2015 Monsanto Shareholder Resolution

Unfortunately, the shareholder resolution was withdrawn in October 2014 and will not be voted on at the 2015 Annual Shareholder Meeting. More details of the demise of the shareholder resolution can be viewed here [PDF].

On August 11, 2014, the following shareholder resolution was submitted to the Monsanto Company:

WHEREAS:
Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide and its key active ingredient, glyphosate, have been linked to various health problems, including chronic kidney disease, https://truth-out.org/news/item/24876-monsantos-herbicide-linked-to-fatal-kidney-disease-epidemic-will-ckdu-topple-monsanto autism, https://www.autismone.org/content/autism-explained-synergistic-poisoning-aluminum-and-glyphosate-stephanie-seneff birth defects, https://earthopensource.org/index.php/reports/roundup-and-birth-defects-is-the-public-being-kept-in-the-dark mammary tumors and pre-mature death, https://www.enveurope.com/content/26/1/14 breast cancer, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23756170 blood cancer, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24762670 ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241196/ Parkinson’s, and https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892036212000438 celiac disease and gluten intolerance. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24678255

Roundup has never been tested or assessed for long-term safety for regulatory purposes. However, independent studies show it is highly toxic to animals and humans. Glyphosate alone is toxic, and some of the added ingredients (adjuvants) in Roundup are, on their own, toxic. In addition, some of these adjuvants increase the toxicity of glyphosate by enabling it to penetrate plant and animal cells more easily. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1257596/

Roundup is toxic to beneficial gut bacteria but non-toxic to pathogenic bacteria. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23224412

Roundup depletes the body of macro and micronutrients. https://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/48190923/glyphosate-reduces-shoot-concentrations-mineral-nutrients-glyphosate-resistant-soybeans

Roundup interferes with CYP enzymes, disrupts the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids by gut bacteria, and impairs serum sulfate transport. https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416 The consequences include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.

People exposed to the spraying of Roundup suffer https://www.reduas.fcm.unc.edu.ar/report-from-the-first-national-meeting-of-physicians-in-the-crop-sprayed-towns/ increased incidence of infertility, birth defects, miscarriages, cancers, genetic damage (which can lead to cancer and birth defects), toxic liver disease, neurological developmental problems, kidney failure, respiratory problems, and allergies.

In 2014 in Brazil, the Federal Public Prosecutor https://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15365 requested the Justice Department suspend the use of glyphosate herbicides, and ordered the National Health Surveillance Agency to re-evaluate the toxicity of glyphosate.

Herbicide-tolerant Roundup Ready crops increased herbicide use in the U.S. by an estimated 527 million pounds between 1996 and 2011. https://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/24

Roundup is commonly found in streams, rain and air in agricultural areas of the US. https://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2909#.U9vktKi1Z0M

Roundup has been found in the blood, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21338670 urine, https://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/press_releases/foee_media_briefing_glyphosate.pdf and breast milk https://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/27/us-monsanto-roundup-epa-idUSKBN0E72IH20140527 of city dwellers.

Parents https://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_30153.cfm and pediatricians https://gmoinside.org/downsides-to-gmo-infant-formula-we-asked-a-pediatrician/ who have monitored children’s exposure to Roundup, have found that health improves when the herbicide is removed from their systems through an organic diet.

RESOLVED:
Shareholders request that the Board establish an independent panel, controlling for conflict of interest, to publish by July 2015, at reasonable cost and excluding proprietary information, a report analyzing the extent to which Monsanto’s Roundup/glyphosate may cause the above health problems, and describing public policy initiatives, and Monsanto policies and activities, to phase out or restrict uses of Roundup/glyphosate that increase human exposure.

Supporting Statement: Proponents believe the report should include all evidence linking Roundup, glyphosate, or Roundup’s inert ingredients or adjuvants, to the above health problems.

— Read the 2014 Shareholder Resolution

During the Cold War 2,4-D was an Agent of Biological Warfare

Currently, the USDA is reviewing GMO crops designed to withstand 2,4-D and Dicamba. However, 50 years ago 2,4-D, otherwise known as 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid, was considered a agent of biological warfare that could kill farmers crops. Agent Orange, used by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971, caused thousands of birth defects. Agent Orange is half 2,4-D and half 2,4,5-T, which means these GMO crops are very toxic to humans and the environment. Worse, if approved, these toxic GMOs wouldn’t be required to be labeled.

“Before disaster strikes.. What the Farmer Should Know About Biological Warfare”
Federal Civil Defense Administration Handbook, 1955

POSSIBLE METHODS OF ATTACK

The methods of attack which seem more likely are:
1. Destructive dusts from airplanes carrying chemical plant growth inhibitors, such as 2,4-D or 2,4,5-T.
2. Large scale aerial dissemination of disease-producing spores.
3. Secret introduction of foreign plant diseases or insects new to this country.

Washington Post: Probe of 3 FDA Officials Sought

Probe of 3 FDA Officials Sought

Industry Ties Before Approval of Bovine Growth Hormone Are at Issue

By John Schwartz, Washington Post Staff Writer, April 19, 1994

Three members of Congress have called for a federal investigation into possible conflicts of interest involving three officials of the Food and Drug Administration, which approved a controversial genetically engineered Monsanto Corp. drug last year. All three agency officials had some ties to Monsanto before coming to the FDA, but an agency spokesman denied there was any misconduct.

In a letter Friday to the General Accounting Office, Reps. George E. Brown Jr. (D-Calf.), David R. Obey (D-Wis.) and Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) asked the watchdog agency to conduct a 30-day review of the FDA’s approval of recombinant bovine somatotropin (bST), a substance that increases milk yields in cows.

“A troubling pattern of unanswered questions is emerging that suggests an altogether too cozy relationship between some FDA officials central to this food safety decision and their close dealings with the Monsanto Company,” Sanders said in a statement.

The letter- which cites an anonymous March 16 complaint ostensibly written by members of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)- asks the GAO to probe the roles of three “key” FDA officials in the approval of the Monsanto drug.

The highest ranking is Michael Taylor, deputy commissioner for policy, a past FDA employee who rejoined the agency in 1991 from the Washington law firm King and Spalding, which represents Monsanto. Also named was Margaret A. Miller, deputy director of the agency’s office of new animal drugs. The letter characterized her as “a former Monsanto company employee” who wrote the FDA’s opinion on why milk from bST-treated cows should not require special labeling.

A third staff member, Susan Sechen, was described as a data reviewer at the FDA who had worked as a graduate student for a Cornell University professor who conducted Monsanto-sponsored research on bST.

Anti-biotechnology activist Jeremy Rifkin first made the charges about Taylor in February, when he petitioned the FDA to rescind the approval of bST and investigate the three staff members’ role in the agency’s policy.

On March 15, FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler sent Rifkin a four-page letter stating that “none of the activities of Mr. Taylor cited in your petition were in violation of any applicable law or regulation, or were otherwise inappropriate … I believe that Mr. Taylor’s behavior adhered to all applicable ethical standards.”

Kessler said that Taylor had not been “intimately” involved in Monsanto’s efforts to obtain approval, as Rifkin charged, and that he was involved in the FDA’s bST policy only in the final stages of review.

Kessler attached a nine-page memo by FDA ethics official Jack M. Kress supporting that position. Upon arrival at the FDA in the summer of 1991, Taylor recused himself for one year from taking part in any agency action dealing directly with Monsanto or any other King and Spalding clients.

Some longtime agency critics found the charges against Taylor misplaced. Sidney Wolfe, a physician who heads the Public Citizen Health Research Group here has filed complaints with the FDA about revolving door ethics issues concerning other officials. But he said yesterday that “It’s barking up a silly kind of tree to be going against Mike Taylor.”

Wolfe said that “as far as we’re concerned, he’s done a perfectly good job.” Wolfe compared Rifkin’s charges to saying that anyone who worked for a drug company and began working for the FDA should not be allowed to say anything about drugs in general- a stance that Wolfe characterized as “preposterous.”

As for the two other FDA employees named in the House members’ letter, agency spokesman Jim O’Hara said there was no impropriety. “As we have learned of these allegations, we have looked at them. The appropriate safeguards against conflict of interest have been taken,” O’Hara said.

Miller was no involved in the decision to approve bST, and Sechen’s involvement with the bST review was approved at the outset by the FDA’s ethics and program integrity division, which “determined that there was no a conflict of interest based on the information they were provided,” O’Hara said.

Although reluctant to comment in the face of a possible investigation, Taylor said yesterday that “I would welcome any scrutiny of my actions.”

Much of the material used in the lawmakers’ letter, including the anonymous CVM letter alleging Miller’s conflict of interest, came from Rifkin, a long-standing opponent of bST. Bill Goold, a spokesman for Sanders, said the search of scientific literature relied upon by Sander’s staff in drafting the letter came from Rifkin’s organization.

Rifkin has fought against the approval of bST for more than seven years as a part of an all-fronts assault against biotechnology. He called his ethical charges “a significant scandal” that he said showed moral weakness at the top of the organization. “We want Kessler’s resignation,” Rifkin said yesterday. He said that the nine-page ethics memo by FDA’s Kress was “people in government trying to protect their own.”

Sanders and Obey have previously taken stands against the approval of bST and its use without consumer labels that identify the milk as coming from cows treated with the drug.

But many Capitol Hill staff members were surprised to see Brown- who chairs the Science, Space, and Technology Committee- as a signer of the letter.

Sources familiar with the process said key committee staff members felt they had been end-run by activists. One congressional aide said staff members who normally would be informed of such an action were unaware that Brown had signed the letter.

“George’s issue is with the process of approval. He wants to make sure people are squeaky-clean,” the aide said. Brown did not see the FDA response to the Rifkin petition before signing the Sanders letter, an aide said. Obey said yesterday that he had seen the FDA response and “I’m frankly not impressed.”

Some acquaintances of Taylor were incredulous that the official would be the object of ethical scrutiny. “There’s no more ethical person in this town than Mike Taylor,” said Wayne Pines, a former FDA official who now consults with companies on FDA matters. “Mike would never get involved in a situation in which there’s a conflict- that’s such a no-brainer.”

Source: Washington Post, April 19, 1994

Big Island Chronicle: Island Dairy Uses GMO Corn

Island Dairy Uses GMO Corn

By Alan D. McNarie, October 1, 2012 – The Big Island Chronicle

There’s a new crop growing in O‘okala and Pepe‘ekeo on the North Hilo/Hamakua coast—well, a new crop for the Big Island, anyway. Big Island Dairy, formerly Island Dairy, has planted field corn in O‘okala and Pepe‘eke‘o to help feed its cows. The corn will be fed as ensilage—“silage” as most farmers call it: green stalks that are cut, chopped and stored in a low-oxygen environment so that they ferment in a process similar to the making of sauerkraut. The silage is one solution to a problem that plagues all livestock farmers in Hawai‘i: the high cost of imported feed. Since the islands grow little grain, farmers are forced to rely on Matson and Young Brothers to bring in feed from outside, often at ruinous prices. The home-grown silage could be a major aid in the survival of one of the state’s only two remaining dairies.

But the new crop has still become a matter of concern for some local residents and farmers, because of one fact: Big Island Dairy is growing genetically modified corn.

The corn was already in the ground when the dairy was recently purchased by Steve Whitesides, who also runs Whitesides Dairy in Rupert, Idaho. But the reason that the GM varieties were planted, Whitesides says, is simple: “The way crops grow there, if you don’t have something planted that can control the weeds, they can overtake it.”

Whitesides didn’t specify what varieties of corn were being grown, but given that weed control is the object, the corn is probably one or more of Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” varieties. Monsanto has long touted both the GM corn and the herbicide Roundup, which is also makes, as safe. But in recent years, some studies have begun to challenge that assumption. And the company has drawn fire for its heavy-handed tactics in dealing with farmers—it’s sued farmers, for instance, for patent infringement when pollen from GM crops drifted into non-GM farmer’s fields. The company has also been accused of tampering with science and with the agencies that regulate it.

GM crops have generated negative publicity in the islands, as well. Pioneer Hi-Bred, for instance, is currently battling lawsuits filed by two groups of plaintiffs—one suit represents over 200 people—who claim that the company has not controlled spray drift and pesticide-contaminated dust from its GM test crop sites on Kauai. Some farmers and residents in Puna are still smarting from the state’s oft-bungled handling of GM papayas, originally developed by Cornell and UH-Manoa to fight papaya ringspot virus; small farmers claimed that the state’s “quarantine zones” set up to create a “sea of GM papayas,” isolating and protecting a few fields of non-GMO papaya for the Japanese market, discriminated against small farmers in favor of a few large export companies; organic farmers complained that their papayas have been contaminated that pollen drift from GM fields, and the GM papayas, though resistant to ringspot, have proved especially vulnerable to a fungal disease, forcing some farmers to periodically abandon their fields anyway. Native Hawaiians have taken offense at attempts to create GM versions of their beloved kalo, and Kona Coffee farmers have resisted attempts to introduce GM coffee.

That resentment boiled to a head in Honoka‘a on September 17, when a group called GMO-Free Hawai‘i sponsored a rally and reggae concert at the Honoka‘a People’s theater. The main target was Monsanto—the event was part of a world-wide “Occupy Monsanto Day”—but Big Island Dairy got some attention, too. Councilman Dominic Yagong introduced Scott Enright, the state Agriculture Department official who said he’d been “Charged by the Governor to assist Big Island Dairy.”

“He [Whitesides] is looking for varieties that will do well here,” said Enright. “He’s going to be doing his best to grow corn conventionally.”

But that clearly wasn’t enough assurance for the crowd. GMO-Free Hawai‘i spokesperson Eden Peart noted that the Hamakua Agricultural Plan “prohibits” GM crops in the district (Actually, it doesn’t prohibit them outright, but it does call for a moratorium on those crops until their possible impacts could be better assessed.)

“If there’s still GMO grown here, blowing pollen in the wind, that is a concern for us,” she said, and announced that protestors would be demonstrating along the Belt Road beside one of the dairy’s O’okala fields on Friday, September 21.

Yagong, in whose district the corn is growing, told Big Island Chronicle he shared some of the community’s concerns about GMOs with Whitesides.

Yagong had already approached Whitesides about the issue. In addition to the kalo and coffee controversies, he told the Chronicle, he had “Shared that in the leasing of [county owned] Hamakua lands, one of the conditions for leasing was no planting of GMO crops on county lands.” Yagong noted that the county’s farm lands and Island Dairy’s O‘okala corn fields were “practically neighbors.” Yagong said Whitesides would “strongly consider the community’s recommendations” but “fell short of saying that they wouldn’t grow GMO corn.”

Whitesides’ response to the Chronicle was similar. He made no commitment to replace the GMO corn with conventional varieties. But he did say his company planned to experiment with conventional varieties to “see if they could be grown at a cost that would still keep the dairy’s output competitive with mainland milk. “

He noted that 80 t0 90 percent of all corn grown in the U.S., now, was genetically modified. Even if his company did continue to grow GM corn, he said, “The product that’s coming over here from the mainland is GMO, so what’s the difference?”

How much of a difference genetically modified corn makes is very much a matter of debate. Dr. James Brubaker, the University of Hawaii at Manoa’s acknowledged authority on corn, maintains that the GM corn is perfectly safe; that the only difference between it an conventional corn was “A little piece of DNA which is very benign and only affects weeds.” He compared GMO opponents to the Creationist movement. “This is the scientific ignorance that we do face in the state of Hawai‘i,” he told BIC. “We don’t come equipped with a realistic appraisal of the achievements of science, so we’re frightened of anything scientific.” He noted that around a thousand scientific papers a year are devoted to GMOs, and that nearly a billion acres of GM corn had been raised: “We know that these are incredibly safe.”

The problem is that not all of science is in agreement with Brubaker’s assessment—and that scientific papers critical of GMOs find an instant and persistent world-wide audience. The Web is awash with stories and blogs citing those articles, but often with no direct documentation or links, and often at Web sites that make no pretense of being unbiased—sites with names like treehugger.com and naturalnews.com. A site called responsibletechnology.org,, for instance, which proclaims itself “the most comprehensive source of GMO health risk information on the Web,” ran an article entitled “65 Health Risks from GMO food,” with factoids such as “More than 20 farmers in North America report that pigs fed GM corn varieties had low conception rates, false pregnancies or gave birth to bags of water.” But the story gives no links or sources for any of its allegations.

Many of those factoids flying around the Web, however, are based on actual scientific articles that do seem to raise some basis for concern. In 2009, for instance, the International Journal of Biological Sciences published an article entitled “A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health “ by Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, François Roullier, Dominique Cellier, Gilles-Eric Séralinis, four well-credentialed scientists from French universities. The study fed three varieties of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, including one of the Roundup Ready varieties and two containing genes from a bacteria, bacillus thuringiensis (BT), that is used as a natural insecticide. The French scientists found that rats fed the corn suffered from various symptoms, including higher liver and kidney toxicity levels and enlarged spleens and hearts.

“Our data strongly suggests that these GM maize varieties induce a state of hepatorenal toxicity,” concluded the article, which called for longer term studies of the three varieties.

But Brubaker said that there were already studies out refuting the French study. “[With] almost any report of that sort, you can be assured there will be immediately responding research studies to validate or invalidate it,” he noted.

There have also been scientific studies that questioned the safety of Roundup itself—and scientists who’ve gone public about their concerns. One of them is Dr. Robert Kremer of the University of Missouri—Monsanto’s home state—who has done extensive studies of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, since 1997. Glyphosate doesn’t kill weeds directly; it inhibits their ability to absorb certain nutrients, making them fatally susceptible to naturally occurring bacteria and fungi. As it turns out, Kremer discovered, glyphosate also makes crops more susceptible to diseases such as fusarium and to the toxins they produce, which can also affect animals and humans who consume those crops. And it can be toxic to some beneficial bacteria, including the ones that live in the roots of soybeans and other legumes and “fix” nitrogen in the soil—a vital function for maintaining soil fertility. Glyphosate, Kremer concluded, “is altering the whole soil biology.”

Kremer is not alone. In a 2009 article in the European Journal of Agronomy, Don Huber, emeritus professor of plant pathology at Purdue University, and Purdue botanist G. S. Johal, warned that widespread glyphosate use could “significantly increase the severity of various plant diseases, impair plant defense to pathogens and diseases, and immobilize soil and plant nutrients rendering them unavailable for plant use.” Huber has also approached the USDA with concerns about a previously unknown microorganism that has appeared in GM-based animal feeds and appears to be linked to an epidemic of livestock infertility and miscarriages.

An interviewer at the Web site nongmoreport.com asked Kremer if glyphosate was environmentally benign.

“Absolutely not,” he replied. “Glyphosate is the single most important agronomic factor predisposing some plants to both disease and toxins. These toxins can produce a serious impact on the health of animals and humans…. Toxins produced can infect the roots and head of the plant and be transferred to the rest of the plant. The toxin levels in straw can be high enough to make cattle and pigs infertile.”

Huber was among the many scientists, including agronomists, plant pathologists, veterinarians, nutritionists, pediatricians and medical doctors, featured in the documentary “Genetic Roulette,” which screened at the Honoka‘a rally before the musicians came on. Those researchers raised a host of apparent human and animal health problems, from infertility to cancer. The scientists also brought up problems in humans exposed to the GM crops/and or Roundup.

Some of the scientists also talked about pressure exerted on them, up to and including firing, by Monsanto, public officials and their peers. One Oregon researcher, for instance, talked about releasing a study critical of GMOs, then getting a call from the former president of her university, questioning whether she “belonged” at the school.

Caught in the crossfire of these scientific barrages and counter-barrages are companies like Big Island Dairy, who just want to give their corn a fighting chance against weeds such as elephant grass, which can quickly grow much higher than the corn.

“The weeds that we have are entirely different for the middle of IA, and they grow much more aggressively,” notes Brubaker, who also points out that some of those weeds themselves contain toxins that can harm cattle.

There are, in fact, non-GM varieties of corn bred specifically for Hawaii—Brubaker himself developed some of them—and it is possible to raise non-GM corn on the North Hilo/Hamakua Coast. Brubaker notes that Loeffler Farms, for instance, grows one of his conventional sweet corn varieties on that coast. But according to Brubaker, even the conventional corn may require chemical assistance from pesticides such as Atrazine, which have their own environmental consequences; they may get into groundwater if improperly applied, so they must be applied by a state-certified specialist—an additional cost for the farmer.

How the GM corn could affect those existing sweet corn crops is another issue. Corn for silage is cut green, but after the corn has tasseled—which means that pollen from it could get to other plants.

“That corn can cross with people’s sweet corn, and do people want those genes in their corn? Probably not,” local natural farming advocate Nancy Redfeather told BIC. She noted that bees carrying pollen could travel up to seven miles a day.

But aside from the dairy, GM corn is already on Hawai‘i Island, in thousands of food products imported daily. If you drink non-organic milk, whether it’s from the mainland or it’s from local cows fed with imported feed, you’re probably drinking milk from cows that have eaten GMOs. The only possible change would be if Island Dairy managed to grow conventional corn.

That’s the outcome Yagong hopes for. He notes that the number of dairies in the state has now shrunk from 24 to two, and he thinks it’s important to support the two that remain.

“I think that would make a lot of people very, very happy and may even distinguish his product further if they knew that the milk was GMO free and fed from conventional corn,” he says.

Source: Big Island Chronicle

INCIDENT REPORT: Photos from the Ithaca, New York Decontamination Event

Saying NO to GMOs!

With over 75 actions worldwide this week to stand up against Monsanto and demand the right to know what is in our food, we knew we had to be a part with the Eco Womb family. With an Occupy Monsanto event scheduled in Ithaca, NY, where we just happened to be headed to meet up with friends, and with the help of the Genetic Crimes Unit team, we connected with Joanne, a local hydro-fracking activist. Together, with a handful of others who joined to stand with us throughout the day, we turned the Ithaca Commons into our educational ground from 12noon-5pm, connecting with hundreds on the importance of learning what is really in our foods, the dangers of GMOs, and why the government is not sharing this information. We handed out educational flyers from the Non-GMO Project to inform people on what a GMO is and what the detrimental effects are on farmers, our soil, and our health. We sang music to the tune of “All we want’s a simple label, for the food that’s on our table” carrying on the energy of the Right2Know March. And, we aired The World According to Monsanto all day so that passer-bys could get a glance at the evils behind Monsanto, and learn the history and ties between Monsanto and the government.

Monsanto is corrupt, and has built its fortunes as a chemical company. It claims to be a seed company, “a sustainable agriculture company” helping farmers by “improving agriculture, improving lives” – yeah right! Monsanto developed Agent Orange, PCB’s, RoundUp pesticides, and has continuously distributed false information on the level of toxicity in their products. They even claimed that dioxin was not cancerous, causing weaker environmental regulations based on falsified evidence! Now, they claim that Genetically Engineered seeds are safe – yeah right, again! We have been eating their foods since 1992 without anyone telling us, warning us, or letting us make the choice to not ingest their poisons.

The health ramifications from GMOs are so huge, and with an increase in autoimmune diseases, allergies, ADD/ADHD, asthma, decreased fertility, and even cancer over the past decade, there is no question in my mind that the two correlate. More toxins in our food, more toxins in our bloodstream, more diseases, as our bodies fight to adapt and try to keep up with all of the foreign elements we are ingesting. There have been studies that link GMOs with birth defects and cancerous tumors, and enough evidence to warrant at least restrictions or labeling laws. I personally think GMOs should be banned and Monsanto should go away! I mean why have they dumped billions of dollars into fighting against labeling with misinformation campaigns if they are so confident in their product? They want you to buy their frankenfoods. They want farmers to be dependent on them year after year. They want us to become sick ingesting their poisons and then have to circle back to the pharmaceuticals for medications to be even more dependent on drugs to prop us up. If they control the food supply, they control the people. Stop buying their products, they don’t control you anymore. If everyone did this, or enough of us did, and we voted with our forks and dollars, there would be change. And the only change that is going to happen is if they feel it in their pockets.

Did you know that Monsanto has a patent on GMO seeds? This means that they can sue farmers whose fields may become contaminated with GMOs through cross-pollination just by being near a GMO farm. GMO seeds also can’t be replanted the next year, they are a dead-end food source. Farmers are becoming dependent on Monsanto year after year to supply seeds, and the corporate giant can even step in and sue farmers for trying to replant. Farmers are supposed to save seeds and replant! That is how we have survived for the past millennium. With 94% of soy, 90% of canola, and 88% of corn grown in the U.S. being genetically engineered, and the government subsidizing farmers to grow these crops, and Monsanto controlling the patents on all of these seeds, it is pretty obvious that they are making huge profits. They don’t want us to understand these connections, or the detrimental effects of GMOs. They don’t care about how sick GMOs make the population. They want this, and they must be stopped.

That is why we marched 313 miles last fall with the Right2Know March to demand GMO labeling, that is why we Shopped for Truth at Trader Joe’s to uncover why they won’t label their brand, that is why our family has committed to shop exclusively Non-GMO, and that is why we are continuing to march and educate on the dangers of GMOs, so that we can reach as many people as we can to deliver this message. We are parents, our children NEED us to speak up. If we don’t, who will? We are truly the change we have been seeking. Our children are depending on us to wake up the world. And, it doesn’t have to mean conflict with the powers that be. Through peaceful non-violent protests, educational opportunities, and continuous connections with conscious souls along the way, we are collectively standing up and speaking out to create change one family at a time.

So, what can you do? Take steps to eliminate GMOs from your diet. Choose one of the top contenders first, like corn, or soy, or canola oil. Check what is in your cabinets and read the ingredients. If it has these foods listed and does not have either a Non-GMO Project Verified or USDA Certified Organic label, or you know exactly what farm it came from and you understand what their practices are, then it most likely has GMO ingredients. You do have the power to affect change. Vote with your fork and your dollar. For every bite you take that is Non-GMO and every food that you buy that is Non-GMO, you are voting for change in the one way that makes a direct impact, it affects the profits of those in control. You can also support Proposition 37, the ballot initiative in California that would require GMO labeling, and candidates that support this initiative. You can continue to learn and understand the issue, help spread the word by sharing this information with your friends and family, and support those businesses, organizations, and educational efforts that are standing up and speaking out on behalf of us all. We CAN collectively make a difference. We finally are.

(more…)

Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s – July 28 & 29, 2012

It’s time to expose Trader Joe’s GMOs!

The fact is no supermarket in America is immune to genetic contamination.  Some grocers & natural food stores work with their customers to prevent this ghastly invasion of our food supply.  Trader Joe’s simply says "Be assured."  

You’ve probably heard that before from Monsanto’s minions in the form of "Trust us," and you’ve probably learned that trust & assurances are earned. According to Trader Joe’s website, we should just blindly be assured that there are no unlabeled GMOs on their shelves:

Trader Joe’s Customer Updates:

Our customers can be assured that all products in Trader Joe’s private label are sourced from non-genetically modified ingredients. Our efforts began in 2001, when we determined that, given a choice, our customers would prefer to eat foods and beverages made without the use of genetically engineered ingredients. Our process has been to identify any product containing ingredients that could potentially be derived from genetically engineered crops and work with our suppliers to replace offending ingredients with acceptable alternatives.

So what assurances do we really have?

According to Fortune’s "Inside the secret world of Trader Joe’s" article from 2010, Trader GMOs private label brands are made by companies who regularly use GMOs in their products. We also know that TJ’s parent company, Aldi, uses GMO ingredients in their low-cost food products throughout America.

Trader Joe’s does not have any sort of standard or system in place, nor does it perform any testing for GMOs.

Unless Trader Joe’s can provide proof that their private label brands are free of Monsanto’s GMOs, the genetic contamination at their stores will be exposed by local Genetic Crimes Units throughout America during the last weekend in July.

Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s will take place on Saturday & Sunday, July 28 & 29, 2012 at Trader Joe’s stores throughout the United States of America.  

If your Genetic Crimes Unit is interested in taking part please email incident@Occupy-Monsanto.com with the Time, Date, & Location and we’ll add it to the listing. This is a great opportunity to recruit members for your Genetic Crimes Unit and inform people in your community about the global week action against Monsanto in September.   Be sure to take photos & video while you shop for the truth.

The methods of exposing Monsanto’s mutilated genetics will vary. Some stores may get the Label It Yourself treatment, other stores will see genetic crime scene tape unfurled in front of the store. Some stores will be enlivened with scenes of street theater and flash mob dance crews.  How to shop for the truth is up to you & your GCU.

Trader Joe’s has hundreds of locations throughout the United States to choose from, but if there isn’t one nearby, consider making a visit to your nearest chain grocery store.

We’re heading to the Trader Joe’s located at 1101 25th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037 and we’re going to be shopping for some truth. We hope you’ll join us.

Confirmed Actions:

Atlanta, GA
Trader Joe’s Midtown
931 Monroe Drive. Atlanta, GA
Saturday, July 28, 2012 from 12:00 noon – 2:00 PM
+ RSVP on Facebook
+ Watch Live

Portland, ME
Trader Joe’s
87 Marginal Way, Portland, ME
Sunday, July 29 from 2pm to 4pm

Prescott, AZ
252 North Lee Boulevard, Prescott, AZ
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 9:30 AM

San Francisco, CA
3 Masonic Ave, San Francisco, CA
Saturday, July 28th at 10 am

Berkley, CA
1885 University Ave., Berkley, CA
Sunday, July 29th from 10-11AM

Washington, DC
1101 25th St. NW, Washington, DC
Sunday, July 29 at 12 noon
+ RSVP on Facebook

UPDATE – 7/31/12

Check out:
+ Photos of Occupy Monsanto Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s in Washington, DC
+ Video of Occupy Monsanto Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s in Washington, DC
+ Photos of Occupy Monsanto Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s in Atlanta, Georgia
+ Read about EcoWomb Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s in Portland, Maine
+ Photos of EcoWomb Shopping for Truth at Trader Joe’s in Portland, Maine