Organic produce superior to conventional on every level, study finds

Written Thursday, September 02, 2010 by Jonathan Benson | NaturalNew.com

(NaturalNews) Mainstream nutritionists often claim that conventional produce is no different than organic produce. But a new study recently published in the online, peer-reviewed journal Public Library of Science (PLoS) One proves otherwise, revealing that organic fruits and vegetables pack a greater nutritional punch and produce better, healthier soil than their conventional counterparts.


John Reganold, professor of soil science at Washington State University Regents and author of the new study, and his colleagues conducted the most comprehensive analysis of its kind on commercial produce soil and the strawberries that grow in it. (Conventional strawberries, as many now know, are one of the most pesticide-laden fruits available for sale.)

Reganold and his team analyzed 31 different chemical and biological soil properties--including soil DNA--and performed tests on the quality, nutritional value and taste of 26 different strawberries from both conventional and organic fields. And what they found is truly astounding.

Organic strawberries contain far more antioxidants, vitamin C and beneficial polyphenolic compounds than conventional strawberries, and they have a longer shelf life. Organic strawberries also contain more dry matter per volume--meaning more actual strawberry--than conventional ones do.

In an unbiased taste test, samplers indicated that organic strawberries taste better overall, both in terms of sweetness and general strawberry flavor. And when viewed side-by-side, organic strawberries are more visually appealing.

But it does not stop there. In soil tests, organic soils tested extremely rich in key nutrients, enzymes and biological and chemical elements, that are otherwise lacking in conventional fields. Such soil nutrients are vital for producing nutritionally-rich fruit, as well as for maintaining healthy soil conditions that preserve and promote environmental integrity.

The study also revealed that organic produce can be raised with the same--or better--yields as conventional produce, but without all the harmful chemicals and pesticides that destroy both human health and the environment.


This article has been brought to you by Knight's Dilemma from NaturalNew.com.
Original article can be found Here.

India files biopiracy lawsuit against Monsanto, says biotech giant is stealing nature for corporate gain.

Written Wednesday, September 28, 2011 by Jonathan Benson | NaturalNews.com
 

(NaturalNews) Representing one of the most agriculturally bio-diverse nations in the world, India has become a primary target for biotechnology companies like Monsanto and Cargill to spread their genetically-modified (GM) crops into new markets. However, a recent France 24 report explains that the Indian government has decided to take an offensive approach against this attempted agricultural takeover by suing Monsanto for "biopiracy," accusing the company of stealing India's indigenous plants in order to re-engineer them into patented varieties.

Brinjal, also known in Western nations as eggplant, is a native Indian crop for which there are roughly 2,500 different unique varieties. Millions of Indian farmers grow brinjal, which is used in a variety of Indian food dishes, and the country grows more than a quarter of the world's overall supply of the vegetable.

And in an attempt to capitalize on this popular crop, Monsanto has repeatedly tried to commercially market its own GM variety of brinjal called Bt brinjal. But massive public outcry against planned commercial approval of Monsanto's "frankencrop" variety in 2010 led to the government banning it for an indefinite period of time.

But Monsanto is still stealing native crops, including brinjal, and quietly working on GM varieties of them in test fields, which is a clear violation of India's Biological Diversity Act (BDA). So at the prompting of various farmers and activists in India, the Indian government, representing the first time in history a nation that has taken such action, has decided to sue Monsanto.

"This can send a different message to the big companies for violating the laws of the nation," said K.S. Sugara, Member Secretary of the Karnataka Biodiversity Board, to France 24 concerning the lawsuit. "It is not acceptable ... that the farmers in our communities are robbed of the advantage they should get from the indigenous varieties."

You can watch the full France 24 video report of India's lawsuit against Monsanto here:
http://www.france24.com/en/20110921...

Farmers and active members of the public in India have been some of the world's most outspoken opponents of Monsanto's attempted GM takeover of agriculture. Besides successfully overturning the attempted approval of Bt brinjal, these freedom fighters have also successfully destroyed several attempted Monsanto GM test fields.

Original Article

Genetically Modified Grass Could Make Superweed Problem Worse

Written by Brandon Keim, July 11th, 2011 (www.wired.com)


A genetically engineered grass expected to hit U.S. markets without government review could speed the evolution of hard-to-control weeds, and perhaps require a return to toxic herbicides scrapped decades ago. 

On July 1 — a Friday afternoon, a time usually reserved for potentially controversial news — the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that Scotts Miracle-Gro’s herbicide-resistant Kentucky bluegrass would be exempt from tests typically required of transgenic crops.
Scotts Miracle-Gro is the largest U.S. retailer of grass seed, and the modified grass could be widely used in residential lawns. It’s resistant to glyphosate, a front-line herbicide known commercially as Roundup.
The grass will survive extra doses of Roundup, allowing more than usual to be applied. That’s the problem, said agricultural biotechnology expert Douglas Gurian-Sherman of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“The more a chemical is used consistently, the more likely that somebody’s weeds will become resistant. That’s standard, agreed-upon science,” said Gurian-Sherman. “The way that Roundup is used because of transgenic crops exacerbates that problem.”

Herbicide resistance evolves in much the same way as antibiotic resistance: When a weed- or bug-killing compound is applied, any weeds or bugs lucky enough to be genetically resistant will have the best chance to survive and reproduce.
Many crop plants are already engineered to be Roundup-resistant, and heavy use of the herbicide appears to have fueled the evolution of dozens of Roundup-resistant weed strains. They’re a major threat to agriculture in parts of the United States, virtually uncontrollable except by hand-pulling or a return to toxic, decades-old herbicides that the relatively benign Roundup had replaced.

“The industry hasn’t developed a new herbicide in a long time. When resistance develops to something like glyphosate, it’s not like we can move to some new chemical,” said Gurian-Sherman.
Compared to pigweed that can grow three inches each day in soybean fields, Roundup-resistant lawn weeds would be a nuisance rather than an economic threat. But just as superweeds have pushed farmers to bring back toxic herbicides, so might they push homeowners and landscapers.
“We’re burning out Roundup and going back into the past,” said Gurian-Sherman. “The same kind of thing could happen in residential use.”
Another potential problem is the spread of Roundup resistance into related strains of bluegrass, said plant geneticist Norman Ellstrand of the University of California, Riverside.
“I don’t know what other bluegrass species it’s cross-compatible with, but I can say with 98 percent certainty that it’s cross-compatible with some,” said Ellstrand. “If this plant grows and flowers at the same time as other bluegrass, they’ll flourish. You’ll have a new incidence of herbicide resistance getting into the wild.”
Whereas Kentucky bluegrass is popular for lawns, it’s not always welcome. Other members of its 500 species-strong genus are considered weeds.
A lesson can be taken from the unintentional escape of genes from rice bred for resistance to the Clearfield herbicide, said Ellstrand. “Now you have a very bad, weedy rice in Costa Rica that’s resistant to the herbicide,” he said. “It doesn’t happen easily with rice. If it happens with rice, it will happen with bluegrasses.”
Another species of Roundup-resistant grass developed by Scotts Miracle-Gro for golf courses was nixed by the USDA because of fear that resistance would spread to related pest species, noted Ellstrand. “The U.S. Forest Service waded in and said, ‘We don’t want it,’” he said.
Had the the Department of Agriculture decided to treat Roundup-ready bluegrass as a genetically modified plant, extra assurance of its environmental safety would have been demanded. But they decided not to because it fit through a loophole.
Genetically engineered plants are technically designated for regulation according to methods used to insert and activate new genes. Earlier methods used bacteria, which triggered pest-related clauses of the USDA’s Plant Protection Act. But the Roundup-ready bluegrass was made with a so-called gene gun. No bacteria were involved, and the law’s fine print was satisfied.
“By all definitions of genetic engineering, that’s genetic engineering. But it totally escapes the U.S. regulatory framework,” Ellstrand said.

According to Scotts Miracle-Gro spokesman Lance Latham, the USDA’s decision “allows us to move forward with field tests. It’s a first step. It’s our hope that testing will continue our advancement to develop grass seed that is even more sustainable.”

View original post HERE

GMO Planting To Begin in More Than 50 Wildlife Refuges

Written by Jill Ettinger, June 24th, 2011 - OrganicAuthority.com

The Obama administration has approved the strategic planting of genetically engineered seeds on more than 50 National Wildlife Refuges in the Midwest as part of region-wide habitat restoration efforts.

The multi-platform plan is designed to restore and manage habitat, supplement food for wildlife and attract wildlife for visitor viewing and photography. Slated to last no more than five years, the main crops would include GMO corn and soy. After the five-year period, farming could continue as a management tool, but it would be limited to non-GMO crops, according to the official government release.

Planting row crops in refuge lands has been used as a tool for many years by The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in restoring native habitats, controlling invasive weeds and providing food for both migratory birds and resident wildlife. Nearly three dozen of the area wildlife and wetland districts already use row crop farming to manage and improve habitats. The widespread use of GMOs in the U.S. has led to the decision to pursue planting these crops in the wildlife areas.

Anti-GMO groups condemn this decision, citing the risks connected to GM seeds and the already delicate nature of America’s protected  wildlife refuges and park lands being affected by climate change, loss of species and pollutants that are contaminating water and soil. In January, the Widener Environmental and Natural Resources Law Clinic on behalf of Delaware Audubon Society, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and the Center for Food Safety filed a lawsuit in a similar case. The plaintiffs alleged that the Fish & Wildlife Service had illegally entered into Cooperative Farming Agreements with private parties, allowing the planting of GE crops at Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge in Delaware.  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service settled the case promising to revoke any further access to GMOs in the area.

Original post: http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/gmo-planting-to-begin-in-more-than-50-wildlife-refuges/

Genetically Engineered Rice Threatens Asian Countries

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has approved $20 million in new monies toward the development of "golden rice" -- an untested, highly controversial GE (genetically engineered) crop that threatens biodiversity and risks bringing economic and ecological disaster to Asia's farms.
The leader of the Golden Rice project is Gerald Barry, previously director of research at Monsanto.
Sarojeni V. Rengam, executive director of Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific (PAN AP), has called the rice a "Trojan horse." According to Rengam, the rice is "... a public relations stunt pulled by the agri-business corporations to garner acceptance of GE crops and food. The whole idea of GE seeds is to make money."
Food Freedom reports:

"Golden rice is a Trojan horse for pushing through GE-friendly biosafety regulations under the guise of humanitarian aid. Once in place, these regulations open the door for the biotech industry to bring in commercial, patented GE crops; USAID and Monsanto accomplished exactly this in Kenya with their sweet potato project."

In Thailand at least, however, a little known and unpublicized agricultural policy protects Thai rice from the risks of GMO's. The Thai Ministry of Agriculture's "Rice Strategy" is a master plan committed to strengthening the nation's rice production while promoting farmers' livelihoods and consumer confidence -- which includes keeping Thai rice GMO (genetically modified organism)-free.
Adding to the risks of GE crops is Monsanto's Roundup, the world's best-selling herbicide that is made to be partnered with GE Roundup Ready crops. According to a new report, regulators have known for years that Roundup causes birth defects.
Regulators were apparently aware as long ago as 1980 that glyphosate, the active chemical ingredient of Roundup, caused birth defects in lab animals. However, the information was not made public. Instead, regulators misled the public about glyphosate's safety.
According to the Huffington Post:

"... [A]s recently as last year, the German Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety, the German government body dealing with the glyphosate review, told the European Commission that there was no evidence glyphosate causes birth defects ...
Although glyphosate was originally due to be reviewed in 2012, the Commission decided late last year not to bring the review forward, instead delaying it until 2015. The chemical will not be reviewed under more stringent, up-to-date standards until 2030."

Full Article

------------------------------------------------------------

Vitamin A enhanced rice for developing countries sounds like a novel idea! Too bad it's not as true as what meets the eye.

Eco-farming outperforms GMOs at improving crop yields and growing more food, says report

(NaturalNews.com) A new United Nations (UN) report blows a major hole in the modern myth that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are the answer to improving crop yields and ending world hunger. A UN Special Rapporteur explains that small-scale eco-farming reliant on natural growing methods works better than GMO and other pesticide-based agricultural systems at producing more and better food -- and if implemented on a wider scope, small-scale farming could double the world's food production capacity within ten years.

"Today's scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live -- especially in unfavorable environments," said Olivier De Schutter, the UN Special Rapporteur. "To date, agroecological projects have shown an average crop yield increase of 80 percent in 57 developing countries, with an average increase of 116 percent for all African projects. Recent projects conducted in 20 African countries demonstrated a doubling of crop yields over a period of three to ten years."

Instead of relying on chemical pesticides and insecticides, eco-farming utilizes nature's own balance to thwart pests and improve yields. Certain combinations of trees, plants, animals, and insects, are used to maintain soil health and eliminate harmful pests. Beneficial insects like ladybugs, for instance, work very well in organic agriculture to protect crops from pests without the need for harsh chemical applications (http://blog.cascadianfarm.com/category/farm/natural-pesticides-using-beneficial-insects-for-organic-pest-control.aspx).


Unlike GMOs, eco-farming allows the People to freely grow and harvest their own food, and take advantage of what nature freely offers them in order to do so. Within the GMO paradigm, however, farmers are controlled by companies like Monsanto that sell them self-destructing "Frankenseeds." These seeds require heavy pesticide applications in order to grow, and represent an unsustainable system that has devastated the livelihoods of thousands of farmers while failing to deliver on its promises (http://www.naturalnews.com/GMO.html).

De Schutter explained in his address that when the African country of Malawi replaced is "massive chemical fertilizer subsidy program" with agroecology, more than 1.3 million of the poorest people in the nation benefited, and corn yields increased from one ton per hectare (ton/ha) to up to three tons/ha.

"Despite its impressive potential in realizing the right to food for all, agroecology is still insufficiently backed by ambitious public policies and consequently hardly goes beyond the experimental state," he added.

Article's sources: http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/press_releases/20110308_agroecology-report-pr_en.pdf

If you found this article informative, you may also want to read "Organic produce superior to conventional on ever level, study finds", also by Natural News.