Top

dining

Stories

 

The Monsanto Menace

The feds see no evil as a belligerent strongman seeks control of America's food supply.

The problem is that plants sweat these chemicals out in the morning dew, where they're picked up by bees like a morning cup of Starbucks.

Last year, Dr. Christian Krupke, a professor of entomology at Purdue University, did one of the first studies linking neo-nics to the collapse of bee colonies, which threatens the entire food system. One-quarter of the human diet is pollinated by bees.

These mysterious collapses – in which bees simply fly off and die – have been reported as far back as 1918. Yet over the past seven years, mortality rates have tripled. Some U.S. regions are witnessing the death of more than half their populations.

University of Wisconsin Law School professor Peter Carstensen notes that Monsanto's seed police are the Pinkertons. "These are the strikebreakers, the railroad goons. It's deja vu all over again."
University of Wisconsin Law School professor Peter Carstensen notes that Monsanto's seed police are the Pinkertons. "These are the strikebreakers, the railroad goons. It's deja vu all over again."
"They're a pesticide company that's bought up seed firms," says Bill Freese, of the Center for Food Safety. "Business-wise, it's a beautiful, really smart strategy. It's just awful for agriculture and the environment."
"They're a pesticide company that's bought up seed firms," says Bill Freese, of the Center for Food Safety. "Business-wise, it's a beautiful, really smart strategy. It's just awful for agriculture and the environment."

"We're looking at bee kills, persistently during corn-planting time," Krupke explains. "So what was killing these bees at corn planting?"

While he's still not sure how much responsibility the chemicals bear, his study indicates a link to Monsanto's GM corn, which has been widely treated with neo-nics since 2005.

But while other countries run from the problem, the U.S. government is content to let its citizens serve as guinea pigs.

What's Mine Is Yours

The same worries apply to contamination from GM crops. Ask Frank Morton, who grows organic sugar-beet seeds in Oregon's Willamette Valley and is among the few non-GM holdouts.

This became abundantly clear in 2010, when a federal judge demanded that all U.S. farmers stop planting GM sugar beets. Farmers were surprised to find that there was very little non-GM sugar-beet seed to be had. Since the GM variety was introduced in 2005, Monsanto had driven just about everyone out of the market.

Morton's farm is just two miles from a GM sugar-beet farm. Unfortunately, beet pollen can travel as much as five miles, cross-pollinating other farmers' fields and, in the case of an organic farmer, threatening his ability to sell his crop as organic and GM-free. The contamination can arrive in the most benign ways.

He recalls how a landscaper bought potting soil from a nearby GM beet farm, then sold it to homeowners throughout the area. A scientist from Oregon State University happened to discover the error. Morton claims the landscaper was forced to retrieve the soil – lest nearby farms become contaminated – paying his customers $100 each to not say anything.

It's especially galling because GM crops have perverted longstanding property law. Organic farmers, for example, are responsible for protecting their farms from contamination, since courts have consistently refused to hold GM growers liable.

Kansas farmer Bryce Stephens had to stop growing organic corn and soybeans for fear of contamination; he has thirty-foot buffer crops to protect his organic wheat. (Wheat pollen doesn't travel far.)

"Monsanto and the biotechs need to respect traditional property rights and need to keep their pollution on their side of the fence," says Maine farmer Jim Gerritsen. "If it was anything but agriculture, nobody would question it. If I decided to spray my house purple and I sprayed on a day that was windy, and my purple paint drifted onto your house and contaminated your siding and shingles, there isn't a court in the nation that wouldn't in two minutes find me guilty of irresponsibly damaging your property. But when it comes to agriculture, all of a sudden the tables are turned."

Contamination isn't just about boutique organic brands, either. It maims U.S. exports, too.

Take Bayer, which grew unapproved, experimental GM rice at test plots around Louisiana State University for just one year. Within five years, these plots had contaminated 30 percent of U.S. rice acreage. No one's certain how it happened, but Bayer's rice was found as far away as Central America and Africa.

Within days of the announcement, rice futures lost $150 million in value, while U.S. rice exports dropped by 20 percent during the next year. (Bayer ended up paying $750 million in damages.)

Last month brought another hit. A Monsanto test of GM wheat mysteriously contaminated an Oregon farm eight years after the test was shut down. Japan and South Korea immediately halted imports of U.S. soft white wheat -- a particularly harsh pill for the Japanese, who have used our white wheat in nearly all their cakes and confectionery since the 1960s.

Monsanto's response? It's blaming the whole mess on eco-terrorism.

Just Label It

Given the company's history, is it any wonder that developing countries like Ecuador, Peru and Haiti have shied away from GM crops? Haiti felt strong enough that in the wake of its 2010 earthquake, it turned down Monsanto's offer of seeds, even with assurances that the seed wasn't GM.

Brazil is poised to become the world's largest soybean exporter on the strength of Monsanto seed. Still, the country's farmers aren't big fans of the company. Thousands are suing Monsanto for more than $600 million after the company continued to charge them royalties two years after the expiration of its patent.

Trust, unfortunately, has never been Monsanto's strong suit. It's become one of the main motives behind the push for GM labeling.

"If they're going to allow the American people to be lab rats in an experiment, could they at least know where it is so they can decide whether they want to participate or not?" asks Lance Harvell, a Republican state representative from Maine. "If the FDA isn't going to do their job, it's time we stepped in."

« Previous Page
 |
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
All
 
Next Page »
 
My Voice Nation Help
2 comments
AmaRose
AmaRose

Thank you for this wonderfully insightful article. So many argue we need GM crops to keep the cost of food down and you have squashed that in this article and you have shed light on these modern day tyrants. I did however stumble across this article to find restaurants that through there partnerships support Monsanto. Would you know more on that? I am anti Monsanto I gear toward buying Organic but everyone likes to go out to eat every now and again. I want to make sure I am not supporting these monsters when I do. Thanks, Ama Rose

paval
paval topcommenter

Excellent article, but being a food article it should have added some of the likely bad boys in the supermarket shelves for GMO content:

- Huge commercial chocolate makers use soy lecithin as an emulsifier. A very high percentage of all soy grown in the US is GMO. Look for non-GMO soy lecithin labeling on Chocolate bars

- anything containing corn (HFCS, syrup, starch, etc) in any form is rather suspicious, specially if its used instead of sugar. That means its used to make a cheaper product not necessarily better. Huge red flag in my book

-  soy products produced in the US due to the high amount of soy being produced in GMO

- cottonseed oil, the new mass usage oil of the food industry

read further on http://www.nongmoproject.org/learn-more/what-is-gmo/ 


Labeling is always the best way. If you want to be a cheap producer and use everything the cheapest. But label it as such so consumers can decide if they want it or not. I am certain most consumers will decide against the bad stuff.

 
Loading...