Thursday, February 16, 2012

Study says insecticide used with GM corn highly toxic to bees

Sierra Club, US bee and honey groups urge EPA to ban clothianidin
An insecticide used as a seed treatment on genetically modified corn and other crops has been found to be highly toxic to honey bees, according to a study published recently in the journal PLoS ONE.
The study may be a key to solving the mystery of Colony Collapse Disorder that has decimated bee populations over the last five years, causing losses of 30% and more of honey bee colonies every year since 2006, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

Found at levels 700,000 times a bee’s lethal dosage

Scientists at Purdue University documented major adverse impacts from the insecticide clothianidin (product name “Poncho”) on honey bee health. The study found that bees are exposed to clothianidin and other pesticides throughout the foraging period. Researchers found extremely high levels of clothianidin—as high as 700,000 times a bee’s lethal dosage—in seed planter exhaust material. It was found in foraging areas long after treated seed had been planted and in dead bees near hives in Indiana. It was also found in pollen collected by bees and stored in the hive. The study raises questions about the long-term survival of this major pollinator.
“This research should nail the coffin lid shut on clothianidin,” says Laurel Hopwood, Sierra Club’s chairwoman of the Genetic Engineering Action Team. “Despite numerous attempts by the beekeeping industry and conservation organizations to persuade the EPA to ban clothianidin, the EPA has failed to protect the food supply for the American people.”

Clothianidin is among those most toxic to bees”
Clothianidin, which is manufactured by German agricultural company Bayer Crop Science, is of the neonicotinoid family of systemic pesticides. Clothianidin is taken up by a plant’s vascular system and expressed through pollen and nectar from which bees then forage and drink. Neonicotinoids are of particular concern because they have cumulative, sublethal effects on insect pollinators that correspond to Colony Collapse Disorder symptoms—namely, neurobehavioral and immune system disruptions.
According to James Frazier, Ph.D., professor of entomology at Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences, “Among the neonicotinoids, clothianidin is among those most toxic for honey bees; and this combined with its systemic movement in plants has produced a troubling mix of scientific results pointing to its potential risk for honey bees through current agricultural practices.”
Clothianidin has been widely used as a seed treatment on many of the country’s major crops, particularly GM corn, since 2003. Back then, the Environmental Protection Agency granted it a “conditional registration,” while EPA waited for Bayer to conduct a field study assessing the insecticide’s threat to bee colony health.

Continued use is in violation of the law”

Bayer submitted its study to the EPA in 2007, two years after it was due. A memo written by EPA scientists and leaked in 2010 said that Bayer’s study was flawed, stating that “deficiencies were identified that render the study supplemental.”
The memo was found by Tom Theobald, a founding member of the Boulder County Beekeeper’s Association. “The document reveals that the agency has been allowing the widespread use of this bee-toxic pesticide, against evidence that it’s highly toxic to bees. Clothianidin has failed to meet the requirements for registration. Its continued use is in violation of the law,” Theobald says.
Upon learning of the EPA’s failures, the National Honey Bee Advisory Board, the American Beekeeping Federation, and the American Honey Producer’s Association urged the agency in a December 2010 letter to cancel the registration of this pesticide. Yet despite the fact that clothianidin had failed a critical life cycle study which was required for registration, the agency responded in a February 2011 letter stating that it wasn’t “aware of any data that reasonably demonstrates that bee colonies are subject to elevated losses due to chronic exposure to this pesticide” and “does not intend to initiate suspension or cancellation actions against the registered uses of clothianidin.”

Time for EPA to cancel this bee-killing pesticide”

Now with the published study documenting harm to bees from clothianidin, beekeepers, honey producers, and environmental groups are calling on the EPA again to ban it.
“EPA said we don’t have the science (to ban clothianidin). Now we have the science,” Theobald says.
Neil Carman, Ph.D., scientific advisor to Sierra Club, says: “A huge shoe has dropped. US researchers have documented major adverse impacts from clothianidin seed treatments in corn on honey bee health.” Carman further explains “Because of the vital role played by honey bees in crop pollination, honey bee demise threatens the production of crops that produce one-third of American diets, including nearly 100 fruits and vegetables. The value of crops pollinated by bees exceeds $15 billion in the US alone.”
Hopwood exclaims, “The time is now for EPA to quit dodging the illusion of oversight and instead, cancel this bee-killing pesticide.  If we travel too far down our current path, we could create conditions in our food system much like those that brought down the financial system.”
© Copyright The Organic & Non-GMO Report, February 2012
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/february2012/insecticideforGMcorntoxicbees.php

Thursday, February 9, 2012

Neotame the next aspartame? FDA doesn't require labeling of latest chemical sweetener from Monsanto

(NaturalNews) It could be lurking in the foods you eat every single day, including U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) certified organic foods, and you would never even know it. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has declared that one of Monsanto's latest creations, a synthetic sweetener chemical known as neotame, does not have to be labeled in food products, including even in organic food products.

A modified version of aspartame with even more added toxicity, neotame received quiet and unassuming FDA approval back in 2002, even though no safety studies have ever been conducted on the chemical (http://www.neotame.com/pdf/neotame_fda_US.pdf). In fact, an investigation conducted by Feingold.org found only four studies relating to neotame in the MEDLINE database.

Two of these "studies" were not studies at all, and the other two were actually one duplicate study conducted by NutraSweet, the company that produces and sells neotame.

So just like with aspartame, the FDA has once again approved for use a dangerous sweetener chemical that metabolizes into formaldehyde when consumed. Except this time, the chemical contains added 3-dimethylbutyl, which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has listed as one of the most hazardous known chemicals, and it does not have to be labeled on any of the products to which it is added.

"Neotame has similar structure to aspartame -- except that, from it's structure, appears to be even more toxic than aspartame," writes HolisticMed.com on its page about neotame. "Like aspartame, some of the concerns include gradual neurotoxic and immunotoxic damage from the combination of the formaldehyde metabolite (which is toxic at extremely low doses) and the excitotoxic amino acid" (http://www.holisticmed.com/neotame/toxin.html).

http://www.naturalnews.com/034915_neotame_Monsanto_sweeteners.html

Monday, February 6, 2012

MONSANTO FORCED OUT OF COSTA RICA

Yay! Another victory for the light!
"Monsanto the company responsible for more than 90% of industrial releases of transgenic organisms in the world has decided to withdraw its request to release genetically modified corn (maiz) in Costa Rica and to pull out of the country. Environmentalists in Costa Rica are still working to strengthen the campaign for an GMO-free country.

Members of the National Commission on Biosafety say that Monsanto s withdrawal is a success for social groups that have been leading a campaign against the expansion of transgenic crops in Costa Rica. Staff of the Biotechnology Department of the State Plant Health Service believe the government can no longer stand up for companies, when faced with the persistent claims and demands of the public that opposes this kind of biotechnology. They say it would be good if the companies responded to the many invitations for an open debate made by numerous social groups.

Isaac Rojas, President of the Costa Rica Federation for Environment Conservation, welcomed the self-criticism of the National Commission on Biosafety. He said the public sector (State) cannot and should not continue to legitimize and defend biotec companies nor transgenic products. It is time that the corporate sector show its face and enter into a process of public debate.

Fabián Pacheco, a spokesman for the Social Ecology Association, said It was to be expected that Monsanto would choose to go to other countries where conditions are less critical and more permissive. and added This kind of evasive attitude shows that the companies do not have technical arguments to prove that GMOs are safe and that the precautionary principle is not being violated.

The Biodiversity Network CR calls on all parts of the ecological movement and peoples organisations of other countries in the region to be alert. Monsanto is leaving Costa Rica, but it will go to other countries where it can sell its transgenic crops without much noise, to avoid polemics and open debate and adverse effects on its economic interests. Beware!

For further information: fabian@cosmovisiones.comgavitza@racsa.co.cr"
http://networkedblogs.com/tBDei

Thursday, February 2, 2012

I Will Not Be Pinkwashed: Why I Do Not Support Susan G. Komen for the Cure

Susan G. Komen: For Cure or Con?
Susan G. Komen for the Cure is a multi-million-dollar company with assets totaling over $390 million dollars. Only 20.9% of these funds were reportedly used in the 2009-2010 fiscal year for research, “for the cure.” Where does the rest of the money go? Let’s have a look.

http://butterbeliever.com/2011/10/22/i-will-not-be-pinkwashed-why-i-do-not-support-susan-g-komen-for-the-cure/

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

McDonald's scraps "pink slime" from burgers

(CBS) McDonald's is axing "pink slime" from its burgers, after receiving heat from celebrity chef and food activist Jamie Oliver, CBS This Morning reported.
What is pink slime? It's the name Oliver has given to fatty beef trimmings soaked in ammonium hydroxide, which removes bacteria and makes the beef taste better.
"We're taking a product that would be sold in its cheaper form for dogs," Oliver said on his TV show, Food Revolution, where he demonstrated the practice. "After this process, we can give it to humans."
The technique is approved by the United States Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration.
Last week, McDonald's announced it's no longer using the beef product, although the chain said in a statement that this decision "was not related to any particular event." Taco Bell and Burger King have also agreed to stop using the additive, according to the Huffington Post.
Oliver isn't the only one to raise issue with the controversial "slime." The New York Times questioned the safety of the process in 2009.
Watch Oliver uncover "pink slime" in the video clip below: