Issues affecting us all!
Watchdog Calls on USDA to Boost Transparency in Organic Governance
Secretary Vilsack Asked to Balance Public's Interest with Corporate Involvement
CORNUCOPIA, WIS: In a move to protect the growing organic industry from undue corporate influence, a leading organic watchdog group released a letter, dated June 7, calling on the USDA to collaborate with the organic community on pending appointments to the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB).
The Cornucopia Institute, and other organic advocates, have long been concerned that representatives from corporate agribusiness have obtained a disproportionate influence on rulemaking at the USDA.
"During the Bush administration we saw crass politics, at its worst, in play during the NOSB appointment process," said Will Fantle, Codirector of The Cornucopia Institute.
In one instance, an employee of General Mills was nominated to fill a slot on the board that Congress had earmarked for a consumer representative. "Abuses of this nature are repugnant to the organic community and certainly betray the letter and spirit of the Organic Foods Production Act, the law passed by Congress giving the USDA authority to oversee the industry," added Fantle.
Although Cornucopia and other independent industry observers have been overwhelmingly satisfied with the new direction the Obama administration has taken in staffing the National Organic Program, and responding to criticism over past ethical lapses in management, including a recent audit by the Inspector General's office, not all stakeholders have been pleased with the NOSB nominating/appointment process.
In 2009, the first time the Obama/Vilsack administration at the USDA named new NOSB members, they continued the Bush administration policy of keeping secret the nominees and the related corporations or organizations they work for or represent.
Some in the organic community feel that the lack of openness in the appointment process has resulted in some important missteps that have hurt the credibility of the board and its work. "Keeping nominees and their affiliations secret raises questions of the process that is a slap in the face to organic principles," said Rebecca Goodman, a certified organic dairy farmer from Wonewoc, Wisconsin.
Goodman had been nominated to the farmer-slot on the board. But instead of choosing one of the legitimate certified organic farmers, widely respected and viewed as qualified and who were under consideration at the time, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack chose an animal husbandry specialist employed by one of the largest organic livestock product marketers in the country.
While this appointee had grown up on a conventional farm, her immediate occupation is not that of an active organic farmer.
"The PhD scientist chosen for that NOSB producer-slot certainly can add an important perspective, but her appointment reduces the voice of actual organic farmers on the board who are, arguably, the most important stakeholders in the industry," lamented Fantle.
There is widespread concern that these appointments marginalize the voices of consumers and farmers who have built this industry, and places a disproportionate control of national organic policy in the hands of board members working for multinational for-profit enterprises like Whole Foods, Earthbound Farms, Quality Assurance International, Organic Valley, Philips Mushrooms and Campbell Soup.
"Those serving on the NOSB would most ideally be producers and consumers who are on the front line of implementing and reviewing the rules, not those who would appear to have a financial interest in the outcome of the rules implemented," said Goodman.
"Many of the corporate organizations that are represented on the board sell just a few percentage points of their product lines as organic," said Fantle. "Other marketers and farmers, whose livelihoods are dependent upon the effort to maintain the integrity of the organic label, might view this as a conflict of interest."
The Cornucopia Institute’s letter to Secretary Vilsack said the reason they are calling on the USDA to make these nominations public is because they, and many other stakeholders in the industry, know that many eminently qualified candidates have in the past been passed over because they did not have the political clout to be appointed.
"We simply want the organic community to be able to help Secretary Vilsack choose the very best candidates available for the NOSB," added Fantle.
Cornucopia's letter went on to say that although they are an aggressive governmental and corporate watchdog they are in no way "anticorporate." They state there are many examples of larger corporations that subscribe to the ethical foundation of the organic movement. But both the Bush and Obama administrations have given disproportionate prominence on the NOSB to major corporate players. "Without denigrating Whole Foods, and their commitment to organics, you have to question why this giant corporation again has a seat on the board, whereas the approximately 275 consumer-owned cooperatives, with hundreds of thousands of members and shoppers, have again been shut out," Goodman said.
Access this news release here.
POM Wonderful in Trouble with the FDA!
From the Moss Report, March 21, 2010: It has now been seven years since the Journal of the National Cancer Institute asked, rhetorically, if pomegranate were "nature's power fruit." There have now been at least 30 scientific articles on the anticancer potential of pomegranate. One company, Pom Wonderful, has been spending some of its hard-earned money furthering research in this field. Their "reward" came February 23, 2010 when the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a scathing 10-page warning letter, declaring POM Wonderful juice to be an unproven "drug," and demanding that the company stop providing health information relating to pomegranate on the company Web site.
According to the warning letter, "FDA's review found serious violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act." To understand this, you have to follow FDA's reasoning process. Each bottle of POM Wonderful juice understandably gives the company's Web address, www.pomwonderful.com. This Web site then cites various scientific studies that support the idea that pomegranate juice is a healthful beverage. According to FDA logic, this constitutes advertising. In regard to prostate cancer, the company states the following:
"In a clinical study involving 46 men with rising PSA after prostate cancer treatment (surgery or radiation) who consumed 8 ounces of POM Wonderful 100% Pomegranate Juice daily over two years, PSA doubling time increased from 15 to 54 months....PSA doubling time is an indicator of prostate cancer progression."
These are truthful statements, derived from a 2006 phase II clinical trial conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). There were 14 coauthors on this study, which was published in Clinical Cancer Research (Pantuck 2006).
But according to FDA, the mere act of citing a scientific study automatically constitutes a form of advertising and turns an innocuous and healthful drink into a drug. Why? "When scientific publications are used commercially by the seller of a product to promote the product to consumers," they say, "such publications may become evidence of the product's intended use....The citation implies treatment or prevention of a disease."
POM Wonderful is not just a drug, but a "misbranded drug." Why? Because, according to FDA, "POM Wonderful 100% Pomegranate Juice and POMx products are offered for conditions that are not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners; therefore, adequate directions for use cannot be written so that a layperson can use these drugs safely for their intended purposes. Thus, your products are misbranded...in that the labeling for these drugs fails to bear adequate directions for use."
In other words, a person with prostate cancer cannot possibly 'treat' his own cancer because he is not a medical practitioner. Pomegranate juice is intended for use by the general public. Therefore no adequate label could be written for it, since de facto no layperson could possibly understand or interpret such instructions.
Truly, this whole situation with FDA has gotten out of hand. It would require the writings of a great satirist, such as a Jonathan Swift or a Kurt Vonnegut, to capture the absurdity of the situation. A harmless juice, which has already demonstrated some huge health benefits, is arbitrarily reclassified as a drug, and then declared "misbranded" because no patient (other than a medical doctor) is by definition allowed to treat cancer, even his own.
Meanwhile, FDA avoids a few larger problems that in a saner world might capture its attention. I could mention a couple of dozen of them, but will simply point out that E. coli bacteria are running rampant through the entire food supply. In November there was a recall of 546,000 pounds of contaminated ground beef in Connecticut, Maine and Massachusetts. This was only the tip of a huge iceberg of truly dangerous food products. But people who are trying to improve the health of the public are maligned and hampered by governmental agents.
Moss Report, March 28, 2010: What I find particularly galling is that at the same time as these FDA attacks on POM Wonderful the National Cancer Institute (NCI) is striving to get Americans to prevent cancer by consuming more fruits and vegetables. "People whose diets are rich in plant foods such as fruits and vegetables have a lower risk of getting cancers of the mouth, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, stomach, lung, and there is some suggested evidence for colon, pancreas, and prostate," NCI states at its Web site. "They are also less likely to get diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension. A diet high in fruits and vegetables helps to reduce calorie intake and may help to control weight." Indeed.
"To help prevent these cancers and other chronic diseases, experts recommend 4 to 13 servings of fruits and vegetables daily, depending on energy needs," NCI adds. "This includes 2 to 5 servings of fruits," including presumably pomegranates. In actual fact, however, only "32.6% of adults consumed fruit two or more times per day and 27.2% ate vegetables three or more times per day" (CDC 2005 figures).
But when a private company is able to motivate tens of thousands of people to increase their intake of a perfectly healthful beverage, and to accurately report scientific findings about that juice, they are viciously attacked by another branch of government. The government, and legislators in both parties, profess concern over the rising burden of health care, including its cost. Yet they allow rampant attacks on companies whose actions, at worst, are harmless, and at best could lead to a major improvement in public health. We live in a topsy-turvy world.
© Ralph W. Moss, from the Moss Reports
Action & Information Alerts!
Aspartame Revisited
A Dangerous Spin on the Cancer Risks of a Sugar-Free Sweetener
CHICAGO, IL, January 5, 2010 --/WORLD-WIRE/-- The Cancer Prevention Coalition notes with alarm that on January 2 this year, in a heavily advertised special health-theme issue of People Magazine, Kraft announced a new campaign on Crystal Light, a sugarless powdered drink mix which can easily be poured into tap and bottled water drinks. Crystal Light's ingredients include the artificial sweetener aspartame, under the trademark names of NutraSweet and Equal, besides citric acid and sodium citrate.
Cancer Prevention Coalition Chairman Dr. Samuel S. Epstein warns that, based on scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed journals and presented to the U.S. Congress, aspartame is both toxic and carcinogenic. The coalition is calling upon the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban all dietary uses of aspartame.
Crystal Light was first marketed in 1982 to "make drinking water more enjoyable," and much less caloric than fruit juices. Aspartame, 200 times sweeter than sugar, is also widely used as a sweetener in tea and coffee, especially by the weight conscious.
Aspartame was synthesized by G.D. Searle in 1965 after its strong sweet taste was first noted.
Subsequent toxicology tests by Searle revealed brain damage in mice, and cancer in the liver, testes and thyroid of rats. However, the results of these tests were never published nor reported to the FDA.
After saccharin, aspartame is the second most widely used artificial sweetener in the world. It is found in more than 6,000 products including carbonated and powdered soft drinks, hot chocolate, chewing gum, candy, desserts, yogurt, and tabletop sweeteners, as well as some pharmaceutical products like vitamins and sugar-free cough drops.
Aspartame is consumed by over 200 million people worldwide and represents about 60% of the artificial sweetener market.
Aspartame provides manufacturers of food, soft drinks, candy and chewing gum with substantial cost savings compared to sugar, which is 200 times less sweet. Aspartame also is a sweetener without calories, which helps people control their weight.
In 1975, a FDA Task Force conducted a comprehensive review of the scientific literature on the toxicity of aspartame. This revealed gross abuse in Searle's claims which trivialized or suppressed evidence on the toxic and carcinogenic effects of aspartame.
In January 1976, then FDA Commissioner Alexander M. Schmidt testified before Congress that Hazleton Laboratories, under contract to Searle, had been charged with falsifying toxicological data on aspartame.
The FDA convened a Public Board of Inquiry to review concerns about the sweetener's carcinogenic effects in experimental animals. In 1980, the Board concluded that aspartame could "contribute to the development brain tumors." The FDA then recommended that, pending confirmation of these findings, the sweetener should no longer be used.
Evidence of these toxic effects was subsequently confirmed by leading independent U.S. scientists. Reacting to these concerns in 1976, Senator Edward Kennedy warned, "This extensive nature of the almost unbelievable range of abuses in several major Searle products is profoundly disturbing."
At invited 1979 testimony before the House Committee on the Judiciary, apart from other examples of corporate crime, Dr. Epstein detailed evidence on Searle's criminal denial of the carcinogenicity of aspartame. This evidence was subsequently posted in the Congressional Record.
In 1996, based on a comprehensive review of the scientific literature, Dr. John Olney, a leading independent U.S. scientist, confirmed that aspartame caused brain cancer when fed to rodents.
A decade later, Dr. Epstein points out, the prestigious Italian Ramazzini Foundation, based on large scale life-long feeding tests in large numbers of rats, commencing in infancy, confirmed that low levels of aspartame induced brain cancer and cancers at other sites. The Ramazzini study was reported in the November 2005 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives, the peer-reviewed journal of the United States' National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
"Our study has shown that aspartame is a multi-potential carcinogenic compound whose carcinogenic effects are also evident at a daily dose less than the current acceptable daily intake for humans," the Ramazzini scientists warned.
Of further significance, these conclusions were endorsed by the Federal National Toxicology Program, says Dr. Epstein. "Nevertheless, and not surprisingly, Searle and its consultants still attempt to challenge these conclusions, and persist in their reckless claim that aspartame is safe."
"In view of the unequivocal scientific evidence of aspartame's carcinogenicity, besides the political gamesmanship that led to its original approval by the FDA," Dr. Epstein says, "it is anticipated that Dr. Margaret Hamburg, the new FDA Commissioner, will ban all dietary uses of aspartame."
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. is professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health; Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition; and a former President of the Rachel Carson Trust. His awards include the 1989 Right Livelihood Award and the 2005 Albert Schweitzer Golden Grand Medal for International Contributions to Cancer Prevention. Dr. Epstein has authored 270 scientific articles, and 15 books on the causes and prevention of cancer. These include the groundbreaking Politics of Cancer (1979), and most recently Toxic Beauty (2009, Benbella Books) about carcinogens and other toxic ingredients in cosmetics and personal care products.
CONTACT:
Samuel S. Epstein, MD
Professor emeritus Environmental & Occupational Medicine
University of Illinois Chicago School of Public Health
Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition
Chicago, Illinois 60612
Tel: 312-996-2297
Email: epstein@uic.edu
Web: http://www.preventcancer.com
To subscribe: http://ens-news.net/lists/?p=subscribe&id=9
Copyright © 2009, World-Wire. All rights reserved.
U.N. Passes Resolution:
2012 is
an International Year of Cooperatives
The United Nations today passed a resolution declaring 2012 the International Year of Cooperatives, the first time this international body has made such a declaration.
While the final version of the resolution will not be available online for several days, NCBA obtained a draft version of the resolution, and learned that in the final version no changes were made. Look for the final version of the resolution on NCBA's Web site in several days.
The resolution comes at a time of great fragility for the world’s economy.
“Co-ops help people of all means, from all walks of life, work together for a common good,” said Paul Hazen, NCBA’s president and chief executive officer. “That’s why they’re not only so attractive in the U.S., but in countries around the world.”
While Hazen and several co-ops in the U.S. advocated domestic support, much of the work was done by members of the International Co-operative Alliance, as well as other international cooperatives. Together, the worldwide cooperative movement drew up more than enough U.N. support to pass the resolution.
“We at NCBA want to thank all the co-ops that helped lobby for the resolution. This never would have happened without so many co-ops working together,” Hazen said.
Previous U.N. observances have included the International Year of Microcredit in 2005, an event which preceded by one year Muhammad Yunus’ and the Grameen Bank’s reception of the Nobel Peace Prize, which they received for their work in microcredit lending.
Keep an eye on the Co-op's Website in the coming days for more announcements about the International Year of Cooperatives.
Giant Organic Livestock Operation
Decertified by USDA
Federal Organic Enforcement Hammer Falls Hard to Protect Farmers/Consumers
WASHINGTON, DC: In an investigation and legal case that dragged on for almost four years, one of the largest organic cattle producers in the United States, Promiseland Livestock, LLC, was suspended from organic commerce, along with its owner and key employees, for four years. The penalty was part of an order issued by administrative law judge Peter Davenport in Washington, DC on November 25.
Promiseland, a multimillion dollar operation with facilities in Missouri and Nebraska, including over 13,000 acres of crop land, and managing 22,000 head of beef and dairy cattle, had been accused of multiple improprieties in formal legal complaints, including not feeding organic grain to cattle, selling fraudulent organic feed and "laundering" conventional cattle as organic.
"We are pleased that justice has been served in the Promiseland matter," said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst for the Wisconsin-based Cornucopia Institute. Scrutiny from Cornucopia, one of the industry's most aggressive independent watchdogs, was part of the genesis for the comprehensive USDA investigation and subsequent legal proceedings.
Promiseland became the focus of Cornucopia's investigation into giant factory farms, milking thousands of cows, that were allegedly operating illegally. Promiseland sold thousands of dairy cows to giant factory dairy farms owned by Dean Foods (Horizon Organic), Natural Prairie Dairy in Texas and Aurora Dairy based in Colorado. Aurora and Natural Prairie supply private-label, store-brand milk for Wal-Mart, Costco, Target and major supermarket chains such as HEB, Safeway and Harris Teeter.
"It appears that it was the investigation into improprieties by Aurora that finally led to the hammer coming down on Promiseland," Kastel observed. Aurora operates five dairies in Texas and Colorado and was found by USDA investigators to have "willfully" violated 14 tenets of federal organic regulations in 2007. However, Bush administration officials let the $100 million corporate dairy continue in operation under a one-year probation.
"It's sad that the civil servants at the USDA, who had recommended Aurora be decertified, were overruled," Kastel lamented. "They should have been banned from organic commerce the same way Promiseland, and its owner Tony Zeman, now have been."
Although Cornucopia has praise for the professionalism of law enforcement agents at the USDA, and the career staff at the National Organic Program (NOP), who carried out the Aurora and Promiseland investigations, the farm policy research group has harshly criticized past management at the USDA which allowed Promiseland, and Aurora, to operate illegally for years.
"From formal legal complaints that we filed, Bush Administration officials at the USDA were alerted, starting in January 2005, to the alleged improprieties by massive factory farms masquerading as organic," said Will Fantle, Research Director for The Cornucopia Institute.
Documents secured under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by The Cornucopia Institute indicate that the initial investigation was squashed for political reasons by Dr. Barbara Robinson, who until recently directed the USDA's organic program.
"It is inexcusable that these improprieties took place for so long and that justice was delayed," said Gary Cox, an attorney who represents Cornucopia. "Ethical organic dairy farmers have been placed at a distinct competitive disadvantage and consumers were obviously taken advantage of."
An investigation by the Office of Inspector General at the USDA, focusing in part on the relationship between Robinson and prominent agribusiness lobbyist and lawyer Jay Friedman, was profiled in a July 3 Washington Post story. Friedman, in addition to representing Aurora and Dean Foods, also was the lawyer for Promiseland when they were targeted by the USDA for investigation.
New documents made public have prompted Cornucopia to prepare additional legal complaints asking the USDA to focus attention now on Quality Assurance International (QAI), the certifier for Promiseland when many of the alleged abuses took place.
"This is not the first time QAI has been suspected of incompetence or improperly accommodating corporate agribusiness," said Fantle. The Robinson, Friedman and QAI connection is part of an investigation by the USDA's Inspector General. QAI also certifies portions of Aurora's operation and Dean Foods' corporate-owned industrial dairies.
"However grim it sounds, this investigation and the legal proceeding illustrate that if organic stakeholders are persistent, the system works," Kastel said.
Cornucopia and other organic policy groups have been delighted by what they have called a "decisive shift" that has taken place since Obama administration officials have taken over at the USDA and its organic program.
At a recent industry meeting in Washington, D.C., Miles McEvoy, USDA Deputy Administrator and the new director of the National Organic Program, stated emphatically that we were now entering the "age of enforcement" at the NOP.
"We started asking for new management at the organic program in 2004," said Kastel. "We had suggested that they go outside of the Department to gain the needed expertise from someone who was universally respected by participants in the organic industry. We couldn't have asked for a more qualified candidate than Mr. McEvoy."
In addition to investigating QAI, Cornucopia has formally asked USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack to reopen the Aurora matter, alleging that the consent agreement allowing their probation included illegally favorable provisions. The farm policy group also asked that complaints involving Dean Foods and its Horizon label, which had languished under the Bush administration since early 2005, now also be actively investigated by the new administration.
"We think that organic consumers and the family farmers who have built this industry have good reason to be optimistic and confident that from this point forward, when they see the organic seal on a product, they know that the public servants in Washington share their steadfast desire to maintain the integrity of the organic label," Fantle stated.
It appears that QAI, the certifying agent, did not act in the Promiseland matter until they were compelled to do so by USDA investigators, even though court records indicate that QAI had reported they knew of "significant audit trail deficiencies" as early as 2005.
"If I'd been guilty of just one of these 'willful' violations, my farm would've been shut down in a New York minute," said Bruce Drinkman, a farmer from Glenwood City, Wisconsin and board member of the Midwest Organic Dairy Producers Alliance.
"Rumors swirled for years about shady practices by Tony Zeman," said Bill Welsh, long-time Iowa organic livestock producer, Cornucopia board member and former member of the USDA's National Organic Standards Board. "Many of the major players that bought meat and dairy replacement animals knew very well what the allegations were and chose, during a period of time when supply was extremely tight, to look the other way. I'm sure there's some heavy soul-searching going on right now."
At the time the legal action was finally brought against Promiseland, in June 2008, Cornucopia and other industry observers were highly critical that the Bush USDA only asked for a suspension of Promiseland, and its owner Anthony J. Zeman, in lieu of requesting a permanent decertification of the operation. The USDA and the administrative law judge both found Zeman and Promiseland had "willfully" violated federal law.
In addition, the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 gave the USDA the right to fine operators like Zeman up to $10,000 per incident for willful violations of the law. They could have levied millions of dollars worth of fines but failed to do so.
"Enforcement actions of this nature should serve as a strong deterrent to other industry scofflaws," said Kastel. "We lament the failure of the past administration to aggressively carry out the will of Congress in this regard."
"Like Al Capone, they didn't actually convict Zeman and Promiseland of actually cheating in organics," Kastel said.
Promiseland was found guilty of not allowing USDA investigators to audit and inspect their financial and organic operating records. "The "audit trail" is the backbone of organic certification," said Fantle. "Obviously, they had something to hide!"
Al Capone was not convicted of murder or racketeering but rather of federal tax evasion.
The USDA's decertification order can be viewed at:
http://www.cornucopia.org/USDA/Promiseland_Judgement.pdf
This article from: The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, that is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
Hungering for a True Thanksgiving
Published on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 by TruthDig.com — by Amy Goodman
"In the next 60 seconds, 10 children will die of hunger," says a United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) online video. It continues, "For the first time in humanity, over 1 billion people are chronically hungry."
The WFP launched the Billion for a Billion campaign this week, urging the 1 billion people who use the Internet to help the billion who are hungry. But if you think that hunger is far from our shores, here is some food for thought ... and action: The U.S. Department of Agriculture released a report Monday stating that in 2008 one in six households in the U.S. was "food insecure," the highest number since the figures were first gathered in 1995.
Economist Raj Patel, author of "Stuffed and Starved: Markets, Power and the Hidden Battle for the World's Food System ," told me he was "gobsmacked" by the U.S. hunger numbers, which he finds appalling: "The reason that we have this huge increase in hunger in the United States, as around the world, isn't because there isn't enough food around. Actually, we produced a pretty reliable solid crop last year. ... The reason people go hungry is because of poverty."
In addition to the online campaign, the United Nations is hosting the World Summit on Food Security in Rome this week, hoping to unite world leaders on the cause of eliminating hunger. Patel remarked on the U.N. summit, "They're making all the right sounds about hunger around the world, but as some of the activists outside that summit are saying, poor people can't eat promises."
Almost 700 people from 93 countries, many of whom are small-scale food producers, have gathered outside the U.N. summit. They are there in behalf of the People's Food Sovereignty Forum, and they are pushing for small-scale, organic, sustainable food-sovereignty and food-security programs, as opposed to large-scale agribusiness with its dependence on genetically modified organisms and chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Michelle Obama said last March when planting the White House's organic kitchen garden, "It is so important for them [children] to get regular fruits and vegetables in their diets, because it does have nutrients, it does make you strong, it is all brain food." The first lady of the U.S. made the point that a homegrown, organic garden is a sustainable and affordable way to strengthen family food security.
This has led some to wonder, then, why her husband has appointed Islam Siddiqui to be the U.S. chief agricultural negotiator. Siddiqui is currently vice president for science and regulatory affairs for CropLife America, the main pesticide industry trade association. According to the Pesticide Action Network of North America, "This position will enable him to keep pushing chemical pesticides, inappropriate biotechnologies, and unfair trade arrangements on nations that do not want and can least afford them." It was CropLife's mid-America division that circulated an e-mail to industry members after Michelle Obama's garden announcement, saying, "While a garden is a great idea, the thought of it being organic made Janet Braun, CropLife Ambassador Coordinator, and I shudder."
Jacques Diouf, director-general of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, engaged in a 24-hour hunger strike over the weekend, before the food security summit kicked off. He said in a statement, "We have the technical means and the resources to eradicate hunger from the world so it is now a matter of political will, and political will is influenced by public opinion." Diouf has estimated that it would take $44 billion per year to end hunger globally, compared with the less than $8 billion pledged recently to that goal. Juxtapose those numbers with the amount being spent by the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan.
According to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, the U.S. has spent on average about $265 million per day in Afghanistan since the invasion of that country in 2001 (which is a much lower estimate than that provided by Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and others). Even at that rate, five months of military spending by the U.S. would meet Diouf's goal, and that would be if the U.S. were the sole contributor.
Consider pausing this Thanksgiving, which for many in the U.S. is a major feast, to reflect on the 10 children who die of hunger every minute, and how your elected officials are spending hundreds of billions in public funds on war.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column. © 2009 Amy Goodman Amy Goodman is the host of "Democracy Now! ," a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 800 stations in North America. She was awarded the 2008 Right Livelihood Award, dubbed the “Alternative Nobel” prize, and received the award in the Swedish Parliament in December.
Nanotechnology: The Secret You Can’t See
For any of us old Star Trek fans, the prefix nano- might be familiar. In that case, it was applied to nanobots, extremely tiny bits of high technology that could invade a body or a computer with extreme ease due to their size. The prefix actually means “billionth”—a nanometer, for example, would be one billionth of a meter, and one inch would equal 25,400,000 of them.
Whether nanotechnology is a blessing or a curse, it is now with us and is being used in products that can allow these tiny particles to enter the human body. On top of that, all of the science that has been used to develop nanotechnology is proprietary, and regulations do not require that it be made public.
It’s even difficult to find a simple definition of the term. So Organic Connections turned to George Kimbrell, staff attorney for the Center for Food Safety and the organization’s resident expert on nanotechnology. “I think part of the problem is that there’s not one definition or an agreed-upon one, but different variations on it,” Kimbrell explained. “I think that they all have the same gist, though. The one I usually use is ‘Nanotechnology is the design and manipulation of materials at the atomic and molecular level. It’s science and technology at the level of natural interaction, and the control, design and manipulation of that.’”
Such technology is already being applied to consumer products. “In sunscreens, for example, you take titanium oxide or zinc oxide and you get it down to about 200 nanometers and it’s no longer white—it’s cosmetically clear,” Kimbrell said. “It becomes transparent. They put it into sunscreens to take advantage of that new, novel property.”
Nanotechnology has also made its way into food production. “We’re seeing a lot of nanotech in food packaging,” said Kimbrell. “Nanosilver is the leading antimicrobial, and it’s being incorporated into packaging as well as cleaners. Silver has the age-old propensity to be a great germ killer, and when you shrink silver down and insert it into materials, it’s like silver on steroids, or ‘supersilver.’ Because interaction takes place at the nano scale, it’s much more effective in killing germs.”
The major problem with nanotechnology is that it has not been tested for its effect on humans or the environment. “We haven’t had any experience regulating these materials,” Kimbrell stated. “We don’t quite understand why they are the way they are. With the nanosilver, for example, it’s a great germ killer, but what happens when it gets released out into the environment? We know that it’s going to have the same effect on beneficial microorganisms at the bottom of the food chain—for example, in aquatic systems. That’s a big concern.
“With the sunscreens, we know that when you put the zinc oxide or titanium oxide nanoparticles in there it makes them clear because they’re so small. But does that now mean they can penetrate the skin? Your hair follicles are 20 nanometers wide. If you had sunscreen that had materials in it that were smaller than that, theoretically they could go into your body and circulate with a mobility that larger materials don’t have.
“So the same new properties that excite industry also create these significant yet unexplored environmental and human health risks.”
There are currently 720 products containing nanomaterials on the market, and it is estimated that by 2014 commercial nanotechnology will be a $2.6 trillion business. Despite this, there is not one government in the world with regulations requiring nanomaterials be subject to new safety assessments prior to commercial release.
A searchable database at www.nanotechproject.org/inventories/consumer/ allows anyone to enter a specific type of product and find out if nanotechnology is being used in its packaging. There are also many reports on where nanotechnology is being targeted.
“Unfortunately, the thousand or so products listed on the database only comprise the tip of the iceberg, in our view,” said Kimbrell. “The database merely identifies products that have publicly disclosed that they are using nanotechnology—I think there are many more under the radar. Right now, regulators aren’t requiring any labeling, so we don’t really know.”
For more information about nanotechnology, visit
www.truefoodnow.org
www.foe.org/healthy-people/nanotechnology-campaign
www.nanotechproject.org
from Organic Connections Magazine
Milk Safety in the News Again
CHICAGO, IL, October 14, 2009 --/WORLD-WIRE/-- The Cancer Prevention Coalition is criticizing a widely publicized recent report, "Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin" (rBST) which claims that milk from cows injected with this genetically engineered hormone is safe.
The report was authored by eight paid consultants to rBST companies, including Elanco and Monsanto, points out Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition. "All of these consultants were paid for their so-called 'safety assessments,'" he says.
The hormone rBST is injected in about 20% of U.S. dairy cows to increase milk production. While the industry claims that the hormone is safe for cows, and that the milk is safe for consumers, this is "blatantly false," says Dr Epstein, who authored the 2006 book, "What's In Your Milk?" (Trafford Publishing).
Dr. Epstein warns: rBST makes cows sick. Monsanto has been forced to admit to about 20 toxic effects, including mastitis, on the label of Posilac, the rBST product that when administered to cows makes them produce more milk. Monsanto's Posilac product was acquired by Eli Lilly in 2008. rBST milk is contaminated by pus, due to mastitis, an infection of the udder commonly induced by the hormone, and also by antibiotics used to treat the mastitis. rBST milk is chemically and nutritionally different than natural milk. Milk from cows injected with rBST is contaminated with the hormone, traces of which are absorbed through the gut into the blood of people who consume this milk or products made from it. rBST milk is supercharged with high levels of the natural growth factor (IGF-1), which is readily absorbed through the gut. Excess levels of IGF-1 have been incriminated in well-documented scientific publications as causes of breast, colon, and prostate cancers.
Additionally, IGF-1 blocks natural defense mechanisms against early submicroscopic cancers. Cancer Prevention Coalition warnings of these risks in 1990 were endorsed by the National Family Farm Coalition, representing 30 organizations, and also by the Campaign Against rBST, representing 10 organizations.
A 2007 Cancer Prevention Coalition petition to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), "Seeking Withdrawal of the New Animal Drug application for rBST," was endorsed by the Organic Consumers Association, Farm Defenders, and the Institute for Responsible Technology.
Nevertheless, the FDA has remained indifferent to these risks, in spite of longstanding Congressional concerns.
Illustrative is the 1986 Congressional report, "Human Food Safety and Regulation of Animal Drugs," by the House Committee on Government Operations. This report concluded that the "FDA has consistently disregarded its responsibility... has repeatedly put what it perceives are interests of veterinarians and the livestock industry ahead of its legal obligations to protect consumers - jeopardizing the health and safety of consumers of meat and milk."
Of particular concern are risks to infants and children in view of their high susceptibility to cancer-causing ingredients in consumer products, warns Dr. Epstein.
Dr. Epstein says these risks are readily avoidable by consuming organic milk. According to The Hartman Group, a prominent Seattle consulting firm, organic milk is now among the first organic product that consumers buy. Organic milk is also becoming increasingly available, with an annual growth rate of about 20%, while overall milk consumption is dropping by 10%.
"Nevertheless," Dr. Epstein emphasizes, "only a few schools make organic milk available, nor do most state governments, under low-income food programs, particularly by the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children."
Wal-Mart is now the biggest seller of certified organic milk, followed by Horizon Organic, owned by Dean Foods, the nation's largest dairy producer, and by Groupe Danone, the leading French dairy company.
While growth in this market is still held back by the higher price of organic milk, this problem is likely to be resolved by Wal-Mart's competitive pricing.
In sharp contrast to the United States, the European Union nations as well as Norway, Switzerland, New Zealand, Japan, and Canada all have banned the use and imports of hormonal milk and dairy products.
This news release has been sent to state governors and senior officials in all 50 state health departments as well as to senior federal officials in all relevant agencies, and also staff members of relevant Congressional committees.
It is anticipated that Dr. Margaret Hamburg, the highly respected new Commissioner of the FDA, will take prompt action to protect the unsuspecting public from the dangers of rBST milk.
CONTACT: Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition Professor emeritus Environmental & Occupational Medicine University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health Chicago, Illinois Tel: 312-996-2297 Email: epstein@uic.edu www.preventcancer.com
Copyright © 2009, World-Wire. All rights reserved. Issuers of news releases and not World-Wire are solely responsible for the accuracy of the content. World-Wire is a resource provided by Environment News Service
Woman’s Shattered Life Shows
Ground Beef Inspection Flaws
While the USDA fiddles, spending countless millions of taxpayer dollars forcing their NAIS "Mark of the Beast" agenda onto traditional farmers and their livestock, Industrial Ag is busy torching Rome (Washington politicians and bureaucrats) with its filthy campaign contributions, payoffs, lobbyists, etc. To the point that Walmart, now the largest retailer in the US, can buy so-called burger from Cargill, now the largest privately held company in the US, and label this swill as American Chef's Angus Beef Patties containing only one ingredient, beef; when in point of fact it's a deadly international blend of slaughterhouse floor sweepings, cereal and spices, laced with E. Coli bacterium. Its time the people of this country felt the same outrage that Stephanie Smith feels everyday in her wheelchair! Be sure to watch the video clip too. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/health/04meat.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
And then, there is Tom Laskawy's followup article in Grist, yesterday, that puts the whole mess into a larger perspective http://www.grist.org/article/warning-this-product-may-cause-sickness-paralysis-and-death/
French Study Says Organic Food is Healthier
By Jess Halliday, 11-Sep-2009
A new review from France has concluded that there are nutritional benefits to organic produce, on the basis of data compiled for the French food agency AFSSA. The conclusion opposes that of a UK study published last month.
Whether or not organic food brings nutritional benefits over conventional food has been a matter of considerable inquiry and debate. The issue came to a head last month when a study commissioned by the UK’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) concluded that there is no evidence of nutritional superiority.
Now, however, a review published in the journal Agronomy for Sustainable Development has said drawn wildly different conclusions.
Author Denis Lairon of the University of Aix-Marseille coordinated an “up-to-date exhaustive and critical evaluation of the nutritional and sanitary quality of organic food” for AFSSA, which was originally published in 2003. The new review is based on this, as well as the findings of new studies published in the intervening years.
Lairon concluded that organic plant products contain more dry matter and minerals – such as iron and magnesium – and more antioxidant polyphenols like phenols and salicylic acid. Data on carbohydrate, protein and vitamin levels are insufficiently documented, he said.
Organic animal products were seen to have more polyunsaturated fats.
Is nutrition important?
In the wake of the FSA report publication, organic groups and the media debated the reasons for consumers’ keenness to buy organic produce. Many concluded that nutritional benefit is not necessarily at the forefront of their minds, but they are more driven by food safety and environmental aspects such as pesticide use.
Unlike the authors of the FSA study, Lairon did look at food safety. He concluded that between 94 and 100 per cent of organic food does not contain any pesticide residues, and organic vegetables have about 50 per cent less nitrates.
Organic cereals, however, were seen to have similar levels of mycotoxins overall compared with conventional cereals.
Emphasis on quality
The FSA study looked at evidence from studies published in the English language, and notably drew attention to shortfalls in the methodology of many which means their findings could not be included.
The original AFSSA report, too, placed a high onus on quality or study. Selected papers had to refer to well-defined and certified organic agricultural practices, and have information on design and follow-up, valid measured parametres and appropriate sampling and statistical analysis.
Source:
Agronomy for Sustainable Development (2009)
DOI: 10.1051/agro/2009019
“Nutritional quality an safety of organic food. A review”
Author: Lairon, D.
from Food Navigator
Tell the USDA GE Frankenfoods & Nanotechnology Aren't Organic
An OCA Action Alert!
Last week, we gave you news of a report issued by the USDA Foreign Agriculture Information Network, "The Unexplored Potential of Organic-Biotech Production," that argues "Governments should change their regulations to allow producers to gain organic certification for biotech crops grown with organic methods."
In May, we alerted you that the National Organic Standards Board was considering an official ban on nanotechnology in organic, but felt stymied by their concern that "Under the current definition, most nanotechnology would not fall into the category of excluded methods."
Every day, we post new evidence at OrganicConsumers.org that genetic engineering and nanotechnology present dangers to human health and the environment...
Please take action to (1) oppose the USDA's cynical attempt to promote genetic engineering as potentially organic and (2) push the National Organic Standards Board to take a strong stand against the use of nanotechnology in organic. Genetic engineering and nanotechnology aren't organic!
From the Organic Consumers Association -- posted here 8/28/09
Factory Farms & Forced Vaccinations
Despite years of warnings by public interest organizations such as the Organic Consumers Association and the Humane Society of the U.S., earlier this year, drugged-out pigs and chickens on intensive confinement factory farms have incubated a highly infectious H1N1 virus that set off a global pandemic.
This so-far only moderately virulent but rapidly spreading strain of influenza, which contains genetic material from pigs, birds and humans has already infected 162,000 people and killed almost 1,800 people across the world, including the United States. The World Health Organization has warned that although the current H1N1 Swine Flu is far less deadly than the Bird Flu, it could mutate into a much more dangerous strain. As the flu season approaches in the Northern Hemisphere, profit-obsessed drug-makers are racing to supply governments with vaccines and medicines. There are numerous concerns about the safety of these messures, including:
A leaked memo revealed that the swine flu vaccine has been linked to paralysis.
The fast-tracked vaccine contains novel adjuvants, including dangerous squalene which was in all probability responsible for Gulf War syndrome.
If the greed of drug companies prevails over safety concerns, vaccines will be pushed on a frightened, ignorant and passive public through the school system, work places and free vaccination programs. Schoolchildren could be first in line for the swine flu vaccine this fall — and schools are being put on notice that they might be turned into shot clinics.
It is important to know that you can avoid quasi-forced vaccinations of yourself and your children. Plus, there are homeopathic alternatives for treating and building a natural immunity to the swine flu.
Tell Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Congress and the President that you reject forced vaccinations and vaccines rushed to market without proper safety testing. Tell them you want them to address the root cause of swine & bird flu: factory farms. Then, click here to contact your local officials with the same message. Many decisions about who will be vaccinated or recieve medical treatment and how will be made at the local level.
from the Organic Consumers Association -- posted here 8/28/09
Food Safety Enhancement Act
This week, as soon as Tuesday, the House will vote on HR 2749 -- the Food Safety Enhancement Act. We strongly encourage you to call or email your Representative as soon
as possible and ask that they support the Farr-Kaptur amendment to HR 2749.
New food safety legislation should not penalize or threaten the nation’s organic and local, sustainable farmers. While we believe that it is not the intent of new food safety legislation to harm these producers, the Farr-Kaptur amendment helps protect organic, local and diverse family farmers by clarifying the legislative intent of HR 2749.
For a further summary of the Farr-Kaptur provisions, click here. If you need to find contact information for your elected Representative, click here.
The Cornucopia Institute
P.O. Box 126
Cornucopia, WI 54827
www.cornucopia.org
cultivate@cornucopia.org
posted 7/28/2009
Bottled water at four times the price of milk???
Witness organic dairy farmers, sometimes tearfully, pleading their case to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack …. and the Secretary appears at the rally and directly responds. Powerful! Please click on this link to view the dynamic, professionally-produced video, by Greta Wing-Miller and Aarick Beher of DowntownDailies.com.
The rally took place on July 16 at the La Crosse County Fairgrounds in West Salem, Wisconsin. Vilsack was gracious in his response to the farmers and went on the record committing to leveling the playing field for small and medium-size producers, enforcing the organic standards and bringing in new management at the National Organic Program that shares our values.
Now it is incumbent upon us to make sure that the Department follows through—on an immediate basis—this is a legitimate emergency! Please blast this blurb and video link out to family, friends and colleagues. We hope it will motivate farmers and consumers to stand in support with organic dairy farmers, many of whom face the loss of their land and farms due to a glut of milk from illegal factory dairies milking as many as 7200 cows each.
In the world of YouTube the more hits we can generate on this video, the higher the ranking, and the more people will be exposed to this crisis. Hopefully we will generate more patronage for organic dairy brands that exclusively buy their milk from family farmers as opposed to the factory farm scofflaws. We must stand in solidarity with the hard-working dairy families whose livelihoods are now at risk. Thanks very sincerely for your support!
Mark A. Kastel Senior Farm Policy Analyst The Cornucopia Institute
Mark A. Kastel The Cornucopia Institute
608-625-2042 Voice
866-861-2214 Fax
P.O. Box 126
Cornucopia, Wisconsin 54827
posted 7/27/2009
Co-ops Reach Out to Support Small Dairy Farmers
One of the strongest supporters of the development of organic food and agriculture has been the nation’s 270 natural food cooperatives. Michelle Schry, the manager at People’s Food Co-op in La Crosse, WI came to the rally to show their solidarity with struggling family dairy farmers. “Whatever we can do to support you, we will do,” Schry told the crowd. “We want that (organic) label to be protected as much as you do.”
MOFGA Late Blight Alert, June 28, 2009
Maine Organic Farmers & Gardeners Association Urgent Late Blight Alert June 28, 2009 If you are growing tomatoes or potatoes, whether in your garden or on multiple acres, you need to be watching for late blight. Tomato seedlings sold at a number of large 'big-box' retailers in Maine and the Northeast are apparently infected with the disease, and it's already started to appear around the region. Eric Sideman's latest Pest Alert describes the disease and what you can do. Watch your plants carefully. If you are not sure whether you have late blight or not, contact Eric or your local Extension office. If your plants are infected, the best control is to pull the plants immediately and seal them in a bag for disposal so the blight spores don't spread further.
Hood Drops Organic Milk Producers
March 12, 2009
Shortly after it was learned that eight organic family dairy farms in Aroostook and Washington Counties were going to be dropped by their processor, H.P. Hood, the Maine Farm Bureau and the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association began working together to help these member farms stay in business. In the past two weeks the support team working group for these farms has grown and much progress has been made in finding alternative markets.
These family farms are located in Mapleton, Woodland, Perham, Smyrna and Hogdon in Aroostook County and Edmunds, Charlotte, and Perry in Washington County.
They are of many different sizes and each has its own story. Some are new first- or second-generation operations, not well known outside their local communities, and some have long histories in Maine agriculture, including Tide Mill Farm in Edmunds, now in its ninth generation and featured in national publications and television shows. Collectively they represent the hard work, innovation, commitment to conservation, wise use of natural resources, and the family values that make Maine's agricultural sector a key component of the Maine economy.
Currently the milk produced by these eight farms is trucked to an out-of-state processing plant. Some of it is then shipped back into Maine to Maine retailers. This system has the Maine farms at the mercy of a national milk marketing system that is often not operating in the best interests of the Maine dairy industry.
The goal of this project is to find a Maine processing facility to bottle the milk produced by these eight farms, and to market it in Maine, under a Maine label. That label would either be the label of the Maine dairy that processed the milk, or a new Maine brand, most likely the "Maine Produces" brand about to be introduced by Maine Farm Bureau on a number of Maine farm products. The milk would also carry the MOFGA label, as well as information identifying the Maine farms where it was produced. Major Maine retailers, who currently feature out-of-state organic milk but who are now using locally-produced food as part of their marketing plans, will be asked to cut back on their purchase of out-of-state milk to assure that all the Maine-label milk has a market. These eight farms produce about 8,000 pounds of milk a day, which is approximately 1,000 gallons a day. The project, could serve as a model for an improved Maine milk industry statewide.
The current contracts between these eight farms and H.P. Hood expire starting in August, 2009, but these farmers need to know by late spring what the future may hold so they can plan their summer operations. This project proposes to put together the first draft of a business plan and model by May 1, 2009, and to have a final plan in place by June 1, 2009 that would detail the feasibility of successfully introducing Maine-labeled organic milk into Maine retail markets.
Accordingly, the working group will seek a cluster planning grant from the Maine Technology Institute. The target date for submission of the MTI grant application is March 20, 2009, and a request for expedited processing due to the emergency nature of the situation. In the interim, the group is seeking other funding to begin the study. We have an interim website, milk.maine.com, to begin a consumer market survey. A permanent website, MaineOrganicMilk.com, will be live soon.
Currently the following people have agreed to partner on the MTI application: Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA) Maine Farm Bureau and Aroostook County Farm Bureau Two of the farms, Chase's Organic Dairy in Mapleton, Aroostook County, and Tide Mill Farm in Edmunds, Washington County. (We anticipate all eight farms will be applicants by the time the grant is submitted) Jason Schoppee of Schoppee's Milk Transport, the company that currently picks up milk at these eight farms Crown o' Maine Organic Cooperative, a food distribution company with offices in Aroostook and Penobscot Counties. Crown o' Maine distributes organic products statewide and is willing to distribute this organic milk to Maine markets Richard Kersbergen, Extension Professor, University of Maine Cooperative Extension Scott Carlin, a retailer and member of the board of directors of the Maine Grocers Association John Harker, Agricultural Resource Management Coordinator, Maine Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources Stephanie Gilbert, Farmland Protection Specialist, Maine Dept. of Agriculture, Food & Rural Resources Dan Lapointe, President of Aroostook County Farm Bureau and Economic and Community Development Director for the town of Van Buren.
We will be contacting others as well, including: Efficiency Maine The Maine Dairy Industry Association Mainestreet Marketplace The Portland Food Cooperative USDA's network of Resource Conservation and Development offices throughout Maine Other retail and institutional buyers of milk.
How can the governor's office help? The governor has been a strong advocate of Maine agriculture and understands the importance of Maine family farms as they relate to the state's goals for energy self-sufficiency, the creative economy, and Maine's "Sense of Place" efforts. We ask that the governor offer the support of his office and the executive branch to help move this project forward as quickly as possible so that these farms, the organic movement, and Maine's dairy industry as a whole can be sustained during these trying economic times.
- David Bright, MFB Marketing Committee
