food politics makin me sick again: Ronnie Cummins: The Organic Elite Surrenders To Monsanto: What Now?

"The policy set for GE alfalfa will most likely guide policies for other GE crops as well. True coexistence is a must." -- Whole Foods Market, Jan. 21, 2011

In the wake of a 12-year battle to keep Monsanto's Genetically Engineered (GE) crops from contaminating the nation's 25,000 organic farms and ranches, America's organic consumers and producers are facing betrayal. A self-appointed cabal of the Organic Elite, spearheaded by Whole Foods Market, Organic Valley, and Stonyfield Farm, has decided it's time to surrender to Monsanto. Top executives from these companies have publicly admitted that they no longer oppose the mass commercialization of GE crops, such as Monsanto's controversial Roundup Ready alfalfa, and are prepared to sit down and cut a deal for "coexistence" with Monsanto and USDA biotech cheerleader Tom Vilsack.

In a cleverly worded, but profoundly misleading email sent to its customers last week, Whole Foods Market, while proclaiming their support for organics and "seed purity," gave the green light to USDA bureaucrats to approve the "conditional deregulation" of Monsanto's genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant alfalfa. Beyond the regulatory euphemism of "conditional deregulation," this means that WFM and their colleagues are willing to go along with the massive planting of a chemical and energy-intensive GE perennial crop, alfalfa; guaranteed to spread its mutant genes and seeds across the nation; guaranteed to contaminate the alfalfa fed to organic animals; guaranteed to lead to massive poisoning of farm workers and destruction of the essential soil food web by the toxic herbicide, Roundup; and guaranteed to produce Roundup-resistant superweeds that will require even more deadly herbicides such as 2,4 D to be sprayed on millions of acres of alfalfa across the U.S.

In exchange for allowing Monsanto's premeditated pollution of the alfalfa gene pool, WFM wants "compensation." In exchange for a new assault on farmworkers and rural communities (a recent large-scale Swedish study found that spraying Roundup doubles farm workers' and rural residents' risk of getting cancer), WFM expects the pro-biotech USDA to begin to regulate rather than cheerlead for Monsanto. In payment for a new broad spectrum attack on the soil's crucial ability to provide nutrition for food crops and to sequester dangerous greenhouse gases (recent studies show that Roundup devastates essential soil microorganisms that provide plant nutrition and sequester climate-destabilizing greenhouse gases), WFM wants the Biotech Bully of St. Louis to agree to pay "compensation" (i.e. hush money) to farmers "for any losses related to the contamination of his crop."

In its email of Jan. 21, 2011 WFM calls for "public oversight by the USDA rather than reliance on the biotechnology industry," even though WFM knows full well that federal regulations on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) do not require pre-market safety testing, nor labeling; and that even federal judges have repeatedly ruled that so-called government "oversight" of Frankencrops such as Monsanto's sugar beets and alfalfa is basically a farce. At the end of its email, WFM admits that its surrender to Monsanto is permanent: "The policy set for GE alfalfa will most likely guide policies for other GE crops as well True coexistence is a must."

Why Is Organic Inc. Surrendering?

According to informed sources, the CEOs of WFM and Stonyfield are personal friends of former Iowa governor, now USDA Secretary, Tom Vilsack, and in fact made financial contributions to Vilsack's previous electoral campaigns. Vilsack was hailed as "Governor of the Year" in 2001 by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, and traveled in a Monsanto corporate jet on the campaign trail. Perhaps even more fundamental to Organic Inc.'s abject surrender is the fact that the organic elite has become more and more isolated from the concerns and passions of organic consumers and locavores. The Organic Inc. CEOs are tired of activist pressure, boycotts, and petitions. Several of them have told me this to my face. They apparently believe that the battle against GMOs has been lost, and that it's time to reach for the consolation prize. The consolation prize they seek is a so-called "coexistence" between the biotech Behemoth and the organic community that will lull the public to sleep and greenwash the unpleasant fact that Monsanto's unlabeled and unregulated genetically engineered crops are now spreading their toxic genes on 1/3 of U.S. (and 1/10 of global) crop land.

WFM and most of the largest organic companies have deliberately separated themselves from anti-GMO efforts and cut off all funding to campaigns working to label or ban GMOs. The so-called Non-GMO Project, funded by Whole Foods and giant wholesaler United Natural Foods (UNFI) is basically a greenwashing effort (although the 100% organic companies involved in this project seem to be operating in good faith) to show that certified organic foods are basically free from GMOs (we already know this since GMOs are banned in organic production), while failing to focus on so-called "natural" foods, which constitute most of WFM and UNFI's sales and are routinely contaminated with GMOs.

From their "business as usual" perspective, successful lawsuits against GMOs filed by public interest groups such as the Center for Food Safety; or noisy attacks on Monsanto by groups like the Organic Consumers Association, create bad publicity, rattle their big customers such as Wal-Mart, Target, Kroger, Costco, Supervalu, Publix and Safeway; and remind consumers that organic crops and foods such as corn, soybeans, and canola are slowly but surely becoming contaminated by Monsanto's GMOs.

Whole Food's Dirty Little Secret: Most of the So-Called "Natural" Processed Foods and Animal Products They Sell Are Contaminated with GMOs

The main reason, however, why Whole Foods is pleading for coexistence with Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta, BASF and the rest of the biotech bullies, is that they desperately want the controversy surrounding genetically engineered foods and crops to go away. Why? Because they know, just as we do, that 2/3 of WFM's $9 billion annual sales is derived from so-called "natural" processed foods and animal products that are contaminated with GMOs. We and our allies have tested their so-called "natural" products (no doubt WFM's lab has too) containing non-organic corn and soy, and guess what: they're all contaminated with GMOs, in contrast to their certified organic products, which are basically free of GMOs, or else contain barely detectable trace amounts.

Approximately 2/3 of the products sold by Whole Foods Market and their main distributor, United Natural Foods (UNFI) are not certified organic, but rather are conventional (chemical-intensive and GMO-tainted) foods and products disguised as "natural."

Unprecedented wholesale and retail control of the organic marketplace by UNFI and Whole Foods, employing a business model of selling twice as much so-called "natural" food as certified organic food, coupled with the takeover of many organic companies by multinational food corporations such as Dean Foods, threatens the growth of the organic movement.

Covering Up GMO Contamination: Perpetrating "Natural" Fraud

Many well-meaning consumers are confused about the difference between conventional products marketed as "natural," and those nutritionally/environmentally superior and climate-friendly products that are "certified organic."

Retail stores like WFM and wholesale distributors like UNFI have failed to educate their customers about the qualitative difference between natural and certified organic, conveniently glossing over the fact that nearly all of the processed "natural" foods and products they sell contain GMOs, or else come from a "natural" supply chain where animals are force-fed GMO grains in factory farms or Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs).

A troubling trend in organics today is the calculated shift on the part of certain large formerly organic brands from certified organic ingredients and products to so-called "natural" ingredients. With the exception of the "grass-fed and grass-finished" meat sector, most "natural" meat, dairy, and eggs are coming from animals reared on GMO grains and drugs, and confined, entirely, or for a good portion of their lives, in CAFOs.

Whole Foods and UNFI are maximizing their profits by selling quasi-natural products at premium organic prices. Organic consumers are increasingly left without certified organic choices while genuine organic farmers and ranchers continue to lose market share to "natural" imposters. It's no wonder that less than 1% of American farmland is certified organic, while well-intentioned but misled consumers have boosted organic and "natural" purchases to $80 billion annually-approximately 12% of all grocery store sales.

The Solution: Truth-in-Labeling Will Enable Consumers to Drive So-Called "Natural" GMO and CAFO-Tainted Foods Off the Market

There can be no such thing as "coexistence" with a reckless industry that undermines public health, destroys biodiversity, damages the environment, tortures and poisons animals, destabilizes the climate, and economically devastates the world's 1.5 billion seed-saving small farmers. There is no such thing as coexistence between GMOs and organics in the European Union. Why? Because in the EU there are almost no GMO crops under cultivation, nor GM consumer food products on supermarket shelves. And why is this? Because under EU law, all foods containing GMOs or GMO ingredients must be labeled. Consumers have the freedom to choose or not to choose GMOs; while farmers, food processors, and retailers have (at least legally) the right to lace foods with GMOs, as long as they are safety-tested and labeled. Of course the EU food industry understands that consumers, for the most part, do not want to purchase or consume GE foods. European farmers and food companies, even junk food purveyors like McDonald's and Wal-Mart, understand quite well the concept expressed by a Monsanto executive when GMOs first came on the market: "If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it."

The biotech industry and Organic Inc. are supremely conscious of the fact that North American consumers, like their European counterparts, are wary and suspicious of GMO foods. Even without a PhD, consumers understand you don't want your food safety or environmental sustainability decisions to be made by out-of-control chemical companies like Monsanto, Dow, or Dupont - the same people who brought you toxic pesticides, Agent Orange, PCBs, and now global warming. Industry leaders are acutely aware of the fact that every single industry or government poll over the last 16 years has shown that 85-95% of American consumers want mandatory labels on GMO foods. Why? So that we can avoid buying them. GMO foods have absolutely no benefits for consumers or the environment, only hazards. This is why Monsanto and their friends in the Bush, Clinton, and Obama administrations have prevented consumer GMO truth-in-labeling laws from getting a public discussion in Congress.

Although Congressman Dennis Kucinich (Democrat, Ohio) recently introduced a bill in Congress calling for mandatory labeling and safety testing for GMOs, don't hold your breath for Congress to take a stand for truth-in-labeling and consumers' right to know what's in their food. Especially since the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the so-called "Citizens United" case gave big corporations and billionaires the right to spend unlimited amounts of money (and remain anonymous, as they do so) to buy media coverage and elections, our chances of passing federal GMO labeling laws against the wishes of Monsanto and Food Inc. are all but non-existent. Perfectly dramatizing the "Revolving Door" between Monsanto and the Federal Government, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, formerly chief counsel for Monsanto, delivered one of the decisive votes in the Citizens United case, in effect giving Monsanto and other biotech bullies the right to buy the votes it needs in the U.S. Congress.

With big money controlling Congress and the media, we have little choice but to shift our focus and go local. We've got to concentrate our forces where our leverage and power lie, in the marketplace, at the retail level; pressuring retail food stores to voluntarily label their products; while on the legislative front we must organize a broad coalition to pass mandatory GMO (and CAFO) labeling laws, at the city, county, and state levels.

The Organic Consumers Association, joined by our consumer, farmer, environmental, and labor allies, has just launched a nationwide Truth-in-Labeling campaign to stop Monsanto and the Biotech Bullies from force-feeding unlabeled GMOs to animals and humans.

Utilizing scientific data, legal precedent, and consumer power the OCA and our local coalitions will educate and mobilize at the grassroots level to pressure giant supermarket chains (Wal-Mart, Kroger, Costco, Safeway, Supervalu, and Publix) and natural food retailers such as Whole Foods and Trader Joe's to voluntarily implement "truth-in-labeling" practices for GMOs and CAFO products; while simultaneously organizing a critical mass to pass mandatory local and state truth-in-labeling ordinances - similar to labeling laws already in effect for country of origin, irradiated food, allergens, and carcinogens. If local and state government bodies refuse to take action, wherever possible we must attempt to gather sufficient petition signatures and place these truth-in-labeling initiatives directly on the ballot in 2011 or 2012. If you're interesting in helping organize or coordinate a Millions Against Monsanto and Factory Farms Truth-in-Labeling campaign in your local community, sign up here.

To pressure Whole Foods Market and the nation's largest supermarket chains to voluntarily adopt truth-in-labeling practices sign here, and circulate this petition widely.

And please stay tuned to Organic Bytes for the latest developments in our campaigns.

Power to the People! Not the Corporations!

Follow Ronnie Cummins on Twitter: www.twitter.com/OrganicConsumer

I still can't fathom that chemically engineered foods are going to be good for me. It wasn't true of margerine, wasn't true of processed foods, why is going to be true for crops?

Hugh Grant make the top 5: The Daily Feast's 50 Most Powerful People in Food via Squid Ink

Listmania continues (David Letterman's cultural legacy, perhaps, along with Velcro suits) but this time The Daily Meal has come up with something more compelling than a list of Top 10 Cupcakes. Theirs? America's 50 Most Powerful People in Food.

It's a good list, as it would be: The Daily Meal is headed by Saveur co-founder Colman Andrews. It's a list filled with "agribusiness moguls" and government officials and public figures, chefs and restaurateurs and journalists. They've also included "a few men and women whose connection with food is less than obvious, too (and explained why they're there). And #1 on our list doesn't fit neatly into any one slot -- though it's somebody the reader is apt to know very well." Of course. Otherwise what fun would it be.

Is Jonathan Gold on the list? Of course he is. As he pointed out to us himself, he's one above Martha Stewart. Turn the page for the complete list. Did they miss anybody? Include somebody you'd disagree with? And we'd love to know what you think of their (cute? sincere? Socratic, even?) pick for #1.

(P.S. Hugh Grant, #3, is not the British actor, but the CEO of Monsanto. Just in case you were wondering.)

food50.jpg

The Daily Meal

50. Adam Rapoport

49. Jeffrey Jordan

48. Ingrid Newkirk

47. Martha Stewart

46. Jonathan Gold

45. Dan Bane

44. Danny Meyer

43. Josh Viertel

42. Barry Estabrook

41. Nobu Matsuhisa

40. Dan Barber

39. Ruth Reichl

38. Michael Pollan

37. Mario Batali

36. David Dillon

35. Susan Ungaro

34. Lockhart Steele

33. Catherine M. Cassidy

32. Daniel Boulud

31. Rich Melman

30. Tom Colicchio

29. Irene Rosenfeld

28. Michael Bloomberg

27. Lisa Sharples

26. Indra Nooyi

25. Tim & Nina Zagat

24. José Andrés

23. Arturo Rodriguez

22. Maria Rodale

21. Oprah Winfrey

20. Grant Achatz

19. Thomas Keller

18. Gregory R. Page

17. Donnie Smith

16. Guy Fieri

15. James Sinegal

14. Rachael Ray

13. Wolfgang Puck

12. John Mackey

11. Michael R. Taylor

10. Jim Skinner

9. Sam Sifton

8. Mike Duke

7. Brooke Johnson

6. Alice Waters

5. Steve Jobs

4. Michelle Obama

3. Hugh Grant

2. Thomas J. Vilsack

1. You

I love lists. Some of my favorite people here! Hugh Grant of Monsanto tops the list. Yum! GMO veggies.

GMO seeds are becoming the norm. Foodie news is as Sci Fi as ever. Sugar beet seed shortage, you are what you eat

Unless regulators can devise new rules acceptable to the federal court, the rulings could force farmers to abandon the genetically engineered beets they have come to rely on. Currently, those beets make up nearly all of the United States crop.

Farmers, who would normally order their seeds around now for planting early next year, say they are unsure what to do.

“Right now, it’s pretty tough to do any planning because everything is in limbo,” said Ric Rodriguez, a beet farmer in Powell, Wyo., and a director of the Western Sugar Cooperative. “Everybody’s pretty nervous right now.”

In the most recent court ruling, on Tuesday, a federal judge in San Francisco ordered that 256 acres of baby beet plants intended to make seeds for future sugar beet crops be pulled from the ground.

In unusually harsh language, Judge Jeffrey S. White of the United States District for Northern California said that the Agriculture Department and the seed industry appeared to have been trying to get around an earlier order from him barring the planting of genetically modified beets.

The lawsuit was brought by several environmental groups, led by the Center for Food Safety, concerned that the modified genetic traits in the beets could spread through pollination to other closely related crops.

The Agriculture Department filed a notice Wednesday that it would appeal Judge White’s decision. Monsanto, which developed the genetic trait used in the beets, and three seed companies said they would also appeal and ask for a stay of the judge’s ruling.

The seed-producing beet plants affected by Tuesday’s judicial order, called stecklings, were intended for crops that would be planted in 2012 and beyond.

Farmers are more immediately concerned about whether they will be able to plant the genetically engineered crops next spring. The beets are modified to be resistant to the popular herbicide Roundup, making it easy for farmers to control weeds.

In August, Judge White said the Roundup-resistant sugar beets could no longer be grown commercially because the Agriculture Department had not adequately considered the environmental impact before approving them.

The U.S.D.A. is preparing an environmental impact statement, but it is not expected to be completed until May 2012. In the meantime, the department is considering granting partial approval, which would allow the genetically engineered beets to be grown with restrictions.

The public comment period on the new U.S.D.A proposal ends Monday. If regulators move ahead with it, the environmental groups are expected to seek another ruling from Judge White invalidating it.

“They’re making it up as they go along,” Paul Achitoff, a lawyer for the environmental groups, said of regulators.

If farmers cannot plant the genetically engineered seeds next spring, they will have to rely on conventional seeds. Most of these seeds are left over from three or more years ago, before the new genetically engineered seeds swept the market. This year, genetically modified seeds accounted for about 95 percent of total sugar beet acreage.

Government experts predict there will not be enough conventional seed to go around. An environmental assessment by the U.S.D.A. predicts that sugar beet acreage could drop by 37 percent and total sugar production could fall by 1.6 million tons of refined sugar. Taking into account sugar from sugar cane grown in the South, total domestic production could fall about 20 percent.

Because each spring’s beet planting produces sugar that is not consumed until the following year, the full impact on prices would probably not be felt until 2012, according to the assessment and industry experts.

“It would have an extremely important impact on the market,” said Frank Jenkins, president of the Jenkins Sugar Group, a commodity brokerage firm in Connecticut. “It will be incumbent on the U.S.D.A. to make up for that by allowing timely imports. If they don’t do a good job of that, we’ll see prices at a historically unprecedented level.”

Sugar beets make up slightly more than half of the nation’s sugar production, with the rest coming from sugar cane. Imports, which are controlled by the U.S.D.A., also contribute to sugar supplies.

Jeff Stachler, the extension specialist for sugar beet weeds in North Dakota and Minnesota, said that some growers were ordering conventional seeds for spring, even if they would prefer the genetically engineered ones.

This allows them to end the uncertainty, assure their seed supply and obtain the necessary weedkillers. “If we can’t plant Roundup Ready at the last minute, we are likely not to have enough herbicide to cover all the acres,” he said, referring to the genetically modified seeds.

But some farmers say the older conventional seed might not grow as well as the genetically engineered varieties. So many farmers and the farmer-owned cooperatives that process the sugar are holding out hope they will be able to grow the engineered beets.

“We are telling our farmers to sit tight,” said Duane Grant, the chairman of the Snake River Sugar Company in Idaho.

In remarks to reporters Wednesday, the agriculture secretary, Tom Vilsack, criticized “a circumstance where a single judge can essentially decide whether someone gets to farm or doesn’t get to farm.”

He also referred to the broader battle between opponents and supporters of biotechnology. “We need to figure out ways in which those who wish to do biotech and those who wish to do organic can live together in the same universe and be able to do what they think is best for their operation,” he said.

Genetically modified seeds are becoming the norm. How would you feel if we lost regular beet seeds altogether? Foodie news is as Sci Fi as ever.