Posts Tagged U.S. Department of Agriculture
Wednesday, August 08, 2012
By: S. D. Wells
[NaturalNews] It is EPIC IRONY that certain genetically modified vegetables, namely corn, soy and beets, are burning up in the summer heat and drought that is devastating the entire Midwestern United States. There is a certain serendipitous irony, like bad karma coming home to roost for the greedy corporations that continually put profits ahead of human health and wellness. There’s always a price to be paid for unethical business practices, and just about every vegetarian and vegan knows the truth about the detriments to your health from eating vegetables that come from seedlings which are bred with pesticide in a laboratory.
Right now, as you read this, massive amounts of dried up and cracking dirt is strangulating nearly 40 percent of the genetically modified CORN, SOY, and BEET roots, and in some hauntingly similar way, those toxic vegetables have been slowly strangulating the masses who have been consuming them for the past 15 to 20 years.
GMO equals short term profits and shorter human life
Pesticide is now growing inside of the most popular vegetation, thanks to the last two decades of “Ag-science,” (agricultural science) figuring out how to engineer toxic pest killers as part of the plants’ genetic makeup. Now, thanks to plant immunity to RoundUp pesticide, at least five to ten times more pesticide is dumped onto the vegetation as it grows in America’s fields. This means fewer worms, fewer insects, and fewer turtles and rabbits eating away at the plants, which means higher profits for “sell out” farmers and the contributing corporations. Or does it? Human beings can’t eat pesticide or we get cancer, and so as we do “EAT CANCER,” huge pharmaceutical firms prosper, and it just further assists them in running the country, the politicians, Western Medicine and the mainstream media. (http://programs.webseed.com/Dont_Eat_Cancer__TV.htm)
The greatest monopoly to ever besiege mankind is the merger of the U.S. food industry with the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. (http://www.naturalnews.com/030394_GMO_plant_pharmas.html) Perpetuated myths invade the masses via media tricks and ad campaigns, and most people have no idea they are eating pesticide for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every single day. The cleansing and detoxifying organs, like the kidneys, pancreas and liver are being overwhelmed with GMO toxins and food additives.
It’s becoming very difficult to find any soy which is truly organic. Most soy in America is genetically modified, processed, and causes extreme health detriment. Do you drink soy milk because you’re trying to avoid dairy? Switch to almond milk or rice milk right away. Why? Soybeans contain HAEMGGLUTININ, which is a clot promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together. This is what leads to strokes. Also, soy beans contain natural toxins or “anti-nutrients” and are considered enzyme inhibitors, because they block the action of trypsin and other enzymes that humans need for protein digestion. These can produce serious gastric distress and cause chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. In test animals, they cause enlargement of pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.
Soy consumption also increases estrogen. Research shows that hamsters fed with GM soy were unable to have offspring and suffered a high mortality rate. Also, steer clear of soy protein isolate, found in most protein shakes and protein bars. Hexane, a petroleum solvent similar to gasoline, is used in the processing phases of soy, and remnants are found in all non-organic soy based food. Oh, but you will never find hexane on the label.
Genetically modified corn does NOT feed the entire world, it poisons the entire world. Frankencorn is laden with pesticides inside and out, and America breeds it and feeds countries and most livestock this toxic, insidious food product, as if it’s just normal daily business. This drought is more like some ancient Egyptian plague for these huge biotech corporations like Monsanto and Dow. This drought is like something out of the Ten Commandments.
Monsanto’s Bt-sweet “Frankencorn,” the agri-giant’s first ever GM corn product, is made available as whole ears right on the cob, so it’s not just the processed corn products to watch out for anymore. (http://www.naturalnews.com)
“What will farmers use to feed livestock if there’s no corn?!” The behind-the-scenes-truth is that corn and grain based animal feed cause digestive infections and disorders in the animals. Those “corporate” infections (and the antibiotics given to treat them) are passed on to carnivores all over the world.
“Agent Orange” corn on the rise like a Grim Reaper: Enlist, known by its critics as “Agent Orange” corn, is created by Dow AgroScience and is engineered to be immune to 2,4-D, an ingredient used in Vietnam that lead to thousands of soldiers coming back from the war with cancer. Farmers can douse their crop with this lethal pesticide and boost profits, all while fueling the $100 billion cancer industry. Studies show that 2,4-D exposure is associated with various forms of cancer, Parkinson’s Disease, nerve damage, hormone disruption and birth defects.
Monsanto GM beets for MONOSODIUM GLUTAMATE; who knew?
Anyone wondering why the biotech giant Monsanto would patent beets and prosecute organic farmers for keeping their seeds? You may be thinking that there can’t be massive consumption of beets, like there is of corn and soy, but think again. That concentrated salt (MSG) that gives you migraine headaches, causes your children to vomit, and gives infants brain damage, is mass produced and mass distributed in nearly every salty, non-organic product known to mankind. You’ll even find it in products that claim to be “all natural.” (http://www.naturalnews.com/024417_sugar_Roundup_beets.html)
Plus, the sugar beet pulp is a processed by-product widely used as feed supplements for livestock. Farmers across the country are planting Monsanto’s Roundup Ready sugar beet, genetically engineered for resistance to Monsanto’s herbicide glyphosate (marketed as Roundup). Up to 95 percent of the sugar beet crop in Idaho alone is GM, totaling 150,000 out of 167,000 acres. Half of the granulated sugar in the U.S. comes from pesticide laden sugar beets, creating UNPRECEDENTED health and environmental risks.
When did all the MSG mayhem kick into full gear? Back in 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) changed the classification of Roundup Ready sugar beets from regulated to “deregulated.” Basically, the USDA and the FDA failed to conduct research into the impacts of humans eating Roundup pesticide.
The great 2012 drought – A blessing in disguise
Unfortunately, there are many innocent organic farmers suffering from the drought too. However, we don’t need GM corn, soy and beets, so let those prices rise. If corn and soy prices went up 100 percent instead of what the media is warning about (four percent), it would be a blessing. Maybe then the masses who think GM means the “evolution of farming” would stop buying cancer causing food and start buying organic food that heals the body and PREVENTS DISEASE. It’s your choice every day, every meal. Every penny you spend can feed pollution and disease, or promote nutrition.
Here are some helpful links for donating funds and/or joining the organic food mission:
Join the movement and the life-long mission, if you have not already. Buy organic food and easy recipe books and videos/guides and start making your own chips and dips, with organic spices and herbs. And don’t you dare complain that you can’t afford it, because what you can’t afford is to get DIABETES, CANCER, HEART DISEASE AND ALZHEIMER’S.
Sources for this article include:
Did you know that ‘natural’ foods can still contain GMOs? The main difference between ‘organic’ and ‘natural’
Thursday, July 26, 2012
[NaturalNews] Have you ever wondered what “natural” and “organic” mean on labels? If so, you’re not alone. Food labels today are filled with a number of ingredients that are barely pronounceable, let alone common enough to know what they actually are. The good news is that with more and more people looking for healthier options to choose from at supermarkets, there are a lot more options today than there were. However, with the variety of products on shelves, it makes it difficult to know what the best choices truly are.
When it comes to “natural” and “organic,” there is a main difference you need to be aware of. One is strictly regulated and the other label can mean, well just about anything.
An organic label means that the product is strictly regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This is good news for all you “organic” shoppers, it means that organic products are regulated from start to finish, assuring that it doesn’t contain certain ingredients found in non-organic foods and products. The USDA says that organic food has to be grown without toxic, synthetic pesticides and herbicides, GMOs, and antibiotics or artificial growth hormones. It also helps that organic farms do not add chemicals to the air, water, and soil. There have been studies that show organic farming also helps produce more nutrient-dense crops.
As far as “natural,” it is a bit more open ended. In fact, it is all the way open ended. The “natural” labels are not strictly defined or regulated. It could mean that the food doesn’t contain preservatives, or that it is minimally processed, and it could mean none of those things. It is important to know that “natural” foods could even contain toxic chemicals and GMOs as they are not regulated like “organic” foods. Hence, it becomes that much more important to know how to read labels and understand what is being put in the products you purchase.
Natural and organic have two different definitions, and it is important to know the difference. Many companies are finding that just by adding “natural” to a label makes it more appealing to the consumer; however, it may not be more beneficial to your health. The bottom line is that organic food is the best choice for your health with its heavily regulated requirements and guidelines.
Sources for this article include:
Saturday, July 07, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff
(NaturalNews) Mexico and Canada have succeeded in a joint effort to strike down an American regulatory policy passed in 2008 that requires country-of-origin labeling (COOL) on meat sold in the U.S. Public Citizen reports that the World Trade Organization (WTO) has ruled against the U.S. in a case regarding the matter, a move that will potentially expose millions of Americans to “mystery” meat from unknown origins.
As a member of the WTO, and now the ominous Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that allows foreign companies to bypass the American legal system (http://www.naturalnews.com), the U.S. is bound to certain international trade rules that supersede its own sovereign laws. These rules prohibit WTO member countries from engaging in so-called unfair trade practices that discriminate against other WTO member countries.
In this particular case, Mexico and Canada filed a dispute with the WTO claiming that U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) meat labeling requirements deviate significantly from international standards, and unfairly discriminate against WTO member countries. COOL requirements end up making it easier for U.S. meat packers to source meat from domestic animals rather than foreign ones, for instance, which Canada and Mexico say puts the U.S. at an unfair economic advantage.
By: Dr. Mercola
June 30, 2012
Mad Cow Disease (the common term for Bovine Spongiform Encepholopathy (BSE) made headlines once again in April 2012, when a dairy cow at a rendering facility in California was found to have the disease.
BSE, a progressive neurological disorder of cattle that can be transmitted to other species, including humans (in people it’s called Cruetzfeldt-Jakob Disease) is a devastating condition that typically leads to progressive dementia and death, often within a year of the onset of symptoms.
One of the primary ways Mad Cow Disease is transmitted is when cows are fed bone meal and waste products from other cattle infected with the disease.
As a result, it’s now illegal to feed beef-based products to cows … but the beef industry has found ways to circumvent this rule by using a feed product known as “chicken litter.”
Cows Fed “Chicken Litter” May be Indirectly Eating Parts From Cows
Chicken litter, a rendered down mix of chicken manure, dead chickens, feathers and spilled feed, is marketed as a cheap feed product for cows. The beef industry likes it because it’s cheaper than even corn and soy, so an estimated 2 BILLION pounds are purchased each year; yes, this is a very serious amount of this product being fed to animals.
As if the idea of your burger being the product of manure and feathers isn’t unsettling enough, about one-third of the chicken litter concoction is spilled feed, which includes cow meat and bone meal often used to feed chickens but which is supposed to be off limits for cows.
However, any cow that eats chicken litter may also be consuming various beef products intended for chickens – the very same feed products that spurred the Mad Cow Disease outbreak in the first place! And it’s not only the spilled feed that’s the problem; the infectious agent can also be passed through the chicken manure as well.
“The primary animal-health protective measure [against Mad Cow Disease] is a feed ban. In 1997, the FDA implemented regulations that prohibit the feeding of most mammalian proteins to ruminants, including cattle. This feed ban is the most important measure to prevent the transmission of the disease to cattle. The feed ban was strengthened in 2008, by additional prohibitions on those tissues that have the highest risk of transmitting BSE. These additions to the feed ban prohibit the use of brain and spinal cord from cattle 30 months of age and older for use in any animal feed.”
It sounds like once again profits have won out over public safety, and while cases worldwide have declined dramatically (from a peak of 37,311 cases in 1992 to 29 cases in 2011), allowing cow parts back into cattle feed, albeit indirectly, could easily reverse this progress.
That is, if progress has really been made. In Europe, all older cattle are tested for Mad Cow Disease, and in Japan every cow slaughtered for human consumption is tested, a move that experts say would add just pennies to a pound of beef if implemented in the United States.ii
But U.S. regulators are still only testing 40,000 of the 35 million cattle slaughtered annually … it was only by happenstance that the 2012 case was detected as part of the USDA’s surveillance program for cattle. Only just over 0.1 percent of U.S. cattle are tested prior to entering the food supply, so there’s really no way of knowing how many cattle with Mad Cow Disease might end up on dinner plates.
USDA is Failing in Protecting Animal Feed, Americans from Mad Cow Disease
The USDA is simply not doing enough to prevent the spread of, and to detect, BSE cases. This includes not only the chicken litter feed that’s commonly fed to cows, but also, according to the physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine:iii
- “U.S. feed producers are blatantly violating restrictions on feed production. Despite a 1997 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ban on the feeding of most mammalian remains to ruminants, which unfortunately includes significant exceptions impairing the protective intent of the law, a January 2001 FDA report showed that, of 180 renderers, 16 percent lacked warning labels on feeds designed to differentiate those intended for ruminants from those for nonruminants, and 28 percent had no system to prevent the actual mixing of these feeds.
- The Government Accountability Office issued a follow up report in 2005, noting many program weaknesses in compliance inspections, including FDA’s guidance for inspectors to visually examine facilities and equipment and review invoices and other documents instead of routinely sampling cattle feed to test for potentially prohibited material.
- Although the World Health Organization called for the riskiest parts of bovine tissues (i.e., brain, eyes, spinal cord, intestines) not to be used in the human food supply or in animal feed to protect from BSE, the United States still allows the feeding of these potentially risky tissues to people, pigs, pets, poultry, and fish.
- There are few restrictions on the use of animal byproducts, including blood and blood products, gelatin, milk, and milk products, in feeds through which prions may be transmitted.
- There are no limits on the use of nonruminant, such as pig or horse, remains in feeds, due to an exemption in the 1997 ban. Because prions are so difficult to destroy, if the remains of a BSE-infected cow are fed to a pig or horse and then the pig or horse remains are fed to cows, the cows may subsequently be infected. Similarly, ruminant remains can be fed to poultry and, in turn, poultry feces are routinely used in cattle feed.
- There are no limits on the “recycling” of beef or other meat products in the form of garbage from restaurants or other institutions for use in animal feeds.” Continue Reading At: Mercola.com
via: The Washington Times
by: Luke Rosiak
Monday, June 24, 2012
Americans spend $80 billion each year financing food stamps for the poor, but the country has no idea where or how the money is spent.
Food stamps can be spent on goods ranging from candy to steak and are accepted at retailers from gas stations that primarily sell potato chips to fried-chicken restaurants. And as the amount spent on food stamps has more than doubled in recent years, the amount of food stamps laundered into cash has increased dramatically, government statistics show.
But the government won’t say which stores are doing the most business in food stamps, and even it doesn’t know what kinds of food those taxpayer dollars buy.
Coinciding with lobbying by convenience stores, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the program in conjunction with states, contends that disclosing how much each store authorized to accept benefits, known as the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), receives in taxpayer funds would amount to revealing trade secrets.
USDA green-lights field trials of Monsanto drought-resistant corn after admitting it performs no better than natural corn
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff
[NaturalNews] The U.S. Department of Agriculture‘s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) does not even pretend to legitimately evaluate genetically-modified organisms (GMO) before approving them anymore, having recently green-lighted approval for a new variety of “drought-resistant” GM corn produced by Monsanto that admittedly grows no better under drought conditions than natural varieties do.
According to the Washington Post, APHIS fast-tracked the corn, known as MON87460, without ever conducting an appropriate environmental risk analysis on the crop’s efficacy, which includes determining whether or not the crop is even safe for humans or the environment. In fact, in accordance with the Obama Administration’s new hands-off approach to regulating GMOs, APHIS decided to actually approve MON87460 even after a cursory evaluation of the data exposed it as a complete failure.
“The reduced yield [trait] does not exceed the natural variation observed in regionally-adapted varieties of conventional corn,” wrote the USDA in an earlier report on the crop published last fall. “Equally comparable varieties produced through conventional breeding techniques are readily available in irrigated corn production regions” (http://www.naturalnews.com/032453_GM_corn_USDA.html).
MON87460 is the first GMO to be approved with resistance to drought, as opposed to a pesticide or herbicide. And even though many drought-adaptive varieties of natural or hybrid corn already exist, Monsanto is pushing MON87460 on farmers all across the Midwest, and primarily in the Western plains where drought conditions are still severe, with promises that it will translate into increased yields.
Based on its initial findings, however, as well as the fact that GM crops are known to contaminate nearby conventional and organic crops, APHIS should have wholly rejected MON87460 and told Monsanto to hit the road. Instead, thanks to embedded special interests throughout the USDA and the highest levels of the federal government, this former regulatory body has become nothing more than a bureaucratic rubber stamp for the biotechnology industry.
“[Bio]technology has been spectacularly unsuccessful at delivering complex traits such as drought tolerance, which involve multiple genes and complex interaction with the plant’s environment,” wrote Dr. Helen Wallace, director of GeneWatch U.K. , in a piece last year on so-called drought-tolerant GM crops. “Meanwhile, conventional breeding and new techniques such as marker-assisted selection — which uses knowledge of the plant’s genome to inform breeding, without engineering the plant, have produced a long string of successes.”