.

A Month Without Monsanto

April Dávila wondered what it would take to cut the GMO giant out of her family's life. She found that it was far more entrenched than she'd ever realized.

by April Dávila

posted Aug 24, 2010

Photo by Roger Smith

In January of this year, while procrastinating on Facebook, I followed a link to an article reporting on evidence that there may be health effects associated with consuming Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) corn. Clicking on that link was one of those moments on which I look back and laugh. I had no idea how my life was about to change.

Monsanto’s Reach

The article I stumbled onto concerned a study done in 2009 by a group of French scientists investigating the safety of genetically modified food. Their results, as published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences, pointed toward kidney and liver damage in rats fed GM corn.
I began to research where exactly Monsanto corn appeared in my family’s diet. With a little online sleuthing, I learned that in addition to producing the genetically modified corn, Monsanto produces several other genetically modified crops such as soy, sugar beets, and cotton. Many of these crops form the foundation of our diets: 70 to 80 percent of American processed foods contain genetically engineered ingredients, according to the Grocery Manufacturers of America. A large percentage of the cotton in our clothes and homes begins in Monsanto's labs.

By day two of my attempt to remove Monsanto from my life, I realized I was in way over my head.

Probing a little deeper, I was surprised to learn that a company specializing in genetically modified plant crops also had an enormous influence on America’s meat industry. Sixty percent of genetically modified corn goes to feed America’s beef cattle. Additionally, Monsanto’s recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) is used to increase milk production in many dairy cows.

Tracing Foods Back to their Source

I decided to see if I could go the entire month of March without consuming any Monsanto products. I committed to an all organic, vegan diet, and reluctantly invested in a small organic cotton wardrobe. It was an experiment born of curiosity: I wanted to know just how deeply my life was influenced by Monsanto, a company I knew little about before that click of my mouse in January.

The City That Ended Hunger
Belo Horizonte, Brazil did—and it wasn't that hard.

By day two of my attempt to remove Monsanto from my life, I realized I was in way over my head. For the past 10 years Monsanto has bought up seed companies around the globe. They now own a majority of the seed lines in America, including a large percentage of organic seeds. For everyday purposes, a Monsanto seed that is grown organically is still organic, but in my attempt to avoid Monsanto, I was left without any easy way of knowing what foods fit my experiment. I retreated to subsisting on wild-caught fish while I dug deep to try to figure out where exactly my foods came from.
With the help of sustainable food advocate Cassie Gruenstein, I got in touch with dozens of health food stores and manufacturers to ask where they sourced their products. I spent hours at the farmers’ market asking farmers what seed companies they bought from, googling on my iPhone before making purchases. It took several weeks, but I slowly built a somewhat normal Monsanto-free existence.

There is no easy way to avoid Monsanto. It requires talking with the person who grew your food—every ingredient of every bite.

Unfortunately, with the exception of a few national brands (check out Annie’s, Inc. Massa Organics, and Lundberg Farms for a good start), there is no easy way to avoid Monsanto. It requires talking with the person who grew your food—every ingredient of every bite.

Good First Steps

While it’s extremely difficult to entirely avoid Monsanto, there are some basic guidelines that anyone can use to minimize the genetically modified organisms in their lives.

1. Avoid processed foods. In particular, eliminate High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) from your diet and be sure to read labels. HFCS appears in everything from sodas to wheat bread.
2. Consider going vegetarian, limiting your meat consumption, or buying grass-fed varieties. Over 60 percent of genetically modified corn goes to feed cattle on polluting concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) in America.  
3. Buy organic dairy products to make sure animals weren't given Monsanto’s recombinant bovine growth hormone.
4. Buy organic cotton when you can. Monsanto is a major player in the cotton industry. Even though cotton makes up only 2.5 percent of the world’s crops, it is doused with 16 percent of the world’s pesticides. Cotton pesticides, most of which are listed as “extremely hazardous” by the World Health Organization, turn up regularly in water sources around the globe.

What most amazed me during my month without Monsanto was the influence that one corporation had in my daily life—without me knowing anything about it. Once I started looking, Monsanto was everywhere. Once I started making the effort to avoid it, I found something else that surprised me: the confidence that comes from really knowing what I’m eating.

---

April Dávila wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. April is a freelance writer living and working in Los Angeles. Find out more about her at AprilDavila.com.
Interested?

• A Farmer Rounds Up Monsanto: A Canadian farmer wins a decade-long battle over "Roundup Ready" canola.
• Haitian Farmers Refuse Monsanto Seeds: A coalition of peasant farmers is standing up for food sovereignty.
  
• Food Rebellions: 7 Steps to Solving the Food Crisis: Resistance to the trade and “aid” policies that displace farmers and increase hunger.

YES! Magazine encourages you to make free use of this article by taking these easy steps. Dávila, A. (2010, August 24). A Month Without Monsanto. Retrieved August 26, 2010, from YES! Magazine Web site: http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/a-month-without-monsanto. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License

Right To Know Bill Introduced

Image via Wikipedia

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 24, 2010 2:17 PM

CONTACT: Congressman Dennis Kucinich  Nathan White (202)225-5871

Kucinich Introduces Right to Know Legislation; Bills Create Regulatory Framework for Genetically Engineered Organisms

WASHINGTON - June 24 - Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), a long-time advocate of family farmers and organic foods, today introduced H.R. 5577, The Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act, as well as supporting legislation that will provide a comprehensive regulatory framework for all Genetically Engineered (GE) plants, animals, bacteria, and other organisms.
"To ensure we can maximize benefits and minimize hazards, Congress must provide a comprehensive regulatory framework for all Genetically Engineered products. Structured as a common-sense precaution to ensure GE foods do no harm, these bills will ensure that consumers are protected, food safety measures are strengthened, farmers' rights are better protected and biotech companies are responsible for their products," said Kucinich.
In addition to the Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act, Kucinich introduced the Genetically Engineered Safety Act, HR 5578, which prohibits the open-air cultivation of GE pharmaceutical and industrial crops and establishes a tracking system to regulate and ensure the safety of GE pharmaceutical and industrial crops.
The third bill is the Genetically Engineered Technology Farmer Protection Act, HR 5579 which would protect farmers and ranchers that may be harmed economically by genetically engineered seeds, plants, or animals, to ensure fairness for farmers and ranchers in their dealings with biotech companies that sell GE products.
Congressman Kucinich has long been a proponent of ‘Right to Know' legislation, and has introduced similar bills in previous sessions of Congress.

###

Related articles by Zemanta

• 2 reviews of Monsanto (rateitall.com)
• DK Matai: Genetically Modified Insects: What Next? (huffingtonpost.com)
• Canada Bans Nano In Organic Foods | Nanotechnology (nanotechnology.org.in)
• Robyn O'Brien: Supreme Court Rules Monsanto Is "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" as Children Bear Witness (huffingtonpost.com)
• Ronnie Cummins: Generation Monsanto (GM) - Why We Need Labels on GM Foods Now (huffingtonpost.com)
• What Supreme Court ruling on GMO crops means (sfgate.com)
• OK to plant genetically modified alfalfa seeds, court rules (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Campaign targets bioengineered food (msnbc.msn.com)
• What Good Are The Patents On Oil-Eating Bacteria Doing Us? (techdirt.com)

Internet Inequality Affects Social Equality

Image via Wikipedia

Published on Monday, May 17, 2010 by Reclaim the Media
Urban Internet Inequalities Reinforce Social Inequalities

by Marcos Martinez

The message couldn't have been more clear last month when FCC staff sat in a crowded Seattle conference room with about 80 local folks, gathered to share our opinions on preserving a fair and open Internet. Even in the tech capital of Seattle, urban communities need broadband access that is more fair, more affordable, and more reliable--and we need consumer protections from Internet providers who would keep many of us stuck in Internet slow lanes rather than treating us all fairly.

This summer, the FCC is making a sensible move to strengthen its ability to improve Internet access across the country, in response to a recent court decision which questioned the agency's authority to hold companies like Comcast accountable to our community needs. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski wants to make sure that the agency remains able to pursue the goals laid out in the National Broadband Plan released earlier this year; those goals include preserving Internet openness (net neutrality), and catching up with other industrialized countries in broadband speed and affordability.

Among the most important goals in that report is establishing broadband as a universal service. It's no secret that huge digital divides still exist between Internet haves and have-nots, as broadband access has been especially slow to reach many rural and tribal areas. But many urban areas are also afflicted by access problems—including some of the nation's supposed high-tech Meccas.

Few readers of Forbes were surprised last year when the business magazine ranked Seattle the nation's most tech-savvy city. Seattle is the center of a famously tech-rich area, with major software, high-tech and Internet-focused companies based in the region, and a high degree of utilization of information technologies ranging from smart phones to computers and cable television. In addition, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis has ranked Seattle 17th in per capita income among 363 metropolitan areas, and the city also boasts among the highest rates of literacy and post-secondary graduates in the nation.

All this makes the persistence of digital divides in Seattle confounding and unsettling.

City government and community organizations have been engaged in studying the problem, and the city has created initiatives to close the gap and also researching the size and shape of the divide. The 2009 Seattle Technology Access and Adoption Report tracks the use of information technologies over time, and documents the digital divide.

“In an increasingly digital culture, the gap in [broadband] adoption threatens greater exclusion or marginalization, and sharper disparities in opportunities for education, civic participation, jobs and economic success.”

The city’s study was conducted using surveys and focus groups. Income and education were the most significant factors in determining digital exclusion, but age, ethnicity, language spoken and disability also were found to be significant in technology adoption. Focus groups conducted with immigrant communities also affirmed that those with language barriers are more disconnected.

One of the important uses of information technology in terms of civic affairs is the accessing of information about city services, policy-making and the opportunity to engage with elected or appointed officials. The city of Seattle, as an example, has an info-rich municipal website where users can not only pay their utility bills and report pot holes, but also send a message directly to the mayor, find out when a transportation planning meeting is taking place, and comment on policy issues that affect their daily living.

While the internet has many uses that are entertaining and could be considered frivolous, the ability to engage civically is one use where the exclusion of certain demographic groups can affect our democracy. If low-income residents are unable to access important services and information online, they are shut out of important opportunities to wield their civic power.

In addition, the success of students is increasingly determined by access to the information and resources that are available online, and which depend on the ability to connect at high speeds. Many low-income households in Seattle remain unable to afford home Internet access--that affects students' ability to complete homework, and parents' ability to communicate with teachers.

In the same way that policymakers implemented Universal Service for telephones in the last century, a similar initiative is needed today to insure that disparities of income and opportunity do not deepen the disenfranchisement of groups that are excluded from the digital revolution. We've got to make sure that the federal government, including the FCC, continues to follow this path.

In Seattle, our local Digital Justice Coalition, led by Reclaim the Media and other MAG-Net member organizations, is calling for both local and national solutions for expanding digital rights. We're pushing our city government to build a publicly-owned fiber broadband network, in order to provide affordable, fast broadband to every home/office in Seattle. This build-it-ourselves solution would go a long way towards erasing local digital divides, equalizing technology access across neighborhoods for the first time. In addition, a publicly-accountable open network would guarantee open access and net neutrality.

But for the long term, federal policies are needed to protect our digital rights--not just in tech centers like Seattle, but in all urban and rural communities. That's why MAG-Net member organizations across the country are continuing to push the FCC and our elected officials to enact policies that make high-quality broadband access truly universal, maintain a fair and open Internet, and encourage all people to become fully engaged participants in our digital democracy.
© 2010 Reclaim the Media
Marcos Martinez is executive director of Entre Hermanos, a nonprofit devoted to HIV prevention in Seattle's Latino community. He is also board president of the Minority Executive Directors Coalition, and a board member of the Youth Media Institute. Marcos was a featured speaker at Reclaim the Media's April community forum with the FCC, "Speaking Up for a Fair and Open Internet." Listen to Marcos' testimony from that event here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Is Obama Abandoning Net Neutrality? (alternet.org)
• Internet Use and Well-Being: U.K. Web Study Shows Link (time.com)
• Ottawa announces funding for broadband in rural areas (financialpost.com)
• Timothy Karr: Communications Breakdown (huffingtonpost.com)
• Megan Tady: Million Dollar Ad Blitz to Kill Net Neutrality (huffingtonpost.com)
• Summary Box: FCC seeks compromise on how it regulates broadband; step is key to its agenda (taragana.com)
• A vital link (timesunion.com)
• Time for FCC to reclassify broadband to ensure Internet remains a democratic medium (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Federal Communications Commission allows blocking of output connectors on set-top boxes (taragana.com)