This GMO labeling battle in California is huge. It’s the best opportunity – our last best hope - to show the government and those corporations that have a stranglehold on our food supply that we – moms, dads, grandparents, students, ordinary citizens – will no longer be kept in the dark about genetically engineered bacteria, viruses, and foreign DNA routinely being laced into our food. We will no longer sit back and allow companies and retailers to label or market GMO-tainted food as “natural” or “all-natural.”

We have a real chance to win in California on November 6. The Biotech industry can’t win in November by buying off politicians because this is a citizens’ ballot initiative. Registered California voters bypassed the legislature to put this on the ballot themselves. Our members and our allies gathered nearly one million signatures – almost twice as many as we needed – to put this issue on the ballot. Polls show that 90 percent of voters support GMO labeling.

Unable to buy their way to victory, Big Biotech and Food Inc. will use their huge war chest to try to scare voters into defeating this initiative. They’ve already cranked up the propaganda machine with the usual lies: Labeling will make food more expensive, family farmers will suffer economically; the law is too confusing, etc.

None of this is true. Almost 50 countries – including Russia, China, Japan and the European Union – require labeling of genetically engineered food and ingredients. Far from the disastrous results that Monsanto would have us believe, labeling has not significantly increased food costs, nor are consumers in those countries confused. Small farmers are doing just fine.

What has happened is this: Once labeling was required by law, millions of consumers rejected GMO-tainted food products. Consequently food manufacturers and retailers stopped selling GMOs. Farmers stopped growing them. Sales of organic products increased significantly. Consumers, empowered with the Right to Know, became more knowledgeable and healthier. Farms and fields became less contaminated. All because companies like Monsanto and Dow, Wal-Mart, Con-Agra, and Kellogg’s were no longer able to force-feed genetically engineered foods to the public.

It is hard to believe that here, in the US, we continue to allow Monsanto and corporate agribusiness to carry out the largest food experiment in history, to literally treat us as like lab rats. It’s time to put an end to this. It’s time to pass the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Foods ballot initiative.

[Positive Vibe Merchant]

the people that work for monsanto I am sure are getting paid handsomely for their effort. And I am sure don't really have conscience when it comes to them having no job.

PVM

[onawah]

Monsanto has been taking a beating lately. :violin: :bounce: :nod: :dance:
Just the beginning, hopefully...
If they can do it in Mexico.....

http://www.nationofchange.org/mexican-farmers-block-monsanto-law-privatize-plants-and-seeds-1337785224


Progressive small farmer organizations in Mexico scored a victory over transnational corporations that seek to monopolize seed and food patents. When the corporations pushed their bill to modify the Federal Law on Plant Varieties through the Committee on Agriculture and Livestock of the Mexican Chamber of Deputies on March 14, organizations of farmers from across the country sounded the alarm. By organizing quickly, they joined together to pressure legislators and achieved an agreement with the legislative committee to remove the bill from the floor.

What’s at stake is free and open access to plant biodiversity in agriculture. The proposed modifications promote a privatizing model that uses patents and “Plant Breeders’ Rights” (PBR) to deprive farmers of the labor of centuries in developing seed. The small farmers who worked to create this foundation of modern agriculture never charged royalties for its use.

Although the current law, in effect since 1996, pays little heed to the rights of small farmers, the new law would be far worse. Present law tends to benefit private-sector plant breeders, allowing monopolies to obtain exclusive profits from the sale of seeds and other plant material for up to 15 years, or 18 in the case of perennial ornamental, forest, or orchard plants–even when the plants they used to develop the new varieties are in the public domain.

The legislative reform would extend exclusive rights from the sale of reproductive material to 25 years. Further, it seeks to restrict the rights of farmers to store or use for their own consumption any part of the harvest obtained from seeds or breeding material purchased from holders of PBRs.

The proposed law would also include genetically modified organisms (GMOs) among the plant varieties covered, converging with the so-called Monsanto Law (Law of Biosecurity and Genetically Modified Organisms). This is an absurd inclusion, since GMOs are created by introducing genetic material from non-plant species.

GMOs cannot be considered a distinct variety, because they do not result from the genetic variability that underlies natural selection. They are the result of manipulation through biotechnology that crosses the boundaries between species and realms. Another absurdity is the private appropriation of genetic information from live organisms, even those altered with genes of other species.

NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.
The proposed law would create a “Monsanto Police,” by giving the National Service for the Inspection and Certification of Seeds the authority to order and conduct inspection visits, demand information, investigate suspected administrative infractions, order and carry out measures to prevent or stop violations of PBR, and impose administrative sanctions, which are increased by the proposal. It would have a government agency promote PBRs held by individuals or corporations.

Holders of PBRs already gain exclusive rights to exploit plant varieties and material for their propagation. The bill under consideration would extend those rights over the products resulting from use of monopolized plant varieties so that, for example, a special license would have to be obtained to use the variety in foods for human consumption or industrial uses.

Farmers Win a Battle, but the Offensive Continues

Now that the regular session has been concluded and the bill wasn’t presented, it will have to wait for a new session. Withdrawal of the bill was a victory for the social organizations over the transnational beneficiaries of the bill, particularly Monsanto.

The battle was won, but the bill is still pending as Monsanto and other large corporations wait for a better time. With Mexican elections just months away, they’re waiting for a time when the political cost of these measures that harm producers’ rights won’t have immediate electoral repercussions.

As now formulated, the reform would further strengthen the legal underpinnings for pillage that the Mexican Congress has been shaping since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) began to be negotiated and then went into effect. The proposed reforms derive directly from the intellectual property agreements contained in annex 1701.3 of NAFTA.

In 2005, the Monsanto Law opened the door for cultivating genetically modified seed in Mexico. The seed is the property of the same transnational corporations that produce the agricultural chemicals used on the GMOs, to their own benefit and the detriment of the food supply, health, and economic well being of the Mexican people.

When the reforms went through the Senate and Chamber committee, members of the Mexican Congress–with the exception of members of the Party of the Democratic Revolution–tossed caution aside and disregarded the warnings of scientists not paid by the transnationals. They decided to forget that small farmers and native peoples, with their ancestral practices of cultivation, selection, and free interchange of seeds, are the ones who created existing plant varieties and are the real owners of the agro-genetic wealth of the country.

Organizations of small farmers declared their opposition because the proposed reforms would deepen the crisis of Mexican agriculture and increase poverty and food dependency, both of which have increased alarmingly under the present administration.

The organizations presented a document to the leaders of all factions in the Chamber of Deputies requesting them to send the proposed law back to Committee. They demanded that the legislature open up a discussion on the inadvisability of continuing to privatize the means of production of foodstuffs, given the Mexican government’s obligation to uphold the right to food.

The right to food was only recently approved as a constitutional reform in Mexico. The United Nations Special Rapporteur for the Right to Food, Olivier De Schutter, anticipated the debate by stressing the need to strengthen the legal framework to oppose the reform on Plant Varieties already approved by Congressional Committee.

In the final report of his visit to Mexico, submitted a few weeks ago, the UN official said that Mexico should approve a law establishing a framework for the right to food, declare a moratorium on planting genetically modified corn, and adopt measures against the monopolization of the production of seeds.

In addition, farmers argue that the nation needs community seed banks and decentralized, participatory programs to conserve agricultural biodiversity. The organizations are preparing to extend the debate and launch legal action against the bill, such as filing injunctions and claims of unconstitutionality, since Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution protects the genetic diversity of species as part of the national patrimony.

[onawah]

Another victory against GMOs
http://climate-connections.org/2012/05/24/victory-richmond-bc-puts-genetically-modified-crops-to-pasture-ge-trees-prohibited/

Victory!: Richmond, BC puts genetically modified crops to pasture–GE trees prohibited

City council endorsed a resolution Tuesday opposing the cultivation of genetically engineered plants and trees in Richmond. Metro Creative Services photo
By Matthew Hoekstra, May 23, 2012
Cross-Posted from the Richmond Review

Genetically modified crops are now unwelcome in Richmond.

City council endorsed a resolution Tuesday opposing the cultivation of genetically engineered plants and trees in Richmond. The resolution states that apart from three existing dairy farms growing genetically modified corn, no further such crops are welcome.

“The city does not have the enforcement powers here. So it is a statement of our intention of our consideration of the matter,” said Mayor Malcolm Brodie.

Regulation of genetically modified crops and food products is a federal responsibility.

“In the most positive sense we would want to work with the agriculture community in general and to make sure that people are educated as to the possible risks and also to work towards getting better information out to consumers,” said Brodie.

There’s little consensus on risks and benefits of genetically engineered plants. According to city staff, a 2008 global review of the available science found a limited number of properly designed studies on the impacts to human health.

City council is nonetheless making a statement.

“We don’t know exactly what the ramifications could be so why take the chance if through a little more thought and searching out alternatives that farmers can grow crops without using genetically modified seeds,” said Brodie.

City council’s resolution, which requires a ratification vote next Monday, also urges senior governments to better manage genetically modified plants through mandatory labelling and greater communication with the public.

Local agrologist Arzeena Hamir advocated for the resolution and called Tuesday’s decision “history in the making.”

“In the ideal world we wouldn’t even have to debate this issue. In the ideal world in Canada products that contain genetically modified ingredients would be labelled and the general public would know what they’re eating.”

Hamir said through choice it would become clear people don’t want these products in their food. But because “we’re all being experimented on” and the federal government hasn’t responded to calls for labelling, it’s up to local governments to respond.

Richmond will be the eighth community in B.C. to adopt such a resolution—and one with the largest agricultural industry—and could lead to more municipal governments to follow.

“When you get a critical mass of communities that have enacted this type of resolution, then you can take it to the provincial level, and then from the province we can then start advocating for a national moratorium, at least,” said Hamir.

Nevertheless, Vancouver Coastal Health officials don’t believe genetically modified food presents a risk to the public.

“There is no public health reason for a ban of genetically engineered trees, plants and crops as proposed in the resolution presented to council,” said the letter, signed by health officers Dalton Cross and Dr. James Lu.

Genetically engineered food products were first approved by Health Canada in 1994. According to health officials, up to 70 per cent of grocery store food has some ingredients derived from genetically engineered organisms.

According to a city staff report, cited benefits of genetically modified food include reduced malnutrition and improved ability to produce affordable food. Risks cited include reduced self sufficiency, higher seed prices, adverse effects on biodiversity and “ethical uneasiness.”

[Robert J. Niewiadomski]

CCD is very convenient for Monsanto's and the likes businesses. If they kill off our little pollinating helpers they will be the only few entities left able to produce any GMO fruits without the bees. And farmers will not be physically able to "pirate" GMO crops... No need for terminator genes.

[onawah]

The first thing I read when I turned on my computer this AM was the following, and it really grabbed my attention.
This info could really turn the tide against Monsanto.
Kudos to Dr. Mercola. This should go viral.

Eating This Could Turn Your Gut into a Living Pesticide Factory
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/05/29/genetically-modified-crops-insects-emerged.aspx?e_cid=20120529_HLNL_art_1


By Dr. Mercola

A new generation of insect larvae is eating the roots of genetically engineered corn intended to be resistant to such pests. The failure of Monsanto's genetically modified Bt corn could be the most serious threat ever to a genetically modified crop in the U.S.

And the economic impact could be huge. Billions of dollars are at stake, as Bt corn accounts for 65 percent of all corn grown in the US.

The strain of corn, engineered to kill the larvae of beetles, such as the corn rootworm, contains a gene copied from an insect-killing bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt.

But even though a scientific advisory panel warned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the threat of insects developing resistance was high, Monsanto argued that the steps necessary to prevent such an occurrence -- which would have entailed less of the corn being planted -- were an unnecessary precaution, and the EPA naively agreed.

According to a recent NPR report:

"The scientists who called for caution now are saying 'I told you so,' because there are signs that a new strain of resistant rootworms is emerging...[A] committee of experts at the EPA is now recommending that biotech companies put into action, for the first time, a 'remedial action plan' aimed at stopping the spread of such resistant insects ...

The EPA's experts also are suggesting that the agency reconsider its approval of a new kind of rootworm-killing corn, which Monsanto calls SmartStax. This new version of Bt corn includes two different Bt genes that are supposed to kill the rootworm in different ways. This should help prevent resistance from emerging, and the EPA is allowing farmers to plant it on up to 95 percent of their corn acres. But if one of those genes is already compromised… such a high percentage of Bt corn could rapidly produce insects that are resistant to the second one, too."

There can be little doubt that genetically engineered crops are the most dangerous aspect of modern agriculture. Not only are we seeing rapid emergence of super-weeds resistant to glyphosate, courtesy of Roundup Ready crops, we now also have evidence of emerging Bt-resistant insects. Add to that the emergence of a brand new organism capable of producing disease and infertility in both plants and animals, and a wide variety of evidence showing harm to human health, and the only reasonable expectation one can glean is that humanity as a whole is being seriously threatened by this foolhardy technology.

Bt Corn—a Most Dangerous Failure

Monsanto's genetically modified "Bt corn" has been equipped with a gene from soil bacteria called Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis), which produces the Bt-toxin. It's a pesticide that breaks open the stomach of certain insects and kills them.

This pesticide-producing corn entered the food supply in the late 1990's, and over the past decade, the horror stories have started piling up. And the problem with Bt crops go far beyond the creation of Bt-resistant insects.

Monsanto and the EPA swore that the genetically engineered corn would only harm insects. The Bt-toxin produced inside the plant would be completely destroyed in the human digestive system and would not have any impact at all on consumers, they claimed. Alas, they've been proven wrong on that account as well, because not only is Bt corn producing resistant "super-pests," researchers have also found that the Bt-toxin can indeed wreak havoc on human health.

Bt-Toxin Now Found in Many People's Blood!

Last year, doctors at Sherbrooke University Hospital in Quebec found Bt-toxin in the blood of:

93 percent of pregnant women tested
80 percent of umbilical blood in their babies, and
67 percent of non-pregnant women

The study authors speculate that the Bt toxin was likely consumed in the normal diet of the Canadian middle class—which makes sense when you consider that genetically engineered corn is present in the vast majority of all processed foods and drinks in the form of high fructose corn syrup. They also suggest that the toxin may have come from eating meat from animals fed Bt corn, which most livestock raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFO, or so-called "factory farms") are.

These shocking results raise the frightening possibility that eating Bt corn might actually turn your intestinal flora into a sort of "living pesticide factory"… essentially manufacturing Bt-toxin from within your digestive system on a continuing basis.

If this hypothesis is correct, is it then also possible that the Bt-toxin might damage the integrity of your digestive tract in the same way it damages insects? Remember, the toxin actually ruptures the stomach of insects, causing them to die. The biotech industry has insisted that the Bt-toxin doesn't bind or interact with the intestinal walls of mammals (which would include humans). But again, there are peer-reviewed published research showing that Bt-toxin does bind with mouse small intestines and with intestinal tissue from rhesus monkeys.

Bt-Toxin Linked to Allergies, Auto-Immune Disease, and More

If Bt genes are indeed capable of colonizing the bacteria living in the human digestive tract, scientists believe it could reasonably result in:

Gastrointestinal problems
Autoimmune diseases
Food allergies
Childhood learning disorders

And lo and behold, all of these health problems are indeed on the rise… The discovery of Bt-toxin in human blood is not proof positive of this link, but it certainly raises a warning flag. And there's plenty of other evidence showing that the Bt-toxin produced in GM corn and cotton plants is toxic to humans and mammals and triggers immune system responses. For example, in government-sponsored research in Italy , mice fed Monsanto's Bt corn showed a wide range of immune responses, such as:

Elevated IgE and IgG antibodies, which are typically associated with allergies and infections
An increase in cytokines, which are associated with allergic and inflammatory responses. The specific cytokines (interleukins) that were found to be elevated are also higher in humans who suffer from a wide range of disorders, from arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, to MS and cancer
Elevated T cells (gamma delta), which are increased in people with asthma, and in children with food allergies, juvenile arthritis, and connective tissue diseases.

Rats fed another of Monsanto's Bt corn varieties called MON 863, also experienced an activation of their immune systems, showing higher numbers of basophils, lymphocytes, and white blood cells. These can indicate possible allergies, infections, toxins, and various disease states including cancer. There were also signs of liver- and kidney toxicity.

Topical versus Internal Toxins

Farmers have used Bt-toxin from soil bacteria as a natural pesticide for years, and biotech companies have therefore claimed that Bt-toxin has a "history of safe use in agriculture." But there's a huge difference between spraying it on plants, where it biodegrades in sunlight and can be carefully washed off, and genetically altering the plant to produce it internally.

Bt crops have the Bt-toxin gene built-in, so the toxin cannot be washed off. You simply cannot avoid consuming it. Furthermore, the plant-produced version of the poison is thousands of times more concentrated than the spray.

There are also peer-reviewed studies showing that natural Bt-toxin from soil bacteria is not a safe pesticide either:

When natural Bt-toxin was fed to mice, they had tissue damage, immune responses as powerful as cholera toxin , and even started reacting to other foods that were formerly harmless.
Farm workers exposed to Bt also showed immune responses .
The EPA's Bt Plant-Pesticides Risk and Benefits Assessment, created by their expert Scientific Advisory Panel, states that "Bt proteins could act as antigenic and allergenic sources."

Do You Know what You're Eating?

Did you know that two years ago, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called on all physicians to prescribe diets without genetically modified (GM) foods to all patients?

They sure did, although few doctors seem to have gotten the memo. They also called for a moratorium on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), long-term independent studies, and labeling, stating:

"Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food, including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. …There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation…"


READ THE REST AT THE LINK

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/05/29/genetically-modified-crops-insects-emerged.aspx?e_cid=20120529_HLNL_art_1

[mountain_jim]

In a related note, no surprise the EU is working on behalf on Monsanto's profits (and efforts to radically reduce the population?)

http://www.infowars.com/blatant-corruption-exposed-as-eu-blocks-frances-ban-on-monsantos-gmo-maize/

http://www.trueactivist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/no-gmo.jpg



Blatant Corruption Exposed as EU Blocks France’s Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize

Anthony Gucciardi
Prisonplanet.com
Thursday, May 24, 2012

Just after France legislators and officials moved to ban Monsanto’s genetically modified strain of GMO maize over environmental and health concerns, the European Union has decided to step in and re-secure Monsanto’s presence in the country — against the very will of the nation itself. This should come as no surprise when considering the fact that the United States ambassador to France, a business partner to George W. Bush, stated back in 2007 that nations who did not accept Monsanto’s GMO crops will be ‘penalized’. In fact, ambassador Craig Stapleton went as far as to say that the nations should be threatened with military-styled trade wars.


That’s right, it appears the reason for the unprecedented move to maintain Monsanto’s deeply-rooted foothold in France has to do with the fact that the United States and other nations are continually pushing Monsanto’s agenda — even going as far as to threaten military-styled trade wars to those who oppose the company. Monsanto has major connections with political heads that have actually threatened trade wars against nations opposed to GMOs on record. As I reported back in January, WikiLeaks cables surfaced revealing and startling information concerning Monsanto’s deep involvement with back-end politics.

One of the most telling details involves a statement made by Craig Stapleton, in which he said:

“Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory. Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices.”

And that is not even the most shocking part. WikiLeaks cables go on to state that United States diplomats actually work directly for Monsanto, furthering the agenda of the company across the globe. Is it any wonder that France is being assaulted by the EU over its decision to secure the health of its citizens?

It becomes even more obvious when examining the ridiculous reasoning as to why the EU had to step in and block France’s in-house legislation. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) rejected the ban on the grounds that “there is no scientific evidence” that shows “risk to human and animal health or the environment.” Of course there is an overwhelming amount of research showing that Monsanto’s creations do in fact threaten not only human health, but the planet as a whole. Even the EPA has warned over the fact that Monsanto’s GMO crops are spawning ‘mutant’ resistant insects and subsequently requiring substantially more pesticides.

Consumers are waking up to Monsanto’s agenda and the dangers associated with their modified creations. Over 45,000 comments were submitted on the USDA website in opposition to Monsanto’s new genetically modified strain, and only 23 in favor. The corruption of Monsanto is now out in the open, and only serves to show how deeply rooted the company is within the United States government. Is it any coincidence that a major head of the FDA was a leading employee of Monsanto?

This post first appeared at Natural Society

[onawah]

Wow, if the Eu did that to France, I wonder what they will do to Poland?

[Robert J. Niewiadomski]

There was a public hearing on April 23rd 2012 in Polish parliament (Sejm). All participants agreed to introduce ban on GMO crops into statute regulating seeds use. If the ban will not be introduced we will go with casseroles into the streets :)