Tell President-Elect Obama: No to Vilsack for Secretary of Agriculture

[Lorien]

From the Organic Consumer's Association:

Ten thousand organic consumers signed OCA's petition last week to Barack Obama, asking him to take a clear position in support of organic agriculture. Thanks to all who joined in to deliver this resounding message to the incoming administration. Unfortunately, it is now being widely reported that former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack is being considered for the Secretary of Agriculture position in the Obama Administration. Vilsack is a notorious cheerleader for genetically engineered crops and chemical and energy-intensive industrial agriculture--certainly no friend of organic food and farming. Tom Vilsack's appointment would represent a major disappointment for the Organic Consumers Association and its members. But there is still time to make your voice heard.


Tell President-Elect Obama: No to Vilsack for Secretary of Agriculture

1) Contact the office of President-Elect Obama and urge him to appoint a Secretary of Agriculture that reflects your organic values

2) Call office of President-Elect Obama at 202-540-3000 and make sure your concerns about Vilsack be heard.

3) Sign the OCA's petition below to President-Elect Obama and urge him to appoint a Secretary of Agriculture that is supportive of organic food and farming.

Take Action: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/642/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=1751

[Deja Q]

1. If people don't, does that imply they lack ballsack?

:yoiks:

[Arkana]

6. Or perhaps they don't have a policy with Aflac.

[Median Democrat]

2. Odd, I Thought Staphanie Miller or Randi Rhodes Were Totally Endorsing...

Vilsack for President not too long ago.

[Avalon6]

3. I'm sorry but I am a biologist and that statement is dumb

"Vilsack is a notorious cheerleader for genetically engineered crops and chemical and energy-intensive industrial agriculture--certainly no friend of organic food and farming."

Organic farming is energy intensive because it produces lower yields, so it takes up more resources and land to produce organic foods. Also, genetically engineered crops are relatively safe, even some of your pharmaceutical drugs are produced through GMOs.

[moodforaday]

4. GM is more than biology.

This is one example of what GM companies like Monsanto do to people's livelihoods. May have little to do with biology, nevertheless it's part of the picture:

The GM genocide: Thousands of Indian farmers are committing suicide after using genetically modified crops

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1082559/The-GM-genocide-Thousands-Indian-farmers-committing-suicide-using-genetically-modified-crops.html

[Lorien]

5. Not dumb at all. Organic crops can be farmed for hundreds of years. GM

crops and industrial farming are causing the desertification that we're seeing all over the Midwest and China. As for the rest:

1. New study confirms GM food damages fertility - GM Free Cymru
2. Austrian study shows GM corn negatively affects reproductive health in mice - Austrian Agency for Health and Food
3. Monsanto's statement on safety allegations related to transgenic maize NK603 X MON 810
--- ---
1. New study confirms that GM food damages fertility
GM Free Cymru, 12 November 2008

In a new Austrian study that will send shock waves through the corridors of power in the EU, and through the offices of the GM corporations, it has been discovered that GM corn has a damaging effect upon the reproductive system (1).

The work was done at the request of the Austrian Health Ministry, and the results were presented yesterday by Professor Jurgen Zentek and his team to an expert conference organized by the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety. The work was done at the University of Vienna, using a GM maize hybrid line called NK603 x MON810, which has two copies of the RR gene in it, each copy with its own, different promoter sequence, as well as the MON810 gene. In one of the very few long-term nutrition studies conducted so far with an approved GM product (2), it became apparent over a period of 20 weeks that the fertility of GM corn fed mice was seriously impaired, with fewer offspring than mice fed on non-GM equivalent material. In a multi-generational trial, mice fed with GM maize had fewer offspring in the third and fourth generations, and this difference was statistically significant. Mice fed with GM-free corn reproduced more rapidly. In a series of carefully-controlled trials, it was also discovered that there was a statistically significant decrease in litter weight in the third and fourth litters of mice in the GM-fed group as compared to the control group.

Although the Austrian authorities have announced the findings in a somewhat cautious fashion, stressing the urgent need for "further studies", the implications of the work are immediate and far-reaching. Speaking for GM Free Cymru, Dr Brian John said: "This work will do huge damage to the GM industry worldwide, since it shows that a crop -- Monsanto's maize line NK603 x MON810 -- which has been approved as safe by EFSA, and given consent for use in food and feed by the EC, is in fact dangerous to health. It demonstrates that the approvals process is at best inadequate and at worst corrupt. This is what NGOs have been saying for years (3). At the same time this work effectively confirms the findings of Irina Ermakova in 2005, who found that rats fed on a diet including GM soya produced offspring which were weak and which had a much higher mortality rate than rats fed on a non-GM diet (4). She also found that when both male and female animals were fed on GM soy they becam e effectively sterile and produced no offspring. Her work was heavily criticised in a despicable publishing scam by a GM industry which fully appreciated its importance (5). However, there has always been a suspicion that ALL soya damages reproductive function (6). That is why this new work -- based upon GM maize rather than GM soy -- is of such massive importance."

The Monsanto maize line MON863 has already been shown -- in the company's own experiments designed to mask health effects -- to damage the internal organs of animals in feeding trials (7). This new evidence, from an EU government-sponsored study, shows that the standard mantra that "GM does not damage health" is shown to be a lie. GM food and feed DOES damage health in a number of ways, as this and other reliable studies have shown over the past decade, beginning with Arpad Pusztai in 1998 (8).

GM Free Cymru has now written to Environment Secretary Hilary Benn challenging him to revise his recent statement (9) that "the scientific evidence clearly demonstrates the safety of GM foods." The NGO has accused him -- and his advisory committees -- of promoting "a culture of complacency" relating to GM food safety, and of implying that the GM health debate is over and done with. The letter (10) says: "You and your advisers have consistently shown a patronising and dismissive attitude towards independent researchers who have shown that animals fed on GM foods are harmed. You have systematically ignored their results which show -- over and again -- that GM materials cause cellular and tissue damage. Will you now revise your opinion that the GM / health debate is over, and demonstrate that you are prepared to put the health of UK consumers above the commercial interests of the GM corporations?"

ENDS
Contact: Dr Brian John
Tel [phone]

NOTES

(1) Austrian study shows GM corn negatively affects reproductive health in mice http://www.ages.at/ueber-uns/presse/pressemeldungen/klars...
Genetically-engineered food: potential threat to fertility
Greenpeace International, 11 November 2008 http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/ge...

(2) NK603 x MON810 EFSA positive opinions for hybrid lines: http://www.foodlaw.rdg.ac.uk/news/eu-05071.htm
Commission approval for food and feed 24 October 2007 (includes EFSA opinion) http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/gmo/db/61.docu.html

(3) http://www.gmfreecymru.org/open_letters/Open_letter10Dec2... http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/reports/gp_... http://www.i-sis.org.uk/CAGMMAD.php

(4) http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/ermakova.htm http://www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?obje... http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/rottweiler.htm

(5) The Ermakova study was of course so appalling in its findings that the GM apologists McHughen, Moses, Chassy and Giddings "set her up" for an orchestrated attack, with the connivance of Nature Biotechnology. http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/rottweiler.htm http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/involvement_erm...

(6) http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/jul/24/foodtech.me...

(7) http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0311/S00113.htm http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/testing112403.cfm http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/monsanto2.htm

(8) http://www.gmfreecymru.org/pivotal_papers/ten_years_on.htm

(9) Benn backs GM food safety News | 10 November, 2008. By Jack Davies http://www.farmersguardian.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&st...

(10) Letter available on request
--- ---
2. Austrian study shows GM corn negatively affects reproductive health in mice Clarification on new findings on feeding GM corn
Need for further studies exists

Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, 11 November 2008.

Vienna -- GM corn as animal feed may, under special trial conditions, have an influence on the reproduction rate of laboratory mice. This is the result of a study by Professor Jürgen Zentek (Veterinary University of Vienna, Austria), commissioned by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Health, Family and Youth Affairs and presented today during an expert conference to AGES, the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety. While this represents an individual study whose results may not be directly applied to humans, it shows, however, that there is a need for further studies.

Less offspring in the fourth generation

It was the objective of the study to analyze possible effects of GMO corn NK603 X MON810 in long-term feeding trials covering several generations of mice. Three trial designs were applied: A multi-generation study, the method of continued breeding, and a lifetime trial. The mice were fed a test diet of 33 percent corn of the GMO corn variety NK603 X MON810. In the multi-generation study, a control group was fed non-GM corn grown in Austria.

The results show no differences in the feed intake and the weight development of adult animals. Although in one of the trial designs the number of litters and of offspring in continuous breeding of the GMO feed group decreased more than in the control group: In the GMO feed group more females were without litter than in the control group. The lifetime trial showed no difference.

The study shows that multi-generation studies are indeed appropriate to show feeding influences in mice. Similar approaches must analyze whether similar findings can be expected in other animals. According to Prof. Jürgen Zentek, a validation of these preliminary results by further studies is urgently necessary.

Queries:

AGES , Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety
Corporate Communication: Univ.-Doz. Ingrid Kiefer Tel: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]


And, real food for thought: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNezTsrCY0Q

[Sebastian Doyle]

7. Yeah, now there's a hell of an endorsement

"Also, genetically engineered crops are relatively safe, even some of your pharmaceutical drugs are produced through GMOs."

That makes me feel a whole Hell of a lot better :scared:

Seriously, no DLC corporatists in charge of Agriculture.

How about Willie Nelson or John Mellencamp.

Willie in particular would be a good balance to all this ridiculous "anti-pot crusader" vibe coming from people like Holder and Emanuel.

[NashVegas]

8. Bogus Falacies About Organic Yields - Get the Facts

Cornell University:

Organic farming produces same corn and soybean yields as conventional farms, but consumes less energy and no pesticides, study finds
By Susan S. Lang

ITHACA, N.Y. -- Organic farming produces the same yields of corn and soybeans as does conventional farming, but uses 30 percent less energy, less water and no pesticides, a review of a 22-year farming trial study concludes.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/organic.farm.vs.other.ssl.html

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University

The popular myth that organic farming leads to lower yields has been exploded by trials conducted worldwide, including India. The Tamil Nadu Agricultural University's study on organic cultivation of green chilli found it produced better yields and quality. Likewise, the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwar, Karnataka, found more
viability in organic cultivation of groundnut and french beans. Punjab Agricultural University studies found use of organic inputs produced better rice yields.

As ICAR Director-General Mangala Rai pointed out, in rainfed agricultural systems, organic farming produces consistently better yields. In Green Revolution areas, too, there is no diminishing of yields. Even the World Bank admits: "Farmers in developing countries who switch to organic agriculture achieve higher earnings and a better standard of living, according to a series of studies conducted in China, India and six Latin American countries by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)."

http://organicuttarakhand.org/products_3_news5.htm


Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture for Food, Energy and Industry

Organic agriculture helps to reduce greenhouse gases by converting atmospheric carbon dioxide into soil organic matter. Studies in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Europe show that the best organic farms can have higher yields than conventional farms. Organic farms spend less on imported chemicals and more on labor and other locally supplied inputs than conventional farms. Published studies comparing the income of organic farms with conventional farms have found that the net income is similar.

http://www.geocities.com/opaq2001/sustainable.htm


Purdue University

Given the right conditions, organic farming can produce, on average, as much corn per acre in Ohio as conventional farming can, according to an Ohio State University study.

Corn hybrids grown in last year's Ohio State Organic Corn Performance Test produced 13 percent more corn per acre than the statewide average yield -- most of that conventional corn -- and topped the record-high state average yield by four bushels per acre.

One hybrid tested did even better, beating last year's state average corn yield by nearly 50 percent.

http://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/AgAnswers/story.asp?storyID=4174


University of Michigan

Ivette Perfecto of the University of Michigan in the US and her colleagues found that, in developed countries, organic systems on average produce 92% of the yield produced by conventional agriculture. In developing countries, however, organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12245


Various


1. GM crop yields

First-generation genetic modifications address production conditions (insect and weed control), and have not been modified to increase yield. Yields of both GM and conventional varieties vary depending on growing conditions, such as degree of infestation with insects or weeds, weather, and region of production.4 Furthermore:

* A 2003 report published in the journal Science states that “in the United States and Argentina, average yield effects are negligible and in some cases even slightly negative”.5
* The UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s 2004 report on agricultural biotechnology acknowledges that GM crops can have reduced yields.6
* In 1998 several universities carried out a study that demonstrated that, on average, Roundup Ready soy varieties were 4% lower in yield than conventional varieties.7

http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:ZW4lrnrljx8J:www.foeeurope.org/GMOs/documents/Ag_and_biotech_report_briefing_17_11_FINAL.doc+%22organic+farming%22+%22yields%22+%22fallacy%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Hundreds of farmers in Andhra Pradesh who grew cotton seeds supplied by companies, applying chemical fertilizers and pesticides, committed suicide because they could not control the pests. At the same time Tamil Nadu farmers applying panchakavya were able to get cotton yield of more than 15 quintals an acre. The average yield of sugarcane is 40 tonnes an acre and they are able to take only two ratoon crops. But organic farmers in Erode district are taking 60 to 70 tonnes an acre and they are able to harvest eight ratoon crops.

After prolonged research by our agricultural universities, all India average in rice yield is one tonne an acre. Nowadays progressive chemical farmers harvest 2 to 2.5 tonnes an acre, but organic farmers Sethuraman, Ramuvelu, Sampantham Pillay of Nagai district are able to harvest 3 tonnes of paddy an acre. Likewise other crops also record higher yields in organic agriculture compared to chemical farming.

http://www.hindu.com/op/2004/11/16/stories/2004111600511500.htm

FACT: GM/GE foods' main beneficiaries are the patent holders and the companies that control them.

[rucky]

9. Willie Nelson!

[NashVegas]

10. Done!

Thanks for the heads up.