See other Health Articles
Title: Federal Judge Revokes USDA Approval Of Monsanto's Genetically Modified Sugar Beets
Source:
Activist Post
URL Source: http://www.activistpost.com/2010/08 ... -approval-of.html#comment-form
Published: Aug 16, 2010
Author: Michael Liedtke AP
Post Date: 2010-08-16 16:38:03 by Original_Intent
Keywords: GMO, Frankenfood, Poison, death
Views: 2480
Comments: 25
Federal Judge Revokes USDA Approval Of Monsanto's Genetically Modified Sugar Beets Michael Liedtke SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge has revoked the government's approval of genetically altered sugar beets until regulators complete a more thorough review of how the scientifically engineered crops affect other food. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White Friday means sugar beet growers won't be able to use the modified seeds after harvesting the biotechnology beets already planted on more than 1 million acres spanning 10 states from Michigan to Oregon. All the seed comes from Oregon's Willamette Valley. Additional planting won't be allowed until the U.S. Department of Agriculture submits an environmental impact statement. That sort of extensive examination can take two or three years. White declined a request to issue an injunction that would have imposed a permanent ban on the biotech beets, which Monsanto Co. developed to resist its popular weed killer, Roundup. Farmers have embraced the technology as a way to lower their costs on labor, fuel and equipment. The Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed Alliance and Sierra Club have been trying to uproot the biotech beets since filing a 2008 lawsuit. Andrew Kimbrell, the Center for Food Safety's executive director, hailed Friday's decision as a major victory in the fight against genetically engineered crops and chided the Agriculture Department for approving the genetically engineered seeds without a full environmental review. "Hopefully, the agency will learn that their mandate is to protect farmers, consumers and the environment and not the bottom line of corporations such as Monsanto," Kimbrell said in a statement. Attempts to reach the Agriculture Department for comment Saturday were unsuccessful. Monsanto, based in St. Louis, referred requests for comment to the America Sugarbeet Growers Association, which pointed to a Saturday statement from the Sugar Industry Biotech Council. In the statement, the sugar beet council said it intends to help the Agriculture Department come up with "interim measures" that would allow continued production of the genetically altered seeds while regulators conduct their environmental review. If a temporary solution isn't found, the planting restrictions are likely to cause major headaches for sugar beet growers and food processors. The genetically altered sugar beets provide about one-half of the U.S. sugar supply and some farmers have warned there aren't enough conventional seeds and herbicide to fill the void. The scientific seeds account for about 95 percent of the current sugar beet crop in the U.S. "The value of sugar beet crops is critically important to rural communities and their economies," the Sugar Industry Biotech Council said Saturday. White expressed little sympathy for any disruption his decision might cause. He noted in his 10-page ruling that regulators had time to prepare for the disruption because he had already overturned the deregulation of the genetically altered beets in a decision issued last September. The Agriculture Department "has already had more than sufficient time to take interim measures, but failed to act expediently," White wrote. Organic farmers, food safety advocates and conservation groups contend genetically altered crops such as the sugar beets could share their genes with conventionally grown food, such as chard and table beets. Those arguments helped persuade another federal judge in San Francisco to stop the planting of genetically altered alfalfa seeds in 2007 pending a full environmental review that still hasn't been completed. Monsanto took that case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in June overturned an injunction against the company's sale of the modified seeds.
Associated Press
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 13.
#2. To: All (#0)
This is an important ruling on a couple of levels. 1. It will take untested, and potentially health threatening, GMO Sugar out of the food supply. 2. It establishes that the USDA, owned by Monsatan, does not have the final word. The caveats of course are that the higher courts, such as the filthy treasonous swine infesting the Supreme Court, are owned by the special interests as well.
The caveats of course are that the higher courts, such as the filthy treasonous swine infesting the Supreme Court, are owned by the special interests as well. Are you saying, "we lose"???? Again.
Again. Possibly. There are variables. The anti-GMO coalition is growing rapidly and has some very bright minds. As well there has been significant activity here in Oregon in opposition to the growing of GMO Sugar Beets in particular. I think that in the end we will prevail, but it is going to be a fight. Monsatan has a big war chest and the Globalists are pushing this as part of their Food Control program. The undercurrent here, which is not real to the programmed Sheeple, is that Food Control and increased mortality ARE part of the program. GMO Frankenfood is one of the ways that they intend to "cull the herd". Of course Organically Grown food will remain available to the well heeled elites. They will ensure that. That is one of the reasons Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are funding the Arctic Seed Vault to ensure non-GMO seeds are preserved in order to rebuild after killing off 5 or 6 BILLION people. This is also why the draconian so-called Food Safety Bill is being pushed as it would outlaw growing your own food, sharing that food, or trading that food. The reality here that people are not getting is that these people, Rotchilds and Rockefuckers, are DEAD serious about world control, and they want a much reduced and heavily controlled population of slaves.
I can't stop laffing... oh, that is a hum-dinger, a real knee-slapper! Of course, you never get to "root cause" about an issue. Listen up, pal.... these giant corporations are creating farm-able products that require less water while being pest free. Why? Not to "cull the herd" as you suggest within your diatribe but to feed the increasing population base of the world that is experiencing a diminishing fresh water table while the average ambient temperatures are going up. Oh, and under these harsh conditions pests are increasing everywhere. Do I agree with the rapid pace of this technology? Of course not. But, what are we to do otherwise .... read your rants on the Internet or develop new methods of agricultural? Do you have any idea of the silliness of your suggestions? Man, you never seem to end with a few unintended jokes to throw around. You truly are a comedian.
Do you have any idea of the level of ignorance your comments prove? Obviously not, in your blithe and unthinking ignorance and regurgitation of industry talking points and misinformation as is most frequently the case you are a fount of frauds and fallacies. YouTube - Health Ranger interviews Jeffrey Smith about dangers of GMOs The Myths Of Agricultural Biotechnology: Some Ethical Questions Genetically Modified Foods are Inherently Unsafe As for the myth that they increase productivity: GM crop produces lower yield, says scientist Do GM Crops Increase Yield? The Answer is No Genetically Modified Foods Not Good Economically Either? I could very easily produce another hundred links about the health risks, dangers, and lies used to promote them, of GMO crops. However, I suspect that as with most issues you will rigidly follow the Party Lyin'.
Why are you disparaging the jackass? You have to know he is smarter than buck of the loose screw.
#17. To: James Deffenbach, Nostradumbass, all (#13)
You are right. I apologize to the Jackass for the unsavory association.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#3. To: Original_Intent (#2)
It establishes that the USDA, owned by Monsatan, does not have the final word.
#4. To: Cynicom, James Deffenbach, christine, wudidiz, TwentyTwelve, CadetD, farmfriend, Kamala, all (#3)
Are you saying, "we lose"????
#5. To: Original_Intent (#4)
GMO Frankenfood is one of the ways that they intend to "cull the herd". !
#8. To: buckeroo, Buckmonster Fullofit, Nostradumbass, abraxas, Critter, James Deffenbach, FormerLurker, wudidiz, IRTorqued, christine, farmfriend, all (#5)
Do you have any idea of the silliness of your suggestions?
Buckie's considered opinion. Excerpt: The agrochemical corporations which control the direction and goals of agricultural innovation through biotechnology claim that genetic engineering will enhance the sustainability of agriculture by solving the very problems affecting conventional farming and will spare Third World farmers from low productivity, poverty and hunger (Molnar and Kinnucan 1989, Gresshoft 1996). By matching myth with reality the following section describes how and why current developments in agricultural biotechnology do not measure up to such promises and expectations.
#13. To: Original_Intent (#8)
Replies to Comment # 13. Why are you disparaging the jackass? You have to know he is smarter than buck of the loose screw.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 13.