Articles

There are a lot of studies asserting that organic is better for you, but if you read nothing else about it, know this: Many nonorganic foods contain dangerous levels of GMOs and glyphosate, the active ingredient in the weedkiller Roundup. You won't find it anywhere on the ingredients list, but this potent herbicide is a new staple of the modern American diet.

Here are 4 strange places Roundup hides in your food supply:

1. Your cereal. GMO Free USA recently published lab testing detecting glyphosate in Kellogg's Froot Loops. But how is this happening? (.....)

2. Cows. German researchers also detected worrisome levels of glyphosate in cows fed GMO-laced grains. (.....)

3. Feeding tube liquid. A recent Moms Across America investigation found that glyphosate could be infiltrating the bodies of our most vulnerable children--sick babies and children with cancer in intensive care units. (.....)

4. Breast milk and baby formula. In the first ever testing on glyphosate herbicide in the breast milk of American women, Moms Across America and Sustainable Pulse found "high" levels in 3 out of the 10 samples tested. (.....)

vieuws.eu

GMOs: the main issue on the agenda of the Commission seminar - 13 pending import applications for genetically modified animal feed varieties. The European Commission is due to publish a review of its GMO authorisation process towards the end of April.

TTIP: outcome of the 8th round of the EU-US trade talks, both sides are working towards greater “regulatory cooperation”

Implementation of the new Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)

Coupled support: all Member States except Germany applied payments linked to production for “vulnerable sectors”

Future meetings: next Agriculture Council meeting will take place on 16 March

Featuring statement by Ignacio Garcia Bercero, Chief EU Negotiator on TTIP.

Why are there still so many hungry people in the world?

The world produces enough food to feed 10 billion people. Poverty and hunger prevail because of economics, not scarcity

The greatest challenge for the sustainable development goals (SDGs) is to eradicate poverty and hunger while maintaining sustainable food security for all in a crowded and dramatically unequal world. Although the world has succeeded in reducing poverty in accordance with the millennium development goal (MDG) targets, food security and adequate nutrition have not been achieved.

(.....) According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), almost 1 billion people suffer from chronic hunger and almost 2 billion are under- or overnourished. Children are the most visible victims of nutritional deficiencies. Approximately 5 million children die each year because of poor nutrition. Access to adequate food during the first 1,000 days of life is vitally important for healthy future generations. Even a temporary lack of food during that crucial time has a negative effect on physical and intellectual development. I was shocked when told that in Haiti, even before the devastating earthquake that ruined the country, that small mud balls were being sold in the market to ease children’s hunger pangs. Of the world’s hungry people, 98% live in developing countries. The root causes of food insecurity and malnutrition are poverty and inequity rather than shortages. FAO statistics confirm that the world produces enough food to feed the 7 billion people living today, and even the estimated 9-10 billion population in 2050. Global agriculture produces 17% more calories per person today than 30 years ago, despite a 70% increase in population.

(.....) The challenge is mainly a matter of fashioning political will strong enough to overcome entrenched interests in maintaining food insecurity.

• Hilal Elver is the UN special rapporteur on the right to food

The idea of a non-browning apple seems, somehow, not too exciting

Last week's announcement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that it would allow marketing of apples that have been genetically engineered to resist browning is turning some environmental activists several shades of red but food safety groups are taking it relatively well.

"Unlike most of the commercially approved genetically engineered crops, which provide benefits primarily to farmers, this product provides a modest benefit to consumers. It might make sense to use such a product for pre-sliced apple slices or in fruit salad or salad bars," said Gregory Jaffe, biotechnology director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

The non-browning "Arctic apples" were developed by Okanagan Specialty Fruits Inc., a Canadian biotech company. They'll be produced in two varieties -- Granny Smith and Golden Delicious -- and are the first in what Okanagan says will be a bushel or more of produce engineered to hold up to the vagaries of time, weather and insects. Peaches, cherries and pears are close behind, the biotech company promises.

OSF says its vision is to "marry the age-old art of fruit breeding with modern science tools, creating exciting new products to benefit producers and consumers alike."

The Okanagan apples will be labeled as "Arctic" but will not be labeled as GMO, the company said. And that's leaving a sour taste in many mouths.

The European Union (EU) published proposals for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) chapter on food safety and animal welfare in January 2015. The draft, which is under first discussion by negotiators in the first week of February 2015, provides a clear indication of EU trade officials’ intentions for the final agreement. Our analysis suggests that the proposed text will undermine existing health and safety regulations in both the EU and the United States (US).

Analysis of the draft published by the EU raises a number of concerns about the impact on food safety and animal welfare. These include: the priority given to maximizing trade, the shift of power from national governments to a new trade committee, the threat to the ability of local authorities to set higher standards, the risk of minimal health and safety checks for novel foods (including GMOs, cloned animals, and nano materials), non-binding provisions for animal welfare, and the required adoption of international food standards established through the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Maize is the major staple crop in many parts of Africa. Bt maize is the only commercialised genetically modified (GM) food crop in the continent and has been cultivated in South Africa since 2001 through public and private programmes. Bt maize produces insecticidal proteins that provide resistance to the African maize stem borer (Busseola fusca) and the Chilo borer (Chilo partellus), two pests that cause significant yield losses.

An article in the South African Journal of Science examines the efficacy of Bt maize in improving smallholder agriculture in the country (Fischer K, Van den Berg J, Mutengwa C. Is Bt maize effective in improving South African smallholder agriculture? S Afr J Sci. 2015;111(1/2), Art. #a0092, 2 pages. http://dx.doi. org/10.17159/sajs.2015/a0092). The article highlights the fact that Bt maize was originally developed for use in large-scale capital intensive farming, which is reflected in its functioning and currently results in it being of limited use to smallholders. It also points to the regulatory context of Bt maize in South Africa and the lack of information provided to farmers, including the need toplant a refuge of non-Bt maize next to their Bt crop to delay resistance development, which have largely prevented smallholders from benefitting from Bt maize.

A study by Environment Agency Austria provides a scientific overview of biotechnology-based approaches in plant breeding other than genetically modification (GM), called “new plant breeding techniques” (NPBTs). This is in response to their increased use by seed companies for commercial purposes; however, some NPBTs may be exempt from current biosafety regulations.

Since NPBTs can be used for different purposes such as introducing new traits into crop varieties or modifying existing traits and are often used in combination with other technologies including GM and conventional breeding, the study examined the biosafety aspects of different NPBTs namely, in terms of their potential adverse effects on human health and the environment as well as those associated with practical application.

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Farmers and farm businesses in 20 states have now filed more than 360 lawsuits against agricultural chemicals-maker Syngenta, and hundreds more may be coming as a federal judge organizes the complex case so they can move forward.

The dispute centers around Syngenta's sale of a corn seed called Agrisure Viptera, which was genetically altered to contain a protein that kills corn-eating bugs such as earworms and cutworms. The U.S. Department of Agriculture approved it in 2010, and Syngenta first sold it to farmers in 2011.

China, a growing importer of U.S. corn that refuses to buy genetically modified crops it hasn't tested, had not approved Viptera when Syngenta began selling it. In November 2013, China discovered the Viptera corn trait in several U.S. shipments.

It began rejecting U.S. corn imports in February 2014. The lawsuits say it rejected more than 131 million bushels.

Non-Biotech Corn, Soybeans Fetch a Premium as Processors Respond to Rising Demand

Last spring, for the first time in 20 years, Indiana farmer Jim Benham planted his fields entirely with soybean seeds that hadn’t been genetically modified to withstand herbicides.

It wasn’t because the 63-year-old suddenly had embraced the anti-GMO movement. Instead, he was drawn to a nearly 14% per-bushel premium for non-GMO soybeans offered by a local grain terminal, which sells them to Asian feed processors.

Mr. Benham is among a small but growing number of Midwestern farmers moving away from biotech seeds developed by Monsanto Co. , DuPont Co. and other companies in response to lower crop prices over the past two years that have slashed farm profits.

The TTIP negotiations round is taking place in Brussels on 2-6 February. Once the TTIP agreement is concluded, it will have to be approved by the European Parliament before entering into force. The Parliament is currently preparing a mid-term review of the TTIP talks and the report could be voted on in May. (http://www.europarl.europa.eu)

--

The trade agreement being negotiated between the US and EU threatens public health, consumer rights and animal welfare standards, shows new analysis today by food and trade experts. The criticisms come as negotiators from both sides of the Atlantic meet behind closed doors in Brussels, Belgium this week to start writing new food safety rules for the trade deal and as hundreds of people demonstrated against the 'Trojan Horse Treaty'.

A document about the deal recently published by the EU shows that officials are planning a major 'power grab' to put trade interests before food safety concerns as part of the planned Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).

The analysis shows that the EU proposals would reduce the possibility of restricting genetically modified foods and the use of hormones and other chemicals in factory-farmed animals by establishing a new transatlantic body to filter all future food safety and animal welfare rules – aiming to facilitate trade "to the greatest extent possible".

First decisions on food safety would be shifted to this new trade committee and away from national and European decision-makers, while also reducing countries' rights to inspect food and agricultural imports at the port of entry – a key measure used to safeguard public health.