The Campaign Blog

The first annual BioREALITY Conference sponsored by The Campaign and The Coordinating Council will be held in Washington, DC, March 27-29, 2007.

The BioREALITY Conference will be in three segments - education, lobbying and strategic planning.

Tuesday, March 27th will be education day. This will provide an excellent opportunity to learn the latest developments in the world of genetic engineered foods. You will hear from some of the top experts in the field share their expertise in their unique areas of scientific study and political activism.

Wednesday, March 28th will be lobbying day. Concerned citizens and experts in their fields (science, agriculture, religion, etc.) visiting the Washington, DC offices of members of Congress can be a key factor in passing legislation through the House of Representatives and the Senate. House Representatives and Senators are regularly visited by lobbyists representing the biotech industry and large biotech companies. These special interest lobbyists tell members of Congress and their legislative aides that citizens and activists are misinformed and that if we really understood the facts we would be in favor of biotech foods. This is your chance to team up with others to let our elected officials know we do know the issues, we are well informed, and we know the problems GMOs (genetically modified organisms) pose to human health and the global environment. And we know without a doubt that biotech crops are contaminating organic crops thereby threatening the purity of organic agriculture. This is your opportunity to let your voice be heard to the people who represent you and your neighbors in our nation’s capitol.

Thursday, March 29th will be strategic planning day. After two days of networking, learning and lobbying, the energy will be flowing as we come together and engage in strategic planning. Learn from experts about how to organize to pass legislation on the local, state and national level. And discover what you can do to make the labeling of genetically engineered foods a topic for presidential candidates as the race heats up for the highly contested 2008 election. Besides legislative and presidential activities, learn how to get involved in the effort to pressure food companies to remove genetically engineered ingredients from their product lines. The statement that “one person can make a difference is true.” But the synergist effort of working with others with mutual goals can multiply the results dramatically. Strategic planning day at the BioREALITY Conference is a wonderful opportunity to come together with like-minded associates from throughout the United States and abroad to share your experiences and learn from others .

To learn more about the BioREALITY Conference, visit the web site at:
http://www.bioreality.org

In a shocking report released on Thursday, December 29, 2005, the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) criticized many aspects of the oversight of genetically engineered crops.

The “Audit Report” is titled “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Controls Over Issuance of Genetically Engineered Organism Release Permits.”

It is a amazing how the mainstream media virtually ignored the release of this disturbing report. It was written about in the Des Moines Register and The Honolulu Advertiser, but most newspapers ignored this story.

You are encouraged to read the executive summary of the report yourself to get the full picture of how little oversight is being done on genetically engineered crops. Here is a link where you can read the entire report as a PDF:
http://www.thecampaign.org/USDA_IG_1205.pdf

The Office of the Inspector General charged that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the branch of the USDA that oversees biotechnology regulatory functions (including control over releases and movements of regulated GE plants), was not complying with the regulations it is supposed to be following in regards to monitoring the field trials of biotech crops.

Further, the Inspector General charged that APHIS has not has not updated its regulations to reflect the Plant Protection Act of 2000, under which APHIS carries out its biotechnology oversight duties.

In the business world, if an employee or group of employees had performed this badly they would have been fired. But in the bureaucracy of the government, a report like this gets issued and apparently no one gets fired.

Many critics of agricultural biotechnology feel it is unlikely that this new Audit Report will really cause the agency to change their lack of oversight and start to follow the regulations. Why? Because of the track record of APHIS.

The Audit Report points out that more than 10 years ago after another audit by the Office of Inspector General, APHIS agreed to improve its tracking of inspection reports. Yet this new Audit Report states that after more than 10 years “the agency continued to lack an effective, comprehensive management information system to account for all inspections and their outcomes.”

Perhaps what is most disturbing is the fact that the stakes are so high for human health and the environment if problems develop and are not discovered because APHIS has not been adequately doing their job.

Craig Winters, President
The Campaign

According to an article in Shanghai Daily, Kraft will begin in 2007 to only sell products that do not contain genetically engineered ingredients in China:
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/art_print/230191.htm

Kraft joins PepsiCo Foods, Coca-Cola and Danone as companies that have adopted a non-GMO policy in China.

One of the primary reasons these companies have decided to go GMO-free is that China requires the labeling of genetically engineered foods. In virtually every country in the world that require genetically engineered foods to be labeled, the companies choose to use non genetically engineered ingredients to avoid the labeling requirments.

According to the article, Kraft indicated that “decisions are made on a market-by-market basis considering national regulations, labeling requirements, ingredient availability, production location and consumer preferences.”

After we pass national legislation to require the mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods in the United States, we can expect Kraft and all the other major food manufacturers to also choose to use non-GMO ingredients.

Labeling legislation is the fastest way to stop the growth of genetically engineered foods. Why? Because if these foods are labeled, people will start asking questions like “Have these foods been safety tested?”

The answer to that question is “NO, they have not been safety tested.” The only testing is being done by the companies that are creating them and have a financial incentive to sell them. No testing in being conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). And under current law, the biotech companies are not even required to notify the FDA they are bringing a new product to market.

NEW SAFETY CONCERNS

And now there is growing evidense that genetically engineered foods may not be safe and could be causing allergic reactions. Read Jeffrey Smith’s new article that explains the latest research from Australia and why it is causing such concern:
http://www.thecampaign.org/forums/showthread.php?t=82

This latest study has opened a can of worms for the biotech companies as they try to explain why they have not done better research and conducted appropriate safety studies on genetically engineered foods. Instead these companies are using nearly 300 million Americans as guinea pigs in the largest feeding experiment in human history.

Craig Winters
President

On Sunday, November 27, 2005, voters in Switzerland decided to ban the growing of genetically engineered crops for five years.

Switzerland is not a part of the 25-member European Union. However, since citizens in the European Union have not had the opportunity to vote on a similar ban, many suggest that the Switzerland vote actually reflects the opinion of most citizens in Europe.

In the GMO News Update Forum, you will find several articles about the recent vote to ban genetically engineered crops in Switzerland.

Craig Winters
President
The Campaign

The argument that the Australian scientist makes in the article below about why their regulatory system worked to prevent this harmful biotech crop from being sold to humans highlights why the U.S. system of regulation is inherently dangerous.

The leading scientific agency in Australia is doing in depth safety reviews, but there are no such studies being conducted by the agencies in the United States. We are allowing the biotech companies to regulate themselves for the most part.

At any rate, this study combined with the one from Russia a couple weeks ago should raise serious red flags to anyone who is honestly looking at the evidense.

Craig Winters
President
The Campaign

GM crop scrapped as mice made ill

Selina Mitchell and Leigh Dayton
The Australian
18nov05

CSIRO (Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) scientists have abandoned a decade-long GM crop project in its last stages of research after learning that peas modified to resist insects had caused inflammation in the lung tissues of mice.

It is only the second time in the world a GM project has been abandoned after a gene transfer from one crop to another, deputy chief of CSIRO Plant Industry T.J.Higgins said yesterday.

The findings - published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry this week - suggest the allergic-style reaction in the mice was triggered because the protein was altered by a natural process.

Dr Higgins said it was disappointing to have to discontinue work on the genetically modified field pea, which had proved almost 100 per cent effective against insect attack.

But he said the case demonstrated the effectiveness of strict regulations on research into genetically modified crops.

The regulations did not allow the commercial release of a genetically modified crop unless it satisfied all health and safety requirements.

“It’s a good example of why the regulations are necessary,” he said. “This work strongly supports the need for case-by-case examination of plants developed using genetic modification and the importance of decision-making based on good science.”

But Greenpeace GM campaigner Jeremy Tager disagreed.

“That’s complete nonsense,” he said. “Withdrawing a failure doesn’t show the success of the regulatory system.

“It just shows the failure of the science in relation to this gene product.”

Director of the GeneEthics Network Bob Phelps was pleased the project was scrapped.

“Not only are these experiments on a minor crop a waste of public money, they highlight the growing concern worldwide about the health impacts of all GM foods,” Mr Phelps said.

The GM peas will be destroyed, Gene Technolgy Regulator Sue Meeks said.

“The whole proof-of-concept study will be wrapped up under contained conditions - nothing has entered the human food chain,” Dr Meeks said.

The CSIRO was working with the Grains Research and Development Corporation to genetically modify peas to resist attack by the pea weevil (Bruchus pisorum) and fungus.

Pea weevils alone can cause yield losses of up to 30per cent a year in the $100million-a-year field pea industry.

The scientists added a gene that produces a bean protein to the peas that causes weevil larvae to starve. Humans have been eating the naturally occurring bean protein for years.

But a team at the John Curtin School of Medical Research found that when mice were fed the GM peas, they suffered an adverse reaction and their lung tissue became inflamed.

“It was not life-threatening, but nonetheless it was a concerning reaction,” Dr Higgins said.

However, he said the search for weevil and fungus-resistant peas would continue, using the gene transfer system that was developed at the CSIRO as part of a $3million project.

In an earlier case of GM research, work on a protein-enhanced soy product was abandoned when it was discovered that the brazil nut gene transferred to the soy produced a protein that could cause allergic reactions in some people.

Grains Research and Development Corporation managing director Peter Reading said it was good to be able to identify problems “early in the piece”.

A spokeswoman for Bayer Crop Sciences, also involved in researching GM products, said the CSIRO’s decision had no impact on the firm’s GM work.

Melbourne-based Monsanto - which has developed several GM food products, including corn - was unavailable for comment yesterday.

To easily stay informed about the latest news, we suggest that people subcribe to the GMO News Update forum. When you subscribe, you can request to receive the news as either a Daily or Weekly Digest.

If you subscribe to the Daily Digest, any day that there are posts to the GMO News Update forum, you will receive an e-mail that lists the articles. Clicking on a link in the e-mail will take you to that article.

With the Weekly Digest, every Sunday night you will receive an e-mail with all the posts in the GMO News Update forum for the past week. Again, clicking on a link in the e-mail will take you to that article.

Here are simple instructions on how to subscribe to either the Daily or Weekly Digest of the GMO News Update :

1) From The Campaign Forums home page, click on the forum titled “GMO News Updates.”

2) On the right side of the screen, click on the drop down menu that says “Forum Tools.”

3) From the drop down menu, select “Subscribe to this Forum.”

4) A screen will come up that says “Notification Type.” Select either “Daily updates by email” or “Weekly updates by email.”

5) That’s it. You are now subscribed. You can unsubscribe anytime by clicking on the link at the bottom of each Daily or Weekly Digest.

Craig Winters
President
The Campaign

Disappointing news from Sonoma County. Measure M lost by a 57 to 43 margin.

–Craig Winters

Voters reject Sonoma ban on genetically modified crops

Associated Press
Wed, Nov. 09, 2005

SANTA ROSA, Calif. - A proposed ban on planting or cultivating genetically altered crops was rejected by Sonoma County voters Tuesday night.

With 68 percent of precincts reporting, Measure M lost 57 to 43 percent in one of the county’s most expensive ballot fights ever.

Supporters and opponents of the proposed 10-year ban spent a combined $850,000. Only three counties in the nation - all in California - ban genetically altered crops.

Sonoma County anti-biotechnology crusaders placed Measure M on the ballot earlier this year, hoping to join neighboring Mendocino County in officially banning biotechnology from its farms, spread out over a region best known for pastoral vineyards and lush orchards.

Mendocino County voters in March 2004 were the first in the nation to enact such a ban, overwhelmingly approving the measure despite a well-funded counter campaign from the biotechnology industry.

In November 2004, voters in Marin County, a mostly suburban region just across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, enacted their own ban on genetically modified crops, while voters in Humboldt, Butte and San Luis Obispo counties voted down proposed biotechnology bans.

The Board of Supervisors in tiny Trinity County also passed a similar ban.

Opponents of genetically modified crops have lobbied for outright bans in Hawaii and Vermont, but California remains the only state in the nation where voters have enacted such bans.

The bans are largely symbolic because few - if any - genetically engineered crops were grown in those counties. The same is true for Sonoma County, where the winemaking grape is king. No genetically engineered grapes are commercially available.

This United Press International story is so important, I am posting it in both the News Forums and the Blog so people don’t miss it.

Study: High mortality rats ate GM food

MOSCOW, Oct. 31 (UPI) — A recent Russian study says 55.6 percent of the offspring of female rats fed genetically engineered soy flour died within three weeks.

The female rats reportedly received 5-7 grams of the Roundup Ready variety of soybeans, beginning two weeks before conception and continuing through nursing. By comparison, scientists said only 9 percent of the offspring of rats fed non-GM soy died.

Furthermore, Russian researchers said offspring from the GM-fed group were significantly stunted — 36 percent weighed less than 20 grams after two weeks, compared with only 6.7 percent from the control group.

The study was conducted by Dr. Irina Ermakova of the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology in Moscow, a part of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

The study was presented during the recent conference of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine in Tucson, Ariz.

The AAEM board issued a statement saying: “We recognize this study is preliminary in nature. It hasn’t yet been peer reviewed and the methodology has not been spelled out in detail. But given the magnitude of the findings and the implications for human health, we urge the National Institutes of Health to immediately replicate the research.”

Citizens in Sonoma County, California are in a tight race to pass the Measure M ballot initiative. If passed, it would put a 10 year moratorium on growing genetically engineered crops in that county.

To read more about the effort, visit our Initiatives web page on this web site.

If you live in the Sonoma County area, please contact their office at (707) 823-4410 or visit their web site at www.gefreesonoma.org.

Here is an update on the Sonoma County effort on November 1, 2005:

Subject: Friends of GE-Free Sonoma Alert

Here’s the latest from the Sonoma campaign. Please help where and how you can! Let’s grow the North Bay GE-Free zone!

Doug

Dear GE-Free friends and allies:

We’re close to winning!

We have now contacted about 50,000 voters in over 300 precincts! Last Saturday we had 50 volunteers walking the neighborhoods in East Petaluma, and we’ve had 12-15 people on the phones every night! We are seeing a major ground-swell of grassroots support, and many of the voters we talk to are changing their minds and voting YES on Measure M. The truth is winning out… but only when we have a chance to share it. To win this campaign, we still have to reach thousands more voters before the election. WE ARE VERY CLOSE - a committed effort for this final week could put us over the top!

This is it - zero hour. Either everyone steps up and does their part this week, or we risk losing not only this election, but the safety of our food and farms for the next thousand years. If you have been waiting to get involved, the time is NOW. If you have not yet asked all your friends to commit, please call them today. The opposition has pulled out all the stops, and is now spending tens of thousands of dollars a day, lying outrageously in all their ads and mailers. WE ABSOLUTELY MUST MOBILIZE MORE PEOPLE TO WIN. _____________________________________________

THE 3 MOST IMPORTANT WAYS YOU CAN HELP MEASURE M WIN:

1. WALK -HUGE WEEKEND MOBILIZATION! We need to turn out 100 precinct walkers this weekend to saturate Santa Rosa. We will walk in groups of four or more to complete whole neighborhoods in one day. We’ll have bagels, fruit, and coffee - join us - and bring your friends! Trainings are at 10am and 1pm on both Saturday and Sunday, at the Campaign Office, 540 Mendocino Ave, Santa Rosa, Info: 823-4410

2. PHONE -We’ve just added more lines, and we need 20 phonebankers every single night from now through election day! We provide training, scripts, and pizza - you provide your voice and commitment. Phonebanks are every evening from 6pm to 9pm, at the Campaign Office, 540 Mendocino Ave, Santa Rosa, Info: 823-4410 You can also make phone calls from home; call for a packet.

3. DONATE

See the website, www.gefreesonoma.org