Monsanto Pressured Journal to Retract Study Linking Cancer to Roundup Herbicide

Internal Monsanto documents released by attorneys leading US cancer litigation show that the company launched a concerted campaign to force the retraction of a study that revealed toxic effects of Roundup. The documents also show that the editor of the journal that first published the study entered into a contract with Monsanto in the period shortly before the retraction campaign began. The study, led by Prof GE Séralini, showed that very low doses of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide had toxic effects on rats over a long-term period, including serious liver and kidney damage. Additional observations of increased tumour rates in treated rats would need to be confirmed in a larger-scale carcinogenicity study. The newly released documents show that throughout the retraction campaign, Monsanto tried to cover its tracks to hide its involvement. Instead Monsanto scientist David Saltmiras admitted to orchestrating a “third party expert” campaign in which scientists who were apparently independent of Monsanto would bombard the editor-in-chief of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT), A. Wallace Hayes, with letters demanding that he retract the study.

New Bill Would Allow Farmers To Sue Monsanto If GMO Crops Invade Their Property

A bill introduced into the Oregon legislature would allow non-GMO farmers to sue biotech patent holders over trespass by their GMO crops if their crops were to spread on to their farms. HB 2739 survived a legal hurdle in April, when the bill was referred to the House Rules Committee, which isn’t subject to an April 18 legislative deadline that recently killed other proposals. The move could effectively allow HB 2739 to stay alive through the end of the 2017 legislative session, scheduled to end in late June.

Honest Scientists who Question GMOs are Attacked and Silenced

Numerous new medicines and medical devices have been marketed with claims that declare them to be “safe and effective” – which is a compelling marketing slogan, though devoid of scientific proof. Such claims are facilitated by collusion between the pharmaceutical industry and authoritative government agencies, aided by leading scientists (“key opinion leaders” known within industry as KOLs) and renowned scientific institutions. Internal FDA documents confirm that genetic engineered/modified food products (widely known as GMOs), entered the U.S. food supply without having been subjected to scientifically rigorous safety tests as is mandated by law. GMOs entered the market through the perversion of science, the corruption of government by politically appointed bureaucrats whose allegiance was with industry. (Read AHRP Post How Monsanto Rigged the System through politics and propaganda) In 2003, a congressional committee report, documented political interference and manipulation of scientific research at federal agencies charged with developing science-based public health policies.

GMO Crops, Bee-Killing Insecticides to Be Banned on Boulder County-Owned Land

Boulder County, Colorado will completely phase out genetically modified (GMO) corn and sugar beets, and neonicotinoid insecticides on county-owned land. According to the Daily Camera, commissioners voted 2-1 last week to approve the latest version of a transition plan that bans the cultivation of GMO corn by the end of 2019 and GMO sugar beets by the end of 2021. Neonicotinoids, which have been widely blamed for the declines of bees and other pollinators, will also be phased out within five years on county properties.

Scotts-Monsanto GMO Grass Threatens National Forests, Rivers, Ranchers, and Farmers

Over a decade ago, Scotts partnered with Monsanto to market a GM bentgrass resistant to glyphosate (Roundup). It was planted next to the Malheur National Forest in test plots ostensibly controlled by Oregon State University. Unbeknownst to most people, it was also planted all over the US—in California, Iowa, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and seventeen other states. It was supposed to be confined and controlled, but it very quickly escaped and spread out of the test plots in Oregon into Idaho, and crossbred with natural grasses to create new breeds that were also resistant to glyphosate. It clogged up irrigation ditches, threatening food crops and contaminating pasture-raised cattle with GMOs. In addition to the immediate threats to farmers and ranchers, grass seed—which is among Oregon’s top five commodities—is now under threat. Initially, Scotts-Monsanto tried to stop the spread and clean up the contamination. But it was unable to do so because the original bentgrass (and now the other grasses it cross-pollinated with) are glyphosate-resistant. More toxic herbicides have been brought in to try to keep irrigation ditches clear, and to stop the grasses from clogging and eventually killing waterways important to wildlife and humans.

Want Holes in Your Stomach? Eat More GMOs

Weed killer used on GMOs may be wreaking havoc on Americans’ guts. Action Alert! Feeding GM food soaked in Monsanto’s Roundup causes liver and kidney problems, fertility issues, tumors, fatigue, paralysis, allergic reactions, and more in animal studies. Now it appears that some GMO foods may be perforating your stomach as well.

Local Governments Can Prohibit GMO Crops, Says U.S. Court of Appeals

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decisions (Nov. 18, 2016) on whether federal and Hawai'i state laws preempt Hawai'i counties' authority to regulate genetically engineered (GE) crops and pesticide use. Of significance to state and local communities throughout the U.S., the Ninth Circuit ruled that federal law—specifically, the Plant Protection Act—does not prohibit states and counties from passing local laws to regulate and ban commercially-grown GE crops. "Today's decision to allow states and counties to ban or regulate GE crops is an important victory for GE-free seed sanctuaries and small communities and farmers around the country," George Kimbrell, senior attorney for the Center for Food Safety, said.

How GMOs, Pesticides and Processed Foods Contribute to Common Bowel Disorders

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) — not to be confused with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) — is an autoimmune disease that can have very serious consequences. (IBS, on the other hand, is a functional bowel disorder. In other words, there are no significant physical conditions that contribute to the problem; hence it's a functional disease.) According to the latest statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), IBD affects more than 3 million American adults, nearly triple previous estimates.1 There are two types of IBD: Crohn's disease Ulcerative colitis Both of these IBD conditions involve chronic inflammation in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Symptoms include abdominal cramps, fatigue and diarrhea. IBD also raises your risk of developing colorectal cancer, the third most common cancer in the U.S.

GMOs and Glyphosate Safe? National Research Council Has Conflict of Interest

Two 2016 studies would have us think GMOs and Glyphosate are safe! But who, exactly, is behind the research? Major studies just released claim that genetically modified (GM) foods—and the chemical used on them, glyphosate—are safe to eat. Following publication, there has been a steady drumbeat in the media essentially claiming that the case is now closed: GMOs are safe. We say, “Not so fast.” The National Research Council (NRC)—the research arm of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)—“examined epidemiological data on incidence of cancers and other human health problems over time,” and says there is no reason to be wary of genetically modified foods. However, more than half of the authors of the NRC report are involved in GMO development or promotion or have other ties to the biotech industry. It is shameful that the National Academy of Sciences cannot police this. Indeed, it seems too intimidated even to try.

Biotech to Receive Tax Payer Money to Promote GMOs?

Hidden within a large federal spending bill is a proposal for $3 million to go toward consumer education and outreach to “promote understanding and acceptance of agricultural biotechnology”—a campaign to be carried out jointly by the FDA and the USDA. In plain English, this proposal would spend taxpayer dollars on an effort to convince Americans that GMOs are just fine—perhaps even that they shouldn’t be labeled.