Environment

Environment

a. Bush killed Kayto http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/akyotoqa.asp --- vote ---

b. WATER and AIR Bush contaminates

Monsanto’s Monstrosity’s

(hit links or scroll down)

1. Monsanto manipulating media

2. Kills butterfly’s

3. Global Vegetative Control (or ) Science Fiction 101 episode

4. Suicide Seeds

5. WAKE UP! WAKE UP! IT'S YER SMALL GENE POOL

1. Monsanto Manipulate Media?

Shred a whole magazine?

A 14,000 copy run of "The Ecologist", the UK's leading environmental magazine was shredded because it discussed Monsanto and genetic engineering in less than flattering terms. Yes, the printer gave in to Monsanto’s attorneys. Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman report this here:

Monsanto recently went on ABC stating: "Organic food is bad for you and bad for the environment." They really want you to believe that the chemicals, hormones, and genetically manipulated foods they are producing are good for you. The evidence is in. Serious and lethal harm can come from manufactured and genetically modified foods. However, many of the reports of this danger have been seized, and not published for consumer consideration

Monsanto suppressed a story on the dangers of Bovine Growth Hormone. Fortunately, and very courageously, the reporters sued their employer, Fox Network, for scuttling their story.

The story is here: http://www.foxbghsuit.com

2. Genetic Corn Kills Butterflies

WHEN THE U.S. government approved the plant four years ago, the promise was extraordinary: The new corn produced a natural toxin that killed the European corn borer, responsible for $1.2 billion in crop damage each year. Farmers hoped the breakthrough would increase yields and make pesticides obsolete.

Years of field tests showed the corn to be safe for humans, honey bees and other "friendly" insects. No harmful side effects were reported.

But a study by Cornell University scientists found that pollen released from the plants, known as "Bt-corn," can kill larvae from the monarch butterfly, a species known for its beauty and long migration between Mexico and the United States.

"We need to look at the big picture here," said John Losey, a Cornell entomologist and the primary investigator in the study. "Pollen from Bt-corn could represent a serious risk to populations of monarchs and other butterflies, but we can't predict how serious the risk is until we have a lot more data. And we can't forget that Bt-corn and other transgenic crops have a huge potential for reducing pesticide use and increasing yields. This study is just the first step. We need to do more research and then objectively weigh the risks vs. the benefits of this new technology."

MSNBC's complete coverage of environment news

DEBATE AHEAD

Further tests are necessary, among them replicating the lab test in the field, but the Cornell entomologists say the problem could be widespread: Other species of butterflies and moths may be harmed by the hybrid corn pollen, and that could in turn affect entire ecosystems.

The study, published in the journal Nature, will likely set off a firestorm of debate about Bt-corn, which was planted on 7 million acres last year and which is considered among the first major successes of agricultural biotechnology.

Cornell entomologist Linda Rayor, a study co-author, called the monarch butterfly discovery a "warning bell" from a flagship species for conservation.

THE SKEPTICS

But a spokesman for the National Corn Growers Association said the study raises more questions than it answers and will need extensive follow-up research.

Monsanto, one of the companies that makes Bt-corn, said the finding is not very important. Many monarch butterflies would not be exposed to the toxic pollen, a spokesman said, since most milkweed does not grow near corn fields.

Val Giddings, vice president for the Biotechnology Industry Organization, said: "Whatever the threat to monarch butterflies that is posed by Bt corn pollen, we know it's less than the threat of drifting pesticide sprays."

Industry officials said they were not surprised by the finding, because the larvae of monarch butterflies are similar to the corn borer. They also called the study sloppy because the researchers didn't precisely measure the amount of pollen ladled onto the milkweed leaves used in the test.

THOSE CONCERNED

Among those alarmed by the study is the Union of Concerned Scientists, an independent nonprofit alliance of scientists based in Cambridge, Mass., who want more intensive testing of genetically engineered crops.

"To put it simply, we're not surprised," said Jane Rissler, a UCS plant pathologist. "We're dismayed. This should help people understand that genetically engineered crops bring with them risks that have not been properly raised or studied."

Rissler said the Cornell discovery is likely the first case of a genetically altered plant proving fatal to a non-targeted or "friendly" insect.

But it is not the first time scientists found possible unintended consequences of genetic engineering:

A Swiss study last year found insects called lacewings died more quickly if they fed on corn borers reared on Bt corn.

A University of Chicago study published in September found that a weed altered by scientists to resist an herbicide developed a far greater ability to pollinate other plants and pass on its traits. The findings raised fears that genetic engineering could lead to the rise of "superweeds" impervious to weed killers.

In Scotland, a toxicologist who added insect-resistant genes and proteins to potatoes and fed them to rats reported that the animals suffered damaged immune systems, growth problems and shrunken brains. But his findings were sharply disputed by other scientists.

* U want a shrunken brain? *

TECHNICAL BACKGROUND

The hybrid corn produces a natural bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, and thus is commonly known as Bt-corn.

The Bt-corn toxin thwarts the European corn borer, a moth species that came over to the United States in the early 1900s. The pest's larvae typically bore into stalks and eat their way through the plant, destroying about 40 million tons of corn each year. Pesticides are not very effective because the larvae live deep in the stalks.

At least 18 Bt-engineered crops have been approved for field testing in the United States. And the Department of Agriculture, which allows transformed corn, potatoes and cotton to be produced commercially, said it was convinced the crops had no negative effects on friendly insects such as bees and ladybugs.

WHAT EARLIER STUDIES MISSED

But until the Cornell study nobody had looked for any risk posed by the spread of the corn's pollen to other plants or the effect it would have on insects feeding on those plants, said Rayor, the Cornell insect behavioral ecologist.

"People weren't really thinking about the toxin flying around and how it affects insects feeding on their own host plants," Rayor said.

Scientists previously conducted tests to make sure the Bt-corn would not harm "beneficial predators" that eat pests such as the European corn borer. But those studies didn't examine the non-targeted insects that feed on plants near cornfields, Rayor said.

Inside the laboratory, monarch larvae were fed milkweed leaves dusted with the transformed pollen from Bt-corn, leaves dusted with pollen from nontransformed corn, and leaves without corn pollen. Milkweed, which Monarch larvae feed on exclusively, is commonly found alongside cornfields.

The result: The monarch larvae that ate the transformed pollen ate less, grew at a slower rate and died faster. Nearly half of the larvae fed the Bt-corn pollen died in the study. All of the other monarch caterpillars survived the study.

SUMMER TESTS

Rayor and colleagues plan to conduct more research on the Bt-corn pollen this summer using colonies of painted-ladies and buckeye butterflies.

MSNBC's Environment news

"We're willing to believe it affects other species of butterflies," Rayor said. "No doubt there are dozens of other innocent victims feeding on weedy species that happen to be near corn."

Until more tests are done, however, the scientists say they don't know if the fatal consequences occur outside the laboratory.

"We don't know how broad this effect will be on butterflies and how large a dose of pollen they need to get to be affected," Rayor said. "This summer we'll be looking at how different doses of pollen affect mortality."

*What about BEE's and Honey and pollination ? *

Newhouse News Service's Mark Weiner and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Environmant home

3. Global Vegetative Control (or ) Science Fiction 101 episode - "Disaster Again."

Thursday, January 07, 1999 <eggy note>

In March of 1998 a seed company in collaboration with the United States Department of Agriculture, was awarded a US Patent #5.723.765. This company was than purchased by Monsanto and Delta and Pine Co. Although the patent is broad, it includes a scheme to engineer crops to kill their own seeds in the second generation, thus making it impossible for farmers to save and replant seeds. In Addition to the US, this patent is pending in 84 countries, including all Europe, Canada and others.

But is this a fair assumption, that the seed company owns the seed forever? As a farmer of twenty years, I purchased the seed. I than plant, fertilize and nurture the crop. The seed I purchased, is gone. It has reproduced into a vegetative state. I harvest, dry and store the crop. The risk of loss is mine, hail draught etc. Unquestionably the crop is mine, to sell, feed to livestock, or whatever. If I decide to use some for seed, I must store, test, clean and treat the grain. Than I can use the grain I raised for seed. Now the company I purchased the seed from, says it is still theirs. How can this be? The cost of seed is high, and margin of profit is low. Farmers around the world are having serious economic problems. Seed is replaced every few years at any rate, as new strains become available etc.

Now, these corporations want to control all seeds. With this technology they could do that. They will also destroy many seeds which are not in their inventory, or cannot be unlocked. Perhaps they destroy a "wild" plant. We have not even identified all the plants ! Perhaps that plant had the medicine to restore YOUR health, or your children’s health. Now it is destroyed......... No more..........

On first site, it seems the Corporation is protecting it’s own interests, hybrid seeds. But, the extent of the "Terminator’s" effect is far reaching. It discriminates, supposedly by family. Thus if used for pumpkin seeds, it would effect all pumpkins. But there is further consideration, the pumpkin is in the squash family, and all the squash family could be affected, exterminating squash from the planet, unless you had the ‘key’ to energize the fertile germ.

Does any corporation "own" seeds? I think not. Whatever creation story you use, creation included plants, water, animals, minerals, the universe, the winged and also humans. The created, are destined to live together in the circle of life. If any element is destroyed, the others will soon follow. Thus we live in a circle, interdependent on each other.

Corporations do not own seeds, anymore than American Airlines owns the air. Corporations must be called upon to respect and honor this relationship. Certainly they have no right to control any of it.

What of the blocker in the plant? Will that affect the plants structure? Use-ability? Will it alter it in such a way that it causes health problems? What of the altered seeds? Seeds make oil, such as corn oil, cotton seed oil, soybean oil. Now to unlock the seeds, they must be soaked in tetracycline. Are you than destined to eat tetracycline in your cooking oils? Ever read the warnings on health from the tetracycline label? (hint, not good)

Tetracycline soaked seeds, are carried away by birds, varmints etc, and scattered . What effect will this have on the earth? What effect will this have on the birds, animals, insects, bio--organisms of the planet?

We have spent billions attempting to bring seeds and gardening techniques to others, that they can provide for themselves. Now, their seeds are in danger of being destroyed.

The far reaching effect of allowing this procedure to be used has the potential to be total destruction of the plant kingdom. The economic destruction is huge. The mentality which produced Nuclear Plants, without first considering what to do with the waste, has already left us in a dangerous state. Surely we cannot gamble our vegetation, our planet, our lives, to fulfill someone’s greed.

An excellent paper outlining the process of the "Terminator" can be found here. http://www.bio.indiana.edu/people/terminator.html

Please contact your Representatives, and utilize the rafi site if you are on the Internet.

The RAFI "Dead Seed Scroll’s" site is here: http://www.rafi.org/translator/termtrans.html

The RAFI site with info and where you can send email to the "powers" is here: http://www.rafi.org/usda.html

---------------------------------- 00 ------------------------------------------

4. Rachel on Suicide for US and the World !

Hi...

This article prompts thoughts of Suicide Seeds as a triple entendre: they 1) won't reproduce; 2) apparently cause death/disease; 3) may contribute to a wipe-out of poor third world cultures that cannot afford to buy Monsanto seeds every year. It may be a critical issue of human survival in all its diversity. Shades of "Soylent Green," the fiction where old ones were disvalued; here, it's all the world's poor. And more. It's a good thing Europeans and citizens of India respond to needs of the common good, rather than every-man-for-himself. Otherwise, survival of U.S. "rugged-individualists" could be further imperiled by another of industry's "acceptable risks"-risks that are never toted up together to see why so many of our family members die of cancer and other preventable diseases.

· Mary Kay

BIOTECH: THE PENDULUM SWINGS BACK

In recent months, opposition to genetically modified (GM) foods has exploded in both Europe and Asia.[1] A powerful consumer/farmer backlash has spread across Europe and the Indian subcontinent, raising eyebrows even in the somnolent U.S.

** In April, the seven largest grocery chains in six European countries made a public commitment to go "GM free" and now they are lining up long-term contracts with growers who can provide GM-free corn, potatoes, soybeans and wheat.

** The Supreme Court of India has upheld a ban on the testing of GM crops even as activists are torching fields suspected of harboring GM plants.

** The third-largest U.S. corn processor, A.E. Staley Co. of Decatur, Illinois, has announced that in 1999 it will refuse to accept genetically modified corn varieties that have not been approved by the European Union. Europeans create a huge market for U.S. crops and the European backlash forces U.S. farmers to think twice about planting GM seeds.

The bellwether event was the announcement last month by seven European supermarket chains that they intend to jointly patronize growers who can deliver food that is 100% free of genetically modified (GM) organisms.[2] Tesco, Safeway, Sainsbury's, Iceland, Marks & Spencer, the Co-op, and Waitrose grocery chains make up the consortium. Last week Unilever, the huge transnational (and aggressive supporter of GM foods), announced it was throwing in the towel and joining the GM-free consortium. One day after Unilever capitulated, the Swiss firm Nestle made the same commitment. The following day Cadbury-Schweppes joined the ranks of the GM-free. It was a complete and unexpected rout for the genetic engineering industry.

According to the London INDEPENDENT, the only major players still supporting GM foods in England are Monsanto Corporation and the Blair government. Just a few months ago, British Prime Minister Tony Blair had told members of parliament that opposition to GM foods would be "a flash in the pan." Now popular support for the Blair government itself has dwindled as opposition to GM foods has swelled. In his last election, Mr. Blair was supported financially by Monsanto, the leading proponent of genetically modified crops (see REHW #637, #638, and #639).

Several factors seem to be at work in Europe:

1) Older people can still remember Nazi eugenics experiments-

Hitler's plan to create a "super race" by genetic selection. As a result, any genetic manipulation of living organisms to produce "super organisms" is suspect.

2) The recent "Mad Cow Disease" scare in England and France- which has killed several dozen people so far and was brought on by the unnatural practice of feeding cows to cows-has seriously undermined government credibility and has made Europeans wary of all unnatural farming practices.

3) Many Europeans-as distinct from many Americans-care about the taste and nutritional quality of their food and drink. Many Americans seem happy to subsist on french fried potatoes and iceberg lettuce accompanied by huge portions of low-grade, fat- laden beef. Many Europeans consider such fare barbaric.

4) On February 12 of this year, the first tentative evidence of health damage from GM foods emerged. Beginning in 1996, Dr. Arpad Pusztai of the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland had been feeding genetically modified potatoes to rats and observing stunted growth and damaged immune systems, including damage to several major organs (kidney, spleen, thymus and stomach). Dr. Pusztai was a senior scientist at the Rowett Institute, having conducted research there for 35 years, during which time he published 270 scientific papers.

In January, 1998 and again in April, 1998, Dr. Pusztai received permission from Philip James, the director of the Rowett Institute, to speak on British television. Although he is not categorically opposed to genetic engineering, in his April TV appearance, Dr. Pusztai said he would not eat genetically modified foods himself and he said it was "very, very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs."

Proponents of genetically modified foods protested loudly against this expression of informed opinion. On the first day of the controversy, Philip James defended Dr. Pusztai's right to speak his mind, but on the second day Mr. James suspended Dr. Pusztai, condemned his research, made him sign a gag order, and forced him to retire.

An audit report by the Rowett Institute in August, 1998, vindicated Dr. Pusztai's research methods. At that point Dr. Pusztai was once again given access to his own research data and he vigorously reconfirmed his original conclusions. Dr. Pusztai's studies have not yet been published, so details remain unknown.

The "Pusztai affair" lay dormant until February 12th of this year when a group of 20 scientists from 13 countries published a manifesto demanding the reinstatement of Dr. Pusztai and expressing support for his tentative conclusions.

Only later was it discovered that the Rowett Institute is partly funded by Monsanto.

The "Pusztai affair" lit a fire of public outrage that has since grown into a raging conflagration.

For its part, Monsanto has admitted that no one knows-or can know-what will happen when genetically modified organisms are put directly into the human food chain and are released into the natural environment, as is the case with genetically modified crops. Robert Shapiro, the chief executive officer of Monsanto, said October 28, 1998, "We don't seek controversy, but obviously it has been thrust on us. It is a direct consequence of a role we have chosen. And it is a role which we can blame only ourselves for.... we realize that with any new and powerful technology with unknown, and to some degree unknowable-by definition-effects, then there necessarily will be an appropriate level at least, and maybe even more than that, of public debate and public interest."[3]

It is clear that Monsanto's best-laid plans are coming unraveled. In the mid-1980s Monsanto convinced the U.S. government to agree that genetic engineering would not be subject to any new regulations, on the theory that a genetically modified potato is nothing more than a potato. Monsanto contributes bountifully to presidential candidates of both parties, and to key members of Congress who sit on food safety committees. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have taken a "hand off" approach to the introduction of this powerful new technology whose consequences are unknown and unknowable. And President Clinton-who has been amply rewarded by Monsanto at election time-has named Monsanto's Shapiro a "special trade representative" of the U.S. In sum, the U.S. federal government is forcefully aiding Monsanto as the corporation prepares to conduct a large-scale, uncontrolled experiment on the general public here and abroad.

A key part of the Monsanto strategy was to mix genetically modified foods with traditional foods, and keep them all unlabeled so that no one would know what they were eating. By the time anyone figured out that they were eating "Frankenstein food"-as it is now known in Europe-it would be a done deal.

Europeans are now hell-bent on reversing this mixture. As a spokesperson for the Tesco chain of supermarkets in England said recently, "We will remove GM ingredients where we can and label where we can't. In the short and medium term I expect the number of products containing GM ingredients to decline steadily, quite possibly to zero." And Fernanda Fau, a spokesperson for Eurocommerce, the association of European food retail chains said, "...the principle that segregation of GM ingredients is possible has now finally been accepted. We first lobbied for this two years ago and were told it was impossible."

With GM foods identified, labeled and segregated, it will be possible for consumers to exercise choice in the grocery store. Then the future of genetically modified foods will be imperiled by the marketplace. Robert Shapiro has bet the entire future of the Monsanto corporation on unknown and unknowable GM foods, so informed choice by consumers is the company's worst nightmare.

Monsanto's plans have gone awry in the Third World, too. Monsanto planned to introduce its genetically modified seeds accompanied by its patented "technology protection system" which makes the seeds from this year's crop sterile. Critics call Monsanto's seed sterilizing technology "terminator" and "suicide seeds." Wherever suicide seed technology is adopted, farmers will have to go back to Monsanto year after year to buy a new ration of genetically modified seeds.

"By peddling suicide seeds, the biotechnology multinationals will lock the world's poorest farmers into a new form of genetic serfdom," says Emma Must of the World Development Movement. "Currently 80 per cent of crops in developing countries are grown using farm-saved seed. Being unable to save seeds from sterile crops could mean the difference between surviving and going under," she says. "More precisely," says Canadian journalist Gwynne Dyer, "it would speed the consolidation of small farms into the hands of those with the money to engage in industrialized agribusiness-which generally means higher profits but less employment and lower yields per [unit of land]."[4]

In February in Cartagena, Colombia diplomats from 175 countries met to hammer out a "biosafety protocol" to control the flow of genetically modified organisms across international borders. The U.S. and Canada favored a weak treaty that would not allow any country to prevent the import and release of genetically modified organisms merely to shelter its population from the socio-economic impact of industrialized, capital-intensive forms of farming, or merely on health or environmental grounds.

The "other side" at Cartagena favored a strong treaty that gives countries the right to say no to GM organisms, requires a full study of the effects of GM foods on farmers' livelihoods, as well as health and environmental impacts, and makes biotech companies responsible for the legal and financial consequences if something goes wrong.

The Third World fought Monsanto and the U.S. government to a draw in Cartagena and no biosafety protocol was adopted. But the whole process helped the Third World figure out where it stands on these issues, and this kind of informed, thoughtful deliberation bodes ill for Monsanto's plan for domination of global food supplies.

As Canadian writer Gwynne Dyer sums it up, "The strategy for the high-speed introduction [of genetically modified foods] throughout the world is shaping up as one of the great public-relations disasters of all time. Public suspicion outside North America is reaching crippling proportions, and the reason is not at all mysterious. It is because the biotech firms literally tried to shove the stuff down peoples' throats without giving them either choice or information."[4]

· Peter Montague (National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO)

[1] Unless otherwise noted, all of the information in this edition of Rachel's was taken from press reports posted on the listserv biotech-l@cornell.edu. To subscribe to biotech-l send an E-mail message to listproc@cornell.edu; in the body of the message put the words "sub biotech-l Your Name" without quotation marks.

[2] Paul Waugh, "Brit. Stores Tesco and Unilever Ban Genetically Manipulated Products," THE INDEPENDENT (London, England), April 28, 1999, page unknown.

[3] Shapiro quoted in MONSANTO MONITOR, introductory issue (January 1999), pg. 7. MONSANTO MONITOR is published monthly by A Seed Europe, P.O. Box 92066, 1090 AB Amsterdam, Netherlands. Tel. +31-20-468-2616; fax: +31-20-468-2275.

. Email: biotech@aseed.antenna.nl.

[4] Gwynne Dyer, "World View, Biotechnology," [Toronto] GLOBE AND MAIL February 20, 1999, page unknown.

Descriptor terms: genetic engineering; genetically modified organisms; agriculture; farming; food safety; monsanto; arpad pusztai; rowett institute; biotech;

Visit Rachel at http://www.cqs.com/news/rehw/

NOTICE

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge even though it costs the organization considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do not send credit card information via E-mail. For further information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F. by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at (410) 263-1584, or fax us at (410) 263-8944.

· Peter Montague, Editor

GM All Over -------------------------------------------------------------------------

This week's SchNEWS: http://www.schnews.org.uk/

5. WAKE UP! WAKE UP! IT'S YER SMALL GENE POOL

SchNEWS ISSUE 346, March 15th, 2002

Monster Munch Inc. | Mexico |

Positive SchNEWS | And finally...

MONSTER MUNCH INC.

Since genetic engineering manipulates the basis of life, the risks involved are more frightening than any other developed so far... We feel it is unjust of the richest of the world to expect us to bear the risks of their experimentation. - Tewolde Egziabher, Ethiopian Delegate (CBD).

In April UN delegates will be yapping about the state of the world's biodiversity resources over two-headed salmon and champagne at the sixth meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Holland. Set up during the UN Rio Earth Summit in 1992, the CBD have only just agreed on the useless Biosafety Protocol and The Law of the Seed. Neither will have the power to stop the legal or illegal spread of GMOs, protect farmers rights or stop finite resources being plundered for profit. This is because these UN organisations didn't have the power or force of will to fight powerful biotech corporations and the World Trade Organisation.

MEXICO

"What's frightening is how fast it has spread" said Yolanda Lara,

spokesperson for Oaxaca's non-governmental Rural Development Agency about the spread of GM corn in Capulalpan, a village in the hills of Mexico's Oaxaca State. Normally locals might be thankful for this new source of corn, the staple food of villages in the area. But they now know this corn is GM, which is surprising because GM crops have been banned in Mexico since 1998. Berkeley scientists have confirmed that this new corn is the spawn of Monsanto: it has the same DNA as the biotech giant's commercial GM maize. David Quist, responsible for the study suggests that "It's more likely that the contamination came from food aid brought into these regions. A lot of it comes from the United States and a lot of it is transgenic." So under the guise of offering support to poverty stricken villagers in remote parts of Mexico, the US has managed to off-load tonnes of subsidised GM maize on unsuspecting shopkeepers and subsistence farmers. Locals are worried that the GM corn, which they say has been around in their shops for several years,

will out-compete native varieties. The Berkeley study confirms their fears, suggesting that GM corn is likely to dominate local corn and may also threaten the research of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, home to the largest variety of endangered maize in the world. Quist believes a well-enforced ban on imported GM corn and a programme to encourage traditional habits of swapping and testing wild seeds is the way forward.

PHILIPPINES

In February this year Greenpeace Asia activists blocked the unloading of 17,000 tonnes of GM soybeans from the United States. The Philippine government buys about 300,000 tonnes of soybeans and over one million tonnes of soymeal annually, mainly from the United States. Last October,

Swiss corporation Novartis AG confirmed allegations from Greenpeace that some samples of baby food it sold did contain genetically modified soybean. Beau Baconguis of Greenpeace Asia said, "We should not be forced to feed our children with food the rest of the world is increasingly rejecting."

INDIA

India is the biggest cotton producer in the world so it was big news when, in 1998, 500 farmers committed suicide in Andhra Pradesh because of the failure of their cotton crops. Dr. Pushpa Bhargava, an Indian biologist, told the Indian Science Congress that the failure of the cotton seed in Andhra Pradesh in 1997 and 1998 should be investigated since Monsanto could have been using local seed companies to market bad seed in order to destroy the supply system. "The destruction of the seed supply and Monsanto's purchase of Indian seed companies would have ensured that Indian farmers had no option but to buy Monsanto's Bt.

cotton and in future Monsanto's terminator crops." The Indian farmers ain't taking this lying down and in 1998 the Karnatka farmers union occupied and burned down the three fields of GM cotton and 500 farmers occupied Cargill, the biotech multinational offices, throwing loads of their processing kit out of windows. They did loads of other actions too as part of 'Operation Cremate Monsanto' and hundreds of farmers and activists took part in the Intercontinental Caravan, which toured through Europe.

The struggle against biotech giants in India continues today and on Monday 18th Indian women farmers will be in London to challenge British Government aid to the state of Andhra Pradesh's "Vision 20\20"

programme, which will displace 25 million rural people, and corporatise agriculture in the state. This action opposes the Memorandum of Understanding signed by Chief Minister of AP and Monsanto, which will give the company free rein to plant GM crops throughout Andhra Pradesh.

They will present the findings of a Citizen's Jury at 2pm in the House of Commons.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

RESISTANCE IS FERTILE

While 9 EU states have a legal postponement of genetically modified organisms, countries such as Sri Lanka and India have been forced to bow to the 'superior' power of US backed World Trade Organisation and sign the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement which limits their ability to deny access to Monsanto and the like. That said,

anti GM and anti-capitalist actions are growing, so get yer arse in gear and see what you can do to stop the greedy corporate elite (and their government chums) from controlling our food supply.

The first GM crop bashing of the year kicked off in Warwickshire last weekend. Following a procession about 100 people pulled up some plants in a field of GM oil seed rape for half an hour before police made five arrests. Despite the non-violent protest a police spokesman said "We were treating it as a peaceful protest, but it did go beyond that." -

probably unaware of cops enjoying tea and cakes provided by the local Women's Institute, in the village hall, with the protesters after the event.

* To see if there's any farm scale trials in your area contact:

020-7272-1586, www.geneticsaction.org.uk.

* After suing Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser for infringing patent rights when his fields were contaminated with GM oil seed rape, even though he was unaware of the contamination and was unable to prevent it (SchNEWS 300) Monsanto are now threatening other farmers. See the threatening letters at www.percyschmeiser.com.

In a separate case two Canadian organic farmers are trying to sue Monsanto and Aventis. They seek compensation for damages caused by GM oilseed rape, and an injunction to prevent Monsanto from introducing GM wheat into the region. The local organic farmers group said "losing wheat to genetic contamination would devastate organic farming - our very future is at stake. Info: www.saskorganic.com.