I Changed My Mind About GMOs!

After writing a book exposing fifty of Monsanto’s top lies, and after running across the country with my son speaking out against the problems associated with chemical intensive GMO-based agriculture, I’ve changed my mind. I now agree with Tony the GMO-Loving Tiger, GMOs are great!

PregnantRoundupHeartsSmall

Just kidding, of course. But I’m intrigued by the people who have switched from an anti to a pro-GMO position. Take Mark Lynas, for example. He claims to have seen the light after starting out as an anti-GMO activist. (Never mind that other anti-GMO activists had never heard of Mark until he announced his conversion.) Now an industry poster child, Lynas travels the world promoting the alleged benefits of genetically modified organisms. How did he and a handful of others make the change? What are their motivations? What are the social costs and benefits?

And if Mr. Lynas can make such a dramatic turnaround, what would it take for me to do the same?

Following is a list of 53 change points that I’d need before I would cross the line to routinely eat and cheerlead for the chemical giants, their GMOs and companion poisons:

1. I’d need to believe that GMOs have never and will never contaminate their natural counterparts.

2. Since that’s not possible, I’d need to believe that pesticide companies have a right to contaminate our biological and cultural heritage with GMOs.

3. I’d need to believe that genetic contamination of native and natural plant and animal varieties benefits farmers, the environment, and human health.

4. I’d need to believe that chemical giants have no moral, ethical, or legal liability to the farmers’ whose crops and livelihoods are destroyed by GMO contamination.

5. I’d need to agree with the U.S. Supreme Court that organic and conventional farmers have no legal recourse or protection from genetic contamination. (http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs122/1104248386985/archive/1116242775724.html)

6. I’d need to believe that small-scale agro ecological family farms and their communities are best relegated to the history books. (http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-family-farm-is-being-systematically-wiped-out-of-existence-in-america)

7. I’d need to believe that GMOs really are needed to feed a hungry world. (http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/tenreasons.cfm)

8. I’d need to believe that GMOs should be pushed and promoted onto world markets before long term environmental, animal and human feeding studies have been conducted. In other words, I’d need to believe that the Precautionary Principle is poppycock. (http://www.i-sis.org.uk/prec.php)

9. I’d need to believe that horizontal gene transfer is no different than traditional crossbreeding and hybridization processes.
(http://consumersunion.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Wide-Crosses.pdf)

10. I’d need to believe that turning plants into EPA-registered pesticide-producing factories provides lasting benefits to farmers, consumers, animals, and the environment.
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/bt-corn_b_2442072.html)

11. I’d need to believe that Roundup resistant GMO crops really are safe for the environment, animals, and human health.
(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/10/23/1249978/-Monsanto-Poisoning-Argentina-The-World#)

12. I’d need to believe that Roundup is safe. Or if not safe, I’d need to believe that drinking and breathing Roundup, and feeding Roundup-contaminated breast milk to babies is more beneficial than not doing so.
(http://naturalsociety.com/3-studies-proving-toxic-glyphosate-found-urine-blood-even-breast-milk/)

13. I’d need to believe that agrochemical poisons cease to be poisonous when we eat them.
(http://www.stonyfield.com/blog/why-i-choose-organic/)

14. I’d need to believe that privatizing seed through patents is ethical, responsible, and in the best interest of farmers, consumers, and the environment.
(http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/10456-moyers-vandana-shiva-on-the-problem-with-genetically-modified-seeds)

15. I’d need to believe that farmers have no right or business saving and replanting seeds.
(http://www.foodnotbombs.net/seeds.html)

16. I’d need to believe that plant and animal biodiversity is of little value or importance.
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/genetically-modified-crops-and-the-contamination-of-america-s-food-chain/19860)

17. I’d need to believe that agricultural imperialism that results from GMO patents benefits poor servant farmers more than it benefits chemical company masters.
(http://www.naturalnews.com/046016_el_salvador_monsanto_gmo_seeds.html)

18. I’d need to believe that monocultures benefit the environment and reduce global warming.
(http://www.navdanya.org/attachments/Latest_Publications9.pdf) (http://www.organicconsumers.org/bytes/OrganicBytes441.pdf)

19. I’d need to believe that turning GMO corn into ethanol is ethical and provides sound fiscal and environmental policy.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/12/time-to-kill-the-corn-ethanol-mandate/)

20. I’d need to believe that it makes sense for the government to burden organic farmers with fees, rules, and bureaucratic nonsense while subsidizing GMO farmers and the chemical companies that own the GMOs with U.S. taxpayer dollars for products that U.S. taxpayers neither need nor want.
(http://www.foginfo.org/policy-work/action-alerts/)

21. I’d need to believe that GMOs really do have identifiable consumer benefits.
(http://www.responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs)

22. I’d need to believe that GMOs really are substantially equivalent to their natural counterparts. Which means, of course, I’d need to believe they no more merit patent protection than their natural counterparts.
(http://gmoinside.org/substantial-equivalence/)

23. I’d need to believe that as government and industry leaders have concluded, U.S. consumers are too stupid to understand GMO food labels.
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/10/gmo-labels-congress_n_5576255.html)

24. I’d need to believe that labeling GMOs must be avoided at all costs, even if that means subverting the American democratic process as the industry has done in California, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Vermont, and indeed the entire nation. Why? Because GMOs are a skull and crossbones to the GMO industry. And if the market shrinks and dies, then millions of people will also die because GMOs are necessary to feed a growing world. (See number 7.) (http://www.alternet.org/story/154951/millions_against_monsanto%3A_the_food_fight_of_our_lives?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark)
(http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/vermont-gmo-idUSL2N0OT20620140612)
(http://www.eatdrinkpolitics.com/tag/california-prop-37/)

25. I’d need to believe that farmers should continue to grow GMOs in spite of the overwhelming consumer rejection of GMOs.
(http://www.gmeducation.org/latest-news/p217765-new-us-consumer-poll-shows-massive-rejection-of-gmo-foods.html)

26. I’d need to believe that pollinators are dispensable members of the web of life.
(http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_29307.cfm)

27. I’d need to believe that we’re better off without the birds, fish, and other animals impacted by GMO-based agriculture.
(http://thecalloftheland.wordpress.com/2011/03/29/latter-day-luther-nails-troubling-thesis-to-gm-farm-food-citadels/)

28. I’d need to believe that the animals that refuse to eat GMOs don’t know what’s good for them.
(http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=C5A58EEADAD40EE44DB101D0C360F763)

29. I’d need to believe that killing the soil with repeated applications of Roundup and other poisons is the foundation of sound modern agricultural practices.
(http://www.rodalenews.com/roundup)

30. I’d need to believe that super weeds and superbugs are beneficial byproducts of GMO-based agriculture.
(http://www.utne.com/environment/superweeds-superbugs-and-superbusiness.aspx#axzz3DsNAIhxH)

31. I’d need to believe that killing super weeds and superbugs with ever more toxic chemicals makes moral, environmental, and fiscal sense.
(http://gmoinside.org/another-strike-gmos-creation-superbugs-superweeds/)

32. I’d need to believe that good science includes bullying, shaming, belittling, intimidating, and silencing scientists and others who oppose GMOs.
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/gmo-researchers-attacked-evidence-denied-and-a-population-at-risk/5305324)
(http://guardianlv.com/2014/05/monsanto-silences-scientist-who-explores-risks-of-gene-modification-video/)

33. I’d need to believe that good GMO related science includes sham research methods that produce sham research results.
(http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2010/12571-sham-science)

34. I’d need to believe that pesticide companies have the right to control the editorial boards of scientific journals.
(http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/seralini-study-toxic-effects-gmos-glyphosate-republished/)

35. I’d need to believe that industry-influenced scientific journals have the right to retract scientifically sound, unfavorable research.
(http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Retracting_Serallini_study_violates_science_and_ethics.php)

36. I’d need to believe that agrochemical companies have the right to control political figures and processes through bribes, donations, and lawsuits.
(http://nodisinfo.com/the-ultimate-crime-syndicate-the-gmo-industry-bribes-racketeering-and-more/)

37. I’d need to believe that regulation of the GMO industry is best performed directly by the GMO industry or only slightly less directly through the industry/government revolving door.
(http://occupy-monsanto.com/tag/revolving-door/)

38. I’d need to believe that chemical companies have the right to control the GMO story spun by the mainstream media.
(http://www.nongmoreport.com/organic-nongmo/the-biotech-industrys-assault-on-balanced-journalism/)

39. I’d need to believe that agrochemical companies have the right to fashion international trade agreements such as the TPP and TAFTA, agreements that are favorable to the GMO industry, agreements that supersede member nations’ rights to govern the industry.
(http://www.naturalnews.com/042158_trade_agreements_monsanto_gmo_labeling.html)

40. I’d need to believe that agrochemical companies have the right to enter public schools to indoctrinate our children regarding GMOs.
(http://www.trueactivist.com/monsanto-biotechnology-book-for-kids-caught-brainwashing-children/)

41. I’d need to believe that agrochemical companies and/or farmers have no moral or legal obligation to disclose what, when, and where they spray Roundup and other toxins.
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-brower/exceptional-volume-of-pes_b_5498415.html)

42. I’d need to believe that agrochemical companies and/or farmers have no moral or legal obligation to disclose where their GMO crops are planted.
(http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/oregon-wants-to-map-gmo-farms-but-biotech-companies-refuse-to-reveal-locations-of-gmo-fields/)

43. I’d need to believe that it’s good that Monsanto—the same company that produced and profited from PCBs, DDT, and Agent Orange—has seized control of much of our food supply.
(http://www.seedbuzz.com/knowledge-center/article/visualizing-consolidation-in-the-global-seed-industry-1996%E2%80%932008)

44. I’d need to believe that parents who choose to feed their kids organic, non-GMO foods are fear-based and irrational, and it’s good that the mainstream media exposes them to public ridicule, name calling, and shame.
(http://nypost.com/2014/04/19/the-tyranny-of-the-organic-mommy-mafia/)

45. I’d need to believe that pesticide industry executives routinely feed GMOs and associated poisons to their own children.

46. I’d need to believe that a proper function of the U.S. State department includes the promotion of GMOs around the world.
(http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/Biotech_Report_US.pdf)

47. I’d need to believe that the U.S. government and the World Bank have the right to provide aid to developing countries only when those countries agree to accept and promote GMOs.
(http://sustainablepulse.com/2014/06/08/u-s-government-ties-el-salvador-usd-277-m-aid-package-monsantos-gmo-seeds/#.U5W4iijihfZ)

48. I’d need to believe the U.S. government has the right to destabilize foreign countries such as Ukraine in order to expand the U.S. corporate empire including the Biotechnology Industry with its patented, chemically dependent, genetically modified seeds.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzR8ob43dsw)

49. I’d need to believe that the U.S. government has the right to use war and foreign occupation to force foreign farmers to use GMOs as it did in Iraq through Paul Bremer’s infamous Order 81.
(http://www.commondreams.org/views/2012/06/24/patenting-staple-foods-bremers-order-81-ruinous-iraqs-agriculture)

50. I’d need to believe that doing business with and/or purchasing products containing GMOs is morally defensible.

51. I’d need to believe that Monsanto and the other chemical giants’ place the public good over their bottom line.

52. I’d need to believe that industry executives and scientists are wiser than Mother Nature and/or God.

53. I’d need to believe that the Earth’s seven billion inhabitants should trust Monsanto and gang.

Based on the previous list, the chances that I may one day see the GMO light, fill my pantry and my kids bellies with chemically saturated, pesticide producing GMOs, write a book about Monsanto’s beneficence, and run across the USA with my son to promote the GMO industry is a bit of a long shot.

What would it take for you to become the next Mark Lynas? Or if you currently support GMOs, what would it take for you to follow the lead of one-time pro-GMO scientists such as Arpad Pusztai, Belinda Martineau, Thierry Vrain, Shiv Chopra, Jane Dever, Tyrone Hayes, who, through their scientific research, have concluded that GMOs are not safe? What would it take for you to conclude, as nearly 600 scientists who participated in the International Cartagena Biosafety Protocol concluded, that “the greatest threat to mankind in the new millennium is not nuclear war, but genetic engineering”?

One last thought. Science plays a key role in any discussion regarding GMOs. But history has shown us time and time again that science without ethics and morality is dangerous. Such science has been used and continues to be used to justify human and environmental atrocities. Many of the world’s “elites” (a euphemism for obscenely wealthy sociopaths), trampled and continue to trample ethics and morality by profiting from scientifically created chemical concoctions such as Agent Orange, PCBs, and agrochemical poisons long after those poisons were proven dangerous. The vastness of the wealth of these sociopaths is exceeded only by the vastness of the human and environmental devastation produced by the immoral, unethical and ongoing misuse of such poisons.

Brett Wilcox gave away more than 3,000 free downloads of his book, We’re Monsanto: Feeding the World, Lie After Lie prior to running from coast to American coast with his 15-year old son, David, to promote a GMO Free USA. You can support Brett’s efforts by purchasing his book or by making a donation here.

Fine Print of the Food Wars

by Dr. Vandana Shiva – The Asian Age, 16 July 2014

seedindustry

Graphics Source: Seed Industry Structure –
Philip H. Howard Associate Professor, Michigan State University – https://www.msu.edu/~howardp/seedindustry.html

Source: http://www.asianage.com/columnists/fine-print-food-wars-538

Creating ‘ownership’ of seed through patents and intellectual property rights and imposing it globally through the WTO, the biotech industry has established a monopoly empire over seed and food

Monsanto and friends, the biotech industry, its lobbyists and its paid media representation continue to push for monopoly control over the world’s food through its seed supply.

This “empire” is being built on false foundations: that Monsanto is a creator/inventor of life and hence can own the seed through patents and that life can be engineered and machined like an iPhone.

Through ecology and the new biology we know that life is self-organised complexity — life makes itself; it cannot be “manufactured”. This also applies to food production through the new science of agroecology. Agroecology gives us a deeper scientific understanding of how ecological processes work at the level of soils, living seeds and living food. The promises made by the biotech industry — of increased yields, reduction of chemical use and control of weeds and pests — have not been kept. Last month an investment fund sued DuPont for $1 billion for pushing herbicide-resistant crops knowing fully well they would fail to control weeds and instead contribute to the emergence of “superweeds”.

Creating “ownership” of seed through patents and intellectual property rights and imposing it globally through the World Trade Organisation, the biotech industry has established a monopoly empire over seed and food. While they claim ownership of the seeds they sell and collect royalties, when it comes to checks and balances on safety, the biotech industry is systematically destroying international and national laws on biosafety claiming their products are “as nature made them”. It’s ontological schizophrenia!

Biosafety is the multi-disciplinary assessment of the impact of genetic engineering on the environment, on public health and on socio-economic conditions. At the international level, biosafety is international law enshrined in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. I was appointed to an expert group to evolve the framework by the United Nations environment programmme to implement Article 19.3 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

Monsanto and friends have been attempting to deny citizens the right to safe food by opposing Article 19.3 since the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992.

Currently they are attempting to dismantle national laws on biosafety in India, Pakistan, the European Union, across Africa and Latin America. In the United States, they are distorting the Constitution by suing state governments that have passed labelling laws for GMO (genetically modified) foods by claiming that the citizens’ right to know what they eat is superseded by the biotech industry’s right to impose hazardous foods on uninformed consumers as the freedom of speech of a corporation, as if it were a natural person.

Their PR machine is deployed to unscientifically attack scientists working on biosafety, such as Árpád Pusztai, Ignacio Chapela, Irina Ermakova, Éric Séralini and myself. Many journalists, having no scientific background themselves, have become soldiers in this PR assault. Privileged white men like Mark Lynas, Jon Entine and Michael Specter, with no practical experience in agriculture, armed only with BA degrees and ties to corporate-controlled media, are being used to undermine real scientific findings about the impact of GMOs on our health and ecosystems.

Biotech industry uses its PR puppets to falsely claim that GMOs are a solution to world hunger. This denialism of real scientific debate about how living systems evolve and adapt, is backed by an aggressive and massive PR assault, including the use of intelligence agencies such as Blackwater.

In 2010, Forbes named me one of the seven most powerful women in the world for “putting women front and centre to solve the issue of food security in the developing world”. In 2014, Jon Entine, a journalist, wrote an “opinion” piece on the Forbes website, falsely claiming that I have not studied physics. While I have studied physics at a post-graduate level and done my doctorate on the foundations of quantum theory, I have spent 40 years studying ecology in India’s farms and forests, with nature and wise peasants as my teachers. This is the basis of my expertise in agroecology and biosafety.

Good science and proven technologies do not need PRs, intelligence agencies or corrupt governments to prove the facts.

If unfounded attacks on a scientist from a developing country by a non-scientist is one of their tools in shaping the future, they have got it all wrong. They don’t see the growing citizens’ outrage against Monsanto’s monopoly.

In sovereign countries, where the might of Monsanto and friends is limited, the people and their governments are rejecting their monopoly and failed technology. But this news is suppressed by the PR machine.

Russia has completely banned GMOs with deputy prime minister Dmitry Medvedev saying, “If the Americans like to eat GMO products, let them eat it then. We don’t need to do that; we have enough space and opportunities to produce organic food”.

China has banned GMOs in military food supplies. Italy has just passed a law, Campo libre, making planting GMO crops punishable with a prison sentence of one to three years and a fine of 10,000-30,000 euros. Italian minister of agriculture Nunzia De Girolamo said in a statement: “Our agriculture is based on biodiversity, on quality, and we must continue to aim for these without ventures that, even from the economic point of view, wouldn’t make us competitive.”

PR pieces in Forbes and the New Yorker cannot stop the awakening of millions of farmers and consumers to the very real dangers of genetically-modified organisms in our food and the shortcomings and failures of the industrial food system which is destroying the planet and our health.

The writer is the executive director of the Navdanya Trust

Subscribe for New Post Notifications

You have successfully subscribed to the newsletter

There was an error while trying to send your request. Please try again.

Running The Country will use the information you provide on this form to be in touch with you and to provide updates and marketing.