FDA/USDA/EPA Approvals, Omissions

Ignoring the Scientific Precautionary Principle underlies flawed US GMO Approvals                      The Precautionary Principle is :
When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm. Morally unacceptable harm refers: to harm to humans or the environment that is: threatening to human life or health, or
serious and effectively irreversible, or
inequitable to present or future generations, or
imposed without adequate consideration of the human rights of those affected.
The judgment of plausibility should be grounded in scientific analysis.   (UNESCO COMEST 2005 Report)

The FDA bureaucratic pronouncement that GMO crops were considered substantially equivalent to nonGMO crops in the 1990’s has again been proven to be false.  Dr. Michael Antoniou, who led the study, said “Our study clearly shows that the GM transformation process results in profound compositional differences in NK603, demonstrating that this GMO corn is not substantially equivalent to its non-GMO counterpart. The marked increase in putrescine and especially cadaverine is a concern since these substances are potentially toxic, being reported as enhancers of the effects of histamine, thus heightening allergic reactions”

How FDA Manipulates the Media    The watchdogs are being turned into lapdogs. “Journalists have ceded the power to the scientific establishment,” says Vincent Kiernan, a science journalist and dean at George Mason University. “I think it’s interesting and somewhat inexplicable, knowing journalists in general as being people who don’t like ceding power.” The press corps is primed for manipulation by a convention that goes back decades: the embargo. The embargo is a back-room deal between journalists and the people they cover—their sources. A source grants the journalist access on condition that he or she cannot publish before an agreed-on date and time.

Glyphosate damage and ecosystem infiltration and damage sparking global concern   Professor David Garbary, the Editor of Phycologia, “This paper provides an important contribution to our knowledge of the environmental toxicology of glyphosate-based herbicides in freshwater aquatic systems.”  Also from article ” It seems that the form of the herbicide (glyphosate, glyphosate plus surfactants – Roundup®, or AMPA) is crucial in determining the intensity of the effects, which means that algal productivity could shift visibly depending on the types of herbicides applied to agricultural land near a stream—even if farmers are using them legally. As the authors noted, even legal concentrations of Roundup® in Brazilian waters “may present significant environmental risks.”

Current FDA Exposure of flaws in USDA-backed GMO Labeling  Bill

***Guidelines for NONGMO labeling just issued by USDA***Since USDA (Public Law 114-216) conflicted with FDA existing labeling  authority in the hastily passed federal action when USDA seized the opportunity to grab federal labeling authority in July from FDA (in the Obama Administration’s forceful implementation of usurping VT, CT, Maine, Alaska GMO labeling laws), USDA just published “Statements That Bioengineered or Genetically Modified (GM) Ingredients or Animal Feed Were Not Used in Meat, Poultry, or Egg Products”  http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/regulatory-compliance/labeling/claims-guidance/procedures-nongenetically-engineered-statement

NEW 8/16Monsanto’s dirty history  and war profiteering with poisonous consumer products goes back a long way, and has many cohort facilitators in government.PCBs, DDT,  GMOs, dioxins, aspartame, bovine growth hormone in dairy,  pesticides and more- with a strategy of denial, deceit, cover-ups and doing it over and over again with US government entrenched influence like Secretary Rumsfeld, Gov.Mitt Romney, Secy. Hillary Clinton and others, including the “war against regulation” and “feed the world ” slogans, and substituting slanted industry science for independent science with integrity. This is a real eye opener with many details hard to ferret out on the internet. Unfortunately Obama has been one of Monsanto’s worst puppets.

EPA Uses Industry Related Studies to Find No Harm from RoundUp’s Glyphosate!  “Having companies fund and perform studies that affect them financially would seem to be an obvious conflict of interest, but that’s the standard practice at EPA. The glyphosate review, which was completed in June, was one of 52 reporting on the endocrine disrupting potential of pesticides, all of which relied heavily on industry-funded research and most of which concluded, as the one of glyphosate did, that there was no cause for further testing.”https://theintercept.com/2015/11/03/epa-used-monsanto-funded-research/

What’s Behind All the EPA Flip Flopping on Glyphosate (RoundUp) Herbicide?  https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/what-going-glyphosate-epas-odd-handling-controversial-chemical

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/label_gmos_now_Mr_President_2016/?t=8&akid=1790.429140.di09Uz

*Potatoes:  Despite FDA’s “approval” the 2nd generation GMO Innate potato from JR Simplot, MacDonalds still refuses to use it. And EPA is supposed to review it later this year… http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/13/fda-gives-ok-for-companys-genetically-engineered-p/  How does FDA treat patented potatoes? “In a letter Tuesday [early January 2016] to Idaho-based J.R. Simplot Co., the FDA said the potato isn’t substantially different in composition or safety from other products already on the market, and it doesn’t raise any issues that would require the agency to do more stringent premarket vetting.”  What about novel proteins created that aren’t on the FDA’s allergen checklist?  Potatoes didn’t make it to market in the past because a toxic protein from the GMO process was discovered just  in time, but the scientists who discovered it were ruined and shamed by industry interest.

*New GMO techniques, regulatory loopholes, and adding more toxins to our foods GMO foods are not only unlabeled, but newer and riskier Genetic Engineering techniques are being employed. New crops are often escaping any robust risk assessment by USDA and FDA, as the regulators are not mandated or funded to do rigorous risk assessments. Despite numerous citizen and scientist objections, the EPA regularly increases Glyphosate weedkiller residues in our food and has recently revived Agent Orange era and Dicamba weedkillers as allowable alongside RoundUp on our food crops (despite toxicity, other health impacts and contributions to our growing antibiotic resistance problems).  We have started a new page to note such developments whenever possible.  Further, the EPA does not routinely measure nor are they mandated to routinely test glyphosate concentrations in our food supply, despite allowing increased RoundUp spraying onto food crops,  Watch out soon for increased 2,4-D and Dicamba toxin residues on GMO food!

*GMO Arctic ApplesFor example, new GMO crop approvals, (like Canadian Co.Okanagan’s Arctic Golden Delicious and Granny Smith apples  http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-gmo-apple-potato-fda-approval-20150320-story.html) are okayed by US regulators, even though major companies like MacDonald’s have said they won’t use either.  The genetic engineers used a new “gene silencing” technique to prevent GMO “Arctic” apples from turning brown when bruised, cut, or exposed to air. Regarding GMO potatoes, which have been shunned in the past and not had commercial success to date, the crop developer’s engineers used genetic modification of “Innate” potatoes to reduce the activity of genes that cause tubers to turn brown.

So, what else happens to the modified fruits and vegetables when some gene traits are “knocked out” or “reduced”?  An apt analogy might be to liken a genome to an ecosystem, in which the absence or change of a factor such as a gene trait may have other still unknown effects on the genome, including affecting other genetic expressions in the subject organism or the consumer of such modified product.  We are still learning about these types of genetic manipulations, and yet our regulators are allowing the developers to run experiments on populations who might not want to be a part of such experimentation.  We thought the human experiments in WWII were bad; this is much larger and babies and children are the most vulnerable subjects in such unknown GMO experimentation!   What has happened to Freedom of Choice and  a citizen’s Right to Know in the United States???

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s