HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Genetically Modified Food...

Tue Feb 7, 2012, 08:11 PM

Genetically Modified Foods Not Served in Monsanto Cafeteria

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Genetically_Modified_Foods_Not_Served_in_Monsanto_Cafeteria/17775/0/38/38/Y/M.html

The fight to ban genetically modified foods has won more converts — some employees of Monsanto the company that is doing the most to promote GM products.

The Independent newspaper reports that there is a notice in the cafeteria of the Monsanto pharmaceutical factory is High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, advising customers “as far as practicable, GM soya and maize (has been removed) from all food products served in our restaurant. We have taken the steps to ensure that you, the customer, can feel confident in the food we serve.”

The notice was posted by the Sutcliffe Catering Group.

Monsanto confirms the authenticity of the notice, but company spokesman Tony Coombes says the only reason for the GM-free foods is because the company “believes in choice.” Coombes says in other Monsanto locations employees are happy to eat GM foods because they are “sprayed with fewer chemicals.”


More at link.

5 replies, 4776 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Genetically Modified Foods Not Served in Monsanto Cafeteria (Original post)
xfundy Feb 2012 OP
proverbialwisdom Feb 2012 #1
proverbialwisdom Feb 2012 #2
proverbialwisdom Feb 2012 #3
proverbialwisdom Feb 2012 #4
proverbialwisdom Feb 2012 #5

Response to xfundy (Original post)

Tue Feb 7, 2012, 09:26 PM

1. Commendable. (BTW, last sentence above factually inaccurate.)

See:

http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/13644-the-mother-of-all-herbicide-marketing-plans
http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/01/dows-new-gmo-seed-puts-us-agriculture-crossroads


More OLD lunch news here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/16/MNK0TRJCI.DTL

Pelosi leads the House to go organic in its cafeterias

Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Monday, December 17, 2007


(12-17) 04:00 PST Washington --

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may have left her progressive instincts at the barn door when she drove a starch-, sugar- and fat-bloated bill that all but left out organic farmers through the House last summer, but when it comes to food for Congress, it's out with high-fructose corn syrup and in with uncaged hens and hormone-free milk.

Under Pelosi's signature "Green the Capitol" initiative, the House cafeterias will get a full-blown makeover Monday to the very latest in organic and locally grown cuisine under a new contract with Restaurant Associates, caterer to the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

The vast House food service operation that feeds the belly of the beast - more than 2.5 million meals a year for members, staff, tourists, lobbyists, lawyers, journalists and other highly regarded species that inhabit the Capitol - is switching to locally grown, organic, seasonal and generally healthy food. It will be served in compostable sugar cane and corn starch containers instead of petroleum-based plastics. Even the knives and forks will be biodegradable.

More...


http://www.theslowcook.com/2009/08/21/2341/

School Lunch: Time For A New Model?
August 21st, 2009



http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2006-09-26-college-food-usat_x.htm

More university students call for organic, 'sustainable' food
Updated 9/27/2006 8:55 AM ET



Many university campuses with cutting edge biotech research apparently prefer to keep GMOs out of the diets of their students, too, (since, by definition, organic food cannot be genetically modified), though it is admitted nowhere. Maybe concerns about food disparagement laws?

http://www.alternet.org/story/12910?page=entire

Industry Attacks on Dissent: From Rachel Carson to Oprah
By Laura Orlando
Posted on April 19, 2002


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xfundy (Original post)

Wed Feb 8, 2012, 10:55 AM

2. Buried in today's NYT, 'Modified Crops Tap a Wellspring of Protest' - done deal, give up, rah, rah,

Lame:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/dining/a-suit-airs-debate-on-organic-vs-modified-crops.html

Modified Crops Tap a Wellspring of Protest

By JULIA MOSKIN
Published: February 7, 2012


SILENT in flannel shirts and ponytails, farmers from Saskatchewan and South Dakota, Mississippi and Massachusetts lined the walls of a packed federal courtroom in Manhattan last week, as their lawyers told a judge that they were no longer able to keep genetically modified crops from their fields.

The hearing is part of a debate that is coming to life around the country, in courtrooms and Occupy sites, in boardrooms and online, with new petitions, ballot initiatives and lawsuits from California to Maine.

Last year, according to the Department of Agriculture, about 90 percent of all soybeans, corn, canola and sugar beets raised in the United States were grown from what scientists now call transgenic seed. Most processed foods (staples like breakfast cereal, granola bars, chicken nuggets and salad dressing) contain one or more transgenic ingredients, according to estimates from the Grocery Manufacturers Association, though the labels don’t reveal that. (Some, like tortilla chips, can contain dozens.)

Common ingredients like corn, vegetable oil, maltodextrin, soy protein, lecithin, monosodium glutamate, cornstarch, yeast extract, sugar and corn syrup are almost always produced from transgenic crops.

No known health risks are associated with eating transgenic foods (though many scientists say it is too soon to assess the effects), and the Food and Drug Administration classifies them as safe.

More...



Better:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/25/business/25FOOD.html?pagewanted=all

Biotechnology Food: From the Lab to a Debacle

By KURT EICHENWALD, GINA KOLATA and MELODY PETERSEN
Published: January 25, 2001


The following article was reported by Kurt Eichenwald, Gina Kolata and Melody Petersen and was written by Mr. Eichenwald

In late 1986, four executives of the Monsanto Company, the leader in agricultural biotechnology, paid a visit to Vice President George Bush at the White House to make an unusual pitch.

Although the Reagan administration had been championing deregulation across multiple industries, Monsanto had a different idea: the company wanted its new technology, genetically modified food, to be governed by rules issued in Washington — and wanted the White House to champion the idea.

"There were no products at the time," Leonard Guarraia, a former Monsanto executive who attended the Bush meeting, recalled in a recent interview. "But we bugged him for regulation. We told him that we have to be regulated."

Government guidelines, the executives reasoned, would reassure a public that was growing skittish about the safety of this radical new science. Without such controls, they feared, consumers might become so wary they could doom the multibillion-dollar gamble that the industry was taking in its efforts to redesign plants using genes from other organisms — including other species.

In the weeks and months that followed, the White House complied, working behind the scenes to help Monsanto — long a political power with deep connections in Washington — get the regulations that it wanted.

It was an outcome that would be repeated, again and again, through three administrations. What Monsanto wished for from Washington, Monsanto — and, by extension, the biotechnology industry — got. If the company's strategy demanded regulations, rules favored by the industry were adopted. And when the company abruptly decided that it needed to throw off the regulations and speed its foods to market, the White House quickly ushered through an unusually generous policy of self-policing.

Even longtime Washington hands said that the control this nascent industry exerted over its own regulatory destiny — through the Environmental Protection Agency, the Agriculture Department and ultimately the Food and Drug Administration — was astonishing.

"In this area, the U.S. government agencies have done exactly what big agribusiness has asked them to do and told them to do," said Dr. Henry Miller, a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution, who was responsible for biotechnology issues at the Food and Drug Administration from 1979 to 1994.

More...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 8, 2012, 11:01 AM

3. More historical context here.

http://www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?objectID=1479

Spilling the Beans, October 2007

The FDA’s “non-regulation” of GM foods

Genetically modified crops are the result of a technology developed in the 1970s that allow genes from one species to be forced into the DNA of unrelated species. The inserted genes produce proteins that confer traits in the new plant, such as herbicide tolerance or pesticide production. The process of creating the GM crop can produce all sorts of side effects, and the plants contain proteins that have never before been in the food supply. In the US, new types of food substances are normally classified as food additives, which must undergo extensive testing, including long-term animal feeding studies.[4] If approved, the label of food products containing the additive must list it as an ingredient.

There is an exception, however, for substances that are deemed “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS). GRAS status allows a product to be commercialized without any additional testing. According to US law, to be considered GRAS the substance must be the subject of a substantial amount of peer-reviewed published studies (or equivalent) and there must be overwhelming consensus among the scientific community that the product is safe. GM foods had neither. Nonetheless, in a precedent-setting move that some experts contend was illegal, in 1992 the FDA declared that GM crops are GRAS as long as their producers say they are. Thus, the FDA does not require any safety evaluations or labels whatsoever. A company can even introduce a GM food to the market without telling the agency.

Such a lenient approach to GM crops was largely the result of Monsanto’s legendary influence over the US government. According to the New York Times, “What Monsanto wished for from Washington, Monsanto and, by extension, the biotechnology industry got. . . . When the company abruptly decided that it needed to throw off the regulations and speed its foods to market, the White House quickly ushered through an unusually generous policy of self-policing.” According to Dr. Henry Miller, who had a leading role in biotechnology issues at the FDA from 1979 to 1994, “In this area, the U.S. government agencies have done exactly what big agribusiness has asked them to do and told them to do.”

Following Monsanto’s lead, in 1992 the Council on Competitiveness chaired by Vice President Dan Quayle identified GM crops as an industry that could increase US exports. On May 26, Quayle announced “reforms” to “speed up and simplify the process of bringing” GM products to market without “being hampered by unnecessary regulation.”[5] Three days later, the FDA policy on non-regulation was unveiled.

More...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xfundy (Original post)

Wed Feb 8, 2012, 11:13 AM

4. Yawn.

Washington PostImmune Systems Increasingly on the Attack

Tuesday, March 4, 2008
...First, asthma cases shot up, along with hay fever and other common allergic reactions, such as eczema. Then, pediatricians started seeing more children with food allergies. Now, experts are increasingly convinced that a suspected jump in lupus, multiple sclerosis and other afflictions caused by misfiring immune systems is real.


Los Angeles Times4% of Children have Food Allergies

November 17, 2009
...The number of children who have food allergies is not only increasing, it now encompasses 4% of all kids in the United States, according to an analysis of four large, national surveys published Monday in the journal Pediatrics.

The study -- the first to make a broad estimate about the prevalence of food allergies among U.S. children -- supports previous studies suggesting that allergy rates are rising rapidly, for reasons that are unclear.


Los Angeles Times - Chronic health conditions increasing in children, study finds

February 17, 2010
...More than a quarter of all U.S. children have a chronic health condition, new research suggests, a significant increase from the rate seen in earlier decades and a statistic that looms large for the nation's efforts to subdue rising healthcare costs....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/03/AR2008030303200.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-sci-allergies17-2009nov17,0,7452917.story
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-sci-child-health17-2010feb17,0,456579.story
.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Reply to this thread