Sunday, November 9, 2014

Safety Testing Will Fail PROOF! NO GMO MAUI for Eternity...

Exposed: Monsanto's fraudulent safety tests for GM Soy
The following documents show how the systematic corruption of governmental responsibility by GM developers and proponents underlies the release of GM crops to environment
They do not know what they are doing and they lie...

Scientists Expose Monsanto's Fraudulent Safety-Testing Data for GE Soybeans Monsanto GM soybean safety assessment flawed, Japan researcher says
(Sunday, Nov. 16, 2003 -- CropChoice news) --
Pacific Ecologist: Monsanto's safety assessment application to the Japanese health ministry for Roundup Ready soybeans was "inadequate and incomplete," according to assistant professor MASAHARU KAWATA, of Nagoya University, Japan.

Monsanto maintains there is no difference between GM soybeans and conventional strains. But according to the Japanese study, Monsanto's safety tests misrepresent data and included testing proteins not derived from the GM plant; insufficient feeding experiments; and intentional neglect of "inappropriate" data. Since the components of the GE soybean that people are eating are still unknown, governments who have approved the GE soybean should review their safety assessments.

Tested soybeans not exposed to herbicide
Commercial crops of Roundup Ready soybeans are usually sprayed with the herbicide Roundup (glyphosate). However, both the genetically modified soybean strain and the parent strain that Monsanto used for feed tests were NOT sprayed with Roundup herbicide during cultivation.

Monsanto produced a minimal amount of soybeans grown with applications of Roundup, but only enough to test for glyphosate residues. This testing checked for residual glyphosate, a toxin that kills plants by inhibiting a plant enzyme in the harvested forage, hay and seed. But testing was not done on the effects on other metabolic pathways which must also be taken into account when such artificial genes are inserted.
Several tons of soybeans used in the safety assessments were not produced with Roundup. No explanation is given for this in the documents. For consumers, the test results obtained by using a sample grown differently from the GE- marketed soybean are meaningless.

GE soybean amino acid sequence unknown
The protein Monsanto analysed was from E.coli, not from RoundUp ready soybeans! Testing assumed the protein expressed in the bio-engineered soybean has the same amino acid sequence as the soil bacterium E coliform from which the genetically engineered gene was extracted. This can only be verified when the soybean-produced protein is isolated and the amino acid sequence is determined. Exchanging genes between bacteria and a higher organism can sometimes result in partial change of amino acid and/or post-translational modification after expression. It was presumed Monsanto had determined the amino acid sequence of the GE soybean but it had not.

Monsanto sequenced only 15 amino acids from the protein that was expressed in E. coliform. The rest of the sequence was an assumption about the sequence of the bacterial DNA. They determined only 3.3% of the expected total of 455 amino acids and the protein is not from soybeans. The test described in the documents is the only method to verify antigenic equivalence of proteins. But antigenic similarity itself does not prove that the amino acid sequences are the same. The real sequence of the GE protein in the soybean that we are eating is still unknown.

Animal tests used wrong protein
Acute toxicity tests on rats were also carried out using the protein produced by E. coliform. Monsanto says in the application that extracting large amounts of the GE protein from soybean is difficult. This is an unacceptable excuse because there is a possibility that the inserted gene works differently in soybean than in the original bacterium. Moreover, according to the application document, 0.238mg of GE protein is detected in one gram of genetically modified soybean, which is enough to extract without difficulty.

This kind of problem could be resolved if all the amino acid sequence in GM soybeans had been sequenced and confirmed equal as the bacterium. The experiment appears to have been conducted on the presumption that the other GE soybean proteins are the same as the non-GM soybean as long as they are not toxic. If so, this is too easy an assumption and a one-sided approach. The core of this problem is whether or not the soybean gene is affected by insertion of a foreign gene. The series of experiments described are fundamentally invalid.

Minimal feeding tests
Animal feeding tests are important for safety assessment. Monsanto conducted these experiments on rats, cows, chickens, catfish and quail. However, the scale of the experiments was very inadequate. For example, in rat experiments, raw and toasted soybeans both genetically modified and non-modified were fed to only 10 rats in each group and the feeding period was only 28 days. Toxicity across generations or chronic toxicity will not be measured by such limited experiments.

Even with these far from satisfactory experiments, the data for body and organ weight of liver, kidney and testicles show obvious differences in the male rats between groups fed wild strain soybean and those fed bio-engin eered soybean.

Raw soybean-fed groups showed no difference. But male groups fed toasted GE soybean, weighed 6.7% less than the group fed the ordinary soybean and 13% less than the group fed the commercial feed-mix at the end of the tes t period of 28 days. Though this difference is described as statistically significant in the data sheet, the conclusion ignores these results and states that "no statistical significance is observed."

The experiments were far from satisfactory both in the samples and the statistical method used. The Nagoya University group transcribed all raw data and redid the statistical analysis. The result again showed the apparent growth obstacle for the body and kidney weight in the male rats group fed toasted GE soybean. There was no such difference in the female rats group, possibly due to the amount of the feed intake. Where males took 25-30g /day, female rats took only 18-20g (approx. 70% of male)/day. It is highly possible that female rats would also show significant growth difference if the experiment was conducted on a much larger scale, with a longer feed ing period.

Misinterpretation, false conclusions, ignored data
The Japanese researchers found clearly intentional misinterpretation in the Monsanto assessment. This was caused through ignoring the differences shown in the documents between the ordinary soybean and the GE hybrid. Obvious differences appeared after toasting at actual feed processing condition (108 degrees celsius, 30min). While the concentration of total protein and potassium was not changed, the concentration of trypsin-inhibitor, urease, and lectin were significantly higher in the toasted GM soybean, compared to that of the normal soybean. These physiologically active substances remained active even after heat treatment in the genetically modified soybean. However, those in the herbicide-sensitive normal bean were easily denatured and inactivated.

Monsanto took this result to mean "the modified soybeans are not toasted sufficiently in the experiment" and returned and asked for re-treatment of the sample to Texas A & M laboratory who processed the beans. Monsanto ordered the temperature of re-toast at 220 degrees Celsius for 25 min., which is considerably higher than normal processing of 100 degrees Celsius, 10 minutes. However re-toasting further widened the difference in the activity between the two strains. Another genetically modified soybean inserted with a bacterial gene, also showed high heat-resistant properties.

Scientists would usually conclude by these results that there is substantial difference between the two. But Monsanto dared to challenge this common practice and concluded the second toasting was still not enough. In the end, they toasted two more times and got the result they wanted, i.e. all proteins were denatured and inactivated. With this result, they concluded that genetically modified and non-modified soybeans have equivalent properties.

No protein can withstand repeated heat treatment and stay active. This is common knowledge of protein chemistry. Monsanto based their argument on their presumption that "they can't be different" and their need that "they shouldn't be different." Their translation of the experiment is based on "the conclusion is safe" attitude but it is not at all scientific.

Monsanto asks governments to lower safety standards
Adopting the Roundup tolerant soybean would increase the herbicide concentration in the soybean plants and seeds, because the herbicide is directly sprayed on the plant before harvest. Monsanto studied in detail the resu lts of changing factors like spraying times, concentration of the active ingredient glyphosate, duration of harvest after spraying and growing locations.

The data shows clearly that the concentration of glyphosate and AMPA (a degraded substance of glyphosate) in forage and hay was increased greatly by post-emergence application of the herbicide compared to that of conventi onal pre-emergence application, although the residual concentration in the plant differed from place to place. The largest value of the combined glyphosate and AMPA was 40.187 ppm in forage which is higher than the US saf ety standard of 15 ppm in forage and hay in 1994 when FDA and USDA accepted the application documents.

In the final conclusion, Monsanto says: "the maximum combined glyphosate and AMPA residue level of approximately 40 ppm in soybean forage resulting from these new uses, exceeds the currently established tolerance of 15 ppm. Therefore, an increase in the combined glyphosate and AMPA tolerance for residues in soybean forage will be requested."
The US tolerance standard of combined glyphosate and AMPA in soybean forage was increased to 100 ppm after they approved the GM soybean. The Japanese government also revised the safety standard of combined glyphosate and AMPA in soybean seed from 6ppm to 20ppm in April 2000 at the request of the US government. By legalising the increase, Japan could import soybeans from the US without violating the law.

Monsanto patch-worked the results of experiments with analyses that are full of holes, and manipulated the results. They even requested the revision and lowering of safety standards. The Nagoya University team discovered facts showing inadequate and incomplete safety assessment in the application document by Monsanto. The process of genetic recombination and the results of other animal experiments remained uninspected by the team.

In May 2000, Monsanto informed countries importing US soybeans that Roundup resistant soybeans had two extra gene fragments in the genome. They were there when the US FDA gave the initial approval to the GE soybeans in 1992. All the GE soybeans supplied worldwide contain these gene fragments. Monsanto asserts that these fragmented genes do not create unknown proteins.

But for such basic facts to come to light eight years after the approval is a clear indication of how incomplete is the state of knowledge about the genetic recombination of crops. It also demonstrates how dangerous it is for governments to rely on a commercial company's information for data and safety assessments. We question the wisdom of experts at the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare who concluded that the genetically engineered Roundup Ready soybean was safe, based on such an inadequate and incomplete application.

Postscript: In a note to the editor early August 2003, Professor Kawata said the research on the Monsanto soybean application was sent to Japan's Agriculture and Fisheries Ministry two years ago. However there has been no response from the authority about the flaws discovered in the application, and Professor Kawata still awaits a response from Monsanto-Japan.
- Masaharu Kawata, Assistant Professor, School of Science, Nagoya University, Japan This article was written in May 2001 and has been slightly adapted for publication in Pacific Ecologist.

More heros from Maui County...Elle Cochran, Ua Ritte, and Hemowai Warriors

"Now that I have had a moment to catch my breath, I will somehow try and put into words how grateful I am for all of your love, and support throughout this campaign season.

It was a tough run and a close race to the finish line, I could not have done it without each and every single one of your votes.

To everyone who sent me reassuring messages and motivational notes: thank you; They were very helpful pick-me-ups during difficult moments.

The results tell me that expensive smear campaigns and outside money can influence results, but that the voice of the people that live here is a stronger force to be reckoned with.

I hope to regain the confidence of the rest of the voters over the coarse of the next two years.

I am here to represent the voice of the PEOPLE, that means everyone. My door is always open, my staff does an excellent job making time for everyone that needs to meet with me.

Please call me to set up a meeting, and I will be more than happy to listen.

My office number is: 270-5504
My cell number is: 281-7709

I look forward to working with the community as a whole, for the betterment of everyone.

Together we can move mountains, indeed we already have."
Elle Cochran

"Right on Elle Cochran ! We three made it! CM Margaret D. Wille too! That would be a trifecta win - combined with the wonderful win you folks on Maui accomplished in passing the initiative - I would call it a blow-out All against over $8 million and the largest chemical companies in the world. Time to celebrate, then rest and then redouble our efforts to make good things happen in our community. Imua!"
Gary Hooser‎

"Congratulations to you both as well! It was a tough go for all of us, but the truth and the side of 'good' has prevailed. Now we work even more diligently! Lets do this."
Elle Cochran 

Maui, Betrayal, and Learning About Bio-tech Chemical Corporations

...Today, Hawai’i imports around 85 – 90% of its food.
How and why did this shift? How did Hawai’i, land of abundance, devolve from a miracle of self-sustaining agriculture to an industrial chemical intensive research lab that depends on petroleum and the outside world to feed itself?

There are many answers to this question- but a key shift occurred when certain empowered trustees and land managers opted to change the course of Hawaiian agriculture (thus altering the destiny of Hawai’i itself) from self-sustaining to an agricultural export economy based on imported low-income workers, imported artificial inputs (the first major imported fertilizer was seagull guano) and mono-crop methodology. Native farmers were displaced, water was diverted and polluted, and food began needing to be imported in order to feed the people of Hawai’i. Essentially, when we stopped viewing the ‘Āina as a source of life and sustenance and instead viewed it as a source of manmade riches, we began a centuries long WAR with the ‘āina.
And so, we acknowledge this long time war with the ‘āina. And now, a new chapter has emerged, and the people of Hawai’i are awakened.

They cannot accurately claim that they are safe- because no one has scientifically examined what they are doing. They are not regulated by the State- as Abercrombie famously said in a symposium on big Ag to the Hawai’i biotech execs: “You don’t have to lobby us! We’re here to lobby you!” They are not regulated by the Feds: Michael Taylor, former attorney of, then VP, of Monsanto, is head of Obama’s FDA, while Tom Vilsack, former governor of Iowa (GE corn central) and biotech “Governor of the Year” is head of the USDA. The fox is guarding the henhouse. “The regulators ain’t workin’ for you; they sold you out and you ain’t got a clue” (from my song “The Story of the GMO”). The biotech firms would have you believe that GMO is sound science. It is not. It is a science in its infancy. They would have you believe that they are feeding the world. It is true they are feeding the world- thanks to our compulsory federal subsidies. GE food is cheap because you’ve already paid for it with your taxes. But their claim that the world cannot feed itself without them is pure deceit: economists know that humans produce more food than they can consume- but we throw most of it away. It’s a distribution issue. But most factitious of all of the deception, the biotech firms have defaulted to the excuse that because they have been doing this for years, it is ok to continue.

When you are entrenched in a system that is destructive, there is no easy way out. We are rooted in a heritage of destructive land management practices. We are participants in a centuries long war with the ‘āina. We are partners in a marriage to an agricultural paradigm based on fossil fuels, industrial chemicals and waste byproducts. And you’re afraid of divorce. And they know it.

Divorce is ugly. I watched my parents go through it. It was brutal, destructive, miserable and sobering. But if they hadn’t done it they would’ve destroyed each other, and us.
Untie the knot. Of course it will be messy. Divorce the biotech firms. Call them out. Either way they will continue to fight. And so will we. This won’t end with this vote- it is only the beginning. War is messy, and this is a chance to move it one step closer to the end: end the reign of toxic export agriculture in Hawai’i. Call in the regulators. Wake up and protect Hawai’i. Vote Yes and divorce your complacency. Start healing now, so that the keiki of the future will inherit, not a broken island home, but one that will convey all of the benefits and joys that the Hawaiians of old experienced.

Recreate Hawai’i Now.

Feel free to share this, I wrote it. Aloha, Makana
Two and a half years ago, my friends and I released a film informing the public of Kamehameha Schools/ Bishop Estate (KS) undisclosed land leases to Monsanto for Genetic Engineering (GE) field trials and cultivation of GE seed crops. 9 days after the release of our film, KS altered their website from a sophisticated, greenwashing, “cultural co-optation” propaganda machine to highlight an admittance that they were indeed leasing acreage to Monsanto, and that Monsanto was a “good tenant who paid their bills”. Obviously their messaging was reflective of a limited understanding and the general zeitgeist of that time: basically, “what’s the big deal?”.
It turns out, the “big deal” is that- unbeknownst at that time to not only the world, but the people of Hawai’i- Hawai’i is the top GE seed producer and exporter on Earth.
Makana wrote much more and these excerpts were taken from here...

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

MONSANTO Dead in the Water on the Shores of Maui

Maui County says YES to getting GMOs and associated pesticides off our islands of Maui and Molokai!
  1. Rights Conferred By This Ordinance

    We, the people of Maui County hereby proclaim that the our residents, visitors, Public Trust Resources, and the Environment must be protected from the potentially hazardous health effects, contamination, loss of diversity, environmental and other potentially harmful impacts from the GE Operations and Practices that have not met the standards set forth in this Ordinance. Therefore, we are hereby exercising our right to utilize the County initiative process to impose a moratorium on the propagation, cultivation, raising, or growing of GE Organisms in Maui County in order to protect, our residents, visitors, and the environment, and to call for a detailed environmental impact study of the harms associated with GE Operations and Practices.

SECTION 4: Purpose

The purposes of this Article are:

  1. to protect Maui County’s Environment and Public Trust Resources from transgenic contamination by GE Operations and Practices;
  2. to defend and promote the economic integrity of organic and non GE markets that are harmed by transgenic contamination by GE Operations and Practices ;
  3. to protect Maui County from hazardous aspects of GE Operations and Practices , including but not limited to increased Pesticide use;
  4. to preserve the right of Maui County residents to reject GE Operations and Practices based on health-related, moral, or other concerns; and
  5. to preserve Maui County’s Environment and Public Trust Resources (with its unique and vulnerable ecosystems), while promoting the cultural heritage of the indigenous peoples of Maui and indigenous agricultural Operations and Practices.
This Article shall be liberally construed to fulfill those purposes.

Section 5: Temporary Moratorium.

  1. It is unlawful for any person or entity to knowingly propagate, cultivate, raise, grow or test Genetically Engineered Organisms within the County of Maui until such time that the terms of the (Section 6, below) have been met.
  2. Subsection (1) of this section does NOT apply to:
    1. the propagation, cultivation, raising, growing or testing of GE Organisms that are in mid-growth cycle when this chapter is enacted;
    2. GE Organisms that have been incorporated into any food or medicine in any manner already prepared for sale for human or animal consumption;
    3. any licensed health practitioner who provides diagnosis, care, or treatment to any human patient using products containing GE Organisms; and
    4. any fully accredited college or university that engages in non-commercial scientific research, medical research, or education using GE Organisms, provided that such activities are conducted under enclosed indoor laboratory conditions, with the utmost precautionary measures to prevent accidental release of GE Organisms into the outside environment. “Moratorium Amendment or Repeal”

It's been a huge fight here on Maui and on Molokai to rid Monsanto from our shores...
In 2009 no one even had heard of Monsanto or GMOs...most thought that pesticides were NOT harmful either...
We changed that...
The yes means no, and no means yes strategy didn't work for the pirates this time...
By 800 votes, and the main Honolulu paper was reporting at the end of the night there needed to be 50% plus 1 vote...I went to bed wondering myself....

The 5 SHAKA members who put the moratorium forward are the heroes.

Helped a small way by creating a blog back in 2009 to fight my pesticide poisoning, and to prove that is what disabled me...I knew it was true, but no docs would even investigate...

I proved it...

Why would anyone think it's OK to poison Paradise is beyond belief!
Monsanto now heads to Mexico...
Monsanto has launched a new global center in Mexico focused on developing hybrid strains of corn.

Monsanto plans to invest $90 million over the next five years to centralize its development of corn seed research at the new center, which is based in Tlajomulco de Zuniga, Reuters reports.

"The aim is to create new varieties tolerant to diseases and the stresses that affect maize cultivation all over the world due to growing negative conditions caused by global climate change," Monsanto said in a statement.

The center is part of Monsanto's effort to boost its output of corn, which is the planet's most widely produced grain, according to Reuters.