See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Monsanto clears USDA regulatory hurdle for new GMO corn
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/monsanto-clea ... o-corn-203841332--finance.html
Published: Oct 25, 2015
Author: Karl Plume and P.J. Huffstutter
Post Date: 2015-10-25 06:02:27 by Tatarewicz
Keywords: None
Views: 61
Comments: 1
Yahoo... CHICAGO (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Friday signed off on a new genetically modified type of corn developed by Monsanto Co after a review concluded it posed no significant threat to agricultural crops, other plants or the environment. The USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced it would deregulate Monsanto's MON 87411 maize, which was developed to protect plants against corn rootworms that can damage roots and drag down grain yields and be tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate. The so-called trait would be inserted into a line of corn seeds' genetic code and could be "stacked" with other traits. Glyphosate, which the World Health Organization has said is "probably" linked to cancer, is the active weed-killing ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup and other herbicides produced by farm chemical companies. The agency's move is a step in the multiyear process of commercializing genetically engineered seed traits. Other steps include assessments by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and regulators in other countries. The EPA's review is still ongoing. The agency's scientific advisory panel has raised red flags on the issue, however, and criticized weak guidelines in assessing the risks of such biotechnology, said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a senior scientist at advocacy group the Center for Food Safety. Among their concerns: better understanding the impact on pollinators like bees and other insects. Monsanto is planning a full commercial launch of its SmartStax PRO, a line of products featuring MON 87411 maize, by the end of the decade pending necessary regulatory approvals, the company said in a statement. Separately, APHIS said Friday it was extending the comment period for a genetically-engineered corn trait developed by Syngenta Seeds Inc., a unit of Syngenta AG, for 30 days. Syngenta's genetically engineered MZHG0JG corn is resistant to glyphosate and glufosinate – an herbicide combination the company says will expand options for farmers battling the growing problem of weed resistance, but one that critics say will fuel the problem. As of 2014, there were 14 different glyphosate-resistant weed species and one resistant to glufosinate, according to the USDA's preliminary findings of the Syngenta petition. The risk of herbicide-resistant weed development will be ever present where herbicides are used, the assessment added. Syngenta could not be immediately reached for comment. The regulatory moves come amid increased scrutiny of glyphosate following a report issued in March by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer that said it can "probably" cause cancer. Monsanto and others have challenged the report's findings, but the controversy continues. California environmental officials have announced plans to list the herbicide as cancer-causing, a move Monsanto is trying to block. The company recently told state regulators that such actions could be considered illegal because they are not considering valid scientific evidence. Monsanto is also facing mounting litigation over the issue as law firms representing U.S. farm workers have filed lawsuits against the company, accusing it of knowing of the dangers of glyphosate for decades. Monsanto said the claims are without merit. (This version of the story corrects organization in sixth paragraph to Center for Food Safety from National Resources Defense Council) (Editing by Tom Brown) Poster Comment: stevem.... Here are some of my thoughts on this as a farmer... 1. Anything the government and Monsanto are trying to sell the public on aren't be trusted or accepted at face value, because neither have your best interest or health in mind. 2. 'Scientific' studies in the U.S. on the subject of GMO's and their assciated herbicides are absolutely corrupted by money and influence, and therefore highly questionable. 3. Monsanto, in collusion with a corrupt federal government, has the power, influence, and money, to get almost anything they want rubber stamped in the U.S. As always, with the accompanying claim of 'helping' farmers, or 'helping' to feed a 'starving' world. 4. In my experience, I'll have to agree that since the introduction of GMO's, weeds have (and who knows what else) became worse and harder to control. 5. In my experience, there is no yield advantage over non-GMO, provided genetics are comparable. There is, however, a huge difference in seed costs per acre. 6. I decided a couple of years ago, that I didn't need to be beholden to huge corporations any longer, sign their technology agreements, or pay their ridiculous fees. 87-5 meowy... What about the effects of our intestinal bacteria and correlating immune system? We barely know enough about how our immune system functions now to go and mess with it by genetically modifying corn, soy and other food sources, and by people's ingestion of glyphosate. Also, how is the requirement that farmers have to sign contracts to only use and repurchase Monsanto seeds good for sustainability? ohhubub ... Former Monsanto corporate heads are now in our USDA, EPA & FDA! seriously! and Hillary Clinton has worked for them for YEARS. She has traveled the globe 'selling' Monsanto's GMO's through the trade legislation, like NAFTA & soon to be the disgusting TPP. She spoke to all the Pacific countries involved, selling them on it at least 45 times. Now, she suddenly says 'It doesn't meet up with my expectations'. Bald face liar, while her family eats Organic. Monsanto is one of her biggest campaign contributors - only the Wall Street banks donate larger amounts. As a democrat, I REFUSE to vote for her! 100-4 Commenter ... Of course the USDA passed it.... the USDA is under the control of that corporation. It is a well-known fact that Monsanto paid shills will vilify all people who post factual information regarding the aforementioned powerful chemical company are generally responded to with sarcasm in lieu of facts. That said, these are some FACTS: The USDA has never denied a single application from Monsanto for new genetically engineered crops. Not one. Ever. The takeover has been thorough. Monsanto's growth hormones for cows have been approved by Michael Taylor, a former Monsanto lobbyist turned USDA administrator and FDA deputy commissioner. This was after Margaret Miller, a former Monsanto employee, oversaw a report on the hormones' safety and then took a job at the FDA where she approved her own report. Islam Siddiqui, a former Monsanto lobbyist, wrote the USDA's food standards, allowing corporations to label irradiated and genetically engineered foods as "organic." Then a law was passed and signed nicknamed the Monsanto Protection Act (section 735,formerly Section 733, of US H.R. 933) strips federal courts of the power to halt the sale and planting of genetically engineered crops during a legal appeals process. The origin of this act can be found in the USDA's deregulation of Roundup Ready sugar beets in violation of a court order. The USDA argued that any delay would have caused a sugar shortage, since Monsanto holds 95% of the market. Section 735 of US H.R.933 was a provision snuck into the emergency budget bill that essentially exempts biotech firms like Monsanto Company from judicial review. Now that President Obama has signed the law, Monsanto may plant genetically modified seeds even if a court of law orders them to stop. The revolving door keeps revolving. Monsanto's board members have worked for the EPA, advised the USDA, and served on President Obama's Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations. 27-2
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
We're the Frankenstein nation. There'll be no containing the genes of our Frankencorn, and other countries will be eating it whether they want to or not! By an odd coincidence, Frankenstein is a Jue name. You don't suppose..... Ms Shelley's book was an allegory on the Jue problem, DO YOU? Comparison....
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest