>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [Biodemocracy]News #34 Agbiotech Aggression >Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:09:37 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [63.231.196.30] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBD18D8D00064400437A03FE7C41E0EAF0; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:10:19 -0700 >Received: from pitboss.mcdonagh.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by >pitboss.mcdonagh.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6E084E06787;Fri, 13 Jul >2001 19:08:04 -0500 >Received: from mail.mcdonagh.com (mail.mcdonagh.com [63.231.199.85])by >pitboss.mcdonagh.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6DLTTE01664for ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:29:29 >-0500 >Received: from aconcagua [63.231.201.21] by mail.mcdonagh.com >(SMTPD32-6.06) id A99B27A0120; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:35:23 -0500 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri, 13 Jul 2001 >17:11:23 -0700 >Message-ID: <C30A35D36FCCD31187570008C7B1EB2156A7A7@AARDVARK> >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.3 >Precedence: bulk >X-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >List-Help: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=help> >List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >List-Subscribe: ><http://listsrv.organicconsumers.org/mailman/listinfo/biodemocracy>,<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=subscribe> >List-Id: biodemocracy newsletter ><biodemocracy.listsrv.organicconsumers.org> >List-Unsubscribe: ><http://listsrv.organicconsumers.org/mailman/listinfo/biodemocracy>,<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe> > >To be removed from this list, send any email (blank or not) to >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]. You will then >receive an email confirming that you have been removed from this list. > >BioDemocracy News #34 Agbiotech Aggression >By: Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association >July 2001 (www.organicconsumers.org) (www.purefood.org) >_________________________________________________ >Quote of the Month: > >"Genetically modified food is viewed as unsafe by most [Americans], and the >public wants warning labels on food, a new ABCNEWS.com poll finds� 52% >believe such foods are unsafe, and an additional 13% are unsure about >them�93% say the federal government should require labels on food saying >whether it's been genetically modified � 57% also say they'd be less likely >to buy foods labeled as genetically modified� The image problem of >genetically modified food is underscored by contrast to organic foods. >While >only five percent of Americans say they'd be more likely to buy a food >labeled as genetically modified, 52 percent say they'd be more likely to >buy >food that's labeled as having been raised organically." (<www.ABCNEWS.com> >6/20/01) > >Attack of the Gene Giants > >The global controversy over genetically engineered foods and crops has >intensified. Sensing that they are losing the battle for the hearts and >minds of the public, even in the US and Canada, Agbiotech interests, large >food corporations, and their allies in government have stepped up their >propaganda and intimidation campaign. Since the beginning of 2001 an >unprecedented number of editorial, opinion, and news stories have appeared >in the world press, extolling the virtues of agricultural biotechnology >while denouncing opponents as know-nothing Luddites. Accompanying this >industry media barrage, choreographed by leading public relations firms, >are >a number of other recent noteworthy aggressions: > >* In Canada, Loblaws, Sobey�s, Safeway, A&P, and other large grocery chains >have banned the use of �GMO-free� food labels. Natural food companies >marketing organic and other foods certified as free of genetically modified >organisms (GMOs) have been ordered by Loblaws and other chains to block out >or remove �GMO-free� labels or else their products will be taken off >supermarket shelves. Despite polls that show 90% of Canadians support >labeling GMOs, government regulators, pressured by the US and the biotech >lobby, have thus far ruled out mandatory labeling. But a new GMO food >labeling law has been introduced into Parliament, supported by 80 public >interest groups. > >* In 1994 Monsanto and state agriculture officials in the United States >launched a similar intimidation campaign against several thousand dairies >and health food stores in the US attempting to label or advertise their >dairy products as free of recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH). To this >date, Monsanto�s �no labeling� intimidation campaign has been quite >successful. Less than 10% of US dairy products today are labeled as >�rBGH-free� even though the overwhelming majority (90%) US dairy cows are >not being injected with the drug. Most of America�s 1500 dairies, backed by >food giants such as Kraft/Phillip Morris, have collaborated in denying >consumers free choice by co-mingling rBGH-tainted milk with regular milk >and >then deliberately lying to consumers about the presence of the hormone (�we >don�t know�) in their company�s products. rBGH is banned in every >industrialized country except for the USA, primarily because of scientific >concerns that it is a cancer hazard and likely to cause increased >antibiotic >residues in milk. Voting with their pocketbooks against rBGH, millions of >US >consumers have turned to organic milk and dairy products as well as >rBGH-free labeled brands. > >* Reports of genetic pollution and genetic drift continue to proliferate. >According to a CBC (Canada) radio broadcast (6/2/01), genetically >engineered >canola plants are showing up in farmers� fields all across the Canadian >prairie, even though many of them have never planted GE seeds. Martin >Phillipson, a University of Saskatchewan law professor, said that Monsanto >may be liable for damages if their gene-altered, herbicide resistant canola >continues to spread. "The GM canola has, in fact, spread much more rapidly >than we thought it would," said Martin Entz, a plant scientist at the >University of Manitoba. "It's absolutely impossible to control." > >* Similar genetic pollution has been reported in the US by farmers growing >organic corn and certified �GMO-free� soybeans. US trade representatives, >working hard to engender a growing sense of fatalism regarding the >�impossibility� of growing �GE-free� soybeans, corn, and canola, have told >EU bureaucrats that it is unreasonable and �unworkable� to expect anything >less that 5% genetic contamination in non-GMO grain exports. (Financial >Times 6/20/01) > >But well-known critics such as Jeremy Rifkin point out that the biotech >industry�s genetic pollution is creating a backlash. "They're hoping >there's >enough contamination so that it's a fait accompli� But the liability will >kill them. We�re going to see lawsuits across the Farm Belt as conventional >farmers and organic farmers find that their product is contaminated.� (New >York Times 6/13/01) > >* The US government has warned EU officials that their proposed mandatory >labeling and traceability requirements for genetically engineered grains >and >foods violate World Trade Organization rules mandating free trade and could >subject EU countries to major WTO sanctions and fines. (Reuters 6/1/01) In >a 5/18/01 letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, the American >Farm Bureau Federation, the Grocery Manufacturers of American, and 17 other >farm and commodity giants warned the EU's proposed regulations threaten "a >$4 billion US agricultural export market." > >* The White House and the biotech industry continue to pressure Brazil to >approve Monsanto�s Roundup Ready soybeans for commercialization. Because of >their ban on GE soybeans the Brazilians have captured an increasing share >of >the EU and Asian export market �while US market share has declined. "We are >very hopeful that last domino will fall," said Bob Callanan of the American >Soybean Association. "That's why the environmentalists are putting up a >stink down there in Brazil. They know if that goes, it's all gone." (New >York Times 6/11/01) According to USDA figures (PS&D database) US soy >exports to the EU during the 1995-2000 period declined 14.3%, while >Brazilian exports increased 10.7%. > >* The Bush administration announced 6/13/01 that studies carried out by the >Centers for Disease Control found �no evidence� that Aventis� genetically >engineered StarLink corn has caused allergic reactions in humans. Last >fall, >revelations that StarLink corn, banned by the EPA for human consumption, >had >contaminated over 300 brand name food products, caused a massive >billion-dollar recall and disrupted overseas grain markets. Further recalls >were announced July 5 as StarLink corn was detected in white corn tortilla >chips. US critics from the Genetically Engineered Food Alert ><gefoodalert.org> coalition immediately denounced the CDC findings as >inadequate and unscientific. Among serious problems with the CDC tests: a >tiny and insignificant sample of human blood serum was tested, too small to >be representative of the potentially affected population; the Cry9c protein >studied for allergenicity was a synthetic lab construct rather than the >actual gene-altered protein as expressed in the corn plant; and special >risks to infants, children, mill workers, and farm workers were not taken >into consideration. For a scientific critique of the StarLink whitewash see >(www.purefood.org/gefood/fdaallergyscandal.cfm) > >* Reuters reported 6/25/01 that Sri Lanka was being pushed by the US to >reverse its ban on genetically engineered foods. Responding to intense >pressure, Sri Lanka officials announced a temporary suspension of their >ban, >but emphasized that the ban would likely be reimposed Sept. 1. "We know of >no credible scientific evidence justifying Sri Lanka's ban. We believe it >is >totally unwarranted," Weyland Beeghly, agricultural counselor of the U.S. >Embassy in neighboring India, told a news conference in Sri Lanka May 10. >Informed sources report similar strong-arm tactics being employed by >American diplomats and trade bureaucrats throughout the Asia and Pacific >region (and across the world)�where mandatory labeling and production or >import bans on GMOs are steadily gaining momentum. > >* Cropchoice.com reported 5/21/01 that Monsanto has continued suing >�hundreds� of US farmers for �patent infringement,� for the �crime� of >having genetically engineered plants growing on their property without >paying royalty payments to Monsanto. Several farmers being sued by Monsanto >are fighting back however, filing counter-lawsuits in North Dakota and >Illinois, claiming that Monsanto is deliberately causing genetic pollution, >and then turning around and suing innocent farmers who are victims of this >genetic trespass. > >* Congressman George Nethercutt, a Republican from Washington state, >detailed plans 6/20/01 for a full-out legal assault on so-called >"eco-terrorism," including a federal bill that would convey �mandatory >prison sentences for violence against environmental and life-sciences >research.� The bill comes in the wake of over 45 acts of crop destruction >or >sabotage carried out over the past two years by American activists against >genetically engineered food crops, trees, and animals. Although no one has >been injured in these �decontamination� actions, the biotech industry >worries that direct action and crop sabotage will become more widespread. >Over the past 60 days anti-GE direct actions and sabotage have been >reported >in Idaho, California, Washington, Oregon, Belgium, France, UK, and the >Netherlands. > >* More Agbiotech Aggression. Monsanto and Aventis recently blocked >citizens� >rights to find out the locations where genetically engineered field crops >are being tested in Australia (Sydney Morning Herald 6/22/01). In a >similar >move, Monsanto threatened July 3 to sue authorities in France for releasing >the location of secret GE test sites. > >* Meanwhile on the �right-to-know� labeling front, Trader Joe�s, Price >Chopper, Hy-Vee and other regional supermarket chains are informing US >consumers that it is not possible to tell them which of their products >contain GMOs�even as these grocers see an increasing demand for organic and >GMO-free foods and beverages. <www.organicts.com> > >* Starbucks, the world�s largest coffee chain, under increasing pressure >from the Organic Consumers Association, as well as activist groups in >Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, still is refusing to state >publicly that they will never purchase GE coffee beans. Starbucks also >refuses to state that they will remove rBGH and other GE ingredients from >their beverages and foods. The transnational coffee giant maintains they >are >conducting �market research� regarding the availability and prices of >GMO-free milk, baked goods, and chocolate, and claim they will start >brewing >Fair Trade shade-grown coffee on an �ongoing� basis. On June 25-26, the >Organic Consumers Association mobilized protesters to leaflet Starbucks >cafes in over 200 cities and five nations (US, Canada, New Zealand, UK, and >Australia). For a Starbucks campaign update see ><www.purefood.org/starbucks/> > >* Switzerland government bureaucrats in mid-June rejected a national GMO >moratorium, despite receiving 300,000 post cards from Swiss consumers, and >despite polls indicating that the overwhelming majority of the population >is >against GE foods. > >* A small Quebec brewery has won a court battle with a federal agency over >its right to label its beer as containing no GMOs. Unibroue, based in >Chambly, Que., obtained a certificate a year ago from the Canadian Food >Inspection Agency, classifying its beers as GMO-free. The classification >was >intended to help the firm's European exports, but was challenged by >pro-biotech government officials in the CFIA. (Canadian Press service >6/15/01) > >Global Grassroots & Regulatory Response > >Despite the ongoing global offensive by the Gene Giants, anti-GE and >pro-organic forces continue to gain strength on all fronts, including >public >opinion, marketplace dynamics, and legislation. > >* In North America, biotech proponents were dismayed by a 6/20/01 ABC News >poll which, among other trends, found that 62% of American women now >believe >that genetically engineered foods are �unsafe.� The ABC News poll, as well >as recent polls in Canada, shows that North Americans are slowly but surely >catching up to their counterparts in Europe and Asia�where 70-80% of >consumers remain firmly opposed to �Frankenfoods.� As ABC News put it, >�Barely more than a third of the public believes that genetically modified >foods are safe to eat.� Another poll (6/26/01) conducted by the Pew >Charitable Trust, underlines the fundamental problem that the gene >engineers >face: the more that Americans hear about genetically engineered foods, the >more concerned they become. More than half of Pew respondents (55%) >reported >they had heard a 'great deal' or 'some' about genetically modified foods >sold in grocery stores, up from 44% just six months earlier, and many lack >confidence in the government's ability to manage gene-altered foods, >following last fall's recall of products contaminated with Starlink corn. >The poll also found that consumers are paying more attention to media >coverage of the potential hazards of GE foods as opposed to their supposed >benefits. In other words the more Americans hear about genetically >engineered foods, the less they like them, despite a $50 million dollar a >year propaganda campaign launched by the biotech industry two years ago. > >* US exports of co-mingled or genetically engineered crops are facing major >restrictions in foreign markets, according to a new report by the General >Accounting Office, the research arm of the US Congress. In the wake of >losing several billion dollars in GE-tainted corn, soy, and canola exports, >US and Canada agro-exporters can expect even more losses as European, >Asian, >and other governments adopt the �precautionary principle� requiring >pre-market safety testing, labeling, and segregation of genetically >engineered crops. > >Since biotech crops came on the market in 1996, US farm exports have fallen >from $60 billion a year to $51 billion�a decline of 15%. The US has lost >$400 million a year in corn exports to the EU, while Canada has lost a >similar amount in canola exports. Bernard Marantelli, a spokesperson for >Monsanto UK, admitted April 18 that GE canola acreage in Canada this year >�went down� a significant amount.� > >A similar pattern is emerging in soybeans, with US GE soya essentially >being >boycotted by major companies in Europe, Japan, Korea, and other nations. >Over the past year, major EU food corporations and fast food chains have >also begun to remove all GE corn and soya from their animal feed. Already >25% of all EU animal feed is now GE-free. Meanwhile exports of GE-free >grains from Brazil, Australia, India, and China are expanding. Sources in >the EU feed industry say the present demand for certified non-GMO soybean >meal has grown from nearly zero to 25% in only 12 months, with the >expectation of further increases in the coming year. (AgJournal UK 5/30/01) > >* Japanese food manufacturers carried out three major recalls of snack >foods >in May and June after finding traces of Monsanto�s genetically engineered >NewLeaf potatoes in the products. Facing global opposition to their GE >spuds, Monsanto announced earlier this year that they were pulling NewLeaf >potatoes off the market. > >* In a related development, Monsanto announced that its Roundup Ready >soybeans would not be available for planting in Canada in 2001. Canada has >begun to supply increasing amounts of non-GE soybeans to Japan. (GAIN >Report >#CA1075 Canada Oilseeds and Products 5/18/01) Four other GE crops have >also >been removed from the Canadian market this year, GM flax - "Triffid"; GM >canola - "Quest"; GM potato - "NatureMark"/"NewLeaf"; and GM > corn-"StarLink.� <www.gmfoodnews.com/> > >* BridgeNews (6/3/01) reported that South Korea's sole food-grade corn >buying group, Korea Corn Processing Industrial Association (KOCOPIA), is >requesting international trading houses to stop supplying the nation with >US >corn. The move follows last week's discovery by local authorities of >StarLink corn contamination in cornstarch production, a KOCOPIA official >told BridgeNews. > >* As the General Accounting Office report indicates, the US is becoming >increasingly isolated in international negotiations such as the Biosafety >Protocol and the Codex Alimentarius of the World Trade Organization--facing >increasing pressure from both the global North and South for precautionary >measures regarding GMOs. Thirty-five nations, representing a billion >people, >are now involved in the process of setting mandatory labeling requirements >for genetically engineered foods. In mid-July the Codex is expected to tell >the US that its �no pre-market safety testing� and �substantial >equivalence� >doctrines on GMOs are not acceptable. (Financial Times 7/2/01) For a report >on present and pending GMO legislation across the world see ><www.purefood.org/gefood/updatethirdworld.cfm> > >*A thousand protesters took to the streets in San Diego, CA June 25-26, >challenging industry leaders gathered for the annual Biotechnology Industry >Organization (BIO) convention. The street protests, preceded by three days >of �BioDevastation� teach-ins and workshops, generated extensive media >coverage across North America, along with a near hysterical response from >the Biotech Establishment. <www.biodev.org> > >In a press release dated 6/22/01, the agribusiness and biotech front group, >American Council on Science and Health, stated: > >�Caveat Emptor. Consumers and journalists beware. Biodevastation activists >aim to target you over the next few days with false and misleading >information about food safety, nutrition and the environment. The same >people who brought you a long list of other false health and environmental >scares-including the infamous Alar in apples scare, the Dow-Corning breast >implant campaign-and dozens of other debunked fears are at it again. This >time the scaremongers are targeting such safe foods as milk and other dairy >products in your local supermarket and at food retail outlets such as >Starbucks.� > >*In one San Diego protest 6/24/01, activists from the Ruckus Society >unfurled a giant 1500 square-foot banner in front of the Convention Hall, >which read "Biotech Perverts--Get Out of Our Genes". "There are thousands >of >biotech industry representatives coming to town, who are perverting >agriculture, science, nature and democracy as we know it. These perversions >impact human health and the well-being of all life." stated Shannon >Service, >a Biodevastation protest leader. > >* On June 26 several hundred protestors in San Diego and Ocean Beach >rallied >against Starbucks, calling on the company to ban GE food and beverage >ingredients and to brew Fair Trade, shade-grown coffee on a weekly basis. >Ocean Beach residents are trying to stop a Starbucks caf� from locating in >their neighborhood, pointing out that Starbucks has now become the >�Wal-Mart >of American coffee shops,� routinely moving into neighborhoods and putting >local independent coffee shops out of business. > >* A North American seafood importer, Martin International Corporation, is >calling on the major seafood companies to take up arms against attempts to >develop genetically modified salmon. If not, seafood consumption may >decline, he says. "It is my opinion that the US consumer would embrace >genetically engineered salmon about as enthusiastically as they would allow >a nuclear power plant to be erected in their back yard. If anything, the >American public is looking to find out more about the products that they >assume to be wholesome, safe and environmentally sound and more and more >are >leaning to 'natural' or certified organic to be sure of what they are >receiving." Richard C. Martin Jr. (Quoted in IntraFish, a fish industry >publication, 5/22/01). In the US, the Center for Food Safety and the >Genetically Engineered Food Alert have launched a legal petition to keep GE >Frankenfish off the market. See <www.foodsafetynow.org> > >* Reuters (6/22/01) reports that the Gene Giants were openly criticized in >front of international farm leaders at the World Agricultural Forum in St. >Louis. "A steadily shrinking number of companies are gaining unprecedented >control over all aspects of commercial food, farming and health," said >Rural >Advancement Foundation International research director Hope Shand. Shand >pointed out that Monsanto seeds account for 94% of the total area planted >in >commercial genetically engineered crops, worldwide. Rounding out Shand's >list of �gene giants� are DuPont Co., Syngenta Crop Protection Inc., >Aventis >CropScience and Dow AgroSciences LLC. Shand said aggressive moves by the >big >Agbiotech firms for greater control of their GM seed creations must be >combated if world hunger and poverty problems are to be addressed. > >* Over the past 60 days public interest activists in a number of countries, >including India, Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Colombia, Bolivia, Mexico, and Peru >have denounced the US for �dumping� GE soya and corn in food aid shipments >and grain exports. Biotech industry spokespersons have responded that >denunciations of GMOs in food aid shipments are proof that anti-GE >campaigners such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are willing to let >the hungry masses in the Third World starve. > >But as noted author and hunger expert Frances Moore Lappe pointed out in >the >Los Angeles Times (7/1/01): �Government institutions are becoming ever more >beholden to� corporations [rather] than to their citizens. Nowhere is this >more obvious than in decisions regarding biotechnology--whether it's the >approval or patenting of biotech seeds and foods without public input or >the >rejection of mandatory labeling of biotech foods despite broad public >demand >for it. Hunger is not caused by a scarcity of food but by a scarcity of >democracy. Thus it can never be solved by new technologies, even if they >were to be proved �safe.� It can only be solved as citizens build >democracies in which government is accountable to them, not private >corporate entities.� > >* Activists barricaded the offices of the Novartis biotech corporation in a >suburb of Minneapolis on 6/25/01, in solidarity with the Biodevastation >protests in San Diego. Police were forced to break down the doors and >arrest >the protesters. On 5/14 a group of 50 Southeast RAGE (Resistance Against >Genetic Engineering) activists in Greensboro, NC were harassed (and three >arrested) by police as they staged a symbolic � crop decontamination� >exercise outside the Agbiotech company Syngenta�s offices in North >Carolina. >Fifty biohazard "technicians" quarantined a cardboard "garden" of >genetically altered mutant corn, which was then removed by a giant puppet, >Father Earth. > >* The biotech industry is alarmed by a proposed ballot initiative in >Denver, >Colorado, next November which will give voters a chance to vote on whether >genetically engineered foods should be served in area schools, given that >these foods have not been proven to be safe. After a heated debate in the >media over several weeks, the Denver Post published an editorial June 1 >calling for mandatory labeling of all genetically engineered foods. ><www.non-gmosource.com> The success of the Denver effort in raising the >level of debate over Frankenfoods in Colorado has inspired the Organic >Consumers Association and a number of Green Party activists to discuss >joining efforts with local activists (and national networks such as the >Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods) to get city council >resolutions and initiatives on the ballot all across the US. State ballot >initiatives on GE foods are also underway in Washington, Oregon, and other >states. <www.washingtonrighttoknow.com> <www.labelgefoods.org> ><www.safefood.org> and <www.thecampaign.org> > >What�s Next in the Frankenfoods Fight? > >Despite industry efforts to create a false sense of fatalism, to convince >people that Frankencrops are spreading everywhere and cross-pollinating >everything, even organic crops, so therefore there�s no possibility of >resisting them, the global consumer and farmers movement against >genetically >engineered foods continues to grow and expand. > >Although US and Canadian corporations such as Loblaws, Starbucks, and >Trader >Joe�s are under tremendous pressure by their partners in the food and >biotech industry to �hold the line,� and not cave in to consumer and >activist demands, the pressure coming from the grassroots against these and >other food and beverage corporations will undoubtedly increase over the >coming months. > >Similarly, although the Bush administration, Monsanto, and the Gene Giants >are trying harder than ever to pressure governments around to world to >import and allow cultivation of GE crops inside their borders, very few are >taking up their offer. Three nations continue to produce almost 99% of all >GE crops�the US (74%), Argentina (15%), and Canada (10%)�and the export >markets for these countries� crops are growing smaller, not larger, >month-by-month. > >On the regulatory front, the US and the Gene Giants appear increasingly >isolated in their �no safety testing� and �no labeling� position. A growing >number of scientists around the world now believe that the gene-splicing >process itself is inherently unpredictable and haphazard, and that >therefore >proving that gene-altered foods are safe for human health and the >environment will be extremely difficult, if not impossible. For a detailed >scientific and legal critique of the US government�s no labeling and safety >testing policy see <www.purefood.org/gefood/fdasued.cfm> > >Similarly on the labeling front, it is becoming increasingly difficult for >the Bush administration and the Agbiotech lobby to override the will of 90% >of world�s consumers who are demanding mandatory labeling of genetically >engineered foods--mainly so that they can avoid buying them. As Norman >Braksick, the president of Asgrow Seed Co. (now owned by Monsanto) >predicted >in the Kansas City Star (3/7/94) seven years ago, �If you put a label on a >genetically engineered food, you might as well put a skull and crossbones >on >it.� > >Stay tuned to BioDemocacy News and the website of the Organic Consumers >Association <www.organicconsumers.org> for further developments. > >### End of BioDemocracy News #34 ### > > >_______________________________________________ >Biodemocracy mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://listsrv.organicconsumers.org/mailman/listinfo/biodemocracy _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
