USDA

Should You Eat Chicken?

/ Ren

Freedom Fowl

It’s a good question. In recent weeks, salmonella on chicken has officially sickened more than 300 people (the Centers for Disease Control says there are 25 illnesses for every one reported, so maybe 7,500) and hospitalized more than 40 percent of them, in part because antibiotics aren’t working. Industry’s reaction has been predictably disappointing: the chicken from the processors in question — Foster Farms — is still being shipped into the market. Regulators’ responses have been limited: the same chicken in question is still being sold.

Food safety advocates are demanding to know why there has been no recall of Foster Farms chicken. The U.S.D.A.’s Assistant Administrator for F.S.I.S. Field Operations, Daniel Engeljohn, talks about the current state of the inquiry.

Until the Food Safety and Inspection Service (F.S.I.S.) of the Department of Agriculture (U.S.D.A.) can get its act together and start assuring us that chicken is safe, I’d be wary.

This is not a shutdown issue, but a “We care more about industry than we do about consumers” issue. Think that’s an exaggeration?  Read this..

Is This the End of Real Food?

/ Ren

 

The effects of eating genetically engineered (GE) foods are still largely unknown. The studies that led to the market release of certain genetically modified seeds were conducted by the same companies that manufacture the seeds themselves, and the raw data for these tests have not been released for the public to see. There have been independent, peer-reviewed studies that suggest that there could be harmful effects to human health caused by the use of GMOs and the chemical pesticides and herbicides that go along with them, but again, there has not been enough research done and the jury is still out. Also, without labeling GE foods, we cannot associate any health problems with people who ate them — because we do not know who ate them. Since the FDA has no way to track adverse health effects in people consuming GE foods, and because there is no requirement that food containing GE ingredients be labeled, there is no effective way to gather data on health problems that may be happening.

BuyTickets

Seeds of Freedom

/ Ren

Seeds of Freedom seeks to challenge the mantra that large-scale, industrial agriculture is the only means by which we can feed the world, promoted by the pro-GM lobby. In tracking the story of seed it becomes clear how corporate agenda has driven the take over of seed in order to make vast profit and control of the food global system.

Through interviews with leading international experts such as Dr Vandana Shiva and  Henk Hobbelink, and through the voices of a number of African farmers, the film highlights how the loss of indigenous seed goes hand in hand with loss of biodiversity and related knowledge; the loss of cultural traditions and practices; the loss of livelihoods; and the loss of food sovereignty.  The pressure is growing to replace the diverse, nutritional, locally adapted and resilient seed crops which have been bred by small-scale farmers for millenia, by monocultures of GM seed.

The story of seed has become one of loss, control, dependence and debt. It’s been written by those who want to make vast profit from our food system, no matter what the true cost.  It’s time to change the story.  http://seedsoffreedom.info/

“If we don’t radically transform the direction of the global food system we will never feed the billion who are hungry, nor will we be able to feed ourselves in the future.”

http://stephenleahy.net/2012/10/11/double-food-production-in-10-years-and-reduce-global-warming/

The CAFO – MRSA Connection

/ Ren

Americans are under threat from antibiotic-resistant superbugs, making us vulnerable to common, once treatable infections (such as MRSA). A remarkable 80 percent of antibiotics sold in the U.S. are used not by humans, but by the meat and poultry industries so factory farm animals can grow faster and survive the crowded and unsanitary conditions found in Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs).

This is creating superbugs on the farm and humans are exposed in a number of ways, including when we handle or eat undercooked meat. Our life-saving drugs are becoming less effective when we really need them. Unfortunately, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has refused to take meaningful action to restrict the use of unnecessary antibiotics in livestock production.

The “natural” label has nothing to do with how an animal was raised.  The USDA requires only that no coloring or artificial ingredients are added to the final meat or poultry product and that it be “minimally processed” (although salt water can be added).

“Natural” meat or poultry products can definitely be given antibiotics in their feed or water while being raised—and can also be raised in confined spaces with thousands of other animals, given hormones and other drugs, fed animal by-products and subjected to many other unnatural practices.

Consumers should beware of several labels that are unapproved by the USDA, such as “antibiotic-free” and “no antibiotic residues”, that could mislead them to think a product was raised without any antibiotics, when in fact that may not be the case.  –Consumer’s Union

If you choose to eat meat, please be a conscientious consumer.  The best sources of clean, healthy animal products are generally those that are organic, grass-fed, often sold at farmers’ markets or CSA-style meat-shares (visit Eatwild,  LocalHarvest or Real Time Farms to find resources in your area).

Related articles

Time To Rein In The Industry-Run USDA

/ Ren

Internal Documents Reveal USDA Dietary Guidelines Panel Dominated by a Profession Under Fire

Washington, DC–December 15, 2011–Under pressure from the Healthy Nation Coalition, the USDA recently revealed the identities of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines “Independent Scientific Review Panel,” which is credited with peer-reviewing the Guidelines to ensure they are based on the preponderance of the scientific evidence available. Seven out of the eight panel members are Registered Dietitians (RDs), chosen according to the USDA, “for their knowledge in nutrition communication and dietary guidance.”

At the same time, RDs across America are reeling from the news that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will not reimburse them to provide intensive behavioral counseling for obesity. While the Federal government appears to be relying on RDs as experts in the midst of America’s obesity crisis, it doesn’t want to pay them to help people lose weight.  This news comes as the American Dietetic Association (ADA)—the professional organization for RDs—is under scrutiny for its ties to food and pharmaceutical industries.

“An ongoing investigation by Congress recently revealed that the ADA receives over $1 million a year in payments from pharmaceutical companies and an undisclosed amount from companies such as Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Hershey. In addition to receiving payments from industries with obvious conflicts of interest, earlier this year the Alliance for Natural Health-USA revealed that ADA’s continuing education courses for RDs are being taught by the Coca-Cola Company’s Beverage Institute,”  stated Darrell Rogers from Alliance for Natural Health-USA. RDs have voiced their dissatisfaction with the ADA’s corporate ties, with members indicating that the ADA’s relationship with corporate sponsors has a negative impact on the public image of RDs and undermines the credibility of the profession.

Credibility has been further undermined by the lack of evidence that the methods RDs use to treat obesity are effective.  The ADA’s own Evidence Analysis Library contains few studies that demonstrate that dietitian-led dietary interventions result in meaningful weight loss.

As a result, many insurance companies, and now CMS, do not reimburse RDs for its treatment.  Tennessee’s state insurance doesn’t cover seeing a dietitian for weight loss. Why? “There’s really no evidence to support the fact that providing those services would result in a decrease in medical cost, certainly not immediately, and even in the longer term,” according to Dr. Wendy Long, chief medical officer of TennCare.

This lack of evidence may be due in part to the limited scope of dietetic education and practice. The ADA relies on the USDA as a scientific authority and follows its lead in most matters of nutrition, limiting the training of RDs to USDA-approved diet recommendations.

Valerie Berkowitz, RD, Director of Nutrition at the Center for Balanced Health and author of the award-winning nutrition guide “The Stubborn Fat Fix” states:  “Registered Dietitians lack education and practice in manipulating macronutrients [protein, fat, and carbohydrate] to switch fuel sources from carbohydrate to fat burning. It is unfortunate that educators do not acknowledge the therapeutic value of lower carbohydrate consumption at least as an additional tool to increase the success of medical nutrition therapy for obesity prevention and treatment.”

The ADA not only limits the training of RDs, it is sponsoring legislation in New York and multiple other states that would essentially restrict the practice of nutrition to RDs, and outlaw highly-qualified non-RD nutrition professionals from practicing. If successful, this would restrict consumer choice of nutrition professionals to those trained to follow USDA recommendations.

Given the ADA’s close ties with the food and drug industry and the lack of effectiveness for USDA-approved dietitian-led interventions for obesity, the public should be concerned about the dominant role that RDs and other ADA members played in the creation of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines. In addition to the Independent Scientific Review Panel being comprised primarily of RDs, ADA members were also one-third of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, the group of experts that creates the Report that guides the writing of the Dietary Guidelines. The majority of the USDA and HHS staff members who worked with the Committee or on the Dietary Guidelines are also RDs.

According to Adele Hite, Director of the Healthy Nation Coalition and lead author of a 2010 peer-reviewed article examining the limitations of the Dietary Guideline process, “The ADA is an industry-friendly organization. The USDA appears to rely on the dietetics focus of ADA-trained Registered Dietitians to confirm their own industry-friendly guidelines. The self-supporting relationship between the ADA and the USDA does not benefit either the credibility of RDs or the health of Americans.”

The Healthy Nation Coalition is an organization dedicated to improving the health of Americans through reforming national food and nutrition policy and does not solicit or accept contributions from the food or pharmaceutical industry.

Media Contact: Kimberly Hartke, Publicist
Hartke Communications
703-860-2711, 703-675-5557

Related articles

Future of Organic Food and Agriculture at Risk

/ Ren

Action alert from The Cornucopia Institute

Dear Secretary Vilsack, Deputy Secretary Merrigan and NOSB members,

As an organic industry stakeholder, I respectfully request that you consider the following:

1.    I object to the NOSB and USDA leadership accommodating corporate interests that want to enhance their profits by including gimmicky synthetics and novel, patented ingredients in certified organic food.

 Martek Biosciences Corporation’s DHA/ARA oils are inappropriate for use in certified organic foods.  Some Martek oils are extracted with the neurotoxic petrochemical hexane, posing questions about human health and environmental impacts.

These supplements, from fermented algae and soil fungus, have never been part of the human diet.  In the late 1990s, Monsanto Corporation’s scientists genetically modified strains of algae for high DHA production (now marketed by Martek and added to some organic products).

Martek’s oils also contain various synthetic ingredients that have never been petitioned and approved for use in organics.  These include ingredients like mannitol, sodium polyphosphate, sodium ascorbate, glucose syrup solids and modified starch.

Adverse reaction reports filed with the FDA indicate at least a subset of infants suffer serious health complications after consuming formula supplemented with Martek oils.  Serious and prolonged gastrointestinal illnesses have resulted in hospitalizations and dangerous invasive diagnostic testing.  Many of the reports indicate that these babies recovered as soon as the Martek oils were removed from their diets.

Martek creates the impression that scientific consensus supports its DHA and ARA oils as beneficial supplements.  But Martek leaves out the preponderance of key studies which point to a single conclusion in independent scientific analysis: Martek DHA in infant formula does not benefit infant development.

2.    I object to the NOSB allowing factory farming practices in the production of chickens (both for egg and meat production) and hog production.

The livestock subcommittee’s proposal for requiring 2 square feet per laying hen, outside, is woefully inadequate, as are some of the other recommendations for poultry production (including turkeys) and the miserable amount of space proposed for hogs. These standards would literally make the US the laughingstock in international organic production and marketing.  Welfare benchmarks need to be mandated in the regulations, not merely in unenforceable “guidance.”

I support a minimum of 5 square feet per laying hen and enhanced space for pullets, turkey, other fowl and hogs.

3.    Enforce the organic standards on factory dairies masquerading as “organic.”

After the organic community has invested almost 11 years of policy debate, attempting to rein-in “factory farms,” milking thousands of cows each and masquerading as organic, it is entirely unacceptable that the USDA has been unwilling to expend the resources necessary to carefully verify whether these dairies, and their certifiers, are complying with the new regulatory benchmarks set in the “pasture rule.”

I respectfully ask USDA leadership to immediately verify that the largest producers of certified organic milk are not economically disadvantaging smaller ethical competitors or continuing to defraud consumers and that new rules immediately be promulgated to prevent conventional cattle from being brought on to organic dairy farms as replacements for expansion.

4.    And finally, I want to clearly go on record that I want the Obama administration to appoint the best and brightest representatives in the organic community to sit on the NOSB board, truly upholding the will of Congress.  No more corporate-backed imposters!

As a consumer, I buy food with the USDA Organic seal precisely to avoid unproven, questionably safe products like Martek’s oils—genetically novel and synthetic—in my diet and to support humane animal husbandry practices resulting in superior nutrition.

The NOSB should improve animal husbandry standards and reject the Martek petition for “DHA Algal Oil” and “ARA Single-Cell Oil.”  I call on the USDA to immediately remove these materials from the marketplace.

Thank you for listening to my concerns.

Sincerely yours,

Related articles

Rally For Real Food

/ Ren

The much-anticipated Rally For Real Food was held on the steps of the Capitol in Austin, Texas earlier today.  The energetic crowd cheered a raft of passionate speakers including Ronda Rutledge (Executive Director, Sustainable Food Center), Eric Herm (Farmer, author of Son of a Farmer, Child of the Earth), Neil Carman, PH.D. (Sierra Club, Lone Star Chapter), Judith McGeary (Executive Director, Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance) and Mike “The Health Ranger” Adams (Editor, Natural News) about the right to know what’s in our food.

Many thanks to Mike LaRocca of Beanitos for organizing this important event!  Thanks also to the sponsors, vendors, volunteers and attendees who helped make today’s rally a success.

Rally For Real Food

Rally For Real Food

(Click to see the photostream from today’s event. You are welcome to reuse these pictures, but please credit ediblearia.com for the original)

###

USDA Caves on GE Alfalfa

/ Ren

USDA DECISION ON GE ALFALFA LEAVES DOOR OPEN FOR CONTAMINATION, RISE OF SUPERWEEDS

ROGUE AGENCY CHOOSES “BUSINESS AS USUAL” OVER SOUND SCIENCE

CENTER ANNOUNCES IMMEDIATE LEGAL CHALLENGE TO USDA’S FLAWED ASSESSMENT

The Center for Food Safety criticized the announcement today by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that it will once again allow unlimited, nation-wide commercial planting of Monsanto’s genetically-engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa, despite the many risks to organic and conventional farmers USDA acknowledged in its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).  On a call today with stakeholders, Secretary Vilsack reiterated the concerns surrounding purity and access to non-GE seed, yet the Agency’s decision still places the entire burden for preventing contamination on non-GE farmers, with no protections for food producers, consumers and exporters.

“We’re disappointed with USDA’s decision and we will be back in court representing the interest of farmers, preservation of the environment, and consumer choice” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director for the Center for Food Safety. “USDA has become a rogue agency in its regulation of biotech crops and its decision to appease the few companies who seek to benefit from this technology comes despite increasing evidence that GE alfalfa will threaten the rights of farmers and consumers, as well as damage the environment.”

On Monday, the Center sent an open letter to Secretary Vilsack calling on USDA to base its decision on sound science and the interests of farmers, and to avoid rushing the process to meet the marketing timelines or sales targets of Monsanto, Forage Genetics or other entities.

CFS also addressed several key points that were not properly assessed in the FEIS, among them were:

  • Liability, Implementation and Oversight — Citing over 200 past contamination episodes that have cost farmers hundreds of millions of dollars in lost sales, CFS demands that liability for financial losses incurred by farmers due to transgenic contamination be assigned to the crop developers.  CFS also calls on USDA to take a more active oversight role to ensure that any stewardship plans are properly implemented and enforced.
  • Roundup Ready alfalfa will substantially increase herbicide use – USDA’s assessment misrepresented conventional alfalfa as utilizing more herbicides than it does, which in turn provided a false rationale for introducing herbicide-promoting Roundup Ready alfalfa.  In fact, USDA’s own data shows that just 7% of alfalfa hay acres are treated with herbicides.  USDA’s projections in the FEIS show that substantial adoption of Roundup Ready alfalfa would trigger large increases in herbicide use of up to 23 million lbs. per year.
  • Harms from glyphosate-resistant weeds – USDA’s sloppy and unscientific treatment of glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds ignored the significant contribution that RR alfalfa could make to their rapid evolution.  USDA failed to analyze how GR weeds fostered by currently grown RR crops are increasing herbicide use; spurring more use of soil-eroding tillage; and reducing farmer income through increased weed control costs, an essential baseline analysis.

“We in the farm sector are dissatisfied but not surprised at the lack of courage from USDA to stop Roundup Ready alfalfa and defend family farmers,” said Pat Trask, conventional alfalfa grower and plaintiff in the alfalfa litigation.

The FEIS comes in response to a 2007 lawsuit brought by CFS, in which a federal court ruled that the USDA’s approval of GE alfalfa violated environmental laws by failing to analyze risks such as the contamination of conventional and organic alfalfa, the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds, and increased use of glyphosate herbicide, sold by Monsanto as Roundup.  The Court banned new plantings of GE alfalfa until USDA completed a more comprehensive assessment of these impacts. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice affirmed the national ban on GE alfalfa planting.  In June 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban on Monsanto’s Roundup Ready Alfalfa until and unless future deregulation occurs.

“Last spring more than 200,000 people submitted comments to the USDA highly critical of the substance and conclusions of its Draft EIS on GE Alfalfa,” said Kimbrell.  “Clearly the USDA was not listening to the public or farmers but rather to just a handful of corporations.”

http://truefoodnow.org/

 

http://organicconsumers.org/

Related Articles

Farmageddon the Documentary

/ Ren

“How much longer should we defer to a governmental agency that has consistently failed to perform its duties?  The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is charged with protecting the American food supply, yet not a week goes by without another food-related health scare seizing headlines across the nation:  listeria in pasteurized milk;  spinach contaminated with E. coli; and potentially unsafe meat from “downer” cattle (animals which are sick or injured and unable to stand).”

“These outbreaks are the results of decades of USDA policy decisions which favor corporations and industrial agriculture over small family farms and local production.  Intensive animal and crop operations can lead to sick animals and tainted vegetables entering the food chain, and regulations which would prevent these incidents are often overlooked when corporate interests are at stake.” –Linda Faillace

[Vimeo 16513455]

http://farmageddonmovie.com/

A film by by Kristin Canty

Featuring Joel Salatin, Jackie Stowers, Mark McAfee, Linda Faillace and Eric Wagoner

Farmageddon
123 Street Ave.
Somerville, MA 02144

A Recipe For Chronic Disease

/ Ren

The just-released Proposed Dietary Guidelines for Americans seems to have as much to do with subsidized corporate profits as it does human health. Indeed, the Standard American Diet (SAD for short) IS the very source of our health care crisis. –Ren


PRESS RELEASE

PROPOSED 2010 USDA DIETARY GUIDELINES –A RECIPE FOR CHRONIC DISEASE
Weston A. Price Foundation Proposes a Return to Four Basic Groups of Nutrient-Dense Foods

WASHINGTON, DC, June 21, 2010: The proposed 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines are a recipe for infertility, learning problems in children and increased chronic disease in all age groups according to Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation.

“The proposed 2010 Dietary Guidelines perpetuate the mistakes of previous guidelines in demonizing saturated fats and animal foods rich in saturated fatty acids such as egg yolks, butter, whole milk, cheese, fatty meats like bacon and animal fats for cooking. The current obesity epidemic emerged as vegetable oils and refined carbohydrates replaced these healthy, nutrient-dense traditional fats. Animal fats supply many essential nutrients that are difficult to obtain from other sources,” explains Fallon Morell.

“The revised Guidelines recommend even more stringent reductions in animal fats and cholesterol than previous versions,” says Fallon Morell, “and are tantamount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. While the ship of state sinks under the weight of a crippling health care burden, the Committee members are giving us more of the same disastrous advice.  These are unscientific and grossly deficient dietary recommendations.”

The Weston A. Price Foundation is a non-profit nutrition education foundation with no ties to the government or food processing industries.  Named for Dr. Weston A. Price, whose  pioneering research discovered the vital importance of animal fats in human diets, the Foundation has warned against the dangers of lowfat and plant-based diets.

“Basic biochemistry shows that the human body has a very high requirement for saturated fats in all cell membranes; if we do not eat saturated fats, the body will simply make them from carbohydrates, but excess carbohydrate increases blood levels of triglyceride and small, dense LDL, and compromises blood vessel function,” says Fallon Morell.  “Moreover, high-carbohydrate diets do not satisfy the appetite as well as diets rich in traditional fats, leading to higher caloric intakes and often to bingeing and splurging on empty foods, resulting in rapid weight gain and chronic disease.”

The proposed guidelines will perpetuate existing nutrient deficiencies present in all American population groups, including deficiencies in vitamins A and D found in animal fats, vitamins B12 and B6 found in animal foods, as well as minerals like calcium and phosphorus, which require vitamins A and D for assimilation. Moreover, low intakes of vitamin K2, are associated with increased risk of heart disease and cancer. The main sources of vitamin K2 available to Americans are egg yolks and full-fat cheese. Incredibly, the Guidelines single out cheese as an unhealthy food!

Fallon Morell notes that by restricting healthy animal fats in school lunches and diets for pregnant women and growing children, the Guidelines will accelerate the tragic epidemic of learning and behavior disorders.  The nutrients found most abundantly in animal fats and organ meats-including choline, cholesterol and arachidonic acid-are critical for the development of the brain and the function of receptors that modulate thinking and behavior.  Studies show that choline helps the brain make critical connections and protects against neurotoxins; animal studies suggest that if choline is abundant during developmental years, the individual is protected for life from developmental decline. The National Academy of Sciences recommends 375 mg per day for children nine through thirteen years of age, 450 mg for pregnant women and 550 mg for lactating women and men aged fourteen and older. These amounts are provided by four or five egg yolks per day-but that would entail consuming 800-1000 mg cholesterol, a crime by USDA standards. In their deliberations, the committee referred to this as the “choline problem.” Pregnant women and growing children especially need to eat as many egg yolks as possible-yet the Guidelines demonize this nutrient-dense food.

The Guidelines lump trans fats together with saturated fats-calling them Solid Fats-thereby hiding the difference between unhealthy industrial trans fats and healthy traditional saturated fats.  Trans fats contribute to inflammation, depress the immune system, interfere with hormone production, and set up pathological conditions leading to cancer and heart disease, whereas saturated fats fight inflammation, support the immune system, support hormone production and protect against cancer and heart disease.

The vitamins and fatty acids carried uniquely in saturated animal fats are critical to reproduction.  The Weston A. Price Foundation warns that the 2010 Guidelines will increase infertility in this country, already at tragically high rates.

“The 2010 proposed Guidelines represent a national scandal, the triumph of industry clout over good science and common sense,” says Fallon Morell. “It must be emphasized that the Guidelines are not based on science but are designed to promote the products of commodity agriculture and-through the back door-encourage the consumption of processed foods. For while the USDA food police pay lip service to reducing our intake of refined sweeteners, trans fats, white flour and salt, this puritanical low-fat prescription ultimately leads to cravings for chips, sweets, sodas, breads, desserts and other empty food-and-beverage-like products just loaded with refined sweeteners, trans fats, white flour and salt.”

The Weston A. Price Foundation proposes alternative Healthy 4 Life Dietary Guidelines, which harkens back to the traditional four basic food groups, but with a renewed emphasis on quality through a return to pasture-based feeding and organic, pesticide-free production methods:

Every day, eat high quality, whole foods to provide an abundance of nutrients, chosen from each of the following four groups:

ANIMAL FOODS: meat and organ meats, poultry, and eggs from pastured animals; fish and shellfish; whole raw cheese, milk and other dairy products from pastured animals; and broth made from animal bones.

GRAINS, LEGUMES AND NUTS: whole-grain baked goods, breakfast porridges, whole grain rice; beans and lentils; peanuts, cashews and nuts, properly prepared to improve digestibility.

FRUITS AND VEGETABLES: preferably fresh or frozen, preferably locally grown, either raw, cooked or in soups and stews, and also as lacto-fermented condiments.

FATS AND OILS: unrefined saturated and monounsaturated fats including butter, lard, tallow and other animal fats; palm oil and coconut oil; olive oil; cod liver oil for vitamins A and D.

AVOID: foods containing refined sweeteners such as candies, sodas, cookies, cakes, etc.; white flour products such as pasta and white bread; processed foods; modern soy foods; polyunsaturated and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils and fried foods.

* * * * * * * * *

The Weston A. Price Foundation is a 501C3 nutrition education foundation with the mission of disseminating accurate, science-based information on diet and health. Named after nutrition pioneer Weston A. Price, DDS, author of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, the Washington, DC-based Foundation publishes a quarterly journal for its 13,000 members, supports 450 local chapters worldwide and hosts a yearly International conference. The Foundation headquarters phone number is (202) 363-4394, www.westonaprice.org, info@westonaprice.org.

CONTACT: Kimberly Hartke, Publicist
Home office 703-860-2711 cell 703-675-5557
press@westonaprice.org

PMB #106-380
4200 Wisconsin Avenue, NW
Washington, District of Columbia 20016
United States

ACTIONS TO TAKE
1. Please take time during this week to post a comment at the USDA website. Go to www.dietaryguidelines.gov and scroll down to “SUBMIT Written Comments.”  It is particularly important to describe any adverse health effects you or family members have suffered by following earlier versions of the Guidelines.

2. Please also EMAIL your comments to your Senators and Representative in Congress.  Let them know that USDA’s formulation of dietary guidelines is a complete waste of taxpayer money and has resulted in a health crisis of epidemic proportions, especially in our children. It would be good also to PHONE your elected officials as well. For congressional contact information, go to www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.

3. If you live near Washington, DC, consider attending the public hearings at USDA on July 8.  You can sign up to give an oral  presentation  or simply attend to show support.  To sign up for attending the meeting, go to www.dietaryguidelines.gov and scroll down to “Meeting Registration/Oral Testimony.”

4. Please send out the Press Release above to your local newspaper and radio shows.  You may add your own contact information to that of  publicist Kimberly Hartke.  In addition, you may add a paragraph to the press release about how the USDA dietary guidelines adversely affected your own health and that of your family.

5.Please broadcast this action alert to other groups.

Who’s protecting farmers and consumers from GE contamination? Not the USDA..

/ Ren

From The Center for Food Safety

Docket No. APHIS-2007-0044
Regulatory Analysis and Development
PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8
4700 River Road Unit 118
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238

USDA’s basic mission is “protecting American agriculture.” Yet in the draft EIS (APHIS-2007-0044) USDA refused to even consider any options that might protect organic and conventional agriculture from contamination and the resulting loss of markets and ability to sow the crop of their choice. USDA analyzed only two options in the EIS: 1) Full approval, allowing GE alfalfa to be grown and sold without restriction like any other crop; and 2) No action, meaning GE alfalfa could only be grown under USDA permit, as at present. USDA’s “all or nothing” approach leaves un-analyzed any potential options to protect farmers. This is contrary to law and logic. USDA should protect all farmers, not just those growing Monsanto’s patented crops.

Additionally, USDA acknowledges that GE alfalfa may contaminate organic and conventional alfalfa, but claims that Monsanto’s seed contracts require measures sufficient to prevent such contamination, and that there is no evidence to the contrary.  But in the lawsuit requiring the EIS, the Court found that GE contamination had already occurred in the fields of several Western states with these same business-as-usual practices in place. In fact, contamination of organic and conventional seeds and crops is widespread and has been documented around the world. A recent report documented 39 cases in 2007 and more than 200 in the last decade. The harms incurred by farmers and food companies from GE contamination are many and include: lost markets, lost sales, lower prices, negative publicity, withdrawal of organic certification, expensive testing and prevention measures, and product recalls. Looking to Monsanto to protect farmers from contamination by their own product is a complete abdication of USDA’s duties, akin to leaving the fox to guard the hen house.

Finally, USDA concludes that GE alfalfa will cause production to shift to larger farms but that these economic shifts are “not significant.” Small, family farmers are the backbone and future of American agriculture and must be protected. According to Farm Aid, thousands of small, family farmers are under extreme economic pressure and are pushed off their land each year.  The very existence of the family farm is at risk and a shift in production from small farms to larger farms in the nation’s fourth-largest crop substantially increases that risk.

Please protect farmers’ and consumers’ right to choose organic and non-GE crops and foods by rejecting the deregulation of Monsanto’s GE alfalfa.

Sincerely,

Click to sign your name

Center for Food Safety v. USDA

/ Ren

Earth Justice

Court Finds USDA Violated Federal Law by Allowing Genetically Engineered Sugar Beets on the Market

Government failed to evaluate environmental and economic risks of Monsanto product

September 22, 2009

San Francisco, CA — In a case brought by Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice representing a coalition of farmers and consumers, a federal court ruled yesterday (PDF) that the Bush USDA’s approval of genetically engineered (GE) “RoundUp Ready” sugar beets was unlawful. The court ordered the USDA to conduct a rigorous assessment of the environmental and economic impacts of the crop on farmers and the environment.

The federal district court for the Northern District of California ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (“APHIS”) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) when it failed to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) before deregulating sugar beets that have been genetically engineered (“GE”) to be resistant to glyphosate herbicide, marketed by Monsanto as Roundup. Plaintiffs Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed Alliance, Sierra Club, and High Mowing Seeds, represented by Earthjustice and the Center for Food Safety, filed suit against APHIS in January 2008, alleging APHIS failed to adequately assess the environmental, health, and associated economic impacts of allowing “Roundup Ready” sugar beets to be commercially grown without restriction.

“This court decision is a wakeup call for the Obama USDA that they will not be allowed to ignore the biological pollution and economic impacts of gene altered crops,” stated Andrew Kimbrell Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety. “The courts have made it clear that USDA’s job is to protect America’s farmers and consumers, not the interests of Monsanto.”

Read the full article..

Screenshot-1
Bookmark and Share

Let the fire of liberty be lit

/ Ren

Via Hartke is Online

USDA Bets the Farm on Animal ID Program

By David E. Gumpert & William Pentland
The Nation

“NAIS, ostensibly intended to contain disease outbreaks among livestock, has sparked the most severe political backlash rural America has seen in decades. The controversy stems primarily from the backhanded way the government has imposed a deeply unpopular policy. By introducing NAIS as regulatory changes, the USDA has short-circuited the democratic processes designed to protect the public from government overreaching. Congress has never debated NAIS, and few elected officials have been held accountable for its consequences. The USDA has backed off the original plan to make NAIS mandatory and fully operational by 2009 and now describes the program as “voluntary.” While it may be voluntary on the federal level, the USDA has pushed states to make NAIS mandatory for their local farmers.

“Farmers like us, we don’t want handouts or disaster payments or loans,” said Kim Alexander, who raises livestock in central Texas. “We just want to be left alone to raise clean and healthy food for people who will pay a premium because they know it’s clean, healthy and local and not contaminated with a bunch of poisons.”

A handful of industry stakeholders have cast their shadow over nearly every component of NAIS–past, present and future. A consortium of industry leaders–Cargill Meat Solutions, Monsanto and Schering-Plough, among others–pushed for NAIS for more than a decade and finally won the USDA’s approval shortly after George W. Bush took office in 2001. The consortium, the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA), designed NAIS for the USDA.

Critics contend NAIS will be the death knell for small farmers, some religious minorities and organic agriculture generally in America. Although the program will amplify American agriculture’s influence in global markets, it will give commercial agriculture an unprecedented monopoly on the future of food–a brave new era of synthetic agriculture and genetically engineered animals.

This era is not beyond some remote horizon. It has already begun. On December 19, the leading cloned livestock producers announced a program designed to monitor meat and milk products from cloned animals as they moved through the food chain. NAIS is the “tracking system” the industry will use to commercialize cloned livestock on a mass scale.

NoNAISpiglaugh200

This post is part of Food Renegade’s Fight Back Fridays

Alexander Family Farm

All-natural, grass-finished, and pasture-raised beef, turkeys, chickens, lamb, and eggs. Eggs are available at the farm, Fresh Plus markets, Wheatsville Co-op, and Farm to Market Grocery.

3700 Victorine Ln., Del Valle, Texas, 512/247-4455. www.localharvest.org

Share

421,000 pounds of E. coli Contaminated Beef Recalled. Again.

/ Ren

SAO PAULO, June 16 (Reuters) – The world’s biggest beef processor JBS (JBSS3.SA) is under investigation by Brazil’s federal prosecutor’s office in a widespread corruption case that has targeted several companies in the beef industry.

Brazil is the world’s largest producer and exporter of beef, and its cattle industry has come under increasing criticism from environmentalists at home and abroad for its role in the deforestation of the Amazon rainforest.

The beef recalls are FSIS Class I, meaning that “use of the product will cause serious, adverse health consequences or death.”

Colorado Firm Expands Recall of Beef Products Due To Possible E. coli O157:H7 Contamination
Recall Release CLASS I RECALL
FSIS-RC-034-2009  HEALTH RISK: HIGH

Congressional and Public Affairs
(202) 720-9113
Bryn Burkard

Editors Note: This recall release is being reissued to expand the June 24 recall to include approximately 380,000 pounds of assorted beef primal products.

WASHINGTON, June 28, 2009 – JBS Swift Beef Company, a Greeley, Colo., establishment is voluntarily expanding its June 24 recall to include approximately 380,000 pounds of assorted beef primal products that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today…

Less Than 20% Of Consumers Trust Food They Buy Is Safe and Healthy

/ Ren

Spotlights Consumer Attitudes on Food Products in Light of Outbreaks and Recalls

Armonk, NY — – 24 Jun 2009: A new IBM (NYSE: IBM) study reveals that less than 20 percent of consumers trust food companies to develop and sell food products that are safe and healthy for themselves and their families. The study also shows that 60 percent of consumers are concerned about the safety of food they purchase, and 63 percent are knowledgeable about the content of the food they buy.

The survey of 1,000 consumers in the 10 largest cities nationwide shows that consumers are increasingly wary of the safety of food purchased at grocery stores, and their confidence in – and trust of – food retailers, manufacturers and grocers is declining.

usda_sm“clean, safe, wholesome and truthfully labeled”

learn more

A Deadly Ingredient in a Chicken Dinner

/ Ren

By Douglas Gansler

Friday, June 26, 2009

“Most people don’t know that the chicken they eat is laced with arsenic. The ice water or coffee they enjoy with their chicken may also be infused with arsenic. If they live on or near a farm, the air they breathe may be infected with arsenic dust as well.

Why do our chicken, our water and our air contain arsenic? Because in the United States, most major poultry producers add an arsenic compound known as roxarsone to their chicken feed. Inorganic arsenic is a Class A carcinogen that has been linked to heart disease, diabetes and declines in brain function. Recent scientific findings show that most Americans are routinely exposed to between three and 11 times the Environmental Protection Agency’s recommended safety limit.

The poultry industry has been using the feed additive roxarsone — purportedly to fight parasites and increase growth in chickens — since the Food and Drug Administration approved it in 1944. Turns out that the arsenic additive promotes the growth of blood vessels in chicken, which makes the meat appear pinker and more attractive in its plastic wrap at the grocery store, but does little else. The arsenic additive does the same in human cells, fueling a growth process known as angiogenesis, a critical first step in many human diseases such as cancer…”

Arsenic, Chinese Wheat Gluten, Antibiotics. What's in your chicken?

GM Corn, Arsenic, Contaminated Chinese Wheat Gluten, Antibiotics. What's in your chicken?

The “People’s Department”

/ Ren

President Abraham Lincoln formed the Department of Agriculture in 1862.  Now known as the USDA, the agency is charged, in part, with

  • assuring food safety
  • protecting natural resources
  • fostering rural communities
  • ending hunger in the United States and abroad

The current administration is giving itself high marks – what do you think?

Are you optimistic that things are improving or is it big business as usual?  How much measurable progress has been made in the last 10, 20, 50 or 100 years?  Let us know in the comments..

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/127078/markofwh1964%5B1%5D.avi

“clean, safe, wholesome and truthfully labeled”

usda_sm

USDA: Candy Bars and French Fries Are Not Junk Food

/ Ren

Which of the following is considered a junk food according to national school nutrition standards?

A. Hi-C Blast – vitamin fortified sugar water
B. Poland Springs seltzer water – water with bubbles
C. French fries
D. Candy Bars

If you guessed A, C or D you’d be wrong.  Believe it or not, seltzer water is the only item on this list banned as a junk food because it doesn’t contain any vitamins or minerals. Yup, french fries, candy bars, and Hi-C aren’t officially considered junk food.  That’s just crazy when you consider that children ages 6-11 are four times more likely to be obese than children were a generation ago.1 Four times!  Today nearly one-third of all children are overweight or obese, placing them at heightened risk for heart disease, type 2 diabetes and many other serious diseases.2

momsrising

Time for an update! Sign our petition today — it will be hand delivered to Members of Congress June 24th:

http://momsrising.democracyinaction.org/o/1768/t/1878/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=1925

The petition says: “Please update outdated nutrition standards immediately to ensure our schools provide healthy food for our children!”

In what universe are candy bars NOT junk food?  The USDA’s school nutrition standards were developed in the 1970’s and are no longer consistent with nutrition science or current concerns regarding childhood health. For example, USDA does not consider candy bars, snack cakes, or french fries to be junk foods in schools.  USDA standards don’t even address calories, saturated, and trans fats or sodium.

Right now Congress is discussing ways to reduce health care costs in America. Improving nutrition in schools is one no-brainer answer.

Sign on our petition and we’ll get it delivered to the U.S. Capitol next week.  June 24th is Capitol Hill Advocacy Day for our friends at the Center for Science in the Public Interest.  They’ve offered to deliver our petition along with your comments to our leaders in D.C. In fact, they have already arranged breakfast, lunch and meetings in-between with members of Congress on the Hill.  Let’s make sure they have a huge number of names signed onto the petition along with comments from us to deliver!  Our voices are key to letting Congress know that mothers and fathers care deeply about making sure our children can eat healthy food at school.

Sign the petition today!

http://momsrising.democracyinaction.org/o/1768/t/1878/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=1925

*Can you also forward this email to five of your friends so they can sign too? The more signatures, we have, the more Congress will get the message that our children deserve healthy food.

Thank you for speaking up for all our kids,

— Joan, Kristin Mary, Donna, Sarah and the whole MomsRising.org team

P.S. Want to go help present these petitions on June 24th? http://fs2.formsite.com/OliviaH/FoodInc/index.html Or learn more about the Child Nutrition Promotion and school food? http://www.schoolfoods.org/resources.html

1,2 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Statement Regarding Release of Estimates of Obesity Prevalence Among U.S. Children and Teens, http://www.rwjf.org/childhoodobesity/product.jsp?id=31611, Beyond Health Care – New Directions to a Healthier America, Robert Wood Johnson Commission to Build a Healthier America, p. 7. http://www.commissiononhealth.org/Report.aspx?Publication=64498

“We believe that federally funded nutrition programs should provide all children with the healthy food they deserve. This includes low fat and safe dairy, fresh fruits and vegetables, and whole grains. Schools should be soda and junk-food-free zones and serve food that complements and furthers parents’ efforts to feed their children healthfully.”

Obama’s New Chef Skewers School Lunches

/ Ren

Somebody certainly ought to.

“…During weekly Tuesday gatherings at the Jane Addams Hull-House Museum in Chicago, Mr. Kass hosted “Rethinking Soup,” which he described as “a communal event where we will eat delicious, healthy soup and have fresh, organic conversation about many of the urgent social, cultural, economic and environmental food issues that we should be addressing.”

Sam Kass

Sam Kass

In May, over a meal of locally-produced beef and barley soup, Mr. Kass lamented the sorry state of the National School Lunch Program, which provides low-cost or free lunches to schoolchildren. He noted that what gets served up to kids is influenced by government agricultural subsidies. As a result, he says, meals served to students are low in vegetables and disproportionately high in fat, additives, preservatives and high-fructose corn syrup…”

[Full story]

So, Secretary Vilsack,  please do let us know what you intend to do about this, and when.

The Organic Consumers Fund, Organic Consumers Association’s partner for legislative and electoral advocacy, has a new graduate student intern, Chantal Wei-Ying Clement, who is working on our Appetite for a Change campaign, lobbying Congress for healthy local and organic food to be included in the Child Nutrition Act. Read Chantal’s first report reviewing the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations for updating the school lunch and breakfast programs. What changes would you make to school food? Write to Congress.

By the way, how many children of US senators and representatives do you think participate in the public school lunch program?