And GMOs march on and on.......

For those concerned about the prevalence of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in Australian crops, there is now an online global register of contamination events.

This GM Contamination Register is the first of its kind in the world.

Genetically modified crops were first commercially grown on a wide scale in 1996. But, there has always been concern about their effects on both health and the environment. A specific concern has been that once released, it would not be possible to contain or control these organisms yet there is no global monitoring system.

Because of this failure of national and international agencies, GeneWatch UK and Greenpeace International launched this joint initiative in 2005 to record all incidents of contamination arising from the intentional or accidental release of genetically modified (GM) organisms (which are also known as genetically engineered (GE) organisms).

It also includes illegal plantings of GM crops and the negative agricultural side-effects that have been reported. Only those incidents which have been publically documented are recorded here. There may be others that are, as yet, undetected.

This site is intended to be a resource for individuals, public interest groups and governments. The register can be searched to see where, when and how contamination has taken place. It includes information about, and links to, sources and the GeneWatch UK and Greenpeace web sites as well as other useful sites.

If you would like to know when incidents are added to the GM Contamination Register, send an email to:
info at gmcontaminationregister.org (replacing 'at' with the @ sign) with 'UPDATE' in the subject line.

Here is an Australian example:

* In June 2000, Monsanto reported to the Australian authorities that in May, approximately 57.6 tonnes of Roundup Ready GM cotton seed from field trials were ginned at three gins in Queensland without segregation and identity preservation. This constituted between 4.5 and 9.1% of all cotton seed ginned on that day at the designated gins.
As a result of the lack of segregation and identity preservation, the Roundup Ready cotton seed was mixed with non-Roundup Ready cotton seed. The mixing meant there was no possible means to track the exact fate (export, animal feed or crushing) of the Roundup Ready cotton seed. Sale of whole seed to the domestic market as animal feed is in contravention of Australia’s GMAC’s advice. The seed was not packaged and secured, therefore seed escape was possible.

This is the current list for Australia:

---

Australia - 15 kgs of Monsanto's GM cotton seed was spilled during transport >> more

---

Australia - an unapproved variety of GM cotton was found in GM Roundup Ready cotton seed >> more

---

Australia - contaminated oilseed rape seed imported from US >> more

---

Australia - unapproved GM cotton (grown in a field trial) was mixed with non-GM and approved varieties of GM cotton after harvest >> more

---

Australia - wheat exports bound for Columbia contaminated with GM maize >> more

---

Australia – contamination of oilseed rape exports by unapproved GM variety >> more

---

Australia – farmer’s conventional oilseed rape crop contaminated with GM >> more

---

Australia – first field resistance to Bt toxins recorded >> more

---

Australia – oilseed rape trials contaminated with GM >> more

---

The Australian Government Office of the Gene Technology Regulator can be found here.

From the Truth Is Stranger Than file: GMO Death-Tech meets Hit Squad

"A death-tech firm weds a hit squad.”
Blogger Rady Ananda

It appears that bio-tech giant Monsanto & Co. has graduated from in-house open source intelligence gathering and moved on to involve itself in the murky world of Blackwater ops.

From The Sovereign Independent, 1 November 2010:

Monsanto hired mercenary Blackwater to infiltrate anti-GMO groups

A spokesperson for Monsanto, reached by Scahill, first denied the relationship with Blackwater, but then admitted that Monsanto had paid Total Intelligence for intelligence reoprts

“… about the activities of groups or individuals that could pose a risk to company personnel or operations around the world which were developed by monitoring local media reports and other publicly available information. The subject matter ranged from information regarding terrorist incidents in Asia or kidnappings in Central America to scanning the content of activist blogs and websites.”………

The documents obtained by Scahill show that Monsanto paid Blackwater’s subsidiary, Total Intelligence a total of $232,000 for intelligence services provided in 2008 and 2009. Aside from the brief statement provided to Scahill, Monsanto is keeping quiet on the matter, as is Blackwater and the other organizations cited in Scahill’s article. Scahill said the Canadian Military paid Blackwater over $1.6 million for training, which was provided through Blackwater’s subsidiary, the Terrorism Research Center. Blackwater violated some US export control laws, reported Yahoo News this past August, violations which included the provision of training to the Canadian Military. While the list of violations the US Department of State found Blackwater guilty of is extensive, the company was only fined $42 million. The company name ‘Blackwater’ was changed to Xe (pronounced ‘zee’) in 2009, which Source Watch called a ‘rebranding effort.’ The company is now up for sale. AFP reported Blackwater operatives were accused of killing 17 Iraqis, wounding a further 22 in what was said to be an unprovoked attack in 2007. The company was later cleared of all wrongdoing. Blackwater was ordered out of Iraq earlier this year because of that violent incident said CBS News.

GMO FOOD PRODUCTS AND PRODUCTION AIDS APPROVED FOR SALE/USE IN AUSTRALIA

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Make the biotech industry part of the Australian federal election debate in 2010

With little likelihood of the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council handing on its final report of the Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy before the federal election this year, I imagine that the biotech industry in Australia is feeling confident that it will not come under real scrutiny during the election campaign.

Because this is an important issue which already sees genetically modified foods (such as certain potato varieties) capable of being sold to the general public without any requirement that it be labelled such, it is important that all candidates standing for a federal seat in 2010 be asked to state their position on the labelling of genetically modified of produce/products/ingredients/foods and the makeup of any future review committee.

How members of the new parliament view issues surrounding genetic modification will be reflected in how they vote on any proposed changes to food labelling law. The forthcoming election campaign is one more chance for Australian consumers to get their own points of view across to those wishing to represent them.

This is what the ANZFRC review website has to say about the one member of the Independent Review Panel with a glaring conflict of interest as Executive Director of the Australian Oilseeds Federation briefed to promote GM technology:

Nicholas Clive Goddard Mr Nick Goddard is a communications and marketing professional with over 25 years experience in the food industry. He has solid track record in bringing new and innovative food products to market, and in doing so has developed a good understanding of the challenges and opportunities the existing food labelling laws present to both businesses and consumers. Mr. Goddard has a Bachelor of Commerce and an MBA, and brings a pragmatic business and solutions oriented approach to the Panel. He is currently Executive Director of an agri-food industry association.
(Conflict of Interest declaration (PDF 190 KB))



















The final report of the Review Committee will be provided to the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council in December 2010 and to COAG in early 2011.
The review process began in late 2009.

Monsanto plays the smart@rse

I got the steely eye this month and a pointed reference to the need for 'somebody' to do a post on Monsanto to keep readers up to date and "Mr. Monsanto" on his/her toes - so here goes.

Some folk just can't help themselves - they have to try to go that one step too far.

This is Monsanto blogging last Tuesday mocking concerns about the environmental impact of GM seed varieties known as Roundup Ready; "It's a bird, it's a plane, no, it's SUPERWEED!"....And finally, what the heck is a superweed? Seriously, this term gets thrown around a lot, primarily in non-agriculture venues. I imagine pigweed standing tall with a red cape, refusing to die. Glyphosate may no longer be able to kill these weeds, but that by itself doesn't make them "superweeds." There was a time when glyphosate wasn't around, and guess what? These weeds existed....

The first resistant weed –horseweed – was discovered in Delaware in 2000. But, I guess the mainstream media has decided weed resistance is now in vogue."

Yep, that's right! It's perfectly fine that wild weeds are developing spontaneous genetic responses to Roundup and other glyphosate products used as part of genetically modified grain and cotton agriculture.

Something which was pointed out in late 2009 in a PNAS article concerning the dicot weed Palmer's Pigweed; "This occurrence of gene amplification as an herbicide resistance mechanism in a naturally occurring weed population is particularly significant because it could threaten the sustainable use of glyphosate-resistant crop technology."

Nothing we at Monsanto need to worry about! After all there are at least 18 glyphosate resistant varieties of weed globally, but other herbicide manufacturers are having similar problems so ours doesn't really count.

And even though the media has been reporting on 'superweeds' since news first got out between 1987 and 1996 we'll just pooh pooh all this attention, reset that ticking clock to 2000, ignore the fact that the we knew about the potential for herbicide resistance long before putting GM seed on the market, that our patented meddling has created almost one new resistant variety each year and pretend it's really all the farmer's fault anyway.

Oh, well done Monsanto!

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

FSANZ and the Food Labelling Law & Policy Review: intending to keep consumers ignorant for international biotech companies' benefit?

Hat tip to MADGE for pointing out the fact that the Food Labelling Law & Policy Review March 2010 Issues Consultation Paper seems to suggest that it would be acceptable for the general public and individual consumers/shoppers to be deliberately kept in the dark concerning certain food ingredients and/or preparation processes:

3.16 Certain technological developments in food production – genetic modification (GM), irradiation and nano-technology – have raised consumer concerns relating to these technologies that have led to calls for disclosure on food labelling. However, caution needs to be exercised in order that the development and application of these and other innovative technologies are not unduly inhibited.

If you have any concerns about this attitude now is the time to raise your voice.

Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy website with online submission page. Submissions closing date is 14 May 2010.
A public consultation is scheduled for Sydney on 29 March and one can register here.

Monsanto's greed exceeds itself

Anyone who has been following the fortunes of biotech companies associated with genetically modified seed will recall Monsanto & Co's oft repeated claim that it's really in the business of feeding the world and not the simple pursuit of profit.

Once more in 2010 this monopolisitic multinational's actions give lie to the PR spin, as it is discovered trying to assert royalty rights over Cefetra's imported animal feed product made from GMO Roundup-ready soybean and accusing this company and others of infringing its patent.
The ruling mentioned below appears to be an interim opinion with the court's final ruling expected sometime later in the year.

The owner of a patented strain of herbicide-resistant soy can't collect royalties on soy meal imported from Argentina and used for animal feed, a European Court of Justice adviser ruled.
Though the soy meal contains residue of Monsanto's patented gene, it's no longer being used for its patented purpose of resisting pesticides.
Monsanto developed glyphosate, a broad-spectrum pesticide marketed under the name Roundup, along with Roundup-ready crops, which are genetically engineered to resist glyphosate.
Advocate General Paolo Mengozzi, in response to a request for clarification from a Dutch court, advised the high court that a European Union biotech directive distinguishes between simple discovery and invention of genetic code.
DNA that simply exists isn't patentable under the EU directive, Mengozzi stated, because this would allow an "unspecified number of derivative products" to fall under control of the patent-holder. For a patent to be enforceable, the genetic information must be "performing the functions described in the patent," Mengozzi said.
The ruling shot down Monsanto's demand for royalties from Dutch importers of genetically modified soybean meal. Although the soy meal, used for animal feed, contains "residue" of the Roundup-ready gene, after harvest the code is no longer active in its purpose of resisting the pesticide, Mengozzi ruled.

European Court of Justice full interim opinion transcript here.

Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops On Pesiticide Use

The opening paragraphs of a November 2009 report commissioned by The Organic Center Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops On Pesiticide Use in the United States: The First Thirteen Years:

This report explores the impact of the adoption of genetically engineered (GE) corn, soybean, and cotton on pesticide use in the United States, drawing principally on data from the United States Department of Agriculture. The most striking finding is that GE crops have been responsible for an increase of 383 million pounds of herbicide use in the U.S. over the fi rst 13 years of commercial use of GE crops (1996-2008).

This dramatic increase in the volume of herbicides applied swamps the decrease in insecticide use attributable to GE corn and cotton, making the overall chemical footprint of today's GE crops decidedly negative. The report identifies, and discusses in detail, the primary cause of the increase -- the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds.

The steep rise in the pounds of herbicides applied with respect to most GE crop acres is not news to farmers. Weed control is now widely acknowledged as a serious management problem within GE cropping systems. Farmers and weed scientists across the heartland and cotton belt are now struggling to devise affordable and effective strategies to deal with the resistant weeds emerging in the wake of herbicide-tolerant crops.

But skyrocketing herbicide use is news to the public at large, which still harbors the illusion, fed by misleading industry claims and advertising, that biotechnology crops are reducing pesticide use. Such a claim was valid for the first few years of commercial use of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton. But, as this report shows, it is no longer.

An accurate assessment of the performance of GE crops on pesticide use is important for reasons other than correcting the excesses of industry advertising. It is also about the future direction of agriculture, research, and regulatory policy.

PDF full report download

Monsanto under the media spotlight once again

Click on image to enlarge

Monsanto and Co is under the media spotlight once more at US ABC News in a four-page article AP IMPACT: Monsanto Seed Business Role Revealed which looks at how this biotech company is determined to create a global seed monopoly.

Something Australian farmers and consumers should consider carefully, given government's almost uncritical acceptance of gene technology, the very narrow profit margins of many family farms and those comfortable margins jealously defended by the dominant retail grocery companies.

"We now believe that Monsanto has control over as much as 90 percent of (seed genetics). This level of control is almost unbelievable," said Neil Harl, agricultural economist at Iowa State University who has studied the seed industry for decades. "The upshot of that is that it's tightening Monsanto's control, and makes it possible for them to increase their prices long term. And we've seen this happening the last five years, and the end is not in sight."

Monsanto is rather upset about the claims made in this and other similar articles and, as usual, has gone into print itself with a quick muddy of the waters over at its own blog Beyond The Rows.

I'm sure that everyone is relieved to know that, according to its corporate blogger Mica, the biotech giant really doesn't control 90 per cent of seed genetics because; we licensed the technology to hundreds of seed companies, including our major competitors, and no one has offered a better product to these seed companies or to growers.

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Monsanto is another word for elitist ethnocentrism

This is Monsanto & Co. on Twitter last week:

MonsantoCo
Even after supplying those who need it this year, the US be able to save 10% of this year's corn harvest for the future. #ThankaFarmer about 5 hours ago from Twuffer

This is what the media reported in the five days before Monsanto made that boast:

• It's estimated one-sixth of the global population, about one billion people, are malnourished and going hungry every day. And there are real fears that number will be much bigger by 2050, when the world's population is projected to pass nine billion.
• In Guatemala, over 400,000 families are in desperate need of food due to a disastrous drought and crop failure. Guatemala’s President Alvaro Colom has declared a national state of calamity due to extreme food shortages. Hardest hit are young children and pregnant women, who are vulnerable to malnutrition and need sufficient nourishment to grow and fight off disease.
• The United Nations children's fund (UNICEF) has urged for more action to be taken in southern Sudan to stop severe food shortage in parts of that region. UNICEF's Deputy Executive Director Hilde F. Johnson who visited in the vast region said now is the time to act. "Now is the time to act. Everybody needs to do their best to stop this humanitarian emergency, which is already affecting 1.5 million people across southern Sudan," said Johnson in a statement received here Friday.
• The number of U.S. households unable to put adequate food on the table increased sharply during the latest recession, reaching the highest level recorded since USDA began monitoring household food security in 1995. Proportionally, increases in food insecurity were greatest in groups that were historically less vulnerable to food insecurity.

I don't know what is more confronting - Monsanto's corporate elitism when it comes to American society, its insular ethnocentricity (based as it is within a global super power which is also one of the leading cereal-growing nations) or its determination to treat its audience like dumb idiots. No wonder this multinational appears to be losing market share.

More on Monsanto:
Monsanto Pulls GM Corn Amid Food Safety Concerns,Scoop, 17 November 2009
Monsanto faces 'distrust' in seed battle, Delaware Online, 15 November 2009

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

An environmentally friendly domestic cat and a dog promoting GMO Red List chocolate

From Montreal Gardens Topiaries

Cadbury's Glass and a Half chocolate advertisement

The leafy cat and garden friends are quite colourful and innocuous. However, the poor dog is lumbered with not only promoting a company which won't guarantee that it will not use genetically modified ingredients in its products - the advertised chocolate is poisonous to all domestic dog breeds.
DON"T FEED YOUR DOG CHOCOLATE!

In 2007 Monsanto spent US$4M+ on lobbying, in 2008 it spent US$8M+, while in 2009....

Graph U.S. Agricultural sector lobbying expenditure 2009

Monsanto & Co. continues to expand its dominance of the world seed and genetically modified food additive markets with certain of its corporate expenses rising each year this century.

In 2006 this biotech multinational spent over US$3 million on lobbying governments and government agencies. By 2008 it was spending over US$8 million. In 2009 so far Monsanto & Co has spent over US$6 million on similar activities.

It is only one of 342 agricultural sector lobbyists in the United States listed by Open Secrets but is by far the biggest spender this year.

The U.S. agricultural lobby sector in 2009 is worth $25,721,913, has made over $2 million in campaign contributions for the American 2010 election cycle to date and Monsanto is in the top five donation contributors.

In February of this year Monsanto approached the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seeking a ruling that stearidonic (SDA) omega-3 soybean oil was generally recognised as safe.

Monsanto intends to market SDA soybean oil as a food ingredient in the United States in a variety of food products including baked goods and baking mixes, breakfast cereals and grains, cheeses, dairy product analogs, fats and oils, fish products, frozen dairy desserts and mixes, grain products and pastas, gravies and sauces, meat products, milk products, nuts and nut products, poultry products, processed fruit juices, processed vegetable products, puddings and fillings, snack foods, soft candy, and soups and soup mixes. SDA soybean oil will be added to foods at levels that provide 375 mg SDA/serving.

Now it is reported that Monsanto is positioning itself to release soy-based GMO omega-3 oil on the market sometime after 2010 and according to a Monsanto media release the FDA has announced this month that genetically modified omega-3 oil is safe to use (however the FDA makes it plain that it has solely relied on Monsanto's own assessment).

Are we getting close to quod erat demonstrandum?

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

What's in that icecream you are eating?

What's in that icream you are eating that wasn't there in your grandmother's day?

In Australia the Federal Government has in total eight pages listing foods using gene technology and approved for sale under the Food Standards Australian New Zealand Act 1991.

Including nine versions of New Leaf potato, canola seed/oil/flour/syrup, corn/flour/oil/syrup/food grade ethanol, cotton oils/cottonseed oils, glucose made from fungus, soy foods/oil/protein meal, pectin, baker's yeast/yeast, icestructuring protein made from fish, food processing enzyme made from a bacteria, and sugar beet.

Genetically modified organisms can now form part of the production process or ingredients in foods - from takeaway foods like fish & chips/meat pies, frozen convenience food such as lasagna/pizza, to staples like bread through to traditional desserts that your grandmother used to make.

GM products approved as food, food additives and processing aids (PDF 79 KB)
GM products approved as therapeutics (PDF 19 KB)
GM products approved as pesticides or veterinary medicines (PDF 9 KB)

List of applications and licences for Dealings involving Intentional Release (DIR) of GMOs into the environment on behalf of CSIRO, BSES Ltd, Florigene P/L, Dept of Primary Industry (Vic), Bayer Crop Science P/L, Monsanto Australia Ltd, Queensland UT, University of Queensland, University of Adelaide, Hexima Ltd, Dept. of Primary Industries & Fisheries (Qld), Imugene Ltd, Dow AgroSciences Australia P/L, Syngenta Seeds P/L, Dept of Primary Industries, Aventis CropScience P/L.

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Photo from Google Images

First Dog On The Moon takes the mickey out of Monsanto with Canolabees

First Dog On The Moon cartoon from Crikey
5 October 2009
Click on image to enlarge

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Dear Mr. MeadowLea, about those seeds...........

I have noticed a MeadowLea margarine advertisement screening on television for the past few weeks which focuses on the goodness found in the seeds used to make its spread.

On the MeadowLea website it claims:

Farmers grow our canola & sunflower seeds
MeadowLea spreads are made from over 70,000 natural seeds. The canola seeds that go into our MeadowLea spreads are Non-Genetically Modified. Our canola seeds are sourced locally from Australian Seed growers, whilst the sunflower seeds are sourced from the warm climate of South America.

Now I do not doubt that at this moment MeadowLea intends to honour this online claim.

However, I did not catch this non-GM pledge repeated in the particular television ad I saw.
Neither have I seen this exact claim on MeadowLea packaging.

What is claimed on the MeadowLea tubs is that the Canola Oil used is non-genetically modified. Something that can be safely stated in Australia, as refined oil made from GM seed does not have to be so identified on a food label because it is not considered to have identifiable genetically modified plant DNA remaining.

There appears to be a long silence on the nature of the sunflower seed used in the manufacture of the margarine.
No mention is made of the fact that in the warm climate of South America mentioned by Goodman Fielder there have been genetically modified sunflower seed field trials underway since 2007 and, although there isn't a commercial quantity available yet the absence of a non-GM claim for this ingredient leaves the company with a lot of wriggle room should it chose to source from GM sunflower in the future.

So Mr. MeadowLea, Original, Salt Reduced, Light, Extra Light, Canola, Lactose Free - I think I'll give all margarine a miss for now.

If you genuinely want your products to be viewed as special a rethink of your labelling and advertising strategy might be advisable.
This is not the time for commercial ambiguity.

Is nature having the last laugh on Monsanto & Co?

Photograph of Palmer Pigweed from Syngenta blog

This U.S. report from Memphis Online last Sunday:

All across the Mid-South, hundreds of thousands of acres of cotton and soybean fields have been infested with a rapacious, fast-growing weed that's become resistant to the main herbicide on which farmers have relied for more than a decade.

Palmer pigweed, often called "careless weed" by field hands, often is surviving and even thriving despite treatments with the chemical glyphosate -- most commonly sold under the trade name Roundup.

In Arkansas alone, the weed has invaded some 750,000 acres of crops, including half the 250,000 acres of cotton. In Tennessee, nearly 500,000 acres have some degree of infestation, with the counties bordering the Mississippi River hardest hit.

The infestation is cutting farmers' cotton yields by up to one-third and in some cases doubling or tripling their weed-control costs.

The invasive noxious weed Amaranthus palmeri which is doing all that damage in America is also found in Australia and has other cousins here, including the noxious weed Amaranthus blitoides (prostrate pigweed).

Pigweed is not the only pest which has become resistant to glycines and the world-wide list includes a number of other pasture or crop weed species which are found in this country.

The biotechnology industry's boast used to be that the glycine derivative Glyphosate or RoundUp was effective in suppressing 76 out of 78 of the world's worst cropping weeds. This boast appears to be a pale shadow of its former self.

Which leads to the inevitable question - just how long will Australian farmers have before the touted 'benefits' of GM crops disappear into thin air?

The faces behind "Mr. Monsanto"

I've been told in no uncertain terms that it's my turn to do a post on Monsanto & Co., so here it is - a view of some of the faces behind Monsanto's media monitor, Mr. Monsanto.

PHOTO: Mica Veihman, head of Monsanto’s social media team (seated), with Chris Paton and Kathleen Manning, is tapping into Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. From the St. Lois Business Journal on 8th August 2009.

Regular readers will remember Kathleen for the noteworty line that no blog is too big or small for Monsanto to monitor.

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Monsanto thinks there is something 'magical' about GM pollination of non-GM crops.....

There is no doubt about it, Monsanto & Co employees are a scary group when they start to blog.

Earlier this month in a post titled I am Monsanto one of these happy clappy souls decided to pose a rather sarcastic hypothetical question; Did you know that pollen from our genetically-modified crops will magically migrate into another farmer's field and contaminate his crop?

Apparently (if one is a Monsanto employee) the well-known natural processes known as pollen drift and cross fertilisation are not within the bounds of our world - for GM traits to be found in non-GM crops or GM plants to be discovered in non-GM fields then something otherworldly has to have occurred.

This will come as a complete surprise to biologists and agronomists:

Managing "Pollen Drift" to Minimize Contamination of Non-GMO Corn, AGF-153

Gene flow through pollen drift: a scientific perspective

Pollen drift and the bystanding farmer: harmonising patent law and common law on the technological frontier

However Monsanto employees are not finished with spin on the company blog Monsanto according to Monsanto.

In another post called Agent Orange and Monsanto the case is made for a benign and patriotic Monsanto participating in deliberate dioxin contamination on a large scale because; The U.S. government, under the Defense Production Act, directed seven companies – including Monsanto, which was then primarily a chemical company – to manufacture the material.

Yes, the President made me do it appears to be the argument here.

A government contract defence that U.S. courts have not apparently fully supported, as there was a 1984 case in which in has been reported that Judge Weinstein encouraged settlement and eventually directed Monsanto to pay over a large percentage of an $180 million out of court settlement in favour of American veterans.

However, in a classic look-here-not-there manoeuvre Monsanto directs our attention to the unsuccessful 2004 litigation by Vietnamese veterans in which it was also a co-defendant.

All the while remaining silent on the fact that sales of Agent Orange and Lasso were basically what kept Monsanto's agricultural chemical division in the black during the 1960s and the Viet Nam War.

Now I have been wondering of late why it is that Monsanto employees are so cavalier with how they use available fact and historical record.

I refuse to believe that their obvious youth (in comparison to North Coast Voices authors) is a significant factor because older people do not have a monopoly on commonsense or knowledge.

So I am left with the possibility that Monsanto's corporate culture is so intense that employees are totally indoctrinated by the end of their first year with the firm and thereafter are incapable of recognising that Monsanto & Co hasn't been a uniformly ethical company from its inception up to the more recent past.

Graphic from arizona.edu

UPDATE:

In June 2009 the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an appeal by the Secretary of the Dept of Agriculture et al (including Monsanto Company as Defendant-intervenor-Appellant) and upheld a lower court injunction against the USDA's deregulation determination re GMO perennial alfalfa.

Geertson Seed Farms et al had sought relief from the US courts, in part on the grounds that there was a need to wait until there had been sufficient investigation of the potential for pollen drift and cross-pollination.

Bless their cute curly heads! Monsanto blogs on morality

From Monsanto according to Monsanto post on 20 July 2009:

In this video I discussed the issue of other farmers saving patented seed with farmers who don't believe in that type of farming practice.

If you think about it, it's pretty simple. The law is the law. When you sign an agreement, you must obey that agreement. Just like when I buy a CD of my favorite artist (which I do have quite the collection), I don't burn it for friends. At the same time, I download quite a bit of songs to jam to on my iPod and I buy each and every one of those songs from iTunes.

Although these examples are on a much smaller scale, it's the right thing to do.

My parents raised me to always do the right thing, even if it costs more or doesn't seem like the most appealing option. I was raised on good morals, which I credit and thank my parents daily for. Just as I was raised on these morals, so were the two farmers featured in this video.

I hope you see it that way.

Leaving aside the ungainly stretch inherent in likening perpetual seed patents to music copyright, the irony of Monsanto blogging about morals is readily apparent.

This is the same company which spent years happily spreading dioxin/PCB contamination across the world. Here is a brief potted history of its recent transgressions and another about heavy metal contamination due to Monsanto mining operations.

Sadly Monsanto does not appear to see that its recalcitrant past concerning environmental degradation and denial of human rights makes a mockery of its current claim that; The law is the law.

Picture from Google Images

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Want to shop locally for GM-free food?

So you want to shop for GM-free food? Well, good luck, because there is still no reliable product labelling in place across Australia.

The next best thing is to access the True Food Guide which at least broadly points concerned consumers in the right direction.

The guide now lists alcohol products.

Download updated 16-page True Food Guide here.

If you are blessed with a comfortable income, then Santos Wholefoods of Byron Bay and Mullumbimby offers an online GM-free, organic and natural produce shopping service.

If it's July it must be time to mention Monsanto again....

Another month has passed and the big biotech companies continue their push to dominate the basic mechanism of food production - seeds, fertiliser and chemical weed eradication/suppression.

Each month that passes highlights Monsanto & Co's abysmal safety record.

From the Idaho Business Review, June 29 2009:

Federal regulators say an Idaho mine that Monsanto uses to make Roundup weed killer has violated federal and state water quality laws almost since it opened, sending selenium and other heavy metals into the region's streams. The Environmental Protection Agency says problems at the St. Louis-based company's mine near the Idaho-Wyoming border were documented starting in April 2002, 15 months after it won Bureau of Land Management approval.
The mine recently has failed to halt metals-laden water seeping from a waste dump.
Eva DeMaria, an EPA enforcement official in Seattle, says, "The measures they have implemented aren't working.''
The disclosure comes as Monsanto Co. wants federal officials to approve a new mine in the region.
Monsanto lobbyist Trent Clark says his company has remedied some EPA concerns and continues to work to fix violations at the waste dump.

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.