OCA's NAIS Videos

These, from Organic Consumer Association...

Mercury in High Fructose Corn Syrup

You have to read THIS Washington Post article...just saw it today. There is mercury in a high percentage of foods made with high fructose corn syrup. And the public has not been aware, although the FDA has since 2005, according to this article.

There has been a HUGE ad campaign to mislead the public about the supposed "safety" of high fructose corn syrup.

I'd not seen any of these commercials since we don't have TV, but this summer during my MIL's hospice stay, I got caught up on what I'd been missing (said a bit tongue-in-cheek). I was really angered at the misinformation about HFCS and the way their commercials made it look like any question about its safety was due to ignorance.

Here's one of their commercials I first saw:



See? It's a classic "poor dumb guy" spot. Poor Dumb Guy is inarticulate and ignorant about HFCS, and is corrected by Smart Savvy Girlfriend. He is saved from his misconceptions about the differences between sweeteners.

Oh brother. First, get over the Poor Dumb Guy stuff. I hope women are a lot smarter than to believe all guys are idiots because of their unfortunate gender. Puh!! Myself, I prefer smart, sharp, informed guys and am guessing nearly all the readers in Informed Blogland do, too. None of this patting a guy on the head like a puppy stuff for me. I, frankly, appreciate the male of the species (vive le difference, I say!), especially the ones that failed Obedience Class and think for themselves. What a stupidly insulting stereotype...

Well, anyway, the strongest argument the girl in the above commercial has is a comparison with processed sugar??? Let's wake up!

Here's another YouTube, and it spoofs the above commercial. I enjoyed it ;-)




As funny as it may seem that this is being promoted as "healthy," high fructose corn syrup is no laughing matter. It's the #1 sweetener in the U.S. and is THE sweetener of choice in most processed foods. As we all know, the bulk of foods out there are processed.

And nowhere on the label does it indicate whether the HFCS was processed using a method that taints it with mercury.

Sigh...

We have to take charge of what goes on our plates, and into our bodies...

Transgenics: The Economics of Putting Mouse in Pig

Another email digest from the OCA in my In Box, and I just have to share...

Ugh. It gets more and more chilling.

Let me back up a second. Tonight we went out shortly before dark to run some errands. There on the side of the highway was a fairly large wild boar, snacking on seedheads or other finds just at the edge of (what's left of) the woods...a big but not fat black boar with a long narrow snout, rooting around for nature's leavings.

I'm not a huge pig fan because pigs don't figure in largely into my sphere. We don't eat them, don't plan to raise them, and I just smile and wish them well when I see them elsewhere. They're not much on my radar. I'm actually ambivalent to them, pretty much, but even so, I would not take one and mess around with its DNA and decide that Pig is better when mixed with Mouse because of some perceived convenience or monetary benefit I might receive. Is this doing new things by breeding for certain characteristics? that's not new...selective breeding animals has been done for millenia. Have at it...breed for a straight tail rather than a crooked, cross-eyed pigs or pigs with spots or with a bigger carcass or pigs that fit in the palm of your hand or have no bristles or that oink at strangers...whatever. But they're still pigs, with their DNA intact.

Not so with the "progress" of the bio-tecchies. Ugh. Why are our governments playing with this stuff, so so cozy with the huge producers and corporations?

Now they are trying to get around the Big Ag dilemmas rather than solving them, by fiddling with DNA. Case in point, putting mouse DNA into hog DNA in order to (now get this, how to say delicately?) to have more environmentally-friendly poop...to create an "Enviropig." The FDA will be trying to bring it to you really soon. I kid you not. Here's a quote:

These are Enviropigs, developed by researchers at the University of Guelph to poop out more environmentally friendly waste. The trademarked pigs are just one of dozens of genetically engineered animals at research institutions around the world whose genes have been altered for human benefit. (<-----Robbyn's interjection: What the heck???)And, due to a recent move in the U.S., the Enviropig may be the first to arrive on your dinner plate.

And of course there's no consumer labeling, so we don't get to decide whether we especially WANT mouse DNA in pig meat.

For me, this is hardly a dilemma, since I'm Jewish and eat neither pig nor mouse. But it's a moral dilemma because in my faith, the Bible is very specific that in both the plant and the animal worlds, living things are delineated into things "of their own type." That does not forbid hybridization but it does forbid what creation itself cannot achieve without human forcefulness and mad science, the forcible mixing of unlike things. You just won't see a lion mating with a hyena, or a giraffe with a water buffalo in nature.

I believe there's a good reason for that.

And what business do we have fiddling with ANY living thing so that it fulfills the propaganda of being crafted and edited "for human benefit"??? This is not the same thing as deciding between a pony and a draft horse depending on its best use. It's not the same thing as breeding a dog to hunt or to herd or to retrieve. This is putting part of other animal and plant DNA INSIDE existing DNA from another species altogether to freaking "play God" and it's the ultimate insult to the universe.

(That's my decidedly objective opinion...) ;-)

Aside from what I believe on those scores, I believe what drives this bio-tech frankenscience is the not-so-almighty dollar/yen/euro.

Here's a quote from the article where you can find the detailed report:

Despite ethical concerns, Ronald Stotish, the CEO and president of Aqua Bounty Technologies, based in Waltham, Mass., is confident genetically engineered animals will make the leap from the lab to the farm - and soon.
"It's the way of the future," he says. "This technology has the capability of making beneficial changes in production agriculture."

Let's demystify this quote.

It's like a house For Sale in the classifieds listed as a "cozy handyman special..." there are more to those words than you might bargain for.

"Production agriculture" is Big Ag, and Big Ag is no friend of the consumer, nor even of your mainstream farmers. Big Ag does whatever it takes to force more into less for fewer dollars into the shortest amount of time for the biggest projected return. It's controlled by large corporations whose interest in money overrides concerns about truthful labeling, plant and animal health, humaneness, consumer health and protections, and other consumer interests. Now they're playing nastier by changing the living things themselves...not by hybridizing, which is how their propaganda would suggest nature does things anyway, but rather by forcing different TYPES of living things into creations that cannot even be created by mating...rather the DNA has to be forced into the DNA of something else...by man.

What arrogance. What foolishness and shortsightedness!

Please read the article by Megan Ogilvie of the Toronto Star, and you'll see what I mean.

Genetically modified and engineered animals and plants MUST be labeled, as there has been no adequate long-term testing on humans.
It must be labeled, so that consumers have a choice.
It must be truthfully spoken about...the misinformation campaign on the part of the big corporations is staggering. Things done in the name of "health" and "environmentally-friendly" are NOT being truthful with their advertising campaigns...changing animal DNA to FURTHER industrial large-scale production has NOTHING to do with REAL CHANGE needed to heal the disconnect and bring production back to smaller local producers, which is more environmentally-concious AND healthy.
Do NOT believe that the FDA is the Benevolent Big Daddy who will handle "all those confusing concerns" for a trusting public...no way. Choice and responsibility lie FIRST with the CONSUMER (that's us) and WE should decide what we eat...and should have the benefit of labels not intended to deceive us in that decision-making process.

I INSIST this MUST be OUR choice...no one else's.

Here is their contact link if you'd like to add your two cents to others voicing their concerns:

In Canada, please write to Health Canada to voice your strong opposition to the approval of this and other genetically engineered animals. They can be reached at novelfood_alimentnouveau@hc-sc.gc.ca
In the US, let the FDA know how you feel via their contact page http://www.fda.gov/comments.html or by writing toFood and Drug Administration 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, Maryland 20857

Monsanto's 125,000 Suicide Farmers

It's being termed GM (genetically modified) Genocide, and the UK's Prince Charles has been advocating against it. Test case, India...where farmers are taking their own lives after the real impact of their growing GM crops has come to light...gruesomely.

Excerpt from full article, here:

(farmer named in article), like millions of other Indian farmers, had been promised previously unheard of harvests and income if he switched from farming with traditional seeds to planting GM seeds instead.

Beguiled by the promise of future riches, he borrowed money in order to buy the GM seeds.

But when the harvests failed, he was left with spiralling debts - and no income.

So Shankara became one of an estimated 125,000 farmers to take their own life as a result of the ruthless drive to use India as a testing ground for genetically modified crops.

The crisis, branded the 'GM Genocide' by campaigners, was highlighted recently when Prince Charles claimed that the issue of GM had become a 'global moral question' - and the time had come to end its unstoppable march.

Post-Election Ruminations

On how we make our own history, here's my article at the collaborative Women Not Dabbling in Normal site.

Comments and insights welcomed!! :)

NAIS, A Threat to Everyone

I highly recommend reading Monica's recent article on this subject...I'll mention it more in this post. Her article is thorough and a really important read...this is a crucial time period in history and our freedoms are at stake in a very real way.

The implementation of the so-called "voluntary" National Animal Identification System and its cousin The Real I.D. monitoring system, are both are current, real, and active systems threatening our basic freedoms guaranteed by the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments to the U.S.Constitution.

Here are excerpts from this site as to how:

1st Amendment violation -- some faiths "cannot comply with the Department's proposed program because it violates their First Amendment right to free exercise. For example, the Old Order Amish believe they are prohibited from registering their farms or animals in the proposed program due to, inter alia, Scriptural prohibitions."

4th Amendment Violation - "The Department proposes surveillance of every property where even a single animal of any livestock species is kept; and to require, at a minimum, the radio-frequency identification tagging of every animal...
...In these instances, the "premises" that the Department plans to subject to GPS satellite surveillance and distance radio-frequency readingare the homes of these tens of millions of citizens. The government is not permitted to use sense-enhancing technologies to invade the privacy of citizens' homes. The sanctity of the home is entitled to privacy protection in circumstances where an industrial complex is not.
This is not speculation."

5th and 14th Amendment Violations - "The proposed NAIS is the first attempt by the federal government at forced registration in a huge, permanent federal database of individual citizens' real property (the homes and farms where animals are kept) and personal property (the animals themselves). Indeed, the only general systems of permanent registration of personal property in the United States are systems administered by the individual states for two items that are highly dangerous if misused: motor vehicles and guns. It is difficult to imagine any acceptable basis for the Department to subject the owner of a chicken to more intrusive surveillance than the owner of a gun..."

Please read the full article here


If this sounds like conspiracy theory material, survivalist paranoia, Orwellian Big Brother-ism, or Sci-Fi convention propaganda, think again.

I've written about it here, as have so many others on their sites. Monica's article at Women Not Dabbling in Normal is excellent, and I'm posting here to head folks to her excellent NAIS post ...here's the link.

By the way, if you think we can opt out by not opting FOR these, we're mistaken. Farmers are routinely included on the NAIS lists without their knowledge, and to not be included automatically in the program must then identify themselves as a farm not wishing to participate (which i believe singles them out further)...and as of yet are not legally provided with a comprehensive registry list in order to determine if they are still on it or not. Please check out Monica's article...excellent!

Raw Milk Dud

This, in my email recently:

Personal Liberties at Stake in Raw Milk Issue

Sunday, October 12, 2008 2:33 PMBy: Kimberly Hartke

Our constitutional right to liberty is systematically being attacked by government agencies flanked by anti-competitive forces in the food industry.
Nowhere is this more obvious than on the raw milk issue. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger recently vetoed SB201, a bill to preserve consumers’ rights to access farm fresh milk while guaranteeing its safety.

Read full article...

11th Hour, and a First Class Stamp

I know, it's hard to believe. I'm one of THOSE...

There have been a lot of elections, and I've voted in very few of them.

I have such an aversion to politicians, sales pitches, pyramid scheme promoters, prosperity evangelists, Tupperware and Amway distributors, it might be a borderline phobia or something, only I'm not afraid of them...I just can't stand two seconds more in the same proximity.

(Could this be because of my former bad experiences with all of the above?? lol)

But I care about my country.

I'm seldom overtly "political," but I will venture forth to make this statement. Neither of the current presidential candidates satisfy what this country needs in leadership during these times. I think either direction, each candidate is a dangerous gamble, and I don't think a country should be run by hoping you're choosing the lesser of two evils. Marriages shouldn't be made that way, and we're going to be married to this person economically and policy-wise for the next 4 years.

I don't blame anyone but ourselves. WE are ultimately responsible for who we put into office.

Well, anyway, that's my wee rant (I cut it short...) And this could very well have been one of my non-voting years, except that my husband was born in a non-free country where people took their lives into their hands to have a voice in who their leaders should be. Now in our family, voting is a responsibility.

So this otherwise politically-averse gal had to listen to the candidates and their promises...or rather, try to read between the lines of everything they are refusing to commit to print or speeches just now. Sheesh!

I'm amazed at the issues that have NOT been raised. Things like the passing of the Real I.D. and its pending implementation...hello?? Um, wouldn't it be nice to have a candidate repeal the Patriot Act? Localize food production? And one hundred other things on my own pet peeve list...things associated with losses of OUR freedoms.

When I hear the candidates, I think in terms of precedents, and the further losses of our freedoms. Some people might thing this is inevitable..."because" (fill in the blank with whatever the crisis is at the moment) As I see it, we've given up more freedoms, whether knowingly or through inattention, in the last 50 years than in the rest of our short American history.

I got my voter's registration off on THE cutoff day for mail-ins...same day we searched the place and couldnt find a 1st class stamp in the house...ha! Same day one of our vehicles went kaput, etc etc, but thanks to Jack, it did get stamped and mailed in time.

You know what this means, right? It means I'll probably get called up for jury duty any day ;-)

Oh yeah, and I have to decide which Amway salesman er, candidate, to vote for...

I know which person my husband's voting for, and he has strong reasons why. I refuse to tell him who mine'll be, because in my family growing up we NEVER told anyone who we voted for...that was something my Depression Era grandparents held sacrosanct...NOT telling ANYONE...and somehow it's still in me.

But I do tease Jack now and then by suggesting the possible redeeming qualities of his choice's opponent....you know, just to make sure he's really listening to me at the moment...

It's so much fun kissing and making up ;-)

Genetically Modified Food Fight

You'd think I could escape this issue in my daily life, but can I?

When I speak of genetically-modified foods, I am not speaking of the age-old practice of creating hybrids. Rather, I am speaking of the hacking of DNA and insertion of unrelated DNA by biotech scientists. The reasons behind the latter are vast, and all have to do with profit margins, despite any claims to the contrary.

That's just to clarify, in a nutshell.

Can we afford to ignore this issue, or be half-hearted about it? After all, our society is issue-weary, I believe. We've been inundated with the enormity of global crises, natural disasters, famines, grass-roots efforts struggling to survive, Davids of emergency causes dwarfed by the money and litigation of corporate and legislative Goliaths. We're often tired and discouraged as we sit in the shadow of mountains that seem to be immovable.

Well, that's a perception I think the Goliaths want to perpetuate. Often, it's the niggling little irritants, us, that are the squeaky wheel that brings attention to and some consistency to these very important milestone issues...we're in the midst of making history, not at the backside of something unchangeable.

The GMO/GE foods issue has invaded my daily life now, whether I like it or not. I just had a contraband (oh the poor diet) handful of Fritos. Did I eat GM corn, and if I did, where is the testing to show what the risks are? More protected than my rights to know are the rights of BigAg to market these without any truth in labeling standard that would allow ME to decide FOR MYSELF about consuming genetically altered products. Allowing the government to be my "parent" in this way is too Big Brother for me. No, in a free society, I get to decide for myself, and I get to demand transparency in access to knowing my food's ingredients.

I believe this movement perpetuates itself through misinformation, and by perpetuating societal assumptions. We are so quick to be influenced.

We watch very little TV, and are really ignorant of the latest shows...we get no TV reception here, and don't pay for any. When I was in hospice during the my late MIL's illness, I did watch TV for the first time in literally years. My interest in it soon flagged, so accustomed I have become to less noise. Most of the TV "noise" I noticed was in the form of advertisements, and I began to count the number of pharmaceutical ads and such...they predominated. Two such ads most recently featured were promoting High Fructose Corn syrup, and the ads mocked opposition to high fructose corn syrup as an additive in our foods. It was interesting what information the ad excluded, their sole pitch being that "HF corn syrup, in moderation, is no worse for you than sugar." I remember the actor in one of the ads responding to her friend's hesitancy in eating a food with HF corn syrup asking him what his objection to it was. His reply about his health concerns was incoherent, and her response to him was "What, (you object) because it's corn??" It made him seem like he's a dork who doesn't like his vegetables.

Well, in the comparison of high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar, these days neither can escape sobering GM realities. BOTH are mass-produced, mass-utilized as food sweeteners, and among the highest percentage crops altered genetically. And neither are labeled, so you never know if you're getting genetically modified crops in your foods, or not. Read any label and you'll soon find it's hard to find much of anything at the store without high fructose corn syrup or cane sugar as an ingredient.

What further mystifies me is how ignorant a lot of science-related professionals themselves are regarding this issue, and why they so strongly resist objecting to the potential and real health concerns. Whenever this happens, I think it points to nepotism or some unhealthy inter-dependence among healthcare industry and the pharmaceutical/bio-research industries and government monetary "national interests" protecting potential overseas trade. That's an entirely different subject...

I went to the doctor yesterday, for a very basic visit. When I entered the office, I noticed they were promoting a high protein diet program for their overweight patients...the samples were on view in the waiting room, along with a lot of promising literature. The program incorporates high protein drinks/soups/etc along with basic healthy eating, minus a lot of carbs and fat. Being overweight myself, I waited to ask the doctor more about it. The nurse gave me literature on it to read while waiting for the doc, and I looked it over. They've had many patients who've lost weight on the program, so it seems to work. I've been down this road before, though, and I know there's no magic bullet. In the past, I've done dietary things I've lived to regret, one of the foremost being trusting the "experts" during the Fen-Phen days. Those "experts" approved me for the use of Phen-Fen even though I have a heart murmur. I temporarily had stunning results, but never truly knew what I was putting in my body (the testing had not been long-term) and was left with regrets late for being so hasty to compromise my health overall for the promise of instant results. That, and so many other guniea pig situations related to not only weight loss but also infertility treatments, etc in the past has made me a very cautious and slow-to-jump consumer presently. I consider my reluctance wisdom gained at a high price, not shortsightedness.

My doc visit went well....until...

the end, when the doc was wrapping things up. She was congenial, worked with me, helped me update things that needed updating. Then I asked the Forbidden Question...."what's in the protein supplements?"

She said I could pick up an ingredient list at the front desk. I asked if the primary protein in the supplements was soy, and she said yes.

I have a condition that soy aggravates due to its effect on estrogen, and I mentioned this to her. Her face began to contort. "Well, I think most of that is just a lot of hype," she said. "I think the point is to lose weight and a lot of people like to make more of the estrogen connection and soy than they should."

OK, that's not exactly giving me scientific reasons why, but then I made the major mistake, and asked,

"my additional concern is that soy is one of the highest percentage genetically-modified foods, and I'm cautious about wanting to consume things that are genetically-modified."

At this point, it was like I had kicked her. Her lightning reaction was to become downright sarcastic and almost hostile. She went from congenial to actually sneering! She stood up, looked at me like "YOU aren't the doctor, and YOU know nothing at all about your body," and said "Yes, soy is mostly GM these days. I guess you also have a problem with roses? Roses are genetically-modified. It's completely natural."

And she looked at me with disdain. I said, "I am meaning something different...I understand roses are hybrids and hybrids occur both naturally and through man-made means. But by GM I'm meaning products whose DNA were hacked into and unrelated DNA inserted into by means nature can never accomplish." She snorted and walked out of the room, and I heard her in the other room going off about it to one of the nurses.

Whew, helpful to hostile in mere seconds! It didn't upset me that she supports GM foods, though I would have reason to disagree -- it upset me that she believes DNA-bio-hacking is the same thing as cross pollinating a red rose with a white one, and produces plants as natural as roses. It also bothers me she is giving misinformation to a patient who is wanting to be cautious for health reasons, rather than the other way around...if I were in there asking about the viability of a product KNOWN to have some risks, she'd run an arsenal of tests, look at my health history and genetic predispositions, and make a cautious decision based on benefits vs risks, acknowledging that there ARE risks.

Whew :)

This issue is not going away.

And I'm still going to opt for REAL food vs. engineered anything. I'm tired of our being unwitting guinea pigs for others' gain. You can always find a statistic to back up anything. 50 years ago, doctors were promoting cigarettes as a healthy thing to smoke. I'm not about regulating people's choices of what they eat, or smoke...it's a free country. I AM about giving them all the facts so they can make informed choices.

Here's some of the latest on the GM issue -- from the Organic Consumers site:

The Food and Drug Administration released a "draft guidance" document on September 18th that outlines the regulatory approval process for Genetically Engineered (GE) animals. To date, the process has not been transparent, and maintains that GE animals, like their plant counterparts, do not need to be labeled. Food derived from GE animals will not be labeled and represents a huge risk for human health and the environment.

Full article at http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_14724.cfm

If we think this is an issue that's harmless, here's a reminder that there is a lot of money and lobbying behind this issue that is striving to silence the folks who openly question and ask for the facts: http://www.gmwatch.eu/archives/5-Interview-about-attacks-on-GM-Watch.html

Gently and consistently, we must insist on honesty in labeling and on protection of our rights to decide for ourselves, as citizens, whether we want GMOs. We can NOT hand this decision over to the government to decide for us, because if we do, they will.

And they'll continue to convince us that GM soy is as "natural" as growing a pink rose.

Participate in Protecting Schoolchildren's Food

This just in my mailbox from my local chapter of the Weston A Price Foundation:


One mission of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (a non-profit organization) is to protect the constitutional right of the nation's family farms to provide unprocessed farm foods directly to consumers through any legal means. www.farmtoconsumer.org

USDA ACCEPTING TESTIMONY ON CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS

The USDA is preparing for the 2009 Reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Programs, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program. The reauthorization process provides Congress with a regular opportunity to examine the operation and effectiveness of the Federal nutrition assistance programs, and consider making improvements to their statutory structure under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.
YOUR TESTIMONY NEEDED!

The USDA is accepting testimony on its Child Nutrition Program. Please make your voices heard by going to the following link:

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=SubmitComment&o=09000064805f 47dd

IMPORTANT POINTS TO MAKE
1. Bring back whole milk to school lunch programs. Children need the butterfat in whole milk for growth and development
2. Abandon the unscientific stricture against use of animal fats in school lunches
3. Recommend against using any soy in school lunches.
4. No junk food in school lunches; no vending machines in schools
5. No use of school lunch programs to promote the unpopular, anti-small farm National Animal Identification Program.

FUTURE MEETINGS--PLEASE ATTEND IF YOU CAN!
There are two more meetings scheduled for citizen input. Please attend if you can and submit testimony. Let's let the WAPF message for nourishing traditional foods in school lunches be heard loud and clear!

September 10, 1-4 pm
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
FNS Midwest Regional Office
GSA Conference Center Room 331
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 20th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
For more information call (312) 353-1044

September 11, 9 am - 1 pm
DENVER, COLORADO
The Colorado History Museum
1300 Broadway
Denver, CO 80203
For more information, call (303) 844-0300

FURTHER BACKGROUND
For further background information, see the press release on the USDA meeting in Atlanta, August 14, below:

Concerned Parents, Farm-to-School Activists to Testify Before USDA
At Listening Session on Child Nutrition

Atlanta, Georgia, August 14, 2008---USDA may get more than they bargained for at their "Listening Sessions" on Child Nutrition programs, now being held around the country. A number of powerful, grass-roots based organizations are mobilizing forces to bring the voices of parents and children to the next session to be held in Atlanta. This series of hearings about the reauthorization of government school feeding and WIC programs would typically be dominated by testimony from food service providers asking for expanded programs, funding and increased reimbursement rates.

Now, parents and their children also want to be heard. An informal coalition of such diverse groups as Georgia Organics, Les Dames d'Escoffier-Atlanta Chapter, Food & Water Watch, AngryMoms.org, Family Farm Defenders, Georgia Chapter of Sierra Club, National Latino Farmers & Ranchers Trade Association and the Weston A. Price
Foundation of Georgia (a 501c3 nutrition education non-profit), are asking their members to submit comments to the USDA at a session or online, to speak to their concerns about food safety and purity.

In last week's hearing in Baltimore, Sarah Alexander of Food & Water Watch, raised the issue of schools having the choice to purchase artificial growth hormone free and organic milk, as well as non-irradiated food. Food & Water Watch has previously succeeded in getting irradiated food as a separate line item on government order
forms, and since that time, not a single school has chosen to order irradiated meat. Food & Water Watch has also successfully defeated corporate efforts to ban artificial growth hormone-free labeling on milk.

Emboldened by such successes around the country, grass-roots and advocacy groups are now going for more transparency and input on what is being fed to our nation's children. Among the concerns that will be raised by members of various groups to the USDA during their comment period are:

- Parental Consent Before Serving Genetically Modified Food
- Preference for Grass-fed Meats from Small, Sustainable Farms
- Elimination of Artificial Hormones, Antibiotics, Steriods from School Food
- Increased Use of Fresh, Locally Grown Produce
- Affirmative Action on Behalf of Family Farms & Ranches
- Junk Foods Removed from Schools
- Oppose Use of Nutrition Programs to Push the Unpopular National Animal ID System
- Parental Rights in Food Choice

Erin Croom of Georgia Organics' Farm-to-School campaign and Natalie Rogers, Health and Wellness Specialist for the Georgia PTA are slated to testify before the USDA on Wednesday, August 20, 9:00 am - 1:00 pm at the Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 2nd Floor Conference Center, Room D at 61 Forsyth St., SW, Atlanta, GA 30303-8930. There are two other listening sessions remaining, in Colorado and Chicago.

For those unable to participate in a listening session, a notice of the request for comments was published in the Federal Register on May 20, 2008, with details on how to submit comments by postal mail or through a courier, no later than Oct. 15, 2008. You may also submit reauthorization comments electronically through regulations.gov or fax to 703-305-2879.

Media Contact: Kimberly Hartke, Publicist 703-860-2711, 703-675-5557 cell

Monsanto's Genetic Conspiracy: European 3 Video Series

This is a thoughtful documentary that speaks to concerns about Monsanto's culpability in obscuring, falsifying, and manipulating data in regards to GM food safety research...worldwide.

Unlabled GM Sugar Now Here

This is sobering.

Sugar Company American Crystal Now Sourcing from GM Sugarbeets

Here is a clip from Organic Consumers Association website. This site is full of important information we all need in order to stay abreast of these developments.



"GE Sugar Beets to Hit Stores in 2008!

American Crystal, a large Wyoming-based sugar company and several other leading U.S. sugar providers have announced they will be sourcing their sugar from genetically engineered (GE) sugar beets beginning this year and arriving in stores in 2008. Like GE corn and GE soy, products containing GE sugar will not be labeled as such.

Since half of the granulated sugar in the U.S. comes from sugar beets, a move towards biotech beets marks a dramatic alteration of the U.S. food supply. These sugars, along with GE corn and soy, are found in many conventional food products, so consumers will be exposed to genetically engineered ingredients in just about every non-organic multiple-ingredient product they purchase...." read rest of article here

The dangers of unlabeled GM sugar in our food supply has prompted a boycott of Kelloggs and other companies that will not agree to acknowledge the public's concern and fears about GE sugar, which is a primary ingredient in many of their products. Read here for more information about taking action to reverse this rhetoric and to urge these companies that the public does NOT want GE sugar used.

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

The BioTech and Corporate Agribusiness Efforts to Pass "Pre-Emption" Laws to Remove Community Resistant to GMOs

Also on the same site is the mention of consumers who are effectively inacting city, county, and local ordinances banning GE crops. As you can imagine, the response from the big GM powers-that-be has been swift and ugly. According to the article,

"15 states have recently passed 'Monsanto laws' taking away the rights of cities and counties to ban GE crops. Now legislators in California, Missouri, Nebraska, and North Carolina are facing the lobbying power of the biotech industry and are threatening to pass controversial "preemption" laws that would take away local rights to regulate GMOs. " read rest of article here

Where does your state stand?

A look at the US map and your state's standing

Debunking the Propaganda: Genetically-Modified Crops No Answer to World Food Crisis

To hear it as told by some folks, genetically-modified foods are the ultimate solution to the world food crisis.

As long as you turn your brains off.

Seriously. This is the best thing since sliced Frankenbread...right?? In fact, it might get so "improved" someday that all we'll have to do is pop open a tube of Engineered Foodpaste, and voila...no thought processes required whatsoever!

The hype is no accident...it takes marketing efforts of monumental proportions to pull off this sort of snow job. I'm sure it took some think tank a while to come up with "hey, I know! We can tout this as the solution to the world's hunger problem...that should help play down the whole GMOs-as-plague-and-pestilence angle, don'tcha think?"

Any worldwide "solution" should examine the power machines, special interests, and political fishhooks associated with anything with that big a marketing budget to back it up.



You just have to see this article at the Millions Against Monsanto site http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_13589.cfm

Genetically modified foods have been a hotly-debated subject of much controversy for some years now. Below are some of the claims widely used to manipulate the world markets towards full acceptance of GM crops -- but research is showing that the claims are quite a different story than reality--

The Propaganda states these things:

1. GM crops are becoming the norm.
However, the evidence is to the contrary.

2. GM crops produce increased yields.
Again, the evidence is to the contrary. In fact, there is proof they are decreased.

3. GM crops require the use of less pesticide.
Wrong. "Although there may have been some initial reductions, recent U.S. data suggest that herbicide use in GE crops is now significantly higher than it was prior to their introduction. Weeds that have developed resistance to the herbicide used with GE crops now infest several million acres, forcing greater herbicide use. Insect-resistant GE crops have reduced overall insecticide use somewhat, but on balance GE crops have not reduced our dependence on pesticides. "http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080618/news_lz1e18gurian.html

4. GM animal feed is more cost-effective/cheaper.
Nope. It's rocketing skyward.

5. It is futile to try to enforce a European "zero-tolerance" policy for non-approved GMOs.
Wrong. The GM conglomerates want that to be the assumption, but it is far from reality.

6. GM crops are more drought-resistant.
False. There is no alternative to good land management. Genetic modification has so far not produced a commercial drought tolerant variety in any type of crop.

The article cited (above) contains the links to the different points above.

Aside from the horrific and irresponsibly-dodged health issues at the heart of GM seeds and crops, has no one considered the absurdity of the argument for****complete reliance on a few GM mega-conglomerates as the controlling forces to world wide food supplies??****

Um...hello?

Makes a person realize just what they have at stake here and why the claims that lack supporting evidence are simply bypassed by the propaganda machines. The GM companies represent big money worldwide. There has been much invested, so they stand to have much to lose...if anyone dares touch them. So far, they have painted themselves as the Providers of the People, the Innovators of the Global Solutions, blah blah blah. Their marketing alone is its own machine.

It is not difficult to remember a lesson from history...that propaganda is not quite the same thing as advertising...it's far more exaggerated and unaccountable; propaganda utilizes (often politically) a selective manipulation (or manufacture) of information, rife with ommissions of full disclosure, typically casting a dictator in a benevolent light as being the author of a "solution for the masses." Look at history's dictators..the benevolent fathers of their people...Stalin, Lenin, Castro, H--ler, Chairman Mao.

Show me where these benevolent dictators have solved the problems they claimed to address historically (other than by wiping out the population so history could be rewritten by their own revisionists)...and maybe then I'll be more willing to trust "Good Father Monsanto"

Until then, I'll just continue thinking for myself and forgoing the communal Koolaid and the microchip implant.

Raw Milk and SB201

The Fresh Milk Act of 2008

New news from the Weston A. Price Foundation I found in my email box about the next steps for AB201:

LET'S CLEAR THE LAST COMMITTEE HURDLE FOR SB201, The Fresh Milk Act of 2008!

We are getting closer to passage of SB201, the Fresh Milk Act of 2008, which will replace AB1735 (the "sneak attack" against raw milk) and guarantee the future of raw milk in California.

We appreciate all your support so far in making calls, which helped the bill pass unanimously out of two committee hearings. The fate of SB201 will have a big impact on raw milk throughout the country so we are sending this action alert to all WAPF members.

Once past the Appropriations Committee, we are expecting a vote by the full California House and Senate before the end of the summer.

ACTION TO TAKE
Please take a few moments on Monday and Tuesday to make your calls to committee members. SB201 will be heard on Wednesday, July 16 in the Appropriations Committee. With your support we can make it to the Assembly Floor.

Please call the Assembly Members below before Wednesday with this short message: "Please support SB201 this Wednesday July 16th in the Assembly Appropriations Committee." Let's inundate them with calls!

ASSEMBLY SPEAKER
Karen Bass • 916-319-2047

APPROPRIATIONS MEMBERS
Anna Caballero • 916-319-2028
Mike Davis • 916-319-2048
Warren Furutani • 916-319-2055
Ted Lieu • 916-319-2053
Pedro Nava • 916-319-2035
Jose Solorio • 916-319-2069

Your Calls Have Made a Huge Impact - Thank You and Keep it up!

U.S. Uses Free Trade Agreement to Bully World Markets

Unbelievable....

You just have to read this! This is not just unethical, it's risking all our health on a global scale....deliberately


Food Safety: Rigging the Game
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/18076

Immediate Action Needed --The NAIS and School Lunches

You may have read about this already. I just received this in my email inbox from the Weston A. Price Foundation -- (I've put certain sections in bold print)

ACTION ALERT: Mandatory Requirement for NAIS in School Lunch Program Put in House Agriculture Appropriations Bill. CALL NOW!

The House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee has included pro-NAIS provisions in the Agriculture Appropriations bill for 2009. According to the press release, the bill would require USDA to purchase meat products for the School Lunch Program from livestock premises registered with National Animal Identification System beginning in July 2009.

This is a back-door method for mandating NAIS through the power of the purse strings. The bill also provides a total NAIS funding level of $14.5 million or about $4.8 million above 2008.

We must stop these provisions from going any further! The full House Appropriations Committee will meet about the Agriculture Appropriations bill this Thursday, June 26. Sometime after that, it will go to the full House.

We also need to contact our Senators now, to keep them from doing the same thing.

TAKE ACTION NOW:

1) Call or fax your US Representative.
You can look up who represents you at www.congress.org or call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or toll-free at 866-340-9281.2)

2.) Call or fax the members of the House Appropriations Committee who come from your State. The members are listed at: http://appropriations.house.gov/members110th.shtml When you see a member who comes from your state, click on his or her name to get contact information.

3) Call or fax your Senators. You can look up who represents you at www.congress.org or call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or toll-free at 866-340-9281.


With each person, ask to speak to the staffer who handles appropriations. If you get their voice mail, leave the following message, or something in your own words that makes the same points:

MESSAGE: My name is ____. I am a constituent [or live in your state, if you aren't in their district].
I am calling because the Agriculture Appropriations subcommittee has inserted language requiring the School Lunch Program to only buy meat from farms registered in the National Animal Identification System.
I am against NAIS, and I do not want it to be tied to school lunch programs.
NAIS, which tracks live animals, will not improve food safety because most food safety problems start at the slaughterhouse and food processing facilities.
Funding for NAIS, particularly any mandatory NAIS, needs to be stopped.
Please call me back at _____ to let me know where the Congressman/woman stands on this issue.


When you talk to the staffer, be sure to make the same points as in the message, and expand on them with some of the talking points below. For more information, contact the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance at info@farmandranchfreedom.org or 866-687-6452.The press release, from Chairwoman DeLauro (D-CT) is available at http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/DeLauroSubMarkup06-19-08.pdf

MORE TALKING POINTS - state your concerns in your own words

* This bill uses the government's power to economically coerce farmers into NAIS. That is not a "voluntary" program.

* This bill throws good money after bad, supporting a program that is not sound economically or scientifically.

* USDA has presented no science to back up its claims that NAIS will address livestock diseases.

* The USDA has never completed a cost/benefit analysis to show that NAIS is worthwhile.

* NAIS will not improve food safety. The massive Hallmark/Westland beef recall this past year was caused by the slaughterhouse employees' failure to follow existing regulations for handling "downer" cows. Mandating NAIS on cattle producers will not make anybody obey the laws we already have.

* NAIS will not help Americans compete in the world market. If it is mandatory, or even adopted by most producers, those who participate will not get premiums for their meat.

* Pouring more money into the program is a waste of precious tax dollars that could be better spent on safety inspections at packing and processing plants, where most food contamination occurs.

* Using the school lunch program to force farmers into NAIS undermines the growing farm-to-school program, which helps children get fresh, local, and sustainably raised foods. Local farmers should not be forced into an unpopular program that has nothing to do with food quality or safety in order to provide food for our children.

* The claim that USDA has achieved 33% of its Premises Registration goal is wrong. USDA computes its percentage of premises registered based on farmers who answer the agriculture census. Hundreds of thousands of additional horse owners, families with a few chickens, suburbanites with a pet pot-bellied pig, and others like them are technically covered by NAIS, but USDA ignores them when it reports its supposed successes to Congress. The vast majority of people who will be impacted by NAIS either oppose it or are still unaware of it!

* NAIS has never been specifically approved by Congress. This massive program, which will impact millions of people, should be addressed through full and open debate, not snuck in through appropriations.

Raw Milk Debate: A Response to the FDA

I found an excellent response to the FDA's 2007 Powerpoint presentation about the "dangers of raw milk."

Wouldn't it be terrific if the FDA focused as much of their money and effort on foods derived from animals and plants altered/medicated by companies like, ohhhhh Monsanto...which comprise a startling percentage of the foods consumed by the unaware American public...since things like genetic alteration of such is not even required to be included on the labels..??

Back to the raw milk. Forget the smokescreens the FDA throws up...they have a monetary interest in keeping milk altered. Responsibly-produce raw milk products cut into their bottom line, since it doesn't hinge on antibiotics, medications, growth hormones, or even pasteurization to produce an unnaturally-lasting shelf life...blah blah blah. A little note to self and others...doesnt it seem like the things the FDA barks on and on about the most are the LEAST relevant issues, seemingly drawing national attention to small farmers as the villains while preserving the right of exemption-from-scrutiny-and-accountability to Big Ag....or even the FDA themselves? Does anyone smell a rat? :)

Here's a great link to a point-by-point response to the FDA's campaign/attack against raw milk.

It's time to be suspicious of the blatant FDA propaganda. If you look at the above Response to the FDA website, you'll find the advocate in support of the raw milk issue in this case is the Weston A. Price Foundation, an organization closely linked to an excellent small farmer's legal resource, the Farm to Consumer Foundation and Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

Check it out if you have a chance! It is a legal issue, and a constitutional freedom issue, to which many other small farm issues are linked.

MSG Alert

This, from my inbox -- latest update from Weston A. Price Foundation:

ACTION ALERT ON MSGPETITION TO REMOVE MONOSODIUM GLUTAMATE FROM THE FOOD SUPPLY BEFORE THE FDA

To the members of Weston A Price Foundation:
After decades of concern about the safety of the food additive MSG in food, and mounting evidence about the adverse reactions many people have to it, the FDA has accepted a petition to remove monosodium glutamate from the GRAS (generally regarded as safe) list of ingredients.

This action would stop hundreds of food manufacturers, from Campbell's to Heinz, and thousands of restaurants, from Kentucky Fired Chicken to Applebees, from using this additive.

Since 1950, food manufacturers and restaurants have discovered that adding MSG to food makes people eat more of it, and eat more quickly. MSG is addictive, like nicotine for food.

If you are one of the millions who have suffered reactions to MSG, from asthma to migraines, please take this opportunity to send your comments to the FDA.

The petition itself is available to be read at the website:http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=FDA-2007-P-01 78

To comment, simply click on the orange thought bubble beside the Petition written by John Erb.

Fill out the fields on the electronic form, and include your comments supporting the petition. Be sure to mention any problems you or your family members have had with the additive Monosodium Glutamate.

To have a better idea of the damage that MSG can cause, please feel free to review the text of the Petition, which shows how MSG has been purposely used to create obese and diabetic test subjects for experiments, and how MSG can be linked to the triggering of abnormal brain growth leading to autism.

By clicking on the HTML or PDF icon you can review the petition itself. By adding your voice to this petition you can help end the poisoning we all have suffered from this toxic ingredient. Together we can make a lasting change towards putting our health before the profit margin of the corporations.

Unfortunately, the FDA has only opened public comment on this petition for a very brief period. The comment period closes on June 23rd, so please act quickly to make your voice be heard.

For more information on the dangers of Monosodium Glutamate, feel free to visit these sites:www.msgmyth.com
www.msgtruth.com
www.truthinlabeling.com

Thank you for making the world a safer place!

My Green Ideal

...is to learn to do the best with what we have...naturally. The Dervaeses at Path To Freedom are my heros in this respect. They are my ideal of Being Green.

Remember this song?



No, it's not always easy being Green... :)

In my last post, I spoke of not labeling myself with particular labels. "Green" has come to mean many things in many different contexts. Our (my husband's and my) focus is to be gentle consumers within a natural framework, and to cut out the middle man between the ground and the table. We are lovers of nature. We feel a keen sense of responsibility in doing this sustainably, our ideal being that there would be no waste that's not converted back into a cycle of regeneration. Our goal is also simplicity.

We're spoiled to modern conveniences, but would rather innovate and find ways to retain some of those conveniences rather than do completely without, or do everything from scratch. This will allow us to focus on the things we most WANT to be hands-on with...because we can't be masters at every skill. We also see relying on others' skills in areas we're not gifted in, and doing the swapping of services, or bartering items for such.

Path to Freedom is one of the first sites I ever found when looking online for resources on sustainability, urban farming, and homesteading. They are still a daily read.

This recent post of theirs details many of the techniques they've been practicing and had success with for many years. For us, this family's success in using what they have and living gently...and abundantly...right where they live, is a high-water mark for us. Please check out the post, and their site, if you haven't already. It's always informative, as well as encouraging!

I didn't want to leave a false impression that my family is not concerned with being "green." It's a label that can be so broad, much like the term "health nut." If you hear someone is a health nut, it can mean anything from eating well, to being focused on running marathons, to fasting regularly, to going bra-less and living in a treehouse...heehee. There are some things perceived as being Green that I'm not on the same page as. I don't want to pay carbon taxes, ever. I don't want to give up any of my constitutional, or personal, freedoms because someone else determines they're don't serve a "green" agenda. I'm not ready to give up toilet paper. I love my ovaries and if they ever serve to grant my husband and myself other children, I do not feel irresponsible and like that is taxing the world population. I don't ride a horse to work, and can't afford to buy another vehicle that uses less gasoline. I eat meat...just less of it till the day when we can raise our own. I don't see cows as the bane of the world food balance...I see Big Ag as such. Grassfed animals are at the top of my preference list as far as agricultural systems, and I won't ascribe to the humble cow or sheep the crowding out of wildlife and the bane of overgrazing...I ascribe that to the people who mismanage them.

I could go on and on, but in some ways, I'm greener...or maybe could be called weirder...than most folks I know. Some of my green views come from sources other than back-to-the-earth movements. Our family follows the instructions in the Torah, and there are many instructions there that we're not used to embracing...but want to. There is a prohibition against mixing "types"...as in breeding a zebra with a camel. We find this an instruction of great import in a day in which pig DNA is being combined through genetic mutilation directly into broccoli or any other number of animal/plant combinations. That is a mixing of unlike types. How can we practice not eating those, if they're not labeled? We must grow our own pure DNA foods. This is ancient "green" principle that, for my family, is a command we must keep.

Another prohibition is against mixing types of clothing materials. Strands of unlike clothing materials are not supposed to be woven together and worn. A lot of synthetic materials are made from the fusing of unlike materials, such as plant based and petroleum based. That of necessity tends us towards using natural fiber materials. Since trying to rid my closet of the synthetic things, I've found I have mostly cotton and linen clothes now...which my body really appreciates! When I have to wear my work uniform, which is to a large degree polyester, my body feels like it's screaming...it's not natural. To some, this is a really weird thing, and does it fall under the category "green"? I have no idea, but to me, it is.

In being green, I don't subscribe to a mob mentality. There is a lot of integrity within the category "green," but there are also politics and specific agendas in different arenas. I can see some things being abused in the name of Green, and one of the ones that most concerns me is eugenics. Eugenics, or the "selecting out" of those things that are weaker or diseased for the supposed survival of the masses or the "greater good," is something of great concern to me. I've heard these sometimes grouped under "green" agendas. That troubles me. Limiting the freedoms of families to determine for themselves how many children they have is another of my concerns. I understand the arguments for and against these issues, which have often been lumped under the greater category "green" when discussing worldwide issues...but those are where I exit the label. When Green becomes a religion, buh-bye. My voice is just as important in the green movement, and my concern is the preservation of individuality within our fragile yet resilient world. It's a revolution that's about returning to basic freedoms, not promoting the loss of them.

I see true "greenness" as being the earning of privilege. It's a privilege to live on this earth...it's not a throw-away resource that can be gobbled like a can of Pringles and then tossed to the curb. The domino-effect on our health and society has been rapid since the rise of Big Ag as "the answer"...um, what was the question?? We believed the propaganda, and didn't remember that "Green" to Monsanto means greenbacks/dollars, not an Eden of plenty.

Watch out for "green" as a proganda trend for the mega-corporations. They are NOT driven by a heart change..they are driven to repackage those items from China in a more palatable-to-the-conscience way. It helps their bottom line to put just enough of these items in their stores to ease the conscience of the consumer who is still for the most part still unaware of exactly what their food contains and where it came from. Watch out for these corporations because they still are a law unto themselves. They still are under-the-table dealing with impunity. We need our justice systems to work for accountability beyond the walls of lawyers these big guys can afford. It is important to hold everyone to the same standards of justice...even the megalopolies and the Monsantos...so that Green can be something not fringe, but a fundamental element of our society and its relationship to the earth that sustains its populations. It needs to be a living community as diverse as the community we find here online, where we can agree or disagree, but still work to better our world and our own square of dirt or cement. At that point, many of us who're on the fringes of an out-of-control mainstream society will not be the outsiders, but the leaders and teachers.

Green, if it was not already, is becoming a necessity for many of us, now. Hopefully, it will be an individual expression as well as a thriving community. We're in that muddle where Green is still being defined, and there are growing pains and still a lot of Goliaths for shepherd boys to face down. So, we embrace being Green. But don't pass us any Koolaid ;-)

RoundUp Ready Sugar Beets

One thing that is appalling is how those who are genetically altering our food plants (or any plant, for that matter) are currently NOT held to those same Truth-in-Labeling standards that have been hard-fought and hard-won on other fronts.

Do I smell a Monsanto...???

They fight to protect their "right" to NOT label products that include their genetically modified substances right there in our supermarkets. So honestly, there's really no way of knowing if that can of veg is GM or not.....or the taco shells....or nearly anything, truly.

Why would there be such a vested interest on GM corporations (such as...oh, Monsanto...) to keep from labeling these things?

Easy...so the effects cannot be tracked and there would be no liability. Why should liability and tracking be any concern?? BECAUSE THE HEALTH EFFECTS ON HUMANS HAVE NEVER BEEN THOROUGHLY TESTED. What you don't label, you don't know is there...

Now Monsanto is trying to corner the market by genetically modifying another vegetable of world-wide consumption...sugar beets. The European market is more vulnerable to this development, since they traditionally utilize sugar beets on a greater scale than Americans.

Please read Pat and Steph's post at Bifurcated Carrots on this development, as they note that potential contamination could be imminent on a world-wide scale.

Another excellent post is at the Seven Trees blog post, where you can read about this in depth. Here is a brief quote from the article:

"The sugar produced will be mixed in with other types of sugar, unlabeled and untraceable. You couldn't avoid sugar from Roundup Ready beets even if you tried.But David Berg, president of American Crystal Sugar Co., the country’s largest beet sugar manufacturer, is confident that food processors will accept GM sugar. “We have not run into resistance...”


There must be a way to get the laws changed SOON to make EVERYONE subject to the SAME truth-in-labeling laws, ESPECIALLY in the experimental and un-tested field of Genetically-Modified Foods and Feeds.

There MUST.....