Organic Farming For Your Health, Your Survival

Posted on April 5, 2023 by marcia

Ronnie Cummins Describes Strategy for Taking Back Organics

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

I interviewed Ronnie Cummins, cofounder and international director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), in honor of Regenerative Food and Farming Week
One of OCA’s major endeavors is the Billion Agave Project, an ecosystem-regeneration strategy being used by Mexican farms to turn agave into inexpensive animal feed
While small farms around the globe are using organic methods to grow food, they’re not getting credit for the truly sustainable farming methods they’re embracing because they’re not certified
OCA’s No. 1 project is to replace “the bogus carbon credits” with a system that measures the ecosystem services that farmers are providing, so they can be paid for these beneficial services along with the food they provide
OCA and their collaborators are working on a cellphone app that will streamline the organic certification process, enable farmers to apply to be certified organic and demonstrate higher levels of regenerative practices

I recently spoke with Ronnie Cummins, cofounder and international director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), in honor of Regenerative Food and Farming Week. OCA is one of the philanthropic organizations that we support, and Cummins shared some exciting updates in the field of organic and biodynamic agriculture.

One of OCA’s major endeavors is the Billion Agave Project, an ecosystem-regeneration strategy being used by Mexican farms in Guanajuato, a high-desert region.¹ Cummins was in San Miguel, Mexico, when we spoke, which was right in the middle of the dry season.

As Cummins explains, there’s typically no rain in the region for eight months out of the year, and since 86% of Mexican farmers don’t have a well, the use of organic and regenerative farming techniques is very important for good production and to improve the environment.²

‘Regeneration’ Being Used for Greenwashing

When you hear terms like regenerative agriculture, it’s important to look at its source. While small farms around the globe are using organic methods to grow food, in part because they can’t afford expensive agricultural chemicals, they’re not getting credit for the truly sustainable farming methods they’re embracing.

Meanwhile, corporate giants are using terms like “regenerative” to make it seem as though their industrial farming methods are natural. “Regenerative food and farming has become a buzzword in natural and organic food circles,” Cummins explains.

“More and more people understand what it is. But unfortunately, a lot of the … agribusiness corporations are using the term regeneration to avoid going organic or biodynamic, and they’re using it more as greenwashing. So, we’re still looking for people to understand that, you know, regenerative needs to be organic or biodynamic as its bottom line, and then you can improve on those practices.”³

As it stands, however, the small farmers aren’t typically getting rewarded for their regenerative methods the way they should. Cummins continues:⁴

“We shouldn’t allow big corporations like Monsanto to be paying bogus carbon credits to, you know, industrial monoculture, corn and soy farms in the Midwest, and claim that if they change one little thing, like they don’t plow because they use glyphosate instead — or if they use cover crops, but then they burn them down with glyphosate — there’s nothing really regenerative about that.

And, if you look across the world of farming systems that are really increasing soil fertility, putting more carbon in the soil, increasing water retention, preserving or even expanding biodiversity, and providing a decent living, these farms are using all the techniques of organic and regenerative, and these are the best practices we need to be looking at and that need to be rewarded for their organic plus practices.”

In Guanajuato, as part of the Billion Agave Project, farmers are harnessing the desert species agave to reform their food system. While agave leaves have historically been discarded as waste, as they’re difficult for farm animals to digest, the farmers are now chopping up agave leaves and fermenting them, which turns the leaves into an excellent and inexpensive animal feed. Mexico is the largest buyer of GMO corn in the world, which is primarily used for animal feed:⁵

“So, one of the things we’re trying to get across to the Mexican government is that farmers who are feeding corn to their animals — chickens, pigs, cows, whatever — they shouldn’t be feeding it to cows and herbivores.

But farmers that are feeding this feed can substitute fermented agave and protein from … other sources to eliminate this water intensive, energy intensive, really destructive monoculture of corn and soybeans. So, we’re pretty excited about this … farmers are picking up on this across the country, and we are getting inquiries from all over the world.”

All Agriculture Was Organic Until 1940

Organic agriculture is sometimes viewed as trendy, but to put this into perspective, all agriculture was organic until about 1940, Cummins notes, pointing out that “it’s only been 80 years of this disastrous experiment with chemicals, and chemical fertilizers and GMOs,” along with lab-grown meat and dairy products.

“If you look at the state of health in 1940, at various things like chronic disease, I mean, why is it four times higher chronic disease, you know, now than it was 80 years ago? Well, I think part of that is the diet,” Cummins says.⁶ Now, however, “people with the biggest megaphones,” like Bill Gates, have stolen concepts like sustainable, regenerative agriculture in an attempt to gain control over the world.

Small victories are occurring, however, like the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) new proposed rule to only allow meat, poultry and egg products derived from animals born, raised, slaughtered and processed in the U.S. to use the “Product of USA” or “Made in the USA” claim on their labels.⁷

Current regulations allow products from multinational corporations to claim their meat is a “Product of USA” if it passes through a USDA-inspected plant, even if the meat is imported.⁸ “We’ve been fighting this for 20 years,” Cummins says of the “Made in the USA” label, continuing:⁹

“I never thought we’d win. But all of a sudden, they finally do something right. And two months ago, they tightened up the requirements for importing foreign grains and organic ingredients. And you know, not just letting people claim they’re organic, pay off a few people overseas, and get here. But in general, I think we have got to stop focusing so much on the federal government and look more at what can be done at the grassroots level.

Measuring Ecosystem Services to Reward Small Farmers

Carbon credits are another greenwashing tool that allow globalists and multinational corporations to “offset” their pollution. It’s a matter of smoke and mirrors, however, that leaves small farmers once again at a disadvantage. While the rich can continue to pollute and buy carbon credits, small farmers may be forced out of business — leaving the wealthy polluters to grab their land and resources.

OCA’s No. 1 project is to replace “the bogus carbon credits, bogus carbon offsets, bogus payments for so-called prevented deforestation — in other words, the across-the-board greenwashing that’s now happening — with a system that really is alternative … it’s called organic ecoservices.”¹⁰

The idea is to measure the beneficial farming practices, or ecosystem services, that farmers are providing, so they can be paid for these services along with the food they provide. According to Cummins:¹¹

“We’ve got to start paying organic and organic plus producers a premium for the food they produce so that they will become more regenerative and really take over … 71% of organic farmers in the United States … are not certified organic. OK, across the world there are 60 billion farmers that could easily be certified organic, if there was a financial incentive to do so. And market access.

… we’re developing a system to where the only payments that we want the polluters to pay, and be able to enhance their PR or their supply chain dynamics, are two things. We want them to stop carbon offsetting and do only carbon insetting.

That is, a carbon inset is something that a corporation does in its supply chain that enhances these environmental services, and puts carbon and fertility in the soil. Or else we want these companies to just pay out money in the form of … ‘MCs’ … these are mitigation contributions. So we don’t want Nestle to be able to claim, ‘Oh, yeah, we’re gonna be net zero emissions by 2050.’”

Why ESG Funds Are a Scam

Pouncing on investors’ interest in environmentally friendly, sustainable investing, the S&P 500 ESG Index was launched in 2019.¹²

ESG, or environmental, social and governance, funds are supposed to be those focused on companies with strong environmental ethics and responsibility, but further investigation reveals rampant greenwashing has occurred, and many ESG-labeled funds are far from “sustainable.” Globally, an estimated $41 trillion flowed into ESG funds in 2022.¹³ Cummins explains:¹⁴

“We’re going to have to make the polluters really squirm if we want them to pay out. ESG companies that file ESG reports now have a total of $125 trillion in assets. That’s not billion, that’s trillion … you got all these companies filing these, they’re bragging about their carbon offsets, their carbon credits … how they paid to defer deforestation here and there … our solution to this is we can’t write a big company’s ESG.

But we can say, if you don’t make a sizable contribution to these mitigation contributions, that are actually restoring the environment and sequestering carbon and biodiversity around the world, we’re coming after you … there are only about six major carbon credit certifiers in the world, and it’s now coming out that it’s all corrupt — and that 90% or more is bogus.”

App in the Works to Streamline Organic Certification

OCA and their collaborators are working on a cellphone app that will enable farmers to apply to be certified organic and demonstrate higher levels of regenerative practices. Right now, costs and regulatory red tape make it difficult for most farmers to become certified organic and stay that way.

“We know full well the reason farmers that were once certified organic stopped getting recertified, or the reason why the overwhelming majority of organic producers in the world are not certified at all, is because it costs money and it takes time … the recording is onerous,” Cummins says.¹⁵

The app will make it much easier for farmers and organic certifiers by providing an online system of records “instead of a bunch of copies of receipts and hand-drawn maps of farms.” They’re also using sophisticated drones that can fly over 50 acres a day combined with satellite information to help determine where and how many soil samples should be taken and how to determine water retention in soil, biodiversity and more.

They’re even using microphones tied into databases to identify bird calls and figure out how many birds live in the area. It’s so detailed, it can determine which birds live there year-round and which are just migrating.

By making the organic certification process easier, and getting more farms certified organic, Cummins hopes that the agricultural system will transform to one that produces healthy, toxin-free food in a truly sustainable way:¹⁶

“We’re obviously in the middle of a … crisis and organic and regenerative nutrient-dense food is what’s got to be made available to everyone. And we can’t do this by paying organic farmers enough for their food to where it gets priced out of the range of more and more people.

We’ve got to start thinking of how do we pay farmers and ranchers and land managers for the environmental services that they provide for all of us, and for reducing poverty.

And so we’ve got to come up with a new system. We need a campaign to rejuvenate the organic movement worldwide … many farmers in the world … aren’t certified and aren’t getting any reward in the marketplace. We can change this, and the way to change it is public education.

We’ve got to expose not only the machinations of the World Economic Forum and Gates and World Trade Organization, but we’ve also got to point out that this new magic bullet that they’re offering up is just greenwashing — and that we have an alternative. This alternative is organic and regenerative, and it’s based on the cutting-edge science and verification that are now within our reach for the first time.”

from: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/04/04/ronnie-cummins-taking-back-organics.aspx

A Little Glyphosate with that Coke?

Posted on September 24, 2020 by marcia

Science Institute Protects Interests of Big Food, Not Public Health, Researchers Say

By Jeremy Loffredo

An investigation by academics, journalists and public interest researchers reveals a web of corporate money and industry-funded science surrounding the nonprofit organization International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI). ILSI describes itself as a network of think-tanks, science societies and institutes that promote food safety and nutrition. However, as research group U.S. Right to Know (USRTK) asserts, ILSI is a “food industry lobbying group” that works to benefit its corporate donors despite its proclaimed mission of improving “human health and well-being.”

USRTK details the revolving door between the ILSI and industry, which goes as far back as the organization’s foundation in 1978. It was started by former Coca-Cola executive Alex Malaspina, and as USRTK points out, the nonprofit has maintained its close ties to Coca-Cola. For example, Michael Ernest Knowles, president of ILSI from 2009-2011, hailed from Coca-Cola where he was the vice president of global scientific and regulatory affairs. As another example, ILSI’s president in 2015, Rhona Applebaum, was, at the same time, working as Coca-Cola’s chief health and science officer. Applebaum was forced to retire from both positions after reports showed that Coke funded and edited the mission statement of a prominent anti-obesity advocacy group in an effort to shift public conversation away from criticism of the effects of sugary drinks and instead blame the lack of physical activity on childhood obesity.

But, as noted in this recent study, sugary drinks are to blame for this epidemic. Researchers from the Medical University of Vienna looked at 20 studies addressing the link between sugary sweetened drinks and obesity in children and adults. Of all the studies, 93% concluded that there was a “positive association” between the onset of overweight or obesity and the consumption of sugary drinks in children and adults. Other research has found positive association between sugary drinks and cancer.

USRTK highlights ILSI’s influence on domestic health officials, in the U.S. and abroad. The report highlights the example of Chinese health officials, noting that ILSI-Chinese operations are actually located inside China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention offices in Beijing. USRTK notes Harvard Professor Susan Greenhalgh findings, which show that Western food and beverage corporations have helped shape decades of Chinese science and public policy on obesity and diet by operating through ILSI.

Greenhalgh explains, “Since 2015, when The New York Times exposed Coke’s efforts to promote activity as the main solution for obesity, we’ve known that Coke was involved in distorting the science of obesity. My work reveals the scale of the impact and the inner workings of the organizations involved,” which includes ILSI.

The researchers also shows how ILSI takes money directly from food and chemical companies. While ISLI does not publicly disclose its funding from industry, researchers were able to find a $500,000 contribution from Monsanto in 2012 and more than $163,500 from Coca-Cola the same year.

In 2013, the ILSI received $337,000 from Coca-Cola and more than $100,000 each from corporations like Monsanto, Dow Chemical and Bayer.

A draft of ILSI’s 2016 tax returns also reveals hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from giants such as Nestle, Kellogg, Kraft, General Mills and Unilever.

USRTK notes that these monetary contributions can affect global health policy. In 2016, the United Nations panel on Monsanto’s chemical glyphosate was chaired by ILSI Europe Vice President Alan Boobis. Co-chairing the sessions was Angelo Moretto, an ILSI board member. Neither individual declared their ILSI leadership roles as conflicts of interest, despite the significant financial contributions ILSI has received from Monsanto.

What’s more, USRTK points out that these monetary contributions can be earmarked for specific initiatives. Coca-Cola earmarked its ILSI contributions to fund the organization’s “Platform for International Partnerships,” which manages its relationships with regulatory bodies like the World Health Organization. USRTK then references a June 2019 paper in Globalization and Health, which explains that corporations deploy ILSI “as a tool to promote their interests globally.” Researchers further demonstrate the existence of a nonprofit industrial complex, where “science institutes” like ILSI serve as a vehicle for corporate influence, at the expense of objective science and public health.

from: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/international-life-sciences-institute-protects-big-food-not-public-health/?itm_term=home

Monsanto Taken to Task

Posted on April 14, 2019 by marcia

What’s on Your Golf Course?

Posted on April 10, 2019 by marcia

Roundup, Monsanto, cancer, golf courses, hidden secrets

by Jon Rappoport

April 10, 2019

There are 34,000 golf courses in the world. They make beautiful pictures. But what keeps the grass of the fairways and greens so uniform and undisturbed by weeds?

Chemical herbicides. One of the herbicide is Roundup, manufactured by Monsanto, the giant corporation owned by Bayer.

It’s now common knowledge that a link has been drawn between Roundup and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. “The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer…decided in 2015 that glyphosate is ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’.” (Mother Jones, March 14, 2019)

The research on the Monsanto pesticide Roundup is far from a finished product. Is it possible that Roundup causes other forms of cancer—brain, colon, and blood, for example? It will be hard to prove, in part because Monsanto can produced a hundred studies that contradict each lone study that says Yes.

But where are the golfers who have cancer? Nowhere, correct? Let’s find out.

“After the death of his [golf-playing] father, from the blood cancer Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, filmmaker Andrew Nisker starts hunting for answers to his many questions about why this particular cancer, and where it came from. His search, to his surprise, takes him into the manicured world of golf. In this world of pearl white bunkers, and putting greens that look and feel like velvet, Andrew discovers that these ‘greenspaces’ are anything but. There’s a lot more than nature at work creating these perfect carpets. At a golf industry trade show he sees the array of chemicals on offer to achieve that championship perfection. To his surprise, he hears at the show that golfers have consistently shown resistance to caring about any health or environmental impacts of their sport.”

“Andrew forms a bond with a sportscaster in Pittsburgh who is blaming golf course pesticides for the cancer death of his own father, a golf course superintendent.”

“As he follows up on his hunt to find out more about pesticide use on golf courses, Andrew asks can golfers themselves learn to kick the chemical habit? He’s convinced that if golfers knew what goes into maintaining the artificial beauty they play on, they’d learn to love dandelions a little more.” (Dad and the Dandelions, CBC TV, March 2, 2017)

A recent lawsuit involved Roundup as a cause of lymphoma: “The groundskeeper who won a massive civil suit against Bayer’s Monsanto claiming that the weedkiller Roundup caused his cancer has agreed to accept $78 million, after a judge substantially reduced the jury’s original $289 million award.”

“Dewayne ‘Lee’ Johnson, a Northern Californian groundskeeper and pest-control manager, was 42 when he developed a strange rash that would lead to a diagnosis of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in August 2014.”

“His groundskeeper duties included mixing and spraying hundreds of gallons of Roundup, the company’s glyphosate-containing weedkiller product, court records say.” (NPR, November 1, 2018)

Buckle up.

Australian professional golfer Jarrod Lyle has died after a long battle with cancer [leukemia], his wife announced Wednesday. He was 36…Last week, Lyle and his family announced that he had decided to end his treatment for acute myeloid leukemia and would undergo palliative care at his home.” (Fox News, 8/8/18)

“Fifty-one female professional golfers and 142 female amateur golfers were evaluated for skin cancer and skin cancer risk…Four of the professionals had already developed basal cell carcinoma (BCC). Their average age was 25.5 years. Eleven amateurs also developed BCC…” (Skin Cancer in Professional and Amateur Female Golfers, Phys Sportsmed. 1985 Aug) Was the cause sun exposure? Herbicides?

“In 2008, not long after playing in his first Champions Tour tournament, [Seve] Ballesteros fell ill in Spain. He was diagnosed with a brain tumor and eventually underwent four surgeries to try to remove the cancer. Ballesteros died on May 7, 2011, at the age of 54.” (ThoughtCo, 9/18/18)

[Heather] Farr was a terrific amateur golfer who never really got the chance to become a great LPGA Tour player. She died of breast cancer (that widely metastasized) at the age of 28 in 1993.” (ThoughtCo, 9/18/18)

“Once dubbed one of the world’s sexiest men by People magazine, Adam Scott looked a bit more garish after a procedure in 2011 to remove a Basil Cell Carcinoma, a form of non-melanoma skin cancer, from his face…A number of players have had varying degrees of battles with skin cancer…Rory Sabbatini, Brian Davis, Aron Price, among others, have all battled the disease…” (PGATour.com, 6/17/14) Sun exposure? Herbicides?

“Professional golfer Tom Lehman understands the importance of detecting cancer early. At 35, he was diagnosed with stage I colon cancer…* (USA Today, 6/26/18)

“Bruce Lietzke, a pro golfer who won 13 Professional Golfer’s Association Tour events, died on Saturday after a year-long battle with brain cancer.” (AJC, 7/28/18)

“[Pro golfer Randy Jones’ 2011] punch biopsy turned out to be melanoma.” (mdanderson.org, 9/13/16)

“A former LPGA Tour member, Shelley Hamlin died on October 15 [2018] at the age of 69 after a long and courageous battle with [breast] cancer.” (golfweek.com, 12/19/18)

“Phil Rodgers, a five-time PGA Tour winner and noted golf instructor, died on June 26 age 80 after a 15-year battle with leukemia.” (golfweek.com, 12/19/18)

“Charismatic Australian golfer Ian Stanley, who was a prolific winner on his home tour before making his mark on the European seniors circuit, died in July at age 69. He had battled cancer for some time.” (golfweek.com, 12/19/18)

“…professional golfer Boo Weekley went public on Thursday in revealing the cause of his prolonged absence from the PGA Tour…discomfort in his right shoulder was revealed to be cancer…” (Pensacola News Journal, 2/15/19)

“Forrest Fezler’s career path in golf included 12 years on the PGA Tour…Fezler, a Californian by birth who settled in Tallahassee, died Friday after battling brain cancer. He was 69.” (Tallahassee Democrat, (12/21/18)

“[In July of 2006], it was discovered that famous pro golfer, Billy Mayfair, “had testicular cancer.” (Coping with Cancer, undated)

A PGA player [Joel Dahmen] who battled [testicular] cancer and lost his mom to the disease is moving into his dream home in Scottsdale…” (azfamily.com, 5/29/18)

Before you jump to the conclusion that exposure to the sun is responsible for the majority of golf-cancers, think about this statistic: “…the New York State Attorney General’s office published a report entitled Toxic Fairways, a widely cited study of pesticide use on 52 Long Island, New York golf courses. The report, which was particularly concerned with the potential for groundwater contamination, concluded that these golf courses applied about 50,000 pounds of pesticides in one year, or four to seven times the average amount of pesticides used in agriculture, on a pound per acre basis.” (beyondpesticides.org)

A variety of products are employed on golf courses. They create virtual lakes of chemical poison.

Or should I say rivers instead of lakes? Underground toxic rivers that affect bordering communities surrounding 34,000 golf courses across the world. If a groundskeeper with cancer can win $78 million in a lawsuit, how many billions of dollars should be awarded in a comprehensive legal action that correctly assigns criminal responsibility to giant chemical corporations?

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

from: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/

Glyphosate – Safe?? Really???

Posted on August 6, 2018 by marcia

Dewayne Johnson (center), former groundskeeper for the Benicia Unified School District, leaves Department 504 with his wife Araceli Johnson (right) behind attorney Brent Wisner (left) at Superior Court of California during the Monsanto trial on Monday, July 23, 2018 in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

A former school groundskeeper, diagnosed with terminal cancer, told a San Francisco jury Monday that he called a Monsanto Co. hotline twice — once before his diagnosis, once after — and asked whether the herbicide he was spraying on the job, the most widely used weed killer in the world, could cause harm to humans.

Both times, Dewayne “Lee” Johnson said, the person at the other end of the line listened to his account of being accidentally doused with the herbicide glyphosate, and said someone would call him back. No one ever did.

“I would never have sprayed the product around school grounds or around people if I thought it would cause them harm,” Johnson told a Superior Court jury hearing his suit against Monsanto. “They deserve better.”

Johnson, 46, of Vallejo, was a groundskeeper and pest-control manager for the Benicia Unified School District from 2012 until May 2016. He was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma in October 2014 and with what his lawyers described as a more aggressive form of the cancer in March 2015.

Even after the latter diagnosis, Johnson said he continued to spray Monsanto’s product, a high-concentration brand of glyphosate called Ranger Pro, until he became convinced that it was dangerous and refused to use it in his final months on the job.

His damage suit, now into its third week, is the first of about 4,000 nationwide to go to trial against Monsanto, now a subsidiary of Bayer. The company markets glyphosate, the world’s leading herbicide, as Roundup, and in higher concentrations, as Ranger Pro. In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

Monsanto disputes the assessment, noting that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has never classified glyphosate as a carcinogen or restricted its use. The company’s lawyers also said Johnson’s primary treating physicians have not determined the cause of his cancer.

Earlier Monday, his wife and a physician described Johnson’s deteriorating condition, although he did not appear frail on the witness stand, speaking calmly in a deep, resonant voice. But jurors saw photos of the painful welts and lesions — on his legs, arms, face, and even his eyelids — that have arisen while he undergoes radiation treatment and chemotherapy. Johnson is scheduled for another round of chemotherapy next month and said he would next turn to a bone-marrow transplant.

He has self-published two books and is working on a third — “about people and how they’re judged by their faces” — and hopes he’ll get to finish it. He tries to shield the couple’s two sons, aged 13 and 10, from his bouts of depression and tears, and said that despite a grim prognosis, “I’ll keep fighting till my last breath.”

Araceli Johnson, his wife of 13 years and a nurse practitioner, said she now works 14 hours a day at two jobs to support them. “My world shut down” when her husband told her he had cancer, she told the jury.

Attorney Brent Wisner answers questions from the media at Superior Court of California on Monday, July 23, 2018, in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

Johnson started working for the Benicia schools as a delivery driver but then applied to become the district’s first pest-control manager and passed a licensing exam. “I liked the job a lot,” he said, recalling how some students gave him a poster for ridding their school of a skunk.

He said the district told him to use the Ranger Pro form of glyphosate because Roundup wasn’t strong enough to remove all the weeds from hillsides on district-owned property. A supervisor told him the product was safe as long as he wore long-sleeved shirts, pants, shoes and socks.

In addition, Johnson said, he wore a sturdy jacket, rubber gloves, goggles and a face mask while he mixed the herbicide with water in 50-gallon drums and sprayed it 20 to 30 times a year for two to three hours a day, mostly during summer months. But he said he couldn’t fully protect his face from wind-blown spray. And twice, he said, he got drenched with herbicide, once when a spray hose became detached from a truck that was hauling it, and another time when the chemical somehow leaked onto his back. He said he had no access to a shower until much later in the day.

It was after the first exposure, Johnson said, that he started noticing rashes on his skin and called the company hotline.

“I had this uncontrollable situation on my skin, which used to be as perfect as this table,” he said, pointing to the brown witness stand. “It was a very scary, confusing time.”

During cross-examination, Monsanto lawyer Sandra Edwards asked Johnson about his past statement to his doctors that he had first developed a skin rash in the autumn of 2013, before he was accidentally doused with glyphosate. The company has contended that the sequence of events suggests other causes for Johnson’s illness.

“It’s hard to remember all that way back,” said Johnson, whose wife testified that her husband has sometimes suffered memory lapses since his diagnosis. That appeared to be on display early in his testimony Monday, when he said he had stopped working for the school district about five years ago, then was shown a document noting that he had worked there until May 2016.

Jurors also heard from Dr. Ope Ofodile, a dermatologist who coordinated Johnson’s medical treatment at Kaiser Health Care in Vallejo from 2014 through mid-2016. She said she saw him more than 25 times, removed one of his lesions, administered radiation, and wrote a letter in 2015 asking the school board not to expose Johnson to airborne chemicals.

“He was not responding (to treatment). He was heading in the wrong direction,” she said. But “he was very much motivated to get better.”

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: begelko@sfchronicle.com

from: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Benicia-man-dying-of-cancer-testifies-in-Roundup-13098953.php

Zika, Gates, Vaccines, Oh, My!

Posted on September 18, 2016 by marcia

Chemicals, Vaccines, and Bill Gates: What You Need To Know About The Zika-Fear Campaign

By Tami Canal On September 5, 2016 ·

Let’s try this one more time.. The Zika virus does not cause microcephaly.

Zika has existed for more than 70 years without a single documented birth defect attributed to the disease. The virus is insignificant and more mild than the seasonal flu, with symptoms ranging from a low-grade fever to body aches and other cold-like symptoms.

The fact of the matter is Big Chem has pesticides to sell and Big Pharma has a vaccine to push.

Suddenly, a disease that has been irrelevant for decades is an imminent health threat.

A gullible public has been tricked into believing the only way to save ourselves from certain death or deformed babies is to allow the aerial abatement of chemicals banned all over the world.

For example, this past weekend’s spraying in South Carolina was successful in wiping out those pesky Zika-carrying skeets. Too bad it also decimated the state’s bee population.

“On Saturday, it was total energy, millions of bees foraging, pollinating, making honey for winter. Today, it stinks of death. Maggots and other insects are feeding on the honey and the baby bees who are still in the hives. It’s heartbreaking.” -Juanita Stanley, Beekeeper

Millions of bees are dead as a result of the state’s first aerial spraying in 14 years. The pesticide, Trumpet (which contains naled), rained down from the sky for 2 hours early Sunday morning.

According to the manufacturer’s label, Trumpet is “highly toxic to bees exposed to direct treatment on blooming crops or weeds. To minimize hazard to bees, it is recommended that the product is not applied more than two hours after sunrise or two hours before sunset, limiting application to times when bees are least active.”

Hmmm…it must have been just an unfortunate oversight to spray heavily during the precise time explicitly discouraged on the label. But, hey, at least AMVAC Chemical Corporation and their parent company, American Vanguard Corporation are making millions.

Chemical corporations aren’t the only ones who will profit from an insignificant disease.

The U.S. government has commissioned Takeda Pharmaceutical Company for the development of a Zika vaccine, with as much as $312 million committed to funding.

Takeda said in a press release that the cash will be put to the development of an “inactivated, adjuvanted, whole Zika virus vaccine.”

Takeda Pharmaceutical has plans for more than just a “cure” for Zika. The Japan-based Takeda also has vaccines for dengue, norovirus and polio in the works.

“This Zika vaccine program joins our work in dengue, norovirus, our partnership with the Japanese Government on pandemic influenza, and the recently announced partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to help eradicate polio. These efforts to develop a vaccine against the Zika virus reinforce Takeda’s commitment to the health of people everywhere, including the most vulnerable populations that are threatened by Zika,” stated Dr. Rajeev Venkayya, Corporate Officer and President of the Global Vaccine Business Division at Takeda.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, you say? Now, that’s interesting.

How convenient that their little foundation has also funded Oxitec, the genetically modified mosquito project that many believe is actually spreading the Zika virus. What a clever guy. After all, there is quite a bit of profit in unleashing a disease on the population and then creating the vaccine to ‘cure’ it. (Read more about that here.)

As reported by Daniel Barker:

It’s easy to see where the Zika virus crisis might fit in with Bill Gates’ admitted depopulation agenda. Not only are babies being born nearly brain-dead, but now women throughout Latin America are being urged not to have children during the next two years. Coincidence?

And in the latest Zika news, GM mosquitoes are now being considered for use in fighting the further spread of the virus.

And of course, researchers are scrambling to develop a vaccine

The irony should not be lost on anyone that the proposed solutions for Zika containment (chemicals, vaccines) are the real causes behind the birth defects being blamed on the virus.

1. Monsanto’s Chemicals

Glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, “probably” causes cancer according the the World Health Organization. It has also been linked to microcephaly.

The link was established in a study titled ‘Glyphosate-Based Herbicides Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signaling.’

In the study, glyphosate-based concentrations were injected into frog and chicken embryos and it was discovered that microcephaly was a side effect in both, along with gradual loss of rhombomere domains and the reduction of the optic vesicles (the latter two are developing parts of the brain in an embryo). (Read the study here.)

Global Research Center also released a different report confirming Brazil’s rampant pesticide use if far more of a concern in microcephaly development than Zika.

According to the report:

“Pesticides in Brazil and Pernambuco state are more likely to be the cause of microcephaly and birth defects than Zika virus and the links below speak for themselves…” (View the links here.)

2. Tdap Vaccine

A study published in The National Center for Biotechnology Information reveals the the United Stated government has known for decades that a link between Tdap and microcephaly exists.

An exert from the study reads:

Prenatal factors are thought to account for 20 to 30 percent of cases. This category includes cerebral anomalies, chromosomal disorders, neurocutaneous syndromes such as tuberous sclerosis, inherited metabolic disorders, intrauterine infections, family history of seizures, and microcephaly (Bobele and Bodensteiner, 1990; Kurokawa et al., 1980; Ohtahara, 1984; Riikonen and Donner, 1979). (Read the full study here.)

At the end of 2014, the Brazilian government mandated the Tdap vaccine for all pregnant women and in the final months of 2015, the Zika-induced microcephaly ‘outbreak’ was all CNN could talk about.

29 countries all over the world have reported cases of the Zika virus, but not a single documented cases of Zika-related microcephaly exists anywhere but Brazil. That’s odd.

The Outliers has compiled a great fact sheet that everyone should read before receiving the Tdap vaccine. We still have a choice, despite the recent revelation of a CDC Quarantine Committee hell-bent on force vaccinating the American public. (Read about that here.)

Thank you to The Outliers for this invaluable information about the Tdap vaccine that the CDC pushes for every pregnancy, regardless of the patient’s previous history of receiving the vaccine.

FACT #1. There are ingredients in the pertussis-containing Tdap vaccine that have not been fully evaluated for potential genotoxic or other adverse effects on the human fetus developing in the womb that may negatively affect health after birth, including aluminum adjuvants, mercury containing (Thimerosal) preservatives and many more bioactive and potentially toxic ingredients.

FACT #2. The FDA has licensed Tdap vaccines to be given once as a single dose pertussis booster shot to individuals over 10 or 11 years old. The CDC’s recommendation that doctors give every pregnant woman a Tdap vaccination during every pregnancy—regardless of whether a woman has already received one dose of Tdap—is an off-label use of the vaccine.

FACT #3. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) adequate testing has not been done in humans to demonstrate safety for pregnant women and it is not known whether the vaccines can cause fetal harm or affect reproduction capacity. The manufacturers of the Tdap vaccine state that human toxicity and fertility studies are inadequate and warn that Tdap should “be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.”

FACT #4. Drug companies did not test the safety and effectiveness of giving Tdap vaccine to pregnant women before the vaccines were licensed in the U.S. and there is almost no data on inflammatory or other biological responses to this vaccine that could affect pregnancy and birth outcomes.

To read more staggering facts about the Tdap, please visit The Outliers here.

from: http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/chemicals-vaccines-and-bill-gates-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-zika-fear-campaign/

Whole Foods Wants Whole GMO’s? Take Action!

Posted on July 2, 2016 by marcia

Whole Foods goes ROGUE… partners with Monsanto to kill GMO labeling across America and replace with fake labeling deception… SENATE VOTE PLANNED AS EARLY AS TOMORROW

Wednesday, June 29, 2016
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) IMPORTANT UPDATE: Whole Foods was just caught blatantly LYING about everything covered in this article. CEO Walter Robb has been captured on video admitting total support for Monsanto-engineered GMO fake labeling law that kills Vermont GMO labeling bill. Whole Foods takes to social media to LIE to everyone, denying everything, even while Robb is captured on video… click here for the breaking news report on Whole Foods CAUGHT LYING.

According to breaking news reports, Whole Foods Market (WFM) has gone full rogue, partnering with Monsanto to kill GMO labeling across America under the guise of a new, fraudulent “GMO labeling compromise” in the U.S. Senate that’s actually a fake labeling law requiring no clear labeling of GMOs whatsoever.

Food Democracy Now has issued this red alert, naming the sellout corporations (including Whole Foods) that have betrayed health-conscious consumers with a sellout deal that outlaws GMO labeling nationwide.

The deception on food labeling has never been greater. With this act of ultimate betrayal, Whole Foods cements its position as a poison-pushing distribution partner of Monsanto, the world’s most evil corporation that produces poisonous, deadly crops laced with bt toxin and glyphosate, a cancer-linked herbicide.

With this betrayal of consumers, Whole Foods might as well now be called, “POISON FOODS” because that’s what they’re pushing.

Click here for the Food Democracy Now petition page to take action now.

What follows is the full text of the Food Democracy Now announcement:

Whole Foods Joins Monsanto Try to Kill GMO Labeling in America

Washington D.C. — National grassroots organizations expressed their outrage today towards a group of U.S. Senators and major, self-described, “organic companies” that have brokered a backroom legislative deal to kill mandatory GMO labeling of food products across America while stifling first-of-its-kind state legislation in Vermont (slated to go in effect this Friday, July 1st) that would mandate labeling of foods that have been genetically engineered in laboratories.

The companies, including Whole Foods, Smucker’s and Organic Valley, among others, have historically funded major public relations and advertising campaigns to promote themselves as “organic” brands. Now, some national leaders are criticizing these companies for “selling out” the GMO labeling movement, public health and the environment and urging the public to fight back.

“Make no mistake, these self-proclaimed organic companies, including Whole Foods, Smucker’s Stonyfield and Organic Valley have just joined with Monsanto and sold out the ability for parents to know what they are feeding their children,” said Dave Murphy, Executive Director of Food Democracy Now!

Murphy continued, “Monsanto and Whole Foods’ new fake labeling bill would not only preempt Vermont’s bill this week, but all provisions of the bill are OPTIONAL — the bill’s language is so poorly written that it would actually not include 85% of the current GMOs on the market, including Roundup Ready GMOs owned by Monsanto that are sprayed with the weedkiller glyphosate, which the World Health Organization declared a “probable carcinogen” linked to cancer in lab animals and humans last year.”

Food Democracy Now! and Organic Consumers Association are now leading a grassroots pressure campaign to urge the US Senate to block the last minute legislative deal.

“Consumers need to resist this outrageous attack on consumer and states’ rights with their pocketbooks and their political voices,” said Ronnie Cummins, the International Director of the Organic Consumers Association. “This is an outrageous assault by corrupt corporate interests on our basic freedoms and a mother’s right to know what’s in the food they feed their children.”

Polls regularly show that ninety percent of American consumers want to know whether their food is genetically engineered and the impending Vermont GMO labeling law has already forced major food corporations to disclose GMO contamination in their products”.

“Now, at the last minute, a self-selected group of so-called “organic leaders,” including the head of Whole Foods Market, Walter Robb; Gary Hirshberg, the CEO of Stonyfield Farm, the bogus pro GMO labeling group Just Label It, run by the Environmental Working Group, and lobbyists for the corporate owned organic companies inside the Organic Trade Association (led by “natural” brands Smucker’s and White Wave) have made an absolutely corrupt bargain with Congress completely embracing an industry-crafted DARK Act “compromise”, now known as The Stabenow/Roberts bill,” continued Cummins.

A coalition of independent family own organic companies and consumers groups is actively working to get Senators the real facts about this bill even as the Organic Trade Association and its corporate-own organic companies are working behind the scenes to intentionally confuse Senators about what’s actually in the bill and the fact that the millions of Americans that actually support GMO labeling are not represented by their corrupt corporate interests.

Take action NOW or be forever screwed by Whole Foods and Monsanto

Click here for the Food Democracy Now petition page to take action now.

Call your U.S. Senator at this switchboard number: (202) 224-3121

Demand they vote AGAINST the GMO labeling “compromise” being pushed by Monsanto.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/054514_Whole_Foods_GMO_labeling_Monsanto_deception.html#ixzz4DHTx8KrE

USDA Censorship, Bee Populations, Corporate Lobbying

Posted on March 22, 2016 by marcia

Is the USDA Just a Corporate Lobbyist Group?

Story at-a-glance

The USDA has come under increasing scrutiny following charges of harassment and censorship. Due to mounting complaints from scientists, the USDA inspector general is opening an investigation.
USDA whistleblower Jonathan Lundgren, Ph.D., claims he was retaliated against when he started talking about his research, which shows neonicotinoids cause decline in bee and Monarch butterfly populations.
Krysta Harden, former deputy secretary of the USDA, has been hired by chemical giant DuPont to head up its “public policy and government affairs strategies” department

By Dr. Mercola

Many, if not most, of our regulatory agencies have a long history of protecting industry interests over public and environmental health. Most recently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has come under increasing scrutiny following mounting charges of harassment and censorship.

In the first week of November 2015, Jonathan Lundgren, who spent the last 11 years working as an entomologist at the USDA, filed a whistleblower complaint against the agency, claiming he’d suffered retaliation after speaking out about research showing that neonicotinoids had adverse effects on bees.¹

In the U.S., nearly all corn, about 90 percent of canola, and approximately half of all soybeans are treated with neonicotinoids. As the use of these pesticides has gone up, bee and Monarch butterfly populations have plummeted.

After publicly discussing his findings, Lundgren claims that “USDA managers blocked publication of his research, barred him from talking to the media, and disrupted operations at the laboratory he oversaw.”

The Washington Post recently published an article that details Lundgren’s complaints and the retaliation waged against him.²

According to Agri-Pulse,³ the Agriculture Department’s inspector general, Phyllis Fong, has now received so many complaints about harassment and censorship, she’s opening a broad investigation to assess “whether there is a systemic problem in the department.”

Charges of Censorship Mount Against USDA

Food and Water Watch⁴ recently followed up on this issue, noting that “when independent, government scientists produce research that threatens corporate agribusinesses, the USDA — according to at least 10 government scientists — censors the results, waters down the findings and punishes the researchers.”

Jonathan Lundgren is one of these 10 scientists. The other 9 have all chosen to remain anonymous for fear of even more reprisals.

Lundgren’s research at the USDA shows that neonicotinoids are instrumental in the decline of bee and Monarch butterfly populations. But his work, and his criticism against factory farming, goes even deeper than that.

He has become convinced and has spoken out about the fact that toxic insecticides like neonics are not some sort of necessary evil. We don’t actually need these types of chemicals at all in agriculture.

As he notes in the video above, organic or regenerative farming actually produces higher yields and requires less land. This, I believe, even more so than his critique of neonics, poses a major threat to corporate agribusinesses.

It does not, however, detract from the USDA’s mission, which is why the agency’s mistreatment of scientists like Lundgren is so revealing.

Whistleblower Sets Up Nonprofit Science Lab and Sustainable Farm

Fortunately, Lundgren has become very outspoken about his whistleblower suit. So much so, the Shafeek Nader Trust presented him with a civic courage award last November, for taking an open stand against the USDA.

Moving forward, he’s also setting up two new businesses: Blue Dasher Farm, which he intends to be a model for large-scale sustainable farming using crop diversity and other regenerative methods, and Ecdysis, a nonprofit science lab for independent research.

According to Lundgren:⁵ “I don’t think science can be done, at least on this subject, in any of the conventional ways. I think we need truly independent scientists — not funded by government or industry.”

USDA Policy Encourages Suppression of Unpopular Science

This charge was made by Jeff Ruch, Executive Director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), who on March 26, 2015 filed a Petition For Rulemaking with the Secretary of Agriculture.⁶ (PEER is also the alliance representing Lundgren’s whistleblower case.) In it, he notes that:

“The stated purpose of USDA’s scientific integrity policy is to ensure ‘the highest level of integrity in all aspects of the executive branch’s involvement with scientific and technological processes and analyses.’

However, the Policy fails to clearly prohibit political suppression and interference. While the Policy defines political suppression and interference, it does not include these acts in its definition of misconduct.

The USDA, by its own admission, has yet to develop procedures for handling scientific integrity complaints. To compound the problem, an overly broad provision within the Policy actively encourages USDA to suppress scientific work for political reasons.

The provision states that scientists “should refrain from making statements that could be construed as being judgments of or recommendations on USDA or any other federal government policy, either intentionally or inadvertently.”

USDA management routinely relies up this vague but expansively worded provision a pretext for suppressing technical work solely because the scientific conclusions expressed draw the ire of USDA corporate stakeholders.”

The Case of USDA Scientist Jeffery Pettis

The case of Jeffery Pettis adds even more weight to the notion that there’s a definitive agenda at work within the USDA to officially downplay any risks associated with neonicotinoids.

Pettis, who like Lundgren is an entymologist, headed up the USDA’s bee laboratory in Beltsville for 9 years. His career was suddenly derailed after he presented testimony about neonics before the House Agriculture Committee in the spring of 2014. As reported by The Washington Post:⁷

“Pettis had developed what he describes as a ‘significant’ line of research showing that neonics compromise bee immunity.

But in his opening remarks before Congress, he focused on the threat posed by the varroa mite, often put forward by chemical company representatives as the main culprit behind bee deaths.

Only under questioning by subcommittee Chairman Austin Scott (R-Ga.) did Pettis shift. Even if varroa were eliminated tomorrow, he told Scott, ‘we’d still have a problem.’ Neonics raise pesticide concerns for bees ‘to a new level,’ he said. About two months later, Pettis was demoted, losing all management responsibilities for the Beltsville lab ….

Pettis said, the USDA’s congressional liaison told him that the Agriculture Committee wanted him to restrict his testimony to the varroa mite. ‘In my naivete,’ he said, ‘I thought there were going to be other people addressing different parts of the pie. I felt used by the whole process, used by Congress.’

The hearing was ‘heavily weighted toward industry,’ he said, ‘and they tried to use me as a scientist, as a way of saying, ‘See, it’s the varroa mite,’ when that’s not how I see it.’…He said he walked up to Scott afterward, to make small talk, and the congressman ‘said something about how I hadn’t ‘followed the script.'”

Is USDA Shielding Corporations Like Monsanto?

While you would think that the USDA exists to protect you against the vagaries of industry, this is not the case. The chemical and agricultural industries spend millions of dollars to lobby for regulations that are favorable to them, and there’s a constantly revolving door between the agency and private corporations.

For example, USDA Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack is widely regarded as a shill for Monsanto, and he’s always been a strong supporter of genetically engineered (GE) crops, regardless of the scientific evidence against it.

The undemocratic and highly unpopular 2005 seed pre-emption bill was also Vilsack’s brainchild. The law stripped local government’s right to regulated GE seed, including where GE can be grown. Overall, Vilsack’s record is one of aiding and abetting concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) or factory farms and promoting both genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and animal cloning.

Roger Beachy is another example. Between 2009 and 2011, he was the head of National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), the USDA’s main research arm, and he too is a proponent of GMOs, and has ties to Monsanto. As reported in a previous Grist article:⁸

“In his short stint at USDA, Beachy never hid his enthusiasm for ag biotechnology — or his disdain for organic ag. When I … asked him about funding for organic research, he came up with a novel slander against synthetics-free ag: ‘I’m concerned about the safety of organic food … I’m concerned about the issue of microbial contamination with organic.'”

To get an idea of just how broad and deep Monsanto’s reach is, take a look at the following chart. Over the years, this biotech giant has successfully infiltrated an ever increasing number of high-level federal regulatory positions in the U.S. government; many of which are positions meant to protect your food safety, including a number of top positions within the USDA.

Top USDA Official Goes to Work for DuPont

The most recent person to walk their way through the revolving door between government and industry is Krysta Harden, who spent over 6 years at the USDA — first as chief of staff to Secretary Tom Vilsack, and then deputy secretary. She’s been hired by chemical giant DuPont to head up its “public policy and government affairs strategies” department. You would think this activity would be illegal and prohibited but it is actually encouraged.

The New York Times recently published an in-depth exposé⁹ on the legal battle fought against DuPont for the past 15 years over PFOA contamination and its toxic effects. The Intercept also published a three-part exposé¹⁰ titled “The Teflon Toxin: Dupont and the Chemistry of Deception” last year, detailing DuPont’s history of covering up the facts.

Earlier this month, they came out with a fourth part in the series,¹¹ covering DuPont’s contamination of the Cape Fear River with “a new generation of replacement compounds” that likely have “the same chemical performance properties as the older generation of PFCs.”

DuPont is now working on a merger with Dow, and once the merger is completed, that chemical-seed company will be even larger than Monsanto. Considering DuPont’s history of covering up the toxic effects of their products, this gigantic entity is going to Monsanto in terms of being a serious threat, and the most perniciously evil company on the planet.

Federal Agencies Aid and Abet Corporate Stronghold

to read the remainder of he article, go here: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/03/22/usda-corporate-lobbyist-group.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20160322Z1&et_cid=DM100981&et_rid=1410751387

List: GMO Free Companies

Posted on July 25, 2015 by marcia

Blacklisted: GMO Supporting Food Companies to Avoid Hot

A genetically modified rose by any other name may smell sweet, but it could still have frankenthorns that might independently detach themselves and lop off your finger while you’re smelling it. That’s not unlike a trip to the grocery store these days. There are a lot of ugly surprises in pretty, charmingly-named packages.

It seems like no matter how hard you try to avoid them, GMOs and toxic foods creep into your life.

Take for example, the earthily-packaged “natural” foods that are showcased in your grocery store aisles. They cost twice as much, have obscure brand names, and tout their health benefits and natural sources. You can almost smell the freshly tilled soil when you pick up the box.

Unfortunately, this is nothing more than corporate sleight-of-hand.

Many of the products that seem so good are actually just subsidiaries of the companies that were most complicit in blocking GMO labeling, aided and abetted by everyone’s favorite purveyor of death, Monsanto. (Monsanto, incidentally, donated $7,100,500.00 to the fight against the labeling of GMO-containing products.) Don’t forget that Monsanto is now above the law due to the Monsanto Protection Act, a traitorous rider that Senator Roy Blunt managed to attach to a bill that was subsequently signed into law by President Obama. (you know, that guy in the White House, who made the labeling of GMOs one of his 2007 campaign promises?)

I wish I could make a comprehensive list, but there are more stealthily labeled toxins on the shelves every single day. It all boils down to a these big companies that own nearly all of the foods sold in the United States. Some of the quietly owned subsidiaries may surprise you. Included is the amount that the company (and its subsidiaries) donated to defeat California Proposition 37 which would have required GMO labeling.

Not every item on this list contains genetically modified ingredients. The list is based on the duplicitous marketing of the companies. More consumers are trying to make healthy choices at the grocery stores, but it’s difficult when companies push their toxic wares and dress them up as health food. Young people in particular fall victim to these schemes. You have to give a kid credit for purchasing something called “Vitamin Water” over a soda pop, and it’s infuriating that the kid, trying to make a good choice, has been tricked into the purchase by deceitful advertising and marketing.

Some of the products listed, may in fact be exactly what they are portrayed to be, but I choose not to financially support the corporations behind them.

Protect your health and help starve the beast by avoiding products distributed by these companies and their subsidiaries:

Campbell’s – $250,000.00

Healthy Request
Wolfgang Puck Soups
Pace Foods
Pepperidge Farms
V-8

Cargill, Inc – $202,229.36

Truvia Natural Sweetener
Shady Brooks Farms
Diamond Crystal Salt
Liza
Nature Fresh
Peter’s Chocolate
Wilbur Chocolate
Honeysuckle White
Rumba Meats
Good Nature

Coca Cola – $1,164,400.00

Vitamin Water
Smart Water
Dasani
Nestea
Minute Maid
Honest Tea
Odwalla
Vitaminenergy

Con-Agra – $1,076,700.00

Orville Redenbacher’s Organic
Hunt’s Organic
Lightlife
Alexia
Healthy Choice
Hebrew National

Dean Foods – $253,950.00

Horizon
Silk
White Wave

General Mills – $908,200.00

Nature Valley
Fiber One
Cheerios
Cascadian Farm
Muir Glen
Lärabar
Gold Medal Organic
Food Should Taste Good

Heinz- $500,000.00

ABC
Bagel Bites
Complan
Daddies
Delimex
Farex
Greenseas
HP Sauce
Heinz
Lea & Perrins
Ore-Ida
Smart Ones
Tater Tots
TGI Friday’s
Wattie’s
Weight Watchers
Wylers

Hain-Celestial

UPDATED TO ADD: Heinz has divested itself of Hain-Celestial stock over the past couple of years. Two sources report that the primary investors for Hain-Celestial are companies of extremely dubious consideration for our health: Phillip Morris, Monsanto, Citigroup, Exxon-Mobil, Wal-Mart and Lockheed Martin. (Farmwars and Home for Health)

Earth’s Best
Spectrum Organics
Garden of Eatin’
Casbah
Rice Dream
Soy Dream
WestSoy
TofuTown
MaraNatha
Mountain Sun
Walnut Acres
Fruiti di Bosco
Health Valley
Bearitos
Bread Shop
Celestial Seasonings

Kellogg’s – $632,500.00

Kashi
Muslix
Nutrigrain

Bear Naked
Morningstar Farms
Gardenburger

Kraft – $551,148.25

Snapple
ReaLemon
Triscuit
SnackWell’s
South Beach
Boca
Back to Nature
Nabisco

Nestle – $1,169,400.00

Pure Life
Pelligrino
Perrier
Poland Spring
Gerber

California Pizza Kitchen
Tribe Mediterranean
Sweet Leaf Tea

PepsiCo $2,249,661.61

Miss Vickie’s
Sun Chips
Aquafina
SoBe
Harvest Crunch
Dole
Ocean Spray

Tropicana
Miranda
Tazo
Quaker
Naked Juice
Mother’s

Unilever – $467,000 (source)

Salada
Knorr
Ben & Jerry’s Ben & Jerry’s Go GMO Free

A little bit of good news…

It isn’t all bad news. There are a few companies you can still count on – keep in mind that corporate mergers take place every day. When businesses change hands, there is no obligation to notify the public. One such cautionary tale took place with the company Dean’s, which acquired Horizon Foods. They quietly phased out the use of organic products without making any changes to the label and used non-organic milk produced under factory farm conditions. As well, they dropped the quality of their organic soy and began purchasing cheaper harvests from Asia. Meanwhile, unwitting retailers had no idea that the company had ceased producing the items organically, and continued to promote the products as they had previous to the acquisition.

#1 Reason for a Big Belly

3 Death Foods to Avoid. Are These Foods Killing You From The Inside?

Divorced For Being “Old!” See Her Revenge Makeover.

What you can do

Of course, the best ways to avoid GMOs and toxic additives are to avoid packaged foods altogether.

from: http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/11357-blacklisted-12-food-companies-to-avoid.html?c=tca

Argentina Lawsuit Challenges Monsanto

Posted on June 27, 2015 by marcia

Federal Judge in Argentina Accepts Class Action Lawsuit Against Monsanto

Will Monsanto be able to bully itself to victory?

by Christina Sarich
Posted on June 27, 2015

While Monsanto tries to dodge a class action lawsuit in California by requesting that it be dismissed by the court, a federal judge in Argentina has accepted a class action lawsuit that would force GMO labeling and provisionally suspend the cultivation of genetically modified crops.

The lawsuit targets Monsanto for causing a seed monopoly through mono-cultivation. It argues for a complete ban on GMOs and on:

“. . .the application of pesticides used for farming until their safety for the environment, ecosystems, biodiversity, the health of living beings, the cultural heritage of the Argentine people, and the sustainability of the production model is scientifically proven.”

Residents of the country of Argentina believe that the commercialization of seed through companies like Monsanto should be forbidden. The lawsuit is titled:

“Gimenez Alicia Fanny and others against the national government, Monsanto and others, over environmental damage.”

Monsanto is not the only party listed as a defendant. Also listed are:

The Argentine national government

The Federal Council for the Environment

A group of companies, including Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont, Novartis, Nidera, Dow AgroSciences, Pioneer, Agrevo, Ciba Geigy, Argenbio, and Bayer Sciences

Monsanto is currently trying to remove their class action suit being filed by T. Matthew Phillips to federal court in order to “prohibit inconsistencies in ruling,” but they also want to have the class action suit dismissed.

Previously, more than 30,000 doctors and health professionals in Argentina asked that glyphosate be banned. The doctors are part of FESPROSA, Argentina’s Union of medical professionals.

FESPROSA explained:

“In our country glyphosate is applied on more than 28 million hectares. Each year, the soil is sprayed with more than 320 million litres, which means that 13 million people are at risk of being affected, according to the Physicians Network of Sprayed Peoples (RMPF). Soy is not the only crop addicted to glyphosate: the herbicide is also used for transgenic maize and other crops. Where glyphosate falls, only GMOs can grow. Everything else dies.”

The doctors also talk about vindicating one of their own:

“Our trade union, the Federation of Health Professionals of Argentina (FESPROSA), which represents more than 30,000 doctors and health professionals in our country, includes the Social Health Collective of Andrés Carrasco. Andrés Carrasco was a researcher at [Argentine government research institute] CONICET, who died a year ago, and showed the damage caused by glyphosate to embryos. For disseminating his research, he was attacked by the industry and the authorities at CONICET. Today, WHO vindicates him.”

If the federal judge who reviews this case prior to the end of the month has any moral fiber, he will stand against Monsanto for a fair trial as Argentina has.