Monday, May 23, 2011

Bad Kitty Himself


Here's Noa the destroyer mulling mayhem on potting table.  He found a way to reach the bird nest built in the basket of our fruit picker, smashing tiny eggs on ground.  While watering this morning I found my thick aluminum plant tags mysteriously pulled out, bent & full of holes.  He likes to CHEW METAL.  Crazy cat.  We can work on projects & garden only if he allows it.  If we show too much interest in something, he gets jealous & tries to destroy it.  If I want him to leave something alone I have to lock him in the atrium or pretend I'm not interested in it and walk away.  He's also the flesh-shredding cuisinart of the animal world, and I thought he'd mellow out as he grew into adulthood, but noooo.  He growls at the mailman (any man, actually), plays fetch til you're tired, insists on drinking from the tap while I brush my teeth, and beats the shit out of our other cat if he sees you petting or talking to him.  He likes to bite & swat at ankles if you try to push him away from something he's determined to wreck.  Puppy Cat, Cuisinart Kitty, Bad Cat, Felonious Monk, Monkey Cat, Gato Diablo... evil has many nicknames. But he cracks me up to no end.  I've had dozens of cats & he's definitely the most hilarious. 

My first attempt at steam distilling rose geranium for essential oil/hydrosol

plant material turning a yellowish color as it steams   



Sunday, May 22, 2011

Various Projects I'm Working On

The entire house has become one big, dirty, greenhouse/lab/art studio.


Assembling the essential oil steam distillation "lab"



Potting up an assortment of moss, tiny corsican mint, trailing dichondras &  contrasting ground covers that will look cool spilling out of pots & creeping between them. This is in the atrium, which is an open, glass-enclosed room in the center of the house. Good humidity.

Coffee table I found on the street that I'm making "yard art" out of.  The white is primer.  I'm going to paint it a deep maroon with light "barely lilac accents (there are swatches in the foreground). On top is rose geranium I harvested yesterday that is wilting a bit before I distill it.  The whole house smells incredible already!  I'm thinking of putting a piece of beveled glass on top to make it more weather-resistant & to create a space to display oddities underneath. The edges of the table are higher than the surface, which would fill with rain water like a bowl & rot the table if I don't cover it with something.  Thought about decking it out & putting it back on my neighbor's doorstep just to freak them out.

The unholy project mess in the livingroom. Outgrew my bedroom desk.  Collecting books on plant propagation, beekeeping, sustainable farming, politics, organic chemistry basics, seed catalogs galore, files... It's no wonder I'm spending 16 hours a day working.  Oh...um... the hideous simulated wood grain coffee table & embarrassingly pink couch are NOT mine!

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Starting over.

Howdy cats n' kittens!

As you know, the 'organic' potting soil I bought to start my seedling project sucked ass & I'm having to start again.  A friend who works at a marijuana dispensary is going to give me a bag of soil that sells for $16 a bag to try.  He guarantees my plants will thrive & I believe him.  Since pot growers pay top dollar for seed, they probably know better than anyone what works & what doesn't.  No, I'm not going to grow pot.  I'm legal to do so in CA, but where there's pot growing there's trouble & I don't need any trouble.

One of the snail flower vines finally sprouted.  I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the others.

The melons are sprouting.  Orangelo watermelon, golden midget, Sakata's sweet, Old Time Tennessee & Burrell's Jumbo are all making an appearance.  They won't be ready to sell for another few weeks, though.


The tomatoes are struggling.  My Gold Medal all died in the crappy soil.  It's a little early for them yet anyway.  They'd be further along if I had a cold frame & better dirt.  Live and learn.


The pole beans are doing the best of all the seedlings.  The purple pole beans & the blue lake pole beans are already 6" high.  Not all of them germinated though, so these ones will be kept for breeding.


One of the rare Pink Feathers Morning Glories sprouted.  I'm really excited about it.  Can't wait to see what they look like in real life.  I'm hoping they'll stop traffic & bring in customers.  


My new honeybees have settled in. I put on the full beekeeper getup for the first time & took a peak inside the hive to make sure they're doing okay. Lots of eggs, nectar, honey & comb.  They're doing better than expected.  I won't remove any honey until the end of next year's bee season, though.


Peace!





Monday, April 18, 2011

Seedlings are Coming Along. Exciting new varieties & old favorites. All grown organically.

The snails, lack of greenhouse, lack of experience, & poor potting soil have made for a rough start. I have decided to delay the first plant sale until May.  I'll have a better selection & more robust seedlings to offer.  I'd like to have everything available by my first sale, but it looks like certain varieties will be available sporadically this season.  A lot of what I'm doing this season is "field trials" & building up seed stock. 

Most of the seedlings are heirlooms grown from organic, un-treated, open-pollinated, non-GMO seed.  All are grown without chemicals.  Composting, precision watering, solar power, biocontrol (using beneficials for pest control), and maintaining pollinator habitat are examples of how I strive to keep my operation as eco-friendly as I can. 

Here is a list of all the plants I hope to offer.  The seeds have been sown, and some have sprouted.  Some haven't and may not.  Some are being offered as seedlings only. Some will be available as seeds only (or both). Some will be available as fresh produce when plants yield more than I can handle.  Some will be available as dried herbs.  Some won't be ready until 2012 (but ask if you're interested in them).  Another list with photos, growing instructions & other info is in the works.  I'm happy to email the catalog in progress.

Bananas:
Blood Banana (ornamental)
Pink Banana (edible/ornamental)

Beans:
Blue Lake Pole Bean
Ruby Moon Hyacinth Bean
Purple Peacock Pole Bean
Sunset Runner Pole Bean
Yellow Pole Wax Bean
 
Romanesco Broccoli
Purple Brussels Sprout

Carrots:
Cosmic Purple Carrot
Gold Mine Carrot
Little Finger Carrot

Corn: 
Japonica Striped Maize (corn)
Oaxacan Green Dent Corn
Tom Thumb Corn

Purple Cauliflower
Spacemaster Cucumber
Pingtung Long Eggplant
Early Purple Vienna Kohlrabi

Melons:
Banana Melon
Burrell's Jumbo Melon 
Golden Midget Melon
Moon & Stars Watermelon
Old Time Tennessee Melon 
Orangelo Watermelon 
Rich Sweetness 132 Melon
Sakata's Sweet Melon
Tigger Melon
 
Yellow Borettana Onion (aka: Cipollini) 

Peppers:
Anaheim Chili (mild)
Ancho Gigantea/Poblano Chili (mild)
Lemon Drop Pepper (hot)
Tequila Sunrise Pepper (mild)
Corne di Toro Rosso Pepper (sweet)
Tolli's Sweet Italian Pepper
Yolo Wonder Pepper (sweet)
Golden California Wonder Pepper (sweet)
Orange Sun Pepper (sweet)
Purple Beauty Pepper (sweet)

Yellow Wonder Wild Strawberry
Yellow Summer Squash
White Scallop Summer Squash
Purple Tomatillo

tomatoes:
Ananas Noire Tomato
Black Elephant Tomato
Brandywine Tomato (Red)
Copia Tomato
Costoluto Genovese Tomato
Coyote Tomato
Gold Medal Tomato
Hawaiian Currant Tomato 
Hillbilly Potato Leaf Tomato
Huan U Tomato
Iraqi Tomato from Basra
Ilini Gold Tomato
Isis Candy Tomato
Peacevine Cherry Tomato
Pierce's Pride Tomato
Purple Russian Tomato
Speckled Roman Tomato

HERBS/GREENS
Italian Arugula 
Rustic Arugula 
Bee Balm
Borage
Catnip 
Huacatay
Hyssop
Purple Dark Opal Basil
Purple Petra Basil
Sweet Green Basil
Black Pepper Vine (2011=field trials. May be available in 2012)
Cardamon Ginger (2011=field trials. May be available in 2012)
Garlic Chives
Cilantro 
Lemon Grass
Patchouli (2011=field trials. May be available in 2012)
Sweet Mace (aka: Mexican Tarragon)

FLOWERS
Aquilegia 'Double Pleat Blackberry'
Bee's Friend 
Bishop's Children Dahlia
Calico Flower (vine)
Color Fountains Cleome
Diablo Cosmos 
Four O'Clocks (hot pink)
Glory Lily (vine)
Munstead Lavender
Pink Baby's Breath
White Baby's Breath
Black Peony Poppy
Mailbox Mix Morning Glory
Pink Feathers Morning Glory 
Scarlet O'hara Morning Glory
Tall Purpea Morning Glory
Pride of Gibraltar
Tropical Fruit Moss Rose
Saltwater Taffy Swirls Sweet Pea 
Scarlet Runner Bean
Sensitive Plant
Snail Flower Vine
Mexican Torch Sunflower (orange/red)
Mexican Torch Sunflower (yellow)
Green Envy Zinnia



Sunday, April 3, 2011

Nobody reads my blog.

I was encouraged to start this blog because I send too many emails to people about what's going on in the world.  I've had success on Twitter & Facebook, but no one reads my blog. 

Growing organic, heirloom/rare seedlings in my backyard has proven much more difficult than I had anticipated.  Dirt + seed + water = plant?  Sometimes.  Some of the more exotic plants haven't germinated yet & I fear the seeds are duds. Driving rain killed my Sensitive Plants. Too much rain killed the eggplant & tomato seedlings. Snails ate at least 30% of what sprouted despite attempts to stop them.  I even found a plant dug out & eaten by squirrels.  Last year, it was armies of earwigs. 

What hasn't been drowned or eaten by varmints is almost ready for my first sale.  I'm aiming for April 23rd, a week after I get my bees & a day before Easter.  Be there or be square!

- Nanda -

Monday, February 14, 2011

UC and CSU team up on new agriculture, environment and human sciences projects

February 14, 2011

CONTACT: John Stumbos, UC Davis College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, (530) 754-4979, jdstumbos@ucdavis.edu

Eight teams of researchers, educators and students from the University of California and California State University have received funding for projects to produce rapid results on topics as diverse as North Coast job development, improved irrigation practices for the San Joaquin Valley, and new technology to detect, monitor and treat mastitis in dairy cows.

The eight projects, selected from 44 proposals, address high-priority issues in agriculture, natural resources, and human sciences. They are also intended to foster collaboration among California's colleges and universities. Funding for the eight projects totaled $79,000 and is provided by UC's Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

"These projects reflect the collaborative spirit in the UC and CSU systems and the commitment the faculty share in addressing issues of importance to Californians," said Neal Van Alfen, dean of the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences at UC Davis. "We developed this competitive grants program to leverage scarce resources for innovative research and to provide hands-on educational experiences for our students."

The campuses involved are those with primary responsibility for agricultural and natural resources research and education in the state: UC Davis, UC Berkeley, UC Riverside, and California State University campuses at Chico, Fresno, Humboldt, Pomona, and San Luis Obispo. The grants program, now in its second year, was designed by deans and department chairs in 2009. The awarded projects, with principal investigators, are listed below:
  • Assessing technology literacy skills of minority college students – Researchers from UC Riverside and Cal Poly, Pomona will assess the extent of an information technology "literacy gap" in Hispanic and other minority college students to improve student success in higher education. (Raheja , Senanayake)
  • Giant sequoia growth response to disturbance intensity – Forestry scientists from UC Berkeley and Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo will measure growth response to low, medium and high levels of disturbance (e.g., fire) to better inform managers of giant sequoia groves and to provide a unique learning opportunity for UC and CSU students (York, Sink)
  • Developing a collaborative environment and community research on California’s North Coast – Researchers from Humboldt State University, UC Davis, and UC Berkeley will hold a three-day workshop in Orleans, Calif. to formulate a strategic plan for natural resource management and job development with the involvement of tribes, community organizations, and schools. (Everett, Sherman, Baker, Ballard, Romm)
  • Student research internship program in nutrition – Two faculty members and two undergraduate students from Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo will participate in a 10-week nutrition internship with faculty from the Western Human Nutrition Research Center at UC Davis in summer 2011 (Reaves, Loan)
  • Comparing subsurface drip and overhead mechanized irrigation systems – Researchers from Fresno State University, UC Davis and the UC Kearney Agricultural Research & Extension Center in Parlier will compare water use efficiency, weed management, and profitability of flat-planted minimum tillage cropping systems using subsurface drip and overhead mechanized irrigation systems. (Shrestha, Mitchell)
  • Fecundity of navel orangeworm reared from pistachio, walnut and almond hosts – Entomologists from Chico State University and UC Davis will document the reproduction of navel orangeworm ­ a severe insect pest of almonds, pistachios, and walnuts – in field and laboratory investigations to enhance integrated pest management recommendations for growers.  (Boyd, Zalom)
  • New technologies for detection, monitoring and treatment of mastitis in dairy cows – Scientists and students from Cal Poly, Pomona will team with UC Cooperative Extension in San Bernardino County, and with an industry partner to investigate the use of infrared thermography for early detection and monitoring, and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy for treatment of mastitis in dairy cows. (Murinda, Peterson, Siegel)
  • Factors influencing probiotic survival in ice cream – Food scientists at UC Davis and Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo will study factors affecting the shelf life of probiotics in full-fat ice cream and determine what factors affect probiotic survival in simulated gastric digestion. (Singh, Lammert)
Reports on project outcomes are expected in December 2011.

###

MEDIA CONTACT:
DeeDee Kitterman, UC Davis College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, (530) 752-9484, dmkitterman@ucdavis.edu

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Here are a list of seed companies that are owned by Monsanto



* Territorial Seeds
* Totally Tomato
* Vermont Bean Seed Co.
* Burpee
* Cook’s Garden
* Johnny’s Seeds
* Earl May Seed
* Gardens Alive
* Lindenberg Seeds
* Mountain Valley Seed
* Park Seed
* T&T Seeds
* Tomato Growers Supply
* Willhite Seed Co.
* Nichol’s
* Rupp
* Osborne
* Snow
* Stokes
* Jungs
* R.H. Shumway
* The Vermont Bean Seed Company
* Seeds for the World
* Seymour’s Selected Seeds
* HPS
* Roots and Rhizomes
* McClure and Zimmerman Quality Bulb Brokers
* Spring Hill Nurseries
* Breck’s Bulbs
* Audubon Workshop
* Flower of the Month Club
* Wayside Gardens
* Park Bulbs
* Park’s Countryside Garden

Iraq: After the Army comes Monsanto

Order 81 mandates that Iraq’s commercial-scale farmers must now purchase "registered” seeds. These are available through agribusiness giants like Monsanto, Cargill Corporation and the World Wide Wheat Company, but Monsanto is far and away the most significant player in the registered seed market. 

Order 81, by first forcing Iraq’s farmers to use genetically modified  seeds, and then by declaring natural seeds an infringement on Monsanto technology, will result in the sorts of tragedies seen elsewhere in the developing world.  

Order 81, mandated under the dystopian title "Plant Variety Protection,” turns the agricultural world on its head by defining indigenous crops as invasive and GM crops as uniform and stable.

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine has called for an immediate moratorium on genetically modified food.  Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, & inflammation. Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid & carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging & possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species. Changes in the kidney, pancreas & spleen have also been documented. http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

The widespread use of glyphosate (Monsanto's RoundUp) is causing negative impacts on soil & plants as well as possibly animal & human health. These are key findings of Don Huber, emeritus professor of plant pathology, Purdue University. “ignoring potential non-target detrimental side effects of any chemical, especially used as heavily as glyphosate, may have dire consequences for agriculture such as rendering soils infertile, crops non-productive, & plants less nutritious. To do otherwise might well compromise not only agricultural sustainability, but also the health & well-being of animals & humans.”  http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may10/consequenceso_widespread_glyphosate_use.php

According to the British govt's chief scientific adviser, Prof Sir John Beddington, a new study provides compelling evidence for governments to act NOW or face global famine. The report is the culmination of a 2yr study, involving 400 experts from 35 countries.  The report emphasises changes to farming, to ensure that increasing yields does not come at the expense of sustainability & to provide incentives to the agricultural sector that address malnutrition.

"Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job." -Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications, quoted in the New York Times, October 25, 1998 

The FDA's Michael Taylor is a lawyer who began his revolving door adventures as counsel to FDA. He then moved to King & Spalding, a private-sector law firm representing Monsanto. In 1991 he returned to the FDA as Deputy Commissioner for Policy, where he was part of the team that issued the agency's decidedly industry-friendly policy on food biotechnology & that approved the use of Monsanto's genetically engineered rGBH in dairy cows. His questionable role in these decisions led to an investigation by the federal General Accounting Office, which eventually exonerated him of all conflict-of-interest charges. In 1994, Mr. Taylor moved to USDA to become administrator of its Food Safety & Inspection Service ... After another stint in private legal practice with King & Spalding, Mr. Taylor again joined Monsanto as Vice President for Public Policy in 1998.

Jerry Crawford, an Iowa lawyer & lobbyist w/deep ties to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, recently registered as the Washington representative for Monsanto. Sen. Kerry, Secretary of State Clinton & Secretary Vilsack are all tight with Crawford.

Vilsack (head of the USDA & ex-Monsanto exec) is an ardent support of corn & soy based biofuels, which use as much or more fossil energy to produce them as they generate, while driving up world food prices and literally starving the poor. "If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it." -- Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, quoted in the Kansas City Star, March 7, 1994

http://nandaspropaganda.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/profile.php?id=100000076953084
http://twitter.com/#!/nandaUganda

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Honey Made Near Monsanto GM Maize May Face EU Limits

By Stephanie Bodoni - Feb 9, 2011 7:54 AM PT Beekeepers with hives close to fields of Monsanto Co. genetically modified maize can’t sell their honey in the European Union without regulatory approval, an adviser to the EU’s highest court said. 


The unintentional presence in honey “even of a minute quantity of pollen” from the maize is sufficient reason to restrict its sale, Advocate General Yves Bot of the European Court of Justice said in a non-binding opinion today.

“Food containing material from a genetically modified plant, whether that material is included intentionally or not, must always be regarded as food produced” from modified plants, said Bot. The Luxembourg-based EU tribunal follows such advice most of the time. Rulings normally follow within six months of an opinion.
EU rules require prior authorization before genetically modified goods can be put on the market. The bloc’s 27 nations are split over the safety of food produced from genetically modified crops. This is slowing EU permission to grow them and has prompted complaints by the U.S. and other trade partners.
Beekeepers “have a real problem,” said Achim Willand, the lawyer for the group of producers that brought the case.

“It’s incomprehensible that the cultivation of such crops on unprotected fields is allowed,” Willand, of German law firm Gassner, Groth, Siederer & Coll, said in telephone interview.
Since the beekeepers aren’t allowed to sell their honey, their only option is to “seek damages and ask that safeguards are put in place” against the pollen from GM crops, he said.
 
Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company, received EU permission in 1998 to cultivate its MON 810 maize and the various products derived from the strain such as maize flour, starch and oil. The German State of Bavaria has a number of fields where the crop is grown for research.

Karl Heinz Bablok, one of a group of beekeepers that brought today’s case, detected traces of the crop in his honey and in the pollen he harvested from a field a few hundred meters behind his beehives.
The beekeepers have asked Bavaria to prohibit further planting close to their hives and for measures to prevent bees coming into contact with the crops.

A German court sought the EU tribunal’s guidance on the matter.

The case is C-442/09, Bablok and Others.
To contact the reporter on this story: Stephanie Bodoni in Luxembourg at sbodoni@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Anthony Aarons at aaarons@bloomberg.net

The trouble with Monsanto and GMOs — Dr. David Suzuki spells it out


From Jeremy Bloom on the Red Green and Blue blog:
Well-known geneticist and science broadcaster Dr. David Suzuki. Photo via Red Green and Blue blog.
I’ve been asked why we’re writing so much about Monsanto and genetically modified food. “It’s been tested,” they say. “It’s safe,” they say. “There’s nothing to fear. Why are you spreading disinformation?”
I’m not a geneticist. If I say “We don’t know enough about this,” I’m just one guy. So I’ll let a geneticist answer those questions.
David Suzuki is a geneticist. He’s one of the top scientists in Canada, his textbook is one of the most widely-used in the world, he’s published more than 30 books. As head of the David Suzuki Foundation, he’s both a promoter of science and a popularizer.
So when David Suzuki speaks, I listen (see the end of this article for a list of sources). And David Suzuki says,
“Because we aren’t certain about the effects of GMOs, we must consider one of the guiding principles in science, the precautionary principle. Under this principle, if a policy or action could harm human health or the environment, we must not proceed until we know for sure what the impact will be. And it is up to those proposing the action or policy to prove that it is not harmful.”

It’s complicated

One plus one equals two. That’s simple. But one gene inserted into a complex chromosome may not work in a simple, linear fashion.
Transgenic crops are not simple products like widgets, ipods or even automobiles. They are living organisms that can interact with other creatures in the environment in myriad ways. Nature is complicated. When you modify an organism at a genetic level, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the results are also complicated, and often unexpected.
…Science does not proceed in a linear fashion the way we write up our grant applications, you know—experiment A leads to experiment B to C to a cure for cancer. So all of the supposed benefits of our manipulations are purely speculative. We don’t know how it will all turn out. And then when we create new organisms, new products, and release them in the wild, in our food, in our drugs, we simply don’t know enough to anticipate what the consequences will be.

We don’t know…

The bottom line with GMO is very simple: We simply don’t have the science lined up to make any sort of blanket reassurances that GMO is really safe. Here’s Suzuki:
I’m a geneticist. What bothers me is we have governments that are supposed to be looking out for our health, for the safety of our environment, and they’re acting like cheerleaders for this technology, which… is in its infancy and we have no idea what the technology is going to do.
…At the cutting edge of scientific research, most of our ideas are far from the mark – wrong, in need of revision, or irrelevant. That’s not a derogation of science; it’s the way science advances. We take a set of observations or data, set up a hypothesis that makes sense of them, and then we test the hypothesis. The new insights and techniques we gain from this process are interpreted tentatively and liable to change, so any rush to apply them strikes me as downright dangerous.

…Because they won’t tell us

Not only have there not been enough studies done… when studies ARE performed, outside researchers often have to pry the data out of Monsanto via Freedom of Information filings and lawsuits. That’s a big concern concern as well.
Transgenic crops are, in many ways, radically new and should be subject to the greatest of scientific scrutiny, not suppressed by proprietary concerns.
So what is the rush to apply ideas that will prove to be irrelevant or wrong? Money, of course.

Unintended consequences

The history of science is the history of the unexpected.
…History informs us that though we love technology, there are always costs, and since our knowledge of how nature works is so limited, we can’t anticipate how those costs will manifest. We only have to reflect on DDT, nuclear power, and CFCs, which were hailed as wonderful creations but whose long-term detrimental effects were only found decades after their widespread use.
…As we learned from experience with DDT, nuclear power and CFCs, we only discover the costs of new technologies after they are extensively used. We should apply the Precautionary Principle with any new technology, asking whether it is needed and then demanding proof that it is not harmful. Nowhere is this more important than in biotechnology because it enables us to tamper with the very blueprint of life.

Putting genes back in bottles

How do you clean up a potential GMO mess? You don’t.
The difference with GM food is that once the genie is out of the bottle, it will be difficult or impossible to stuff it back. If we stop using DDT and CFCs, nature may be able to undo most of the damage – even nuclear waste decays over time. But GM plants are living organisms. Once these new life forms have become established in our surroundings, they can replicate, change, and spread; there may be no turning back. Many ecologists are concerned about what this means to the balance of life on Earth that has evolved over millions of years through the natural reproduction of species.

We’re experimenting on… us

In effect, by feeding this stuff to the American population without any long-term studies, we’ve made the US one giant petri dish. Europeans – who have banned GMOs (which ought to make you wonder about safety) get to be the control group of this planet-wide experiment.
Anyone that says, “oh, we know that this is perfectly safe.” I say is either unbelievably stupid, or deliberately lying. The reality is, we don’t know. The experiments simply haven’t been done, and now we have become the guinea pigs.
…A review of the science conducted under the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development in 2008 concluded that “there are a limited number of properly designed and independently peer-reviewed studies on human health” and that this and other observations “create concern about the adequacy of testing methodologies for commercial GM plants.”
…Some have argued that we’ve been eating GM foods for years with few observable negative consequences, but as we’ve seen with things like trans fats, if often takes a while for us to recognize the health impacts. With GM foods, concerns have been raised about possible effects on stomach bacteria and resistance to antibiotics, as well as their role in allergic reactions. We also need to understand more about their impact on other plants and animals.

…Without our consent

We have learned from painful experience that anyone entering an experiment should give informed consent. That means at the very least food should be labeled if it contains GMOs so we each can make that choice.
I am most definitely not in favour of release of GMOs in the food stream and given that it’s too late, I favour complete labelling of GMO products.

But wait, there’s more:

And that’s only the beginning. Other issues include:
  • Monsanto monopolizing the seed supply for the US… and the world
  • Monsanto’s GMO seeds are designed to maximize use of pesticides, as well, further impacting the environment
  • Use of pesticides has already led to super-weeds that acquire resistance
  • Bacteria transfer genes directly. This could lead to super-bugs with unknown consequences
  • Monocultures – reliance on one crop – is bad agriculture. Reliance on a single strain could be disastrous. Biodiversity is nature’s insurance policy.
  • Traditionally, farmers have saved some of their crop as seed to plant the next season. It’s the heart of sustainability. Not with Monsanto – they want you to buy new seed from them every year. Keeping some of your crop to plant next season is a violation of your contract, and farmers get sued for it.
  • American farmers with access to credit can buy seed every year. But Monsanto is also pushing their product line in the developing world, destroying a 10,000-year-old system of sustainable agriculture.
  • Monsanto has a history of suing farmers for “stealing” their patented genes… when they get contaminated by pollen from nearby GMO fields. And the court system has generally backed Monsanto.
  • That same GMO gene contamination has already led to some farmers losing their organic certification.
  • Monsanto hired the mercenary company Blackwater (now Xe) to spy on anti-GMO activists.
With all that, is it any wonder some of us have taken this irrational dislike to Monsanto?
Suzuki sources:
What can you do?
Contacts:
  • Tom Vilsack – USDA Alfalfa Comments Line:  301-851-2300
  • President Obama  202-456-1111 (or send a written message online)
  • Monstanto               314-694-1000
More on Monstanto and GMOs:

10 Things Monsanto Does Not Want You to Know | Environment/Nature |Axisoflogic.com

10 Things Monsanto Does Not Want You to Know | Environment/Nature |Axisoflogic.com
10 Things Monsanto Does Not Want You to Know ( 10)
Printer friendly page Print This ShareThis
By Millions Against Monsanto
Organic Consumers Association
Sunday, Feb 6, 2011

What’s wrong with Genetic Engineering?

Genetic engineeringis a radical technology that breaks down genetic barriers between humans, plants and animals. Once released, these genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can easily spread and interbreed with other organisms, and they are virtually impossible to recall back to the laboratory.

Monsanto provides roughly 90% of GMO seeds in the world. These seeds have been genetically modified to produce their own pesticide or survive repeated spraying of their toxic herbicide Roundup. Monsanto’s GMOs are not designed to increase yields to feed the world, but rather to increase Monsanto’s profits by increasing the use of chemicals such as Roundup and selling their high-priced patented seeds which farmers must buy every year.

Due to the enormous political clout of Monsanto, the American public is being denied the right to know whether their foods are genetically engineered or not. Following is a list of 10 facts about Monsanto and GMOs, and how they can adversely affect your health, local farmers, and the planet.

1 No GMO Labeling Laws in the US

Foods containing GMOs don’t have to be labeled in the US. Monsanto has fought hard to prevent labeling laws. This is alarming, since approximately 70% of processed foods in the US now contain GMO ingredients. The European Union, Japan, China, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and many other nations now require mandatory GMO labeling.

2 Lack of Adequate Safety Testing

In May 1992, Vice President Dan Quayle announced the FDA’s anti consumer right-to-know policy which stated that GMO foods need not be labeled nor safety-tested. Meanwhile, prominent scientists such as Arpad Pusztai and Gilles-Eric Seralini have publicized alarming research revealing severe damage to animals fed GMO foods.

3 Monsanto Puts Small Farmers out of Business

Percy Schmeiser is a Canadian farmer whose canola fields were contaminated with Monsanto’s Round-Up Ready Canola by pollen from a nearby GMO farm. Monsanto successfully argued in a lawsuit that Schmeiser violated their patent rights, and forced Schmeiser to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages. This type of biotech bullying is happening all over North America.

4 Monsanto Products Pollute the Developing World

Monsanto’s deadly legacy includes the production of Agent Orange and DDT. Now massive aerial spraying of Roundup in Colombia is being used by the US and the Colombian government as a counter-insurgency tactic, contaminating food crops and poisoning villagers.

5 Monsanto Blocking Government Regulations

A revolving door exists between Monsanto and US regulatory and judicial bodies making key decisions. Justice Clarence Thomas, a former Monsanto lawyer, was the one who wrote the majority opinion on a key Monsanto case. Michael Taylor once worked for the FDA, later represented Monsanto as a lawyer, then returned as the FDA’s Deputy Commissioner for Policy when rBGH was granted approval.

6 Monsanto Guilty of False Advertising

France’s highest court ruled in 2009 that Monsanto had lied about the safety of its weed killer Roundup. The court confirmed an earlier judgment that Monsanto had falsely advertised its herbicide as “biodegradable”.

7 Consumers Reject Bovine Growth Hormone

In the wake of mass consumer pressure, major retailers such as Safeway, Publix, Wal-Mart, and Kroger banned store brand milk products containing Monsanto’s controversial genetically engineered hormone rBGH. Starbucks, under pressure from the OCA and our allies, has likewise banned rBGH milk.

8 GMO Crops Do Not Increase Yields

A major UN/World Bank-sponsored report compiled by 400 scientists and endorsed by 58 countries concluded that GM crops have little to offer to the challenges of poverty, hunger, and climate change. Better alternatives are available, and the report championed organic farming as the sustainable way forward for developing countries.

9 Monsanto Controls US Soy Market

In 1996, when Monsanto began selling Roundup Ready soybeans, only 2% of soybeans in the US contained their patented gene. By 2008, over 90% of soybeans in the US contained Monsanto’s gene.

10 GMO Foods May Lead to Food Allergies

In March 1999, UK researchers at the York Laboratory were alarmed to discover that reactions to soy had skyrocketed by 50% over the previous year. Genetically modified soy had recently entered the UK from US imports and the soy used in the study was largely GM.

MILLIONS AGAINST MONSANTO

HERE IS WHAT YOU CAN DO

* Read the latest news, join in on Action Alerts, and sign up for OCA’s free newsletter at www.OrganicConsumers.org

* Buy organic foods at your local health food store,
co-op or farmers’ market.

* Avoid processed foods, especially those containing corn, soy, cottonseed oil and canola unless they are organically certified.

* Call or send a letter to your public officials. Tell them to support labeling and safety testing of GMOs and subsidies to help family farmers make the transition to organic.

* Tell the following companies to stop using and selling GMO Ingredients: Kellogg’s/Kashi • Coca-Cola Kraft/Nabisco • McDonald’s • Frito-Lay
General Mills • Quaker Oats • Procter & Gamble
Nestle • Safeway • Campbell Soup • Wal-Mart

Source: Organic Consumers Association

Food Prices Rising. Good For Monsanto & Syngenta.

Logo of the Food and Agriculture Organization
Image via Wikipedia
The Chinese Central Bank, The People’s Bank of China, (PBOC), has increased interest rates once again. This is the third increase in four months as the authorities in Beijing seek a way to contain inflation.
 PBOC announced that it would raise the 1 year lending rate to 6.06% from the previous level of 5.81% and the 1 year deposit rate to 3.0% from 2.75%.
Back in October, PBOC raised rates for the first time in nearly three years as it began doing battle with surging prices, exacerbated by the high growth rate of the domestic economy.
Data supplied by the Chinese Economic Information Bureau shows that inflation has started to rise again following a dip in 2009. Annual averages since 2007 read as: 2007 ~ 4.8%,  2008  ~ 5.9%,  2009  ~ -0.7%,  2010 ~ 3.3%.  However in Q4 2010 the average was 4.7%. Clearly the trend is above the official target of 3.0%. The Government has leaned on the PBOC and for 2011 the official target has been adjusted higher to 4.0%. This alteration in inflation policy was announced by the main economic and planning agency, the National development and Reform Commission
Clearly the pace of economic growth is a major factor as Q4 2010 economic expansion was booked at 9.8% following increases in the level of industrial production and retail sales. For all of 2010 the economy grew at a pace of 10.3%, the strongest level in 3 years and compares to 9.25 in 2009.
A Billion plus hungry mouths:
If the workers keep the economy moving, then the workers have to be fed. Food prices around the world have risen substantially this year. Rough rice slipped to $10.485/cwt on June 30th 2010 marking a 25.95% fall from where the year began. Since then it has risen to $16.285/cwt on February 3rd, +55.32%. One has to hope that the Head of the Chinese Statistics Bureau is being completely honest when he says that China has an abundant supply of rice. I say this because with 3 Billion people in the world using rice as their staple food and just 6 to 7% of global rice production trades on the free and open global market. The Dollar Index is inversely correlated to the price of rice to such an extent that R2 is 0.98. As the Fed looks to keep rates low and the ECB is seen as an eager rate riser, so globally one can expect downward pressure on the Dollar and upward pressure on rice. That will in turn place greater strain on the nations that have many hungry mouths to feed. Of course China has a strong $ revenue stream from its exports and foreign exchange reserves have reached $199Bn in Q3 2010. So China should not face any immediate risk of civil unrest. However, if the stockpile ran too low and supplies where hard to come by, one never knows. The smallest spark can light the flame of uprising.
Of course the price of commodities has been incredible with the Reuters-Jefferies CRB Index higher by 35.35% since the low on May 25th 2010. Recently vast tracts of productive land has been out of commission as floods hit farmland Australia, which exports its wheat and sugar cane around the world. There are fears that their priceswill continue to rise. China has not escaped a knock on effect from this as providers to end customers have passed on cost hikes from their own value chain.
In January, wholesale food costs hit the highest monthly figure on record, according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). This is a serious issue although the FAO has been quick to argue that this is not the onset of another emergency.
Why are food prices rising?
Following the 2008 peaks there were good harvests for most basic foods and that allowed prices to fall back. At the end of last year severe weather in many of the world’s biggest food exporting countries damaged supplies so pushing food prices almost 20% higher than a year earlier, according to the FAO. Flooding hit the planting season in Canada, and destroyed crops of wheat and sugar cane in Australia. Severe drought and fires ruined wheat harvests in Russia and the surrounding region during the summer, prompting Russia to impose a ban exports.
Consequently wheat production is forecast to be lower this year than in the last two given the data released by the US government.
Not all food prices have risen  as countries that are not reliant on supplies from disaster-hit exporters haven’t experienced the same price squeeze. As an example please consider maize in East Africa. Prices have backed off by 50% after outstanding harvests in 2010.
Onion prices have soared in India in the past month, following heavy rains in the west, where the majority of the supply comes from. Regional and national government has come under severe pressure to act, as onions are such an important part of the Indian diet.
OK…now let the politicians and bureaucrats blame the market speculator.
It is a great relief to hear the FAO be partially market savvy when they say that speculators trading commodities on the financial markets are not to blame for the huge rise in prices. It is a shame they had to add to this by saying they have made matters worse. One can sight as many examples as one likes, but it is the market that brings liquidity to the crops. Only through the market can buyers and sellers meet effectively and efficiently. If there is an issue with price movement, surely governments around the world should look to stop blocking the most efficient methods of growing hardy crops that can stand up to weather extremes.
Sugar production has failed to keep up with the growing demand coming from developing countries, pushing prices sharply higher.  So there should encouragement to find better methods of crop production. Not a cheap swipe at market trading.
The World Development Movement (WDM) is keen to curb this betting on prices. It is determined to impose greater regulation and restriction on the buying and selling of futures. Big mistake as prices will become artificial and allow inefficient operators to stay in place so short changing the human race in the medium to long term. 
Two companies that are set to benefit from this situation are Monsanto Co (US) and Syngenta AG (Switzerland). There are many others that one could select and at Spotlight Ideas a detailed analysis is soon to be released.  In the year todate a global index of chemical companies has gained 3.14%. In contrast Syngenta is higher by 12.21% and Monsanto 7.09%. For the American player there has been several items of constructive news as the US has approved the use of GM beet seeds this year. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA), has announced that US sugar supplies could run short this year as farmers could lose 21% of the 2011 crop if they are not able to start sowing in the spring. Farmers have the go ahead to use GM Alfalfa that was developed by Monsanto.
For Syngenta, they too have a slice of the good news it has won approval from the National Biosafety Committee to distribute to farmers in Brazil supplies of “Triple Stack Corn”. This corn is resistant to corn borer, root worm and herbicide infection.
Price wise, Monsanto needs to break over 76.05…on that move the price will book gains to 84 as a short term first objective. Monsanto has a better chart, a classical impulsive rally and once over 310.90 it will rally to 342.72.
Stephen Pope ~ MarketMind
London

GMO Contamination Prevention and Market Fairness - What will it take?

11.22.10
National Organic Coalition
www.NationalOrganicCoalition.org
GMO Contamination Prevention and Market Fairness
What Will It Take?

How do we protect organic and conventional agriculture from contamination by genetically modified
organisms (GMOs) and the inevitable market losses? What set of principles and concrete measures must
be adopted to ensure the continuation of these farming methods that have served as the foundation of
American agriculture and ensured our nation’s food security for centuries?

Before answering these questions, we must first acknowledge that the challenges we face in this regard
stem from two known facts: 1) Biological and physical movement of material derived from genetically
engineered crops is difficult and oftentimes impossible to control or recall and, 2) Domestic and global
markets demand foods with zero or near-zero levels of material derived from genetically modified
organisms. The harsh consequences of these two known facts is that planting genetically modified crops
can threaten livelihoods, affect critical food supply and demand, and it can impose an unfair financial
burden on farmers seeking to satisfy discernible markets for GMO-free products. So, what do we do?
Our goal is to identify policy outcomes that are fair, comprehensive, and that do not pit farmer against
farmer. What is at stake is the ability of American farmers to compete in national and global markets and
not risk having those markets supplied by farmers from other countries due to GMO contamination in the
US food and seed supply. Farmers who seek to avoid GMOs must not continue to be solely responsible
for contamination prevention and clean-up and/or be forced give up growing certain crops. For this to
happen, direct government intervention is needed to protect livelihoods and local economies.

We have deliberately chosen to use the phrase “GMO contamination prevention” instead of “coexistence”
to more accurately reflect a public policy framework which emphasizes that planting GMOs must not in
any way preclude the growing of organic and non-GMO conventional crops. Implicit in this framing is
the acknowledgement that preventing contamination is a two-way street. While those who seek to avoid
GMOs take reasonable precautions to avoid pollen drift and the commingling of seeds and products, their
actions may not always be enough to prevent contamination in a given circumstance. We strongly believe
that those who own, promote, and profit from GMO technology must be held responsible for the
economic and market harm their products cause.

To overcome perceptions about the lack of fairness, trust, and transparency surrounding GMOs, we
believe that basic democratic principles and values must frame the discussion of how to prevent
contamination and facilitate fair market farming systems (see box on next page). Adherence to these
principles can lead to the creation of practical government policies that directly address how to prevent
GMO contamination.

The Secretary of Agriculture possesses expansive authority under the Plant Protection Act (PPA), to
broadly assess economic, environmental, public health, agricultural, and other impacts of GMOs. USDA
can require on-going regulation of GM crops if the impacts directly or indirectly cause injury or harm to
PRINCIPLES TO DRIVE GMO CONTAMINATION PREVENTION STRATEGIES

Consumer choice – Consumers have the right to choose non-GMO food.

Consumer right to know – Consumers have the right to know where and how their food was grown.
Farmers Entrepreneurial Choice – Farmers must have the right and opportunity to grow food, feed, fiber, livestock, and fish that serve important and lucrative domestic and foreign markets.

Fairness –Personal and corporate responsibility must be upheld. If you own it and are profiting from it you are responsible for the costs associated with contamination prevention and any resultant damage from contamination.

Liability –Testing for contamination, establishing buffers, reimbursement for lost sales, loss of organic product premiums, clean-up and removal are the costs of doing business that must be borne by the GMO patent holder.

Precaution – The pre-market burden of proof of safety is on the patent holder. This includes comprehensive evaluation of health, socio-economic, and environmental impacts of GM crops and technologies.

Sustainability – Agricultural technologies and systems must be assessed for sustainability and those that facilitate further declines in family farming or erode the human and environmental foundations of American agriculture must not be allowed.

Health, Environmental and Economic Evaluation –Technologies that pose environmental, economic, and health risks should be evaluated before commercialization and tough choices must be made about whether their overall societal benefits outweigh their costs.

Parity – There must be a long-term commitment to supporting the vitality of diverse agricultural enterprises, including parity of public investment, infrastructure, marketing, technical assistance, research, and funding.
Transparency – Ongoing documentation, tracking and labeling systems must be established to monitor the movement of GMOs in the environment, seed banks, non-GMO seed stocks, and food.

Diversity – Society and agriculture will greatly benefit from the rapid reinvigoration of public cultivars and breeds to restore genetic diversity on farms, ensure greater farmer seeds/breeds choices, and to enhance national food security.

other agricultural production systems and markets. It can also assign responsibility and liability for GMO contamination prevention to the offending technology owners, where it belongs. As such, USDA authority exists to prevent GMO contamination and to compensate contaminated farmers. Now, all that is needed is the will to do so and a comprehensive plan of action.

The development of strict and long-overdue GMO regulations should specifically include at least:

Labeling of GM crops and product ingredients.

Liability assignment to the GMO patent holder.

Contamination Compensation Fund in FSA or RMA through a fee on GMO patent holders, which would provide immediate assistance to farmers pending further necessary remedies of law and equity.

Ongoing GM crop regulation and the complete elimination of deregulated GM crops.

Comprehensive, independent health, environmental, and socio-economic assessments prior to making a decision on GM crop approvals.

Prohibition on the growing of GM crops that are too promiscuous to prevent GMO contamination, such as GM alfalfa, GM sugar beets, GM corn, and GM canola.

Evaluation of food security risks associated with the concentration of any sector of our food system in the hands of a few companies or with the use of one food production technology or patented seed to the near exclusion of all others.

Establish infrastructure to prevent GMO commingling and contamination during post-harvest handling. Patent holder should be responsible for full segregation and traceability, from seed to plate.

US farmers contribute to a stable domestic economy by feeding our nation, maintaining a diverse agricultural gene pool, and by supplying differentiated markets. GMO contamination risks compromising that diversity and the competitive advantages diversity affords our farmers in national and global markets. Immediate and comprehensive government action is needed to prevent GMO contamination and to protect conventional and organic agriculture and US food security. This includes ensuring that farmers have public cultivar choices that are not genetically modified.

Take Action » Food & Water Watch

Take Action » Food & Water Watch

SNL Digital Short Pee Wee Herman 1/15 SNL (TheAudioPerv.com)

Take Action » Food & Water Watch

Take Action » Food & Water Watch

Friday, February 4, 2011

World Environment News - China province Hit By Worst Drought, Warning On Wheat - Planet Ark

World Environment News - China province Hit By Worst Drought, Warning On Wheat - Planet Ark

Report: Urgent action needed to avert global hunger

Fruit at a market (Image: BBC) The report calls for an urgent change to food production in order to feed future generations
A UK government-commissioned study into food security has called for urgent action to avert global hunger.
The Foresight Report on Food and Farming Futures says the current system is unsustainable and will fail to end hunger unless radically redesigned.

It is the first study across a range of disciplines deemed to have put such fears on a firm analytical footing.
The report is the culmination of a two-year study, involving 400 experts from 35 countries.
According to the government's chief scientific adviser, Professor Sir John Beddington, the study provides compelling evidence for governments to act now.

The report emphasises changes to farming, to ensure that increasing yields does not come at the expense of sustainability and to provide incentives to the agricultural sector that address malnutrition.

It also recommends that the most resource-intensive types of food are curbed and that waste is minimised in food production.

"We know in the next 20 years the world population will increase to something like 8.3 billion people," he told BBC News.

"We know that urbanisation is going to be a driver and that something of the order of 65-70% of the world's population will be living in cities at that time.

"We know that the world is getting more prosperous and that the demand for basic commodities - food, water and energy - will be rising as that prosperity increases, increasing at the same time as the population."
He warned: "We have 20 years to arguably deliver something of the order of 40% more food; 30% more available fresh water and of the order of 50% more energy.

"We can't wait 20 years or 10 years indeed - this is really urgent." 

Radical changes Professor Beddington commissioned the study and was among the first to warn of "a perfect storm" of a growing population, climate change and diminishing resources for food production.
The Foresight report says that the food production system will need to be radically changed, not just to produce more food but to produce it sustainably.

"There is an urgency in taking what may be very difficult policy decisions," the authors say.
"(But) 925 million people suffer hunger and perhaps a further billion lack micronutrients. The task is difficult because the food system is working for the majority of people but those at risk of hunger have least influence on decision-making."
Diagram showing UK self-sufficiency for food groups (Image: BBC)
Professor Beddington also said he viewed the billion people who overeat and are therefore obese as another symptom of the failure of the food production system to deliver good health and well-being to the world's growing population.

The report says that "piecemeal" changes are not an option: "Nothing less is required than a redesign of the whole food system to bring sustainability to the fore."

The authors are calling for food and agriculture to move up the political agenda and be co-ordinated with efforts to tackle the impact of climate change, water and energy supplies and the loss of farm land.
They also warn that there is no "silver bullet" that will solve the problem but concerted action is needed on many fronts.

Facing reality Professor Beddington said: "We've got to actually face up to the fact that this is a complicated problem which involves vastly different levels of society and we need to be persuading policy makers not to think about food in isolation, not to think about climate change in isolation, not to think about water in isolation, not to think about energy in isolation. All of them are intimately related."
Map showing state of hunger in nations (Image: BBC)
The report adds that new research can play an important role. It also says that the use of any particular technology, such as genetic modification, cloning and nanotechnology should not be ruled out. But it acknowledges that there is resistance to the application of controversial technologies.

"Achieving a strong evidence base (of the safety or otherwise) in controversial areas is not enough. Genuine public debate needs to play a crucial role," the report says.

However, by assessing 40 success stories from Africa the report authors say the spread of existing best-practice could treble food production.

"Ending hunger is one of the greatest challenges to be considered by this project," the report observes.
It calls for protection of the poorest from sharp price increases through government intervention and greater liberalisation of the trade in food in order to offset market volatility.

They also note that China has invested heavily in agriculture and is consequently one of the few countries to have met the Millenium Development Goal (MDG) of halving hunger.

The report also calls for new measures to hold governments and food producers to account. This would involve developing objective measures on how well they are doing to reduce hunger, combat climate change and environmental degradation and boosting food production.