Open Forum on Food Politics

[jamiemaw]

Perhaps this will help inform the discussion

An excellent and entertaining link! Thanks, Jamie!

←

Food styling for 2010 and yonder with 2005 ingredients was challenging. Thank goodness spring arrived early this year.

Cheers,

Jamie

[Daniel Rogov]

It is clear that without exception, every human act has political ramifications. I have, however, in recent years grown so weary about reading about the dangers that face us on one side and the potential benefits on the other that I have decided to take a rather humorous (and yes, even that is political) stance on the issue. With regard to humane treatment of animals, with regard to genetically modified foods and even with regard to the French paradox, let me simply post an excerpt from an article I wrote some years ago about various culinary curmudgeons.

Culinary Curmudgeons

Daniel Rogov

Years ago, when I first started writing about food, I promised

myself to avoid generalizations. No matter how hard I tried, how-

ever, I kept running into them. I have concluded, for example,

that many of world's most devoted culinary curmudgeons have found

their way to the Holy Land.

One of the most vociferous complainers was American dentist John

Burril who used his position as a trustee of St. Alban's Episco-

opal Church in Washington, D.C. to take to the pulpit to espouse

his theory that foods should never be eaten hot or cold, but only

at room temperature. When he came to Jerusalem in 1901 Burril was

shocked to see that "in the many cafes of the city it is consi-

dered perfectly normal to put before you a cup of steaming hot

coffee and a glass of ice-cold water". Convinced that this prac-

tice would ruin the health of the people, he was determined to

change the local way of life and, wherever he went during his

three month visit he loudly berated the people for this "dirty and

barbaric habit". One of his companions wrote in his diary that

during a visit to Jaffa Burril "informed a group of Arabs that

their habit of sipping hot tea would rot their teeth, damage their

livers and destroy their digestive systems." It is nowhere record-

ed how his audience reacted to this advice.

Junius Booth (the father of the even more notorious John Wilkes

Booth who assasinated Abraham Lincoln) is another American who

made his way to Jerusalem. Booth, a Methodist minister who came to

Israel on a pilgrimage with members of his flock, adhered zealous-

ly to what he thought to be the ideas of the Greek philosopher and

mathematician Pythagoras. In a sermon he presented on the shore of

the Kinneret, not far from the Mount of Beatitudes, Booth summed

up his attitude towards the culinary arts when he forbad the mem-

bers of his flock not only the eating of animals (which he consid-

ered "unnatural"), but also the harvesting of any crop wherein the

harvest killed the plant. Booth must have had a terrible time dur-

ing his visit for in a letter to his wife he wrote that "the olives

of the Galillee are too hard; the oranges of the coastal plain are

too sour; the cheeses are too salty; and the milk is not clean."

Nor did his complaints stop there. He did not approve of the cus-

tom of cooking vegetables over hot charcoals and was "disgusted"

by the fact that people put sugar in their coffee. Oddly enough,

Booth found nothing offensive in the "native custom of smoking

hashish". In fact, he found it "a most refreshing substitute for

the local sweets".

Another gastronomic curmudgeon who found himself, albeit it for

a short visit to Jerusalem was the Reverend Sylvester Graham (yes, he

for whom the Grahamcracker has been named. A

forerunner of today's devotees of natural foods, Graham's culinary

outlook was that the more "natural" a thing was, the more virtuous

it became. On his return to America, Graham wrote that he "was de-

lighted to find in the Holy Land a large variety of grains, herbs

and spices, all of which would be welcome additions to our own

diets." He was "extremely distressed, however at the tradition of

welcoming strangers by roasting a whole sheep on a spit in honor

of their arrival." When he visited the city of Acre, Graham was

delighted at the choice of fresh fish that were available but

wrote that he "could not understand why the people of the city in-

sist on seasoning their fish with garlic and herbs before they

cook them and then of sprinkling their fish and their salads with

lemon juice".

In a search for the ultimate culinary pest, one would be hard

pressed to overlook Catherine Beecher, aunt of author Harriet

Beecher Stowe (who wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin). Ms. Beecher, felt

that food should be "plain and nutritious and never fancy or ex-

travagant." In fact, in what is probably the most boring cookbook

ever written, she advocated that "it is the moral duty of house-

wives to avoid a variety of tempting dishes at any meal." When

she visited Jerusalem, Beecher was shocked to learn that many

meals started off with eight or more different salads, and then

continued with a soup, a choice of two or three main dishes and

as many as five or six different vegetables. Mrs. Beecher was

probably not too well liked by the Jeruselmites she visited, for

wherever she went she went to great pains to tell the women she

met how they were destroying the health and moral fiber of their

families. There is no record of what Ms. Beecher ate on her one

trip to Jerusalem, but it is known that she died there, according

to her physician, "probably of acute indigestion caused by over-

eating".

On those notes, it is time for sleep. I have an early morning flight. No fear though, before the flight I shall fortify myself with several cups of good espresso and at least two croissants as rich with butter as is humanly possible.

Edited January 17, 2005 by Daniel Rogov (log)

[jsolomon]

Having grown up deep in corn, wheat, soybean, and ranch country, I have seen the quagmire that farmers have got themselves in get deeper and deeper.

It's very odd for farmers because in most cash crops (read: grains) on an individual basis, the best way to get bigger, get better, but, usually, get out of debt, is to produce more. In the macroscale, this drives prices down. But, one farmer simply can't produce enough <delta>price to offset his/her need to rationalize producing less crop. It really is a downward spiral debt-wise for most farmers most years.

So, to keep the farmers in business, our government bails them out with subsidies, grants, and whatnot every year. To justify these subsidies, our government then holds our grains (among other things) over the heads of countries who produce things we want, like oil, minerals, or in the case of the cold war, to promote things like democracy.

This has been written on again and again.

Part of the societal problem we run into is one of the farmers. Many of the ones I know, good farmers, and bad farmers, are very proud of the work they do. They ought to have a tremendous amount of pride. I wouldn't do anything for over 100 hours a week if I couldn't get personal satisfaction from it. So, when we confront farmers and say, "You're doing it wrong" you're going to get sub-optimal responses. Plus, if you can convince them that they need to change practices, products, etc, they are so saddled with debt that they are literally locked into growing the crop that is financially killing them in the first place. It's a catch-22 for them.

Then, if Monsanto (or Pioneer, or Pfizer, or Stine.....) comes along with a whiz-bang corn/soybean/wheat that can alleviate some of the farmer's trouble (rootworms, round-up susceptibility, growing in crooked rows) the farmer is going to jump on it without looking at much of the fine print. They simply won't because they have too little time, too little education--usually--and too few resources to fight a contract in bad faith.

My question becomes, then, why are we discussing this instead of writing letters to our senators? Save our society: chuck Monsanto's leadership where Enron's ought to go. Reform the farm subsidy program. Provide better education opportunities for rural Americans. And, finally, mandate land-grant research universities to provide, research, and improve the grains that we already grow.

I'm going to go re-read "A Modest Proposal" first, though.

[WHT]

Okay, I'll admit it.  Where I work, we GM O's.  My father grows GM corn.

Having gone through a fair amount of genetics in college and having been a protein chemist off and on since graduating, I'm not going to bat an eye about eating GM food.  But, it's how the gi-normous food corporations act that frightens me.

They chew up and spit out workers the same way their machinery chews up and spits out beef carcasses, and why is there no outcry?

-jared

P.S.  Corn fed beef rules.

←

There was an article in The New York Times last week that said thus far there has ben no proof that GM food has caused any problems. Either in people or the environment. If I can find the story again I will post a link.

[WHT]

The interesting thing about seeds over the last seven or so years is it has gone from just directions on the packages to wording akin to software licenses. Whether or not you can save the seed from a crop or cross breed lines of seed all spelled out in exhaustive detail and this is on the stuff you get at the hardware store in the little envelopes, can you imagine the wording on commercial seed? It might be an interesting thing to check on a web site or find out from a farmer.

[Rebel Rose]

Although written long before the advent of GMO's, I recommend the works of Wendell Berry to anyone interested in the economies and challenges of sustainable agriculture. Personally, I feel he's little didactic and curmudgeonly, but nevertheless, one of the most poetic and thorough essayists on these issues.

The Art of the Commonplace: The Agrarian Essays of Wendell Berry

What Are People For?

Sex, Economy, Freedom & Community : Eight Essays

Home Economics

In Home Economics, a collection of fourteen essays, Berry explores this process and continues to discuss what it means to make oneself “responsibly at home.”

His title reminds us that the very root of economics is stewardship, household management. To paraphrase Confucius, a healthy planet is made up of healthy nations that are simply healthy communities sharing common ground, and communities are gatherings of households. A measure of the health of the planet is economics—the health of its households. Any process of destruction or healing must begin at home. Berry speaks of the necessary coherence of the “Great Economy,” as he argues for clarity in our lives, our conceptions, and our communications. To live is not to pass time, but to spend time.

Whether as critic or as champion, Wendell Berry offers careful insights into our personal and national situation in a prose that is ringing and clear.

And, if you can find it in a used book store, one of my most beloved "old" books is The Big Flat, by Owen Wister (author of The Virginian), 1942. A story of small farmers threatened by a large landholder who plans to build, then dynamite, a dam in order to flood them out of business and buy their productive yet small properties.

[jsolomon]

What Are People For?

←

Oh, I can answer that question! People are for generating posts on eGullet!

[FaustianBargain]

My question becomes, then, why are we discussing this instead of writing letters to our senators?  Save our society: chuck Monsanto's leadership where Enron's ought to go.

Letters to senators?

With the ceaseless encouragement of the Department of Agriculture, American farmers have planted more than 50 million acres of Monsanto's genetically engineered crops over the past four years.

[...]

The Food and Drug Administration[...], acceding to the company's demand that genetically engineered crops not be labeled as such.

[...]

Monsanto has poured nearly $200,000 a year into the coffers of candidates for federal office and the two major parties.

[...]

In 1997, the chemical giant invested $4 million for lobbying Congress and the White House on issues ranging from the federal tax code and agricultural subsidies to hazardous waste laws and food safety regulations.

[...]

When faced with the almost certain prospect that the EU would ban the import of Monsanto's genetically engineered corn in 1998, the company unleashed an unprecedented lobbying effort,

[...]

Monsanto's lobbying apparatus even has penetrated the ranks of a nonprofit consumer group, the Safe Food Campaign, which advocates tougher food inspection standards. The group was founded by Carol Tucker Foreman, who served as an assistant secretary of agriculture in the Carter administration. Ironically, Foreman also represents the Beef Council, Procter and Gamble and Monsanto.

[...]

[source: commondreams.org]

Monsanto has infiltrated the FDA, White House(both rep and dem) non profit food advocacy groups, have even bribed public officers in foreign countries in order to obtain licences for their GM crops and now targetting pro-technology organaisations sowing fears of 'hippies' trying to get back to a 'luddite' world. Anti-GM folks are painted as tree-hugging, anti-capitalist luddites with a mission to take all of us back to the Stone Age. Meanwhile, the company that gave us PCBs, Agent O, pesticides and beef growth hormones is quite simply plunging the world and small economies into chaos. GM is not all bad. Like I mentioned before, man has been genetically modifying food for centuries. Modern wheat is a classic example. GM technology is not the point.

If we dont talk about it, who will? It is not like the MEDIA is going to bail out the long suffering American farmer. Even the big bad boys at Faux News are scared of Monsanto.

Yet another infamous Monsanto scandal involved Fox news reporters Jane Akre and Steve Wilson who were fired from the Florida station they worked at, WTVT - owned by Rupert Murdoch, for refusing to weaken their story regarding rBGH. The BGH Scandals--The BGH Scandals--The Incredible Story of Jane Akre & Steve Wilson recounts how Akre and Wilson rewrote the story 83 times in an attempt to mollify a threatening Monsanto, the new Fox station manager Dave Boylan and Fox attorneys yet remain truthful at the same time. They won a "landmark whistleblower lawsuit" against the station and were awarded $425,000 in damages. However, Fox appealed and prevailed February 14, 2003 when the jury decision was reversed on a legal technicality: the appeals court agreed with Fox that it is technically not against any law, rule or regulation to deliberately distort the news on television.

[source: disinfopedia.org]

Monsanto also has strong ties to the core players in the US administration of George W. Bush, including John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Ann Veneman, Tommy Thompson, and Clarence Thomas, a former attorney for Monsanto who was appointed to the Supreme Court by George H. W. Bush.[source: wikipedia.org]

And anyways...thats why writing to senators isnt going to help. Stop consuming or at least start discouraging the obvious crimes against foods, people and quality of life by the the likes of Monsanto is likely to be more effective. For that, we need to talk.

The farmers in Brazil refused to pay Monsanto royalties for the soy produced and insist on paying royalties only for the seed given by Monsanto. Meanwhile, in America, the farmer gets sued. We should talk about such things. Really.

I request you to read the links I have provided and talk about it. Here, somewhere..anywhere. If you care.

And yea...you can spank me with a noodle, but I'd still say, "Shame on Monsanto".

Edited January 18, 2005 by FaustianBargain (log)

[stovetop]

There was an article in The New York Times last week that said thus far there has ben no proof that GM food has caused any problems. Either in people or the environment. If I can find the story again I will post a link.

There was a Canadian farmer who was sued by Monsanto for having some of the Copyright Genes occurring in his field, his farm was next to a field that contained Monsanto product. This farmer was forced to go on the defense and prove in a court of law that he was not quality of using Monsanto genes in his crop strain.

This farmer eventually won in a court of law and was proven not quality, although he could have sued Monsanto for contaminating his crop, he was a seed saver farmer and made his living by producing seed. He spent 50 years developing a very diversified and sustainable food crop seed for sale and was about to put his seed on the market, now his 50 years of work has gone down the drain because of the contamination of the Monsanto gene infiltrating and crops interbreeding with his crop.

It blows my mind away that this even went to court, the thing that gets my goat even more is this farmer who has lost 50 years of work can not afford to take on Monsanto for something they sued him for but they are just as guilty of destroying his work as they feel that he is using their gene without their permission. This is more legal stuff to keep lawyers busy for the next hundred years.

So the question was show us the proof where Monsanto has affected the environment, is this on its own not enough to show how something Monsanto does effects the lives of other farmers not wanting to be part of Monsanto’s program.

It is like StarTreck and the Borg; Resistance is Futile.

Steve

[WHT]

There was a Canadian farmer who was sued by Monsanto for having some of the Copyright Genes occurring in his field, his farm was next to a field that contained Monsanto product. This farmer was forced to go on the defense and prove in a court of law that he was not quality of using Monsanto genes in his crop strain.

Steve

←

In your effort to slam Monsanto you ignore one factor. It was a civil suit Monsanto brought against a farmer for reasons of intellectual property. . I was paraphrasing the article; I think the exact wording was “ecological” harm not harm to the bottom line of a corporation.

Pollen crosses fields all the time, just because Monsanto wanted to pull a fast one has nothing to do with how safe or unsafe GM food is.

[stovetop]

I am not a Scientist but a Chef with High school science knowledge and a father who was a doctor; this might have influenced me in some manner. I know that scientist have theories to prove in a lab, they get grant assistance and might get someone to sponsor their doctorate. They do their thesis in something like isolating a gene that might make Tomatoes travel better or last longer before they reach the market. Their research has substance to it and there’s is an honorable thing that they are doing.

My Question is to all you Scientist out there, do you take into consideration of research which is usually done in a closed environment ( lab), or on a research farm, not as closed as a lab but still how much outside influences and how long are these tests done.

In Mother Nature there are huge cycles that go in and out of nature, all Her variables change in massive cycles, like the weather, seasons, what other farmers are growing, Temperature, wind, and many others.

When genes that are produced by humans make it into the gene pool how will these genes interact with what mother nature does and do you know without a doubt, that there will be no long term and unforeseen changes when other genes collide, like animal and plant genes, like in Star-Trek a new life form was created.

Science fiction always becomes science at some point and time, back in the fifties so many science fiction stories were viewed with laughter, look back in time and come the vaults of science fiction and you will see that many of our predictions where not that outlandish as we first thought, so what makes us think that fifty years from today that what we think as now outlandish will be commonplace.

If the opposing side of science had as much money to prove theories with the same vigor as Monsanto gives its research grants, there would be a lot more even playing field. We in society are being bombarded with science fiction; Technology is moving faster then we are, courts of law are still trying to figure out what when on yesterday, every thing will take time for things to balance out.

There is way more information and knowledge to learn then we have time to live, although we must be given time and have the freedom to choose our food source, if we loose trust in our system, there will be chaos and we do not want this kind of madness.

There are alternative choices out there, the sustainable agriculture industry is growing and the organic food industry is so successful that it has become mainstream, so it is being bought up by the big corporations, so it now has come full circle in 30 years.

We just need to ask questions, where does our food come from????

If we stop and become complacent then we are in trouble, because who will be the canary in the coalmine???

[stovetop]

Pollen crosses fields all the time, just because Monsanto wanted to pull a fast one has nothing to do with how safe or unsafe GM food is.

I am open minded to how safe GM foods are, if they Monsanto are so confident that there will be no long term effects on us, the they should not have a problem to disclose all foods that contain GMO's, this mostly is what my thesis is all about.

" I believe that all GMO"S should be disclosed to the public, all foods containing GMO's should be listed and told if there is any animal genes or any other gene not normally occurring in nature"

The scientist have not proved anything, they do not have any data showing 20 years of research in an open lab showing how GMO's interact in nature, until that time I will always be reluctant to believe everything that is written by a huge corporation supporting only one side of science.

steve

[WHT]

Monsanto has infiltrated the FDA, White House(both rep and dem) non profit food advocacy groups, have even bribed public officers in foreign countries in order to obtain licences for their GM crops and now targetting pro-technology organaisations sowing fears of 'hippies' trying to get back to a 'luddite' world. Anti-GM folks are painted as tree-hugging, anti-capitalist luddites with a mission to take all of us back to the Stone Age. Meanwhile, the company that gave us PCBs, Agent O, pesticides and beef growth hormones is quite simply plunging the world and small economies into chaos. GM is not all bad. Like I mentioned before, man has been genetically modifying food for centuries. Modern wheat is a classic example. GM technology is not the point.

←

I love this type of over generalization; If you check you will find it was Dow that gave us Agent Orange, Merck and Squib along with others on the hormone bit, PCB from any of the large chemical companies. Some of the stuff you mentioned isn’t even areas that Monsanto works in.

You mention ties to the current administration but fail to report on how much Dupont and Corning gave Clinton. If you presented your facts in a more compelling light you would get farther. Part of why you come off as neo-luddites is that is the face we the public see most often. This happens at both ends of the spectrum; emotional statements used to bolster a logical argument. Along with the inevitable clustering of evils and rhetoric.

[stovetop]

"I would like to make something more clear to you as well, I am not a leftist but right wing, actualy more center but on the right side but not neceraly god, I mean I do not want to be on the bad side of god either, you never know when we die that we might need to be on the right side of god, but not to right of god, i mean center or is that centre"

[WHT]

Pollen crosses fields all the time, just because Monsanto wanted to pull a fast one has nothing to do with how safe or unsafe GM food is.

I am open minded to how safe GM foods are, if they Monsanto are so confident that there will be no long term effects on us, the they should not have a problem to disclose all foods that contain GMO's, this mostly is what my thesis is all about.

" I believe that all GMO"S should be disclosed to the public, all foods containing GMO's should be listed and told if there is any animal genes or any other gene not normally occurring in nature"

The scientist have not proved anything, they do not have any data showing 20 years of research in an open lab showing how GMO's interact in nature, until that time I will always be reluctant to believe everything that is written by a huge corporation supporting only one side of science.

steve

←

I agree with most of this; it should be disclosed and I should have the ability to choose. We are too close to the subject with not enough data to make any sort of determination at this point. My problem is with people seeing the boogieman behind every corner; be it corporations, terrorists, The Devil or whatever.

Was the high fructose sweetener in my soda made from GM corn from Monsanto or a more traditional hybrid from ADM? Do I have a product that contains material from Cargil that was bought from farmers at market or raised on factory farms by Con-Agra? Farming is a necessary evil if we want to eat; most of us are not in the position to try to grow our own food. Then the question could become are small inefficient family farms better or worse in the long run? I think people tent to over romanticize certain things and farming is one of them.

Yes there are dangers if there are too few players in an industry. Some industries seem to have more problems than others Petro-Chem and Agriculture share some nasty secrets some are even common; remember DDT? Cheap to make and use and supposedly safe and by using it we wiped out species of animals and brought others near extinction. Edison was quick to play to the fact that AC electricity killed people to play up his plans for a DC power grid. I don’t think we have enough facts to actually make a decision on GM food at this point. Heck in the ‘60’s they said that LSD would mess up your chromosomes and give you horrible psychotic flashbacks.

[WHT]

"I would like to make something more clear to you as well, I am not a leftist but right wing, actualy more center but on the right side but not neceraly god, I mean I do not want to be on the bad side of god either, you never know when we die that we might need to be on the right side of god, but not to right of god, i mean center or is that centre"

   

←

Good point but if it is The Centre in Del. ask Dr Rehines

[stovetop]

Was the high fructose sweetener in my soda made from GM corn from Monsanto or a more traditional hybrid from ADM? Do I have a product that contains material from Cargil that was bought from farmers at market or raised on factory farms by Con-Agra?

Excellant question; for me it is not the singular of the corporation, cause a corporation is a person, but what is a group of corporations, if we in theory can prove a singularity in a corporation then can we prove plural in a corporation, then how does It defend itself??????????????????

steve

[Rebel Rose]

Ladies and gentlemen,

We all have our positions on this issue. It is dear to our gullets.

Please focus on your personal stand, and present reasons for your rationale without attacking other members.

[jsolomon]

I hate to burst y'all purists' bubbles, but GMO's are here to stay, whether you like it or not. There are simply too many things that are easier done the GMO way, than otherwise.

For instance, vaccines. Many vaccines are produced by inserting the DNA sequence of interest into a separate organism and having the other organism express the product. Why? Many times, it's chemically easier to purify. It can also be safer, faster, or more effective to produce.

Alternatively, you ask scientists to prove them safe. Well, that's fine and dandy, but asking us to prove them safe is a handy semantic twist of asking us to prove that they DON'T do something, and proving a negative is always a tricky business. Certainly not one I want to be a part of.

So, I'm going to operate under the assumption that GMO's are innocent until proven guilty. Also, that the US needs to adjust its IP laws. Likewise, our use of food and food subsidies for political clout should be limited. Finally we ought to re-examine what sustainable agriculture really is. However, I don't think that GMO's ought to be excluded from the food supply. Records ought to be kept for safety's sake. However, I don't believe panic is iin order.

Also, don't neglect the power of the pen in US politics. 50 constituents writing in to a senator or representative in opposition to something Monsanto wants still has clout. We vote. Monsanto don't.

[stovetop]

So, I'm going to operate under the assumption that GMO's are innocent until proven guilty

Hey that works for me!

steve

Who is going to be the Judge?

There is plenty of evidence and science to prove anything; we all do not have the money Monsanto has to prove anything!!

Edited January 18, 2005 by stovetop (log)

[stovetop]

Like I said before; The only thing I disagree with is the non-discloser on any info related to genetic diffrence.

steve

We do not have the research grants that monsato has to prove anything in regards the scientific method.??

Edited January 18, 2005 by stovetop (log)

[FaustianBargain]

I love this type of over generalization; If you check you will find it was Dow that gave us Agent Orange, Merck and Squib along with others on the hormone bit, PCB from any of the large chemical companies. Some of the stuff you mentioned isn’t even areas that Monsanto works in.

An April 2003 report paid for by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that during the Vietnam War, 3,181 villages were sprayed directly with herbicides. Between 2.1 and 4.8 million people "would have been present during the spraying." Furthermore, many U.S. military personnel were also sprayed or came in contact with herbicides in recently sprayed areas. The study was originally undertaken for the U.S. military to get a better count of how many veterans served in sprayed areas. Researchers were given access to military records and Air Force operational folders previously not studied. The re-estimate made by the report places the volume of herbicides sprayed between 1961 and 1971 to a level 7,131,907 liters more than an uncorrected estimate published in 1974 and 9.4 million more liters than a 1974 corrected inventory. It was produced under contract for the Army by Diamond Shamrock, Dow, Hercules, Monsanto, T-H Agricultural & Nutrition, Thompson Chemicals, and Uniroyal.

[source]

Monsanto developed a synthetic version of bST, known as recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST), which goes by the brand name Posilac®. Injected into dairy cattle, the product can increase milk production by anywhere from an average of 10% up to 40%. In November 1993, the product was approved for use in the U.S. by the FDA, and its use began in February 1994. The product is now sold in all 50 states. According to Monsanto, approximately one third of dairy cattle in the U.S. are injected with Posilac; approximately 13,000 dairy producers use the product. It is now the top selling dairy cattle pharmaceutical product in the U.S. The FDA does not require special labels for products produced from cows given rbST.

[source]

The major producer, Monsanto, marketed PCBs under the trade name Aroclor from 1930 to 1977. Their commercial utility was based largely on their chemical stability, including low flammability, and desirable physical properties, including electrical insulating properties. Their chemical and physical stability has also been responsible for their continuing low-level persistence in the environment, and the lingering interest decades after regulations were imposed to control environmental contamination.

[source]

You mention ties to the current administration but fail to report on how much Dupont and Corning gave Clinton.

This is a logical fallacy. It is irrelevant to bring up Dupond and Corning while discussing Monsanto. It is like getting hysterical about a rape when someone pipes in and mentions why there is no reaction to the rape that is happening in the neighbouring county.

If you presented your facts in a more compelling light you would get farther. Part of why you come off as neo-luddites is that is the face we the public see most often. This happens at both ends of the spectrum; emotional statements used to bolster a logical argument. Along with the inevitable clustering of evils and rhetoric.

I am relieved that it is just about my presentation skills. I am sure someone will saunter along to give facts in the most compelling light as the public likes it. Hopefully, it wont be too late. If it is too late, *I* would simply have to kill myself out of sheer guilt.

Edited January 18, 2005 by FaustianBargain (log)

[stovetop]

Cargill

Cargill, Cargill has a long, rich history, starting with W. W. Cargill's first grain storage facility on the American frontier in 1865. The company has grown to become one of the largest, privately-owned businesses, providing food, agricultural and risk management products and services around the globe.

Louis dreyfus

The Group has merchandised and traded bulk agricultural commodities in international markets since 1851. Louis Dreyfus conducts its merchandising and trading activities through various affiliates in cities around the world.

Louis Dreyfus is consistently ranked as one of the world's largest merchandisers of grains and oilseeds every year. Products traded today include corn, barley, wheat, sorghum, soybeans, canola, sunflower and oilseed products. Louis Dreyfus has a major presence in all of the major grain and oilseed production regions in the world, including the United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Europe, South Africa and the states of the former Soviet Union. In addition to these origination activities, the Group is engaged in a large distribution network in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and the former Soviet Union. Offices in Paris, Singapore and Wilton (Connecticut) serve as hubs to coordinate the merchandising activities of over 30 local offices. The Group's history and expertise in transport logistics provide an advantage in merchandising activities.

Con Agra foods

ConAgra Foods Inc. (NYSE: CAG) is one of North America's largest packaged food companies, serving consumer grocery retailers, as well as restaurants and other foodservice establishments. Popular ConAgra Foods consumer brands include: ACT II, Armour, Banquet, Blue Bonnet, Brown 'N Serve, Butterball, Chef Boyardee, Cook's, Crunch 'n Munch, DAVID, Decker, Eckrich, Egg Beaters, Fleischmann's, Golden Cuisine, Gulden's, Healthy Choice, Hebrew National, Hunt's, Kid Cuisine, Knott's Berry Farm, La Choy, Lamb Weston, Libby's, Life Choice, Lightlife, Lunch Makers, MaMa Rosa's, Manwich, Marie Callender's, Orville Redenbacher's, PAM, Parkay, Pemmican, Peter Pan, Reddi-wip, Rosarita, Ro*Tel, Slim Jim, Snack Pack, Swiss Miss, Van Camp's, Wesson, Wolf, and many others. For more information, please visit us at www.conagrafoods.com.

ADM

A world leader in agricultural processing, ADM has built a vertically integrated global franchise with the sourcing, production and transportation capabilities to meet the needs of customers on six continents. ADM is a world leader in the production of soy meal and oil, corn for ethanol and sweeteners, wheat for bakery products and cocoa for a number of chocolate products. The Company also makes such value-added products as specialty food ingredients and specialty feed ingredients. At ADM, we work closely with our customers to provide a matrix of value, a mix of agricultural products and services that meet their specific needs. ADM'S operations encompass agricultural producing and consuming regions on six continents, with a global network of agricultural sourcing, processing, transportation and financial services. Headquartered in Decatur, Illinois, ADM has over 26,000 employees, more than 250 processing plants and net sales for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004 of $36.2 billion.

Monsanto

Monsanto is a leading provider of agricultural products and solutions. We use unparalleled innovation in plant biotechnology, genomics and breeding to improve productivity and to reduce the costs of farming. We produce leading seed brands, including DEKALB and Asgrow, and we develop biotechnology traits that integrate insect control and weed control into the seed itself. We make Roundup, the world’s best-selling herbicide, and other herbicides, which can be combined with our seeds and traits to offer farmers integrated solutions. Through our Holden’s/Corn States business, we also provide other seed companies with genetic material and biotechnology traits for their seed brands. We manage our business in two segments: Seeds and Genomics, and Agricultural Productivity

Saputo

2001-Saputo becomes the leader in the Canadian dairy industry by acquiring Dairyworld Foods, a major Canadian producer of cheese, fluid milk and other dairy products.

2003-To provide added value to its whey derivatives, Saputo enters into a partnership agreement in which it holds a 51% interest. California-based Gallo Protein produces and markets whey by-products. Saputo positions itself as the leader in the blue cheese category in the US retail market segment by acquiring the activities related to the Treasure Cave and Nauvoo blue cheese brands.

2003-Saputo establishes itself outside North America by acquiring Molfino Hermanos S.A., the third largest dairy processor in Argentina.

2004-Owed to the efforts of its founding members Luigi, Lino, Frank, John, Rosalia, Antonina, Maria, Elina and their parents, Giuseppe and Maria, today Saputo celebrates 50 years of growth, passion and craftmanship.

Unilever

Our purpose in Unilever is to meet the everyday needs of people everywhere – to anticipate the aspirations of our consumers and customers and to respond creatively and competitivelywith branded products and services which raise the quality of life.

Our deep roots in local cultures and markets around the world are our unparalleled inheritance and the foundation for our future growth. We will bring our wealth of knowledge and international expertise to the service of local consumers – a truly multi-local multinational.

Our long-term success requires a total commitment to exceptional standards of performance and productivity, to working together effectively and to a willingness to embrace new ideas and learn continuously.

We believe that to succeed requires the highest standards of corporate behaviour towards our employees, consumers and the societies and world in which we live.

This is Unilever'sroad to sustainable, profitable growth for our business and long-term value creation for our shareholders and employees.

Parmalat

Our tradition of quality began in Parma, Italy in 1961. Calisto Tanzi founded Parmalat with the hope of building a solid local business to support his family. But in time, Parmalat has become much more than that. With a continued commitment to quality and innovation, Parmalat has become an international company with increasing sales year after year. Parmalat is the world's leading producer of UHT shelf stable milk.

Today, Parmalat is one of the largest food companies in Canada. In fact, millions of Canadians enjoy our products every day. Trusted brands like Beatrice, Lactantia, Astro, and Black Diamond are all part of the Parmalat family. Not to mention Balderson, Cheestrings, Sargento, Olivina, Parkay and Colonial too. Which means Canadians can enjoy everything from our milk and dairy products, to fruit juices, cultured products, cheese products, table spreads and cookies. All with the highest standards of quality demanded for your family.

Agropur

Natrel is a division of Agropur Cooperative, a 100% Canadian-owned and operated business. Agropur is a leading Canadian dairy organization with $1.9 billion in sales and a membership of 4,400 dairy farmers. Its head office is located in Granby, Quebec.

  Natrel’s head office is located in Longueuil, Quebec.

  Natrel was formed in 1990 as a subsidiary of Agropur for the sales and marketing of fluid milk products.

  Agropur purchased Brant Dairy in 1995, the Ontario fluid milk division of Ault Foods in 1997 and Grace-Mar Dairy in British Columbia in 1998 in order to expand the national presence of Natrel.

  Natrel has net sales in excess of $980 million annually.

  Natrel has 9 manufacturing plants in Canada

(4 in Ontario, 4 in Quebec and 1 in British Columbia).

  Ontario plants are located in Toronto, Sudbury, Brantford and Ottawa.

  Quebec plants are located in Montreal, Quebec City, Amqui and Saint-Bruno.

  The British Columbia plant is located in Chilliwack.

  Brand names include Sealtest*, Québon, Natrel Fine-filtered, Natrel Ultra’Milk, Natrel Lactose Free, Natrel Calcium, Natrel Ultra'milk Calcium, Natrel Omega-3, Natrel Nutrition 24, Ultra’Cream, Natrel Moostache, Hershey® and Oh Henry!® milkshakes and Le Petit Gaspésien.

  Natrel employs over 1,540 people across Canada.

Altria

Although the company today known as AltriaGroup has only been in existence since 1985, our operating companies have roots that stretch back, in some instances well over 150 years. Kraft Foods, for example, has its origins in 1767 when Bayldon and Berry began selling candied fruit peel to the citizens of York, England. In the mid-nineteenth century, Philip Morris, Esq. opened his retail tobacco shop on London's Bond Street. That modest venture has grown to become Philip Morris USA, the largest tobacco company in the U.S., and Philip Morris International one of the largest tobacco companies in the world. Over the centuries these companies have grown individually and, more recently, as part of the Altria family of companies.

Each of these quotes comes from the corporate web sites; each is a description of the corporation by the corporation. Each has a link to where the quotes are from, each corporate web site..

The purpose of this is to show the corporation we are talking about and how few food corporations there realy are. A few control the many.

steve

Edited January 18, 2005 by stovetop (log)

[jsolomon]

So, clarify for me, please. How would you label milk from cows given Posilac? Posilac is from a GMO, to be sure. But, it doesn't do anything of the sort of genetic modification do the cow--and if you're going to bring up histone modification and de-methylation go straight to purgatory and think about what you're saying.

And, if you do this, would you further the fear uncertainty and doubt by making your physician and your pharmacist have to give you a big long schpiel every time you purchase a recombinant vaccine. Is there a difference between GMO food and GMO medical items?

It's the same FDA between foods and drugs. Do you lobby the same way against GMO medicines?

Edit to fix pre-caffeinated verb conjugation.

Edited January 18, 2005 by jsolomon (log)

[Boris_A]

Just wonder: how is liability regulated? If there is an extended, environmental GM-food contamination, is sufficient insurance coverage warranted? Or more precisely: are the risks privately or publicly financed?