GMO policy. Quotes from the book by William Engdahl, Seeds of Destruction

GMO policy. Quotes on the book by William F. Engdahl, "Seeds of Destruction. Secret Agenda of Genetic Manipulation "

"Food — is power! We use it to change behavior. Some would call it a bribe. We do not care, we do not intend to apologize. "

Catherine Bertini, Executive Director of the World Food Program, a former adviser to the assistant U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.

"… For foreign investors charm scheme was that, compared to conventional agriculture production GMO soybean needs more workers.

In reality, due to the economic crisis, millions of acres of farmland major banks were bought under the hammer. As a rule, the only buyers with dollars that are ready to invest, were foreign corporations or private investors. Small peasant farms offer a penny for their land. Sometimes, if they did not want to sell the land, they were forced to give up their property rights, inciting them to local gangs or state police. Tens of thousands of farmers have been forced to leave their land because cheap imports flooding the market of food, according to free-market reforms to IMF rules, leading them to bankruptcy.
Besides fields sown with genetically modified herbicide-tolerant "Roundup" soybeans and processed by a special herbicide "Roundup", did not require conventional plowing. To maximize profitability, sponsors GMO soybean revolution created a huge area of land in Kansas style, where large-scale mechanized equipment to operate around the clock, often with a remote control using satellite navigation, without a single farmer at least in order to drive a tractor. GMO soybeans from "Monsanto" Argentine farmers sold as sverhekologicheskaya because of the use of technology "zero tillage". In fact, it was not safe for the environment.
GMO soybeans and herbicide "Roundap" sow and spray method, called "crop stubble", first used in the U.S. in order to save time and money. (12) Available only more wealthy farmers' crop stubble "demanded monstrous special machines that automatically inserts the seeds of genetically modified soy in drilled several centimeters deep well, and then pressed down on top of her land. With this machine, "stubble sowing" man alone could sow thousands of acres. The remains of the previous crop simply left to rot in the field, leading to a wide variety of pests and weeds next to the germs GMO soybeans. This in turn opened the "Monsanto" wide market for the sale of its patented or glyphosate herbicide "Roundup", along with the necessary with resistance to the herbicide "Roundup" patented soybean seeds. After a few years of planting weeds began to show a special resistance to glyphosate, requiring more powerful doses of this or other herbicides. (13)
In contrast to this practice, traditional trehgektarnye peach or lemon groves required for processing of agricultural workers 70-80. In 1996, after the decision "Monsanto" license genetically engineered RR soybeans, Argentina will be a revolution, which her supporters hailed as a "second green revolution". In fact, it was the transformation of once-productive national and farming systems based on agriculture neofeodalnoe State ruled by a handful of wealthy landowners, landowners … "

"… In the countryside, the impact of mass-crop soybeans was horrendous. Traditional rural communities near large soy plantations have been seriously damaged by air spraying herbicides "Roundup" "Monsanto". In Loma Senes farmers who grow mixed vegetables for their own consumption, found that spraying has destroyed all of their landing, as "Roundup" kills all plants, except in genetically modified "herbicide-tolerant" beans "Monsanto".
A study in 2003 showed that the spraying destroys not only vegetable planting neighboring farms. Their chickens were dying, and other animals, especially horses, were adversely affected. People experiencing severe nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, and skin damage from the herbicide. There were reports of births about GMO soybean fields animals with severe deformities, deformed bananas and potatoes, the lake suddenly filled with dead fish. Rural families reported that their children had appeared grotesque spots on their bodies after spraying on adjacent soybean fields.
Additional damage was done valuable forest lands, which were cut down to make way for the mass cultivation of soy, especially in the Chaco region of Paraguay and around the Yungas. The loss of forests has given rise to an explosive growth of diseases among local residents, including leishmaniasis, caused by a parasite carried by mosquitoes, whose treatment is very expensive and leaves scars and other serious deformities. In Entre Rios, by 2003, had been cut by more than 1.2 million acres of forest, and only if the government finally issued a decree banning further cutting.
To convince wary Argentine farmers to use genetically modified soy seeds, in 1996, the much-touted miracle crops, arguing that its GMO soy has been genetically modified to be resistant to the herbicide "Roundup".
The company assured the farmers that the reason for GM soy they will need far fewer herbicides and chemical fertilizers compared to traditional cultivation. Since the "Roundup" kills virtually everything that grows, except soybean, "Monsanto", no need for other herbicides — claimed a PR campaign "Monsanto". Loudly advertised were expected higher yields and lower costs, in order to lure the desperate farmers with dreams of a better economic situation. Not surprisingly, the response has been extremely positive.
The promises were false. On average, crops resistant to the herbicide "Roundup" soy gave 5-15% lower yields than conventional soybeans. Also, farmers have found new noxious weeds that needed to spray, three times more than before, which was also far from the promises to reduce the number of herbicides. Statistics of the Ministry of Agriculture of the United States since 1997 has shown that the extended planting of herbicide-tolerant "Roundup" GMO soybeans led to a 72-hprotsentnomu increased use of glyphosate. (23)
According to the organization "The Pesticide Action Network", scientists have estimated that genetically engineered plants resistant to herbicides, effectively triple the use of agro-Mikati. Farmers, knowing that their crop can endure or resist herbicides, will tend to use herbicides more freely. And "Monsanto" did not strictly independent studies confirming the negative effects on the health of cattle (let alone humans), eating raw soybeans "Monsanto" saturated herbicide "Roundup". Increased use of chemicals has led to cost more than in the case of conventional seeds. (24)
But by the time the farmers have realized this, it was too late. By 2004, GM soy has spread across the country, and all the seeds depended on the "Roundup". More elegant scheme enslavement of man it was hard to imagine … "

"… Warm regards" Monsanto "with the government
The relationship between the U.S. government and the giants of the GMO seeds, such as "Monsanto", "Dupont" and "Dow AgroSayensis" were not random. Government encouraged the development of unregulated GMOs as a strategic priority, as already noted, the first years of the Reagan presidency, long before it became clear whether the nature of this restructuring is desirable. This was the first reason why the government maintained the long-term laboratory research through research grants. And there was a second, invisible cause that swing open markets to have failed the test risky new procedures, which had the opportunity to work on the basic food supply of the country and the planet.
Washington also acquired a shameful reputation that was called "rotation of the government." This expression refers to the general practice of large corporations to hire high-level government officials from the public service directly to senior corporate positions, where their influence and connections in government to benefit the corporation. Similarly, the practice works in reverse order: top officials of corporations came to high public office, where they can promote the interests of the corporation directly to the government itself. Few companies have been as skilled at this game in the rotation as "Monsanto". The corporation to contribute to the campaigns of candidates and respublikantsev.i of Democrats. They received from the "Monsanto" generally 711,000 dollars on the campaign. Impossible to prove that this fact influenced the decision of the Senate Committee. Clearly, however, he did not cause damage in the case of "Monsanto". The Committee rejected the proposed draft law on the labeling.
"Monsanto" has a special skill set of their key people to the relevant government office. Agriculture Minister George Bush Veneman came to Washington in 2001 as director, "Kolga" biotechnology company, which became a subsidiary of the "Monsanto". Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO's daughter "Monsanto" "Dzhi.Di.Serl" manufacturer of artificial sweetener and a carcinogen based on GMOs — aspartame. Rumsfeld also was chairman of the board of directors of the California biotech company "Sayensis Gilead," which held the patent on the drug "Tamiflu", which is recommended by WHO for the prevention of avian influenza.
Former U.S. Trade Representative and lawyer Mickey Kantor Clinton left the government to take a seat on the board, "Monsanto". Also, there sat the former head of the Agency for environmental protection in the Nixon and Reagan administrations, William Dee. Rukelshaus. MD Michael A. Friedman, senior vice president of clinical research in the unit "Monsanto" "Dzhi.Di.Serl" was at one time the Director of the FDA Food and Drug Administration. March-sion Hale, director of "Monsanto 'relations with the British government, was previously assistant to President Clinton for Intergovernmental Relations. Vice-President of "Monsanto" Public Relations Linda J. Fisher was one time administrator of the Division for the Prevention of Pollution by pesticides and toxic substances agency for the protection of the environment. Legal Counsel "Monsanto" Jack Watson was the chief of the White House during the Carter administration.
This scheme of rotation of the conflict of interest between senior officials of government agencies responsible for food policy, and corporate sponsors such as "Monsanto", "Doe", "Dupont" and other players agribusiness and biotechnology existed at least since the Reagan administration. Unmistakable conclusion is that the U.S. government was essentially a catalyst for Gene Revolution crops with GMO inserts and spread them throughout the world. In this case, it acted with unison with corporate giant agrochemical firms ("Monsanto", "Doe" and "DuPont"), as if the public and private interests are the same … "

"… Syngenta" from Basel, Switzerland, — product of a merger in 2000 of agricultural units "Novartis" and "AstraZeneca" worth 6.8 billion U.S. dollars. She announced in 2005 that it became the world's largest agrochemical corporation and the third largest grain company. Being nominally Swiss, "Syngenta" in many ways controlled by the British community, its chairman and director of many came to management of the British "AstraZeneca". "Syngenta", which deliberately kept in the shade to avoid the high tensions with U.S. rivals, was the second largest producer of agrochemicals in the world and third largest producer of seed.
"Syngenta" came under massive unwanted media attention in 2004 when a German farmer Gottfried Glockner of North Hessen found evidence that its landing on feed cattle genetically modified seed corn Bt-176 of "Syngenta", since 1997, have been responsible for the deaths of livestock, destroying the production of milk and poisoned farmland. Maize Bt-176 of "Syngenta" were designed to isolate the toxin Bacillus thuringiensis, which they advertised, kills certain pests — corn borer. (24) Glockner was the first farmer in Germany, admitted to using Bt-corn hybrids from "Syngenta" to feed. He kept detailed records of his experiments, initially thinking that is at the forefront of the revolution in agriculture. As a result, his minutes were one of the longest in the world, test the impact of Bt-corn hybrids from "Syngenta", length up to five years. The results were disappointing for supporters of GMOs.
However that may be, the trial of GMOs is not the intention of the Glockner. He wanted to favorable effects of power his cattle GMO grain and tried to avoid yield loss from European corn borer, which typically reduces the yield by 20%. In the first, in 1997, the year Glockner was cautious. He grew only a small test field Bt-corn hybrids from "Syngenta". The results were impressive: corn the same height, green arrows "stood tall as the soldiers — he recalled. — As a practitioner, I was fascinated by the spectacle of high-shoots and apparently healthy plants, with no signs of any damage from the European corn borer. " The second, in 1998, the year he increased the planting of GMO corn to 5 hectares, in close cooperation with the German representative of the company, Hans-Theo Yahmanom. By 2000, Glockner expanded GMO experiment in all its fields of approximately 10 hectares. With each harvest, he gradually increased the amount of Bt-176 maize in the feed stock, carefully recording the yield of milk and possible side effects. In the first three years, no side effects from the increase in the diet of GMO food was noted.
However, when convinced that he will get even higher yields, he increased the dosage of pure grain feed GMOs from their green fields from the "Syngenta", according to his testimony, the nightmare began.
Glockner, a farmer with a university education, told the Austrian press that he was shocked when he found his cows in a sticky-white feces and from severe diarrhea. Their milk contains blood, something unheard of during lactation. Some cows suddenly stopped giving milk. Then, between May and August 2001, one after another died five calves — an extremely disturbing case.
Glockner, eventually lost most of his herd of 70 cows. "Syngenta" refused any responsibility for the events, insisting that according to their tests, cows neutralize the toxin of Bacillus thuringiensis in Bt-176 maize. Despite dodging "Syngenta" from any responsibility, Glockner gave up and got an independent scientific examination of their land, their corn and their cows. One laboratory returned a result which confirmed the view Glockner that Bt-176 maize from "Syngenta" was the cause. The examination showed that its Bt-176 maize in 2000 contained 8.3 micrograms of toxin per kilogram. In June 2004, the distinguished professor of the Institute of Geobotany the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich Angelika Hirbek found that the samples provided Glockner Bt-toxins were "found in an active form and extremely stable," an alarming result, despite the objections of "Syngenta". (26) The independent review for Glockner was in complete contradiction with the statement "Syngenta" that its research center in North Carolina "not found Bt-toxin in the submitted sample …"

"… Based in Indianapolis, Indiana," Dow AgroSayensis "- agrochemical and grain conglomerate, worth U.S. $ 3.4 billion and operating in 66 countries — was the third giant GMO. "Dow AgroSayensis" was formed in 1997 when the "Dow Chemical" bought a stake drugmaker "Eli Lilly" from "Doe Elanko." The parent company "Dow Chemical" as a result has become the second largest chemical company in the world with annual revenues in total, more than $ 24 billion and operations in 168 countries. (18)
As with its allies in the GMO agribusiness, "Monsanto" and "Dupont", the "Doe" was a very ugly history concerning environmental and health problems.
Factory "Doe" with its headquarters in Midland, Michigan, have polluted the whole neighborhood to incredible levels of dioxin. Tests conducted by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, found that in 29 (out of 34) soil samples taken in Midland, dioxin levels were higher than the state standard. (19) In some samples of dioxin concentrations up to 100 times above normal. The government has asked residents of the Midlands "not allow children to play in the ground. Wash hands and any other exposed areas of the body after any contact with the soil. Do not eat unwashed foods from your garden. Avoid any action which might result in loose soil in the mouth. " (20)
Dioxin — one of the most toxic compounds ever studied. It is dangerous to life in minute amounts and, according to experts, has been associated with endometriosis, the deterioration of immune system, diabetes, neurotoxicity, birth defects, decreased fertility, testicular atrophy, reproductive dysfunction, and cancer. According to a research report, dioxin can affect insulin levels, thyroid and steroid hormones, threatening the development of infants. (21)
"Doe" was the inventor of the infamous napalm used against civilians in Vietnam. This jelly-like chemical, when applied to the skin of people eating it. The infamous photo of a naked child in 1972, running down the street in Vietnam and screaming in pain, marked to the world its impact. President of the "Doe" while Herbert D. Doan described as napalm
"A good weapon to save lives … a strategic weapon, essential to pursue tactics that we use, without excessive loss of American lives." (22)
"Dow AgroSayensis" described her work as "the provision of innovative crop protection and seeds, and biotechnology solutions to serve the world's growing population." In 2003, in a hearing on the case "against Bates" Dow AgroSayensis »» twenty-nine farmers in West Texas went to court, arguing that the herbicide "Strongman", produced "Dow AgroSayensis" inflicted heavy damage to their crops of peanuts and not destroy weeds as advertised. The farmers sued the "Doe" for false advertising, breach of warranty and deceptive trade practices in Texas law on unfair competition. "Dow AgroSayensis" won the action for declaratory judgment against the farmers in federal district court, seeking, among other things, a judgment which, by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act would prevent such claims farmers. The U.S. government has joined the "Doe", becoming an advisor in the trial in the case, which is examined by the Supreme Court … "

"… The possibility of mergers and vertical integration of corporations created concentration of enterprises, has never existed in agriculture. By the end of the 1990s, four major companies — "Tyson", "Cargo", "Swift" and "National Beef co-packing" — controlled 84% of the processing of beef in the United States. Four companies — "Smithfield Foods", "Tyson", "Swift" and "Hormel" — controlled 64% of all meat pork. "Cargill", "Archer Daniels Midland" and "Bunge" controlled 71% of soybeans, and the "Cargo", "Archer Daniels Midland" and "Conagra" controlled 63% of the total flour production. Two GMO giant, "Monsanto" and "Hi-Bred Payoner Interneshenl" Corporation "Dupont", controlled 60% of the U.S. market of seed corn and soybeans, which consisted entirely of patented genetically modified seeds. The ten largest companies engaged in the retail sale of food products, with the "Wal-Mart" in the lead, monitored in 2002, the total global market of 649 billion dollars. (36)
By the beginning of the new millennium, the vertical integration of agribusiness corporations has led to the concentration of power in the market, which had never before existed, even in the heyday of the monopolies in the early 1920s. Agribusiness sector, as was the second most profitable industry in America after pharmaceuticals with annual sales in the domestic market in size, greatly exceeding the $ 400 billion. (37) And the next step, of course, will be the merger of pharmaceutical giants with agribusiness.
And not surprisingly, the Pentagon's National Defense University on the eve of the U.S. war in Iraq in 2003, issued a report stating that "agribusiness was for the United States the same as what is oil in the Middle East." (38) Agribusiness become a strategic weapon in the arsenal of the world's sole superpower.
Huge industrial farms also destroyed the viability of traditional agriculture, destroying about three jobs on a traditional farm, on every new job created, often low-paid … "

"… In the case of" Monsanto "is the only company allowed to seamlessly went round antitrust restrictions the U.S. government, to gain unprecedented control over the sale and use of seeds of grain in the United States. (45)
Sighted and that GMO seeds sold and developed herbicide-resistant special of the same company. Resistant to the herbicide "Roundup" GMO soybeans, "Monsanto" was clearly genetically modified so as to be resistant to glyphosate specially patented "Monsanto", sold under the brand name "Roundup". This soy was "ready" to "Roundup." This ensured that farmers entering into a contract to buy GMO seeds from "Monsanto", will also buy herbicide "Monsanto". Herbicide "Roundup" was designed so that it can not be used for non-gene nomodifitsirovannoy soybeans. In fact, it's GMO seeds have been made to order — appropriate to the existing herbicide glyphosate by the same "Monsanto".
Was the so extensive and rapid increase of genetically modified organisms in the food chain is safe or desirable, is not of interest to the chemical giant agribusiness and seed production. The representative of "Monsanto" Phil Angell was frank.
"" Monsanto "should not vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Provide answers about its safety — the Office of FDA food and drugs. " (46)
He was well aware that the U.S. Department of FDA food and drug on demand "Monsanto" has long left any attempt independent safety monitoring of GMO seeds. The government agreed to allow GMO companies' own look "for the industry. That is a perfect Angel described the vicious circle of lies and deceit of public, outlining the incestuous relationships that have been established between the private agribusiness giants GM and the U.S. government … "

Source: (F. William Engdahl, "Seeds of Destruction. Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation")

Like this post? Please share to your friends: