Guest guest Posted September 2, 2004 Report Share Posted September 2, 2004 > GMW:_Bio-imperialism_-_excellent_article > " GM_WATCH " <info > Thu, 2 Sep 2004 11:22:10 +0100 > > GM WATCH daily > http://www.gmwatch.org > --- > Perhaps over gloomy on what's happening in Europe > but an otherwise excellent article. Note > 'Bio-imperialism' secyion and analysis re USAID. > --- > Gene-manipulated Seeds: Are We losing Our Food > Security Too? > By F. William Engdahl > http://www.currentconcerns.ch/archive/2004/04/20040401.php > > Washington and London are united not only on policy > in Iraq. Tony Blair and George W. Bush also agree > that the world should be saturated with > gene-manipulated (GM) or genetically-engineered > crops and seeds. Its advocates, including major > chemical giants Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont and > Bayer, claim that GM crops are the answer to world > hunger, and promise food security to growing > populations. Astonishing enough, the claims are made > in the absence of almost any serious independent > scientific long-term study of the effects of GM > crops on animal or human organisms. > > If the spread of GM crops continues at the current > pace, within perhaps seven to eight years, the > essential food supply of mankind will pass to the > corporate control of perhaps three to four giant > multinationals. Such power over life and death has > never before in history been so concentrated in so > few hands. Most shocking is that such a profound > policy change is being advanced with almost complete > absence of truly independent scientific study, or > analysis of long-term possible negative effects of > genetically modified foods, sometimes called GMO’s, > on either humans or animals. > > Since April 18, 2004 the EU, under heavy pressure > from Washington, has permitted gene-manipulated > foods to be sold inside the EU for the first time > since a ban was imposed in 1998. The new rule > appears to be a control of GM products, as it > imposes labelling, somewhat like that warning on > cigarettes, that a product contains a certain > percent GM substance. The EU Agriculture > Commissioner, Franz Fischler, an open fan of GM > food, hails it as " farmers' right to choose. " > However, with this step, the EU moratorium on GM > plants has now been effectively destroyed. And the > world’s second largest economic region now faces > loss of its own control over the most vital > commodity—its own food supply. > > In June 2003, immediately following the US > occupation of Baghdad, President George W. Bush > launched an offensive against the EU moratorium on > GM products. Bush blamed the EU for starving Africa > by its ban, and threatened to go to the WTO to > challenge the EU moratorium. " For the sake of a > continent threatened by famine, " Bush then declared, > " I urge European nations to end their opposition to > biotechnology. " > > Bush's urgency about lifting Europe’s ban on GM > products arguably had little to do with stopping > starvation in Africa however. It had very much to do > with future control of the world food supply by a > power whose military already has developed the most > awesome dominance of any military in history, and > whose financial and economic weight dominates the > world economy. If Washington and its corporate > backers succeed in their GM push, it will be to the > worse for mankind. How so? > > In late January the EU Commission approved sale of > canned GM Maize by the Swiss biotech firm, Syngenta, > allowing it to sell the food as corn-on-the-cob in > EU shops and restaurants. The EU argues that the new > rules on GM labelling make it safe to approve such > foods. The same day the Belgian government said it > was planning to approve a variety of GM oilseed or > raps, for cultivation. > > In march, the EU Commission announced it was about > to approve planting of an allegedly > herbicide-resistant maize, NK603, owned by Monsanto, > the world's largest owner of GM plant patents. At > the same time Swiss giant, Syngenta, applied to > German officials to begin trials of GM wheat crops > in Thuringia. If the US experience is a guide, > within a few short years, the entire EU agriculture > production from Poland to Hungary to Germany and > France, will be dominated by GM crops. The Polish > Parliament, under pressure from Monsanto and the US > agribusiness GM lobby, recently opened the country > to wide use of GM crops in one of the richest > growing soils in Europe. The EU Commission has > opened Pandora's Box with its decisions to allow > consumers a " choice. " Brussels European Food Safety > Authority is reviewing applications from Monsanto > and Syngenta for GM maize cultivation and feed use. > > No independent research > > Most shocking is the near total absence of > fundamental independent research on the possible > effects on humans and animals of introducing GM > substances into the food chain, as the floodgates > are opened for changes which could potentially alter > the way we live and even who lives. > > British Minister for Environment, Michael Meacher, > was fired from his cabinet post by Tony Blair in > June 2003. The reason, according to British sources, > was Meacher's refusal to back untested use of GM > plants. Meacher, after leaving the Cabinet, accused > the Blair government of " rushing to desired > conclusions which cannot be scientifically > supported. " The UK Soil Association backed Meacher's > charge, stating, " The decision whether or not to > allow the commercial growing of GM crops is a > momentous one, potentially one of the most > far-reaching that any government has had to take in > terms of environment and public health. " > > The Soil Association went on to warn, " The only > human GM trial so far found that GM DNA transferred > to bacteria in the human gut, while animal trials > have seen a doubling of death rates among chickens > fed GM feed and the development of gut lesions in > rats eating GM potatoes and tomatoes. " What they did > not state was evidence as well that Britain’s BSE or > mad-cow scare a few years ago may well have been the > result of feeding cattle GM feed.1 > > In August 1998, the world's leading GM research > expert, Hungarian-born scientist, Dr. Arpad Pustzai, > was fired from his job at the UK Rowett Institute > research center. His career was ruined and he was > blacklisted from finding further work. His crime was > that he had the courage to go public with alarming > research findings in a British ITV television > interview. Pustzai revealed that his research on > laboratory rats showed rats fed GM potatoes suffered > stunted growth and immune system damage. Pusztai > stated his data showed that the diet of GM potatoes > led to smaller livers, hearts and even affected > brain size. His research was embargoed, his research > team disbanded and he was forbidden to talk with his > colleagues about his former work. > > Pustzai, an eminent scientist with more than 35 > years published professional research, later found > he was fired on the intervention of British Prime > Minister Blair. It seems that then-President Bill > Clinton phoned Blair, after himself being alerted by > Monsanto of the danger were the Pustzai research to > gain worldwide attention. At the time Monsanto, a US > chemicals firm famous for the deadly Agent Orange > used in Vietnam, produced 91% of the world’s GM > seed. Clinton had reportedly been the one to > convince Blair of the benefits of promoting GM foods > as a major new field for UK industry.2 > > One year later, in the Scientific Conference of the > International Federation of Organic Agriculture > Movements in 1999, delegates from 60 countries > called on governments to ban use of GM food, citing > possible threats to human health and risk to rights > of choice for farmers. Dr. Michael Fox, a specialist > in bioethics from Washington, cited evidence that > with GM crops, foreign DNA can enter the human body; > GM organisms can produce unanticipated toxins or > allergens; that gene transfer can occur between > transgenic plants and bacteria, " the ecological > consequences of which can be catastrophic. " He also > reported that milk from cows injected with a GM > substance, r-BGH, creates an increased insulin-like > growth implicated in human breast cancer. Fox called > for a worldwide moratorium on GM spread until > adequate scientific risk assessments could be done. > > In March 2004, a report was released in the United > States of tests by two independent laboratories who > tested non-GM seeds, which make up the traditional > seed supply for maize, soya and oilseed rape, the > three most important animal feed sources. They > found, according to a report in the UK Independent, > that fully 67% of all conventional crops—corn, soya, > rape oilseeds—had been contaminated with genetically > modified material through wind, pollination and > other causes. The study said farmers unwittingly > planted billions of GM seeds a year believing they > have normal or non-GM seed. This came only 8 years > after GM crops were introduced in US farming. The > report warned there could be " serious risks to > health " if GM drugs or GM industrial chemicals from > the next generation of GM products find their way > into the human food chain. > > In one well-publicized incident, genes from Starlink > (Bayer AG), a GM crop approved only for animals, > planted in only 0.4% of all US maize, showed up in > food across the United States including in tacos > from Taco Bell. The tacos contained insecticide > proteins not digestable by humans. > > GM seed pollution is at the heart of the GM issue. > Once the door is open to any planting of GM seeds in > a region, all seeds in that region are vulnerable to > contamination, whether by wind carry or bees or > other insects. There are little controls on large > grain trading firms like Cargill or ADM, many of > whom have been suspected of deliberately mixing GM > with non-GM seeds. That contamination, or genetic > pollution factor alone will spell the end of > bio-farming, as well as of conventional agriculture > within a few years at most as US experience shows. > > In another silenced study, Dr. Terje Traavik, > director of the Norwegian Institute for Gene > Ecology, found alarming evidence of GM effects. In > the case of BT-Maize from US seed producer, Dekalb, > evidence suggested that during pollination, the GM > (maize) corn triggered disease in Philippine people > living near the GM field. A virus used in making > most GM foods, CaMV, was found intact in rat tissues > three days after it had been mixed into a single > meal, and was also confirmed in human cells. Most > alarming, GM pox viruses recombined with natural > viruses to create new hybrid viruses with > unpredictable and potentially dangerous > characteristics. > > Traavik urged immediate further investigation of the > alarming findings. He said his research, " raises > additional concerns that GM foods might encourage > genetic instability and mutation, accidental > expression of allergens or toxins from non-target > genes, and even activation of dormant viruses … We > must investigate whether Bt-crops contribute to the > unexplained rise of allergies. " He was greeted with > stony silence in major western media. > > A three-year UK government study, originally done > under the supervision of Michael Meacher, and > published in October 2003, showed that farmland > wildlife is harmed more severely by the > extra-powerful herbicides used by GM crops than even > by conventional chemical herbicides. One argument > used by Monsanto and the GM lobby to silence green > critics of GM seeds, is the allegation they require > less chemical herbicides. The UK biotech industry > denied the report was important, and the Blair > government approved " limited " GM use. The Meacher > study also found that GM crops had been engineered > to be herbicide tolerant and unaffected by even the > strongest deadly chemical weed-killers like > Monsanto’s Roundup, a chemical so strong it kills > everything in conventional crop fields including the > crops, bees and butterflies.3 > > The Meacher UK study lasted 3 years, cost millions > of euros, and found a 500% decrease in flora, a 25% > fall in butterflies and fewer seeds in oilseed rape > fields. The Blair government buried the results, and > approved limited GM use this year. > > Fraudulent GM cost-benefit claims > > The spread of GM seeds to American farmers was made > on the basis of fraudulent promises of major > productivity gains and significantly lower chemical > pesticide use. Reality does not support this; in > fact the opposite seems the case. In 2001 Dr Charles > Benbrook presented results of analysis of the > economics of Bt Maize (corn). He found that over > three years US farmers paid large price premiums for > GM seeds and ended with a net loss of $92 million or > $1.31 per acre from it. Benbrook also found that the > " planting of 550 million acres of GE corn, soybeans > and cotton in the United States since 1996 has > increased pesticide use by about 50 million pounds. " > So-called 'herbicide tolerant' crops, which require > far more use of special herbicides than normal > plants, have been specially GM developed to insure > that farmers who grow the GM corn or other crops are > forced to buy the GM herbicide from the same > company, such as Monsanto's Roundup.4 > > GM seeds were promoted aggressively to desperate US > farmers in the late 1990's on promises of big > profits and higher yields, and less weed problems. > As of 2002, more than 70% of all US soybeans were GM > plants, over 61% of all cotton and 25% of all corn. > Supermarket products from Ovaltine to baby foods > from Nestle, to McDonald's burgers contained GM > food. > > An Iowa State University study by Michael Duffy > showed that HT-Soya, a GM crop, lost $8.87 per acre > compared with normal soya. In 2001 the Canadian > government Biotechnology Advisory Committee stated, > " …there is no publicly available survey or data on > how individual farmers have benefited from adoption > of GM crops in Canada. " > > Another hidden cost to farmers for GM seeds is what > Monsanto and others term a " technology fee. " > Monsanto charges an added " technology fee " on top of > the already high seed price on the argument farmers > will get the benefit of the GM technology. Including > the fees, GM seeds typically cost farmers 24-40% > more than non-GM seeds. For GM maize, costs run > anywhere from 30% to 90% higher. In addition, when > buying the seed, the farmer is forced to sign a > " technology agreement " with Monsanto the supplier, > legally forbidding the farmer from saving any seed > for the next harvest. If he cheats, he risks legal > action. > > According to a report by Food First Institute for > Food and Development Policy in California, GM seeds > " may be responsible for a string of crop failures. " > They report that herbicide-tolerant plants and weeds > have emerged in the United States, and that > glyphosate-tolerant weeds there are plaguing GM > cotton and soya fields. Atrazine, one of the most > toxic herbicides, has to be used with > glufosinate-tolerant maize. > > More alarming, Bt proteins, used in about 25% of all > GM crops worldwide, have been found harmful to a > range of non-target insects, and many scientists > have warned against releasing Bt crops for human > use. Increasingly, large pharmaceutical companies > are using GM crops to produce drugs, including > cytokines, which is known to suppress the human > immune system, induce sickness and central nervous > system toxicity, according to FoodFirst. GM plants > have also been documented to have produced > interferon alpha, reported to cause dementia, and a > viral sequence such as the 'spike' protein gene of > the pig coronavirus, which is in the same family as > the SARS virus which recently swept across Asia. > Glufosinate ammonium and glyphosate are used with > herbicide-tolerant transgenic or GM crops, in some > 75% of all GM crops worldwide. Glufosinate ammonium > is tied to neurological, respiratory and > gastrointestinal toxicities and birth defects in > humans and animals. Children born to users of > glyphosate had heightened neuro-behavioral defects. > > Food First concludes, " The known effects of > glufosinate and glyphosate are sufficiently serious > for all further uses of the herbicides to be > halted. " Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide has been found > to cause cell dysfunction that may be linked to > human cancers. But the most frightening danger of GM > consumption is the inherent tendency of gene > recombination and transfer, the main route to > creating viruses and bacteria which cause epidemics. > In 2001 an 'accidental' killer mouse virus was > created in the course of an apparently innocent GM > experiment.5 > > In February this year, Devinder Sharma, writing in > the journal, BioSpectrum, reported alarming results > of planting Monsanto Bt (GM) cotton. The Indian > company, Mahyco-Monsanto, promoted the Bt cotton > seeds claiming it had the built-in ability to kill > pink bollworms, a major pest. Because of the claim, > they were able to sell the GM seed at four times the > existing seed price. In its first year of planting, > the Bt cotton crop in India has failed, in some > fields by 100%. > > In China, some 7 million hectares were planted with > Bt cotton in 1999. Today, pesticide use has returned > to earlier pre-1999 levels as the Bt cotton loses > resistance to pests. GM cotton in China accounts for > 50% of its entire cotton. This year, the Beijing > government issued import certificates for several US > gene technologies including five from Monsanto. More > than 70% of China's soybean imports are GM. China is > trying to develop its own GM rice and plant > varieties, presumably hoping that might be safer. > > GM food as a US geo-strategic weapon > The country which grows far the world’s largest > acreage of GM crops, the United States, allows GM > agriculture to go ahead essentially unregulated. > Owing to a 1992 Executive decision by > then-President, George H.W. Bush, the US Government > has ruled ever since that GM-altered seeds or crops > are " substantially equivalent " to normal seeds or > plants, and so, do not require any special testing! > > The term " substantially equivalent " was intended to > be vague, giving GM companies full freedom in > developing GM products. The ruling was entirely > political, not scientific. Many of the US Food and > Drug Administration scientists at the time > disagreed. US courts have upheld the fact that GM > foods are " unregulated. " In other words, the most > far-ranging alteration to the human food chain in > history, with potential consequences unimaginable, > is officially treated as if it were a new brand of > toothpaste. Children’s toys receive more regulatory > control than GM foods. > > In short, GM foods have entered the diets of most > Americans with no significant pre-market testing by > the FDA or even the US Department of Agriculture. In > fact the USDA holds many patents on GM seeds and > stands to gain significant revenue from its > worldwide sale. > > The 1992 decision not to regulate GM plants has been > upheld by both Presidents Clinton and now by George > W. Bush. The present Secretary of Agriculture, Ann > Veneman, came from the board of directors of > Calgene, a part of Monsanto, the world’s largest GM > seed producer. Veneman also sat on the powerful > agriculture industry trade group, International > Policy Council on Agriculture, with Monsanto, World > Bank, Syngenta, Cargill, Nestle, Kraft, ADM and > other power food multinationals. This group, IPC, > defines all key policy issues in world agriculture > trade. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld came from > Chicago where his drugs company, G.D. Searle, was > bought by Monsanto. > > Other members of the Bush Cabinet are in one or > another way financially tied to the GM bio-industry > lobby. At the very least, this indicates what a > strategic priority GM food domination has assumed > for Washington. At a time when US foreign policy > under George Bush and Dick Cheney is guided by the > looming crisis of oil depletion worldwide, and US > efforts to control remaining oil and natural gas, > the US push to spread GM seeds to the entire world > food production assumes alarming dimension. > > There is an intimate link between the Washington > government and the GM industry. > > A bio-imperialism? > > To counter the small number of truly independent > research efforts, Monsanto and the biotech industry > have funded their own partisan research, and > aggressively slandered or attacked contrary studies. > Monsanto and the USAID, the State Department agency > which administers world food aid, along with the > World Bank, finance the Kenya Agriculture Research > Institute studies of Dr. Florence Wambugu. Her > studies claim that GM crops could raise crop yields > by 4-10 tons per hectare. Independent investigation > by Aaron deGrassi of the Sussex Institute of > Development Studies, revealed that the data used by > Wambugu was fraudulent. " The transgenic sweet potato > being used as the answer to Africa's food security > was no improvement at all, " Sharma charges. > > In April 2002, the respected British science > journal, Nature, printed its first ever declaration > that it had been " wrong, " in printing a scientific > paper. The paper was from University of California > Berkeley scientists critical of GM, charging native > Mexican maize had been contaminated by GM maize. > Nature had come under enormous pressure from the GM > industry. A media PR firm hired by Monsanto, Bivings > Group, it later was revealed, ran the coordinated > attack on Nature resulting in their repudiation of > the research. Scientists at respected universities > such as Berkeley, signed attacks of the Nature > article. Some of the scientists were involved in a > university GM research project that got $25 million > from Monsanto.6 > > Given all the evidence, it is not beyond the pale to > ask whether the Washington demand for worldwide use > of GM crops and products is part of a more sinister > agenda than mere corporate profit and greed of a > few. In his historic and unexpected visit to West > Africa in summer of 2003, President Bush offered > food aid to several African countries. It had big > strings tied to it. > > The US food aid was in the form of US-grown GM > plants and seeds, not the traditional financial > grant allowing the country to buy food on the > market. Africans were told by USAID, the State > Department agency in charge, either take GM or > starve. The UN Food Program and the EU give food aid > in financial grants allowing the country to buy > locally or regionally. UK Chief Scientist, Prof. > David King, called Bush Administration efforts to > force GM foods on Africa, " a massive human > experiment. " When some African governments protested > the US move, a US official replied, " beggars can't > be choosers. " > > The official USAID role is explicitly to promote GM > crops as part of its food aid in developing or poor > countries. Its own website boasts, " The principal > beneficiary of America's foreign assistance programs > has always been the United States. Close to 80% of > USAID contracts and grants go directly to American > firms. Foreign assistance programs have helped > create major markets for agricultural goods… " > > USAID finances US corporations such as Monsanto to > run GM research programs in Africa. A former > Monsanto official is USAID consultant on use of GM > in food aid. Recently USAID granted $100 million for > a 10-year program, " Collaborative Agriculture > Biotechnology Initiative or CABIO, to 'help > developing countries access and manage the tools of > modern biotechnology.' " > > To help this along, USAID has pressured numerous > developing governments in Africa and elsewhere to > pass national laws on " intellectual property rights > (IPR's). " Given the fact that GM companies like > Monsanto and Syngenta are filing patents on GM > maize, rice, soya and other natural crops, the day > is approaching where a Kenyan traditional farmer or > Indian peasant must pay a " technology fee " to plant > rice or corn grown by their ancestors for thousands > of years simply because a DNA gene has been altered. > The WTO is in charge of enforcing these IPR's. > Washington has the largest weight in WTO. > > USAID also funds the International Service for the > Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). > The ISAAA promotes GM crops for the developing > world, from Africa to Asia and Latin America, > including GM bananas, sweet potatoes, maize and > papaya. ISAAA is funded by USAID together with > Monsanto, Bayer AG, Syngenta, Cargill, Dow > AgroSciences, and the US Department of Agriculture. > > Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe recently refused GM food > aid. In Malawi, the IMF demanded the government sell > its emergency grain reserves to pay its debts. Then, > with a famine that could have been prevented, USAID > demanded Malawi accept GM food aid. The South > African government, on US pressure, approved $18 > million for research on GM maize. Developing country > farmers increasingly will be forced to go to > Monsanto and other US and multinational companies to > buy seeds each year, and special GM pesticides. > > The next likely step is likely to be introduction of > the controversial " terminator seed " technology once > the markets are dependent on GM crops. In 1999 > Monsanto caved in to massive public pressure and > announced it was not going to commercialize its > Terminator Seed technology. > > The name is a deliberate reference to the Hollywood > movies made by the California Governor. Terminator > or GURT seeds, use GM engineering to ensure that any > GM seeds replanted by a farmer are sterile, courtesy > of a built-in GM sterilizer. Monsanto argued it was > part of its protection of its " intellectual property > rights. " With Terminator seeds, a farmer cannot use > a part of his seeds for the next harvest. He is > totally dependent on Monsanto or his corporate seed > source, and whatever price they decide to name. The > vital right of a farmer to save and replant seeds > will be gone. He will be a modern-era serf to seed > company giants like Monsanto and Syngenta. > > In April 2003, Monsanto scientists published a paper > praising Terminator technology benefits. The > technology will take an estimated four years more to > be ready for commercial introduction. At that point, > with the largest growing areas of Africa, Asia, > Europe and North and South America dominated by GM > crops, the potential for Monsanto, Cargill and a > handful of US-led agri-giants to " play God " with the > human race becomes real and concrete. > > In May 2003, Monsanto won a surprising decision > before the European Patent Office in Munich. After a > 9 year legal battle, the company was given monopoly > rights, European Patent no. 301,749, to “all forms > of genetically engineered soybean varieties and > seeds, regardless of the genes used.” The patent has > been attacked worldwide as immoral and illegitimate. > In 2001 91% of all GM seeds in the world were from > Monsanto. Syngenta holds the most patents on rice, > including basmati rice grown for more than 2,500 > years. > > Kissinger’s NSSM200 and the GM revolution > > It is but a short leap of the mind to imagine the > temptation for some leading policy circles in the > Anglo-American establishment to impose Malthusian > population reduction using their power over GM > crops. This is especially credible in the face of > growing shortage of vital energy such as oil and > natural gas. > > In 1974 US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, > proposed a Presidential security policy memorandum, > NSSM 200, titled, “Implications of Worldwide > Population Growth for US Security and Overseas > Interests.” NSSM200, which was made policy by > President Ford in 1975, made population control and > birth reduction official US foreign policy. It > stated, “World population growth is widely > recognized within the (US) Government as a current > danger of the highest magnitude calling for urgent > measures.” The USAID, CIA, Agriculture Department > and Defense Departments were all involved in > formulation of the Kissinger policy. > > NSSM200 was officially revoked as US policy in face > of heavy Vatican pressure, at least as open policy. > But it continues to this day unofficially, as US > foreign policy, imposed via third agencies, such as > the IMF and World Bank, and their “conditionalities” > for emergency financial aid. In an April 2002 > article in Australia’s The Age, Nobel Prize > microbiologist, Sir Macfarlane Burnet, advocated > biological warfare as a form of population control. > Is the proliferation of GM seeds for every vital > crop a part of such a strategy? For the sake of the > human race we should make certain it is not.7 > > 1 " Brussels clears GM maize to 'Please US' " by > Andrew Osborn, UK Guardian, January 29, 2004. > " Meacher attacks GM crops, " in BBC News, 18 February > 2003. news.bbc.co.uk. > > 2 " Soil Association backs Meacher’s stance on GM > crops, " press release, 23 June 2003, > www.soilassociation.org. " World’s top GE researcher > was fired and persecuted by White House & Blair " ” by > Andrew Rowell, The Daily Mail, July 7 2003. > www.organiconsumers.org. > > 3 " Revealed: Shocking new dangers of GM crops, " by > Geoffrey Lean, Independent, 7 March 2004. “Proven: > Environmental dangers that may halt GM revolution,” > by Michael McCarthy, Independent, 17 October, 2003. > “New health dangers of genetically modified foods > (and vaccines) discovered,” by Institute for > Responsible Technology, February 24, 2004 on > www.organicconsumers.org. “Dangers of GE foods & > crops,” Dr. Michael W. Fox, Humane Society of the > United States, www.hsus.org or > www.organicconsumers.org. > > 4 “Farmer Income: seeds of doubt” by Norfolk Genetic > Information Network, 24 October 2002. > members.tripod.com. or www.non-gm-farmers.com. > > 5 “The case for a GM-free sustainable world,” by > Food First/Institute for Food and Development > Policy. Available on www.foodfirst.org. > > 6 DevinderSharma, “GM crops: If it can’t work, fake > it” in BioSpectrum, February 2004. in > www.organicconsumers.org. “Monsanto’s World Wide Web > of Deceit,” in The Big Issue, no. 484, 15-21 April > 2002. reprinted in ngin.tripod.com. > > 7 " USAID and GM Food Aid, " in Norfolk Genetic > Information Network, 8 October 2002. Terminator > details in " Broken Promise? Monsanto Promotes > Terminator Seed Technology, " ETC Group, 23 April > 2003. Press release: www.etcgroup.org. and “Patently > Wrong!” May 7, 2003, www.etcgroup.org. on Monsanto’s > success in a Munich Patent Court to win patent > monopoly rights to all forms of GM soybeans and > seeds regardless of genes used. “World Population > Control: US Strategy and UN Policy Program,” in > www.fathersforlife.org. ------------------------- > http://www.gmwatch.org --------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.