Supreme Court Rules Monsanto Is "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" As Children Bear Witness

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Monsanto Corporation on Monday and struck down a 2007 restriction that barred farmers from planting Monsanto Co.'s Roundup Ready alfalfa seed. The ruling allows the interim planting of Monsanto's product, RoundUp Ready alfalfa, pending USDA approval, as the federal government completes a study of whether the seed's use would have an environmental impact.

Monsanto, the corporation who owns the patent on RoundUp Ready alfalfa, celebrated the decision in support their product's advancement in the marketplace in a statement to the press and shareholders:

"This Supreme Court ruling is important for every American farmer, not just alfalfa growers. All growers can rely on the expertise of USDA, and trust that future challenges to biotech approvals must now be based on scientific facts, not speculation."

-- David F. Snively, Monsanto senior vice president and general counsel

"This is exceptionally good news received in time for the next planting season. Farmers have been waiting to hear this for quite some time. We have Roundup Ready alfalfa seed ready to deliver and await USDA guidance on its release. Our goal is to have everything in place for growers to plant in fall 2010.

-- Steve Welker, Monsanto alfalfa business lead

According to Business Week and the USDA, alfalfa is "the fourth-most-planted U.S. crop behind corn, soybeans and wheat, is worth $9 billion a year, with annual seed sales valued at $63 million, according to a USDA study. Dairy cows are the primary consumers of alfalfa hay".

The decision is significant because it gives the USDA the ability to partially deregulate genetically engineered crops.

According to the USDA, "U.S. farmers have adopted genetically engineered (GE) crops widely since their introduction in 1996, notwithstanding uncertainty about consumer acceptance, economic and environmental impacts" and the fact that allergenicity testing is not yet available for the novel proteins and allergens created in the genetic engineering process.

Debates over the allergenicity of genetically engineered crops have continued since an August 13, 2002 meeting of the Food Biotechnology Subcommittee of the Food Advisory Committee a multi-agency committee that included representatives from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Center or Food Safety and applied Nutrition, a division of the FDA, at which the committee's acting chair, Edward N. Brandt, Jr. MD, PhD, stated in response to a discussion on the safety of genetically engineered foods,

"Of course, we haven't worked into this some kind of test for allergenicity, per se...."

Dean Metcalfe, who served as the head of the National Institutes of Health's Laboratory for Allergic Diseases at the time, explained that although you could test genetically engineered crops for known proteins it was the unintended creation of new proteins that made it difficult to test GM crops for allergenicity.

Despite the fact that a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control, "Food Allergy Among US Children Trends in Prevalence and Hospitalizations, shows a 265% increase in the rate of food allergic hospitalizations, these novel food proteins have been considered innocent until proven guilty.

While Monsanto appears to benefit from the Supreme Court ruling which will allow for the introduction of its licensed and patented product into the US food supply, pending USDA approval by the office that oversees biotech crops, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), (which leaves the door open to some sort of preliminary approval for the alfalfa seed), perhaps as we move forward we should call on the USDA to not only conduct an Environmental Impact Sudy, but also an Children's Impact Survey.

Given that in today's ruling, the Supreme Court has also now ruled for the very first time that "environmental harm" includes economic effects such as reduced agricultural yield or loss of market due to genetic contamination, as well as the concept of what biologists refer to as "gene flow" (in practice, the idea that genetically engineered material may get into conventional plants through cross-pollination), the Supreme Court has now accepted that this phenomenon in and of itself is harmful and illegal under current environment protections.

While we may not all be shareholders in the profits to be derived from Monsanto's genetically engineered alfalfa patent and its licensing agreement, we are all stakeholders in the environment and in our food supply. And as we proceed with caution, it could be argued that those who stand to gain or lose the most, given the environmental and health implications of genetically engineered alfalfa, are our children.

 

Follow Robyn O'Brien on Twitter: www.twitter.com/unhealthytruth

Comments

[darma2u]

11:05 PM on 06/25/2010

also it was just in the news this past week or so that in parts of our south, farmers are now reporting Roundup resistant weeds!! now that is irony. ..Monsanto could give a rats body part what happens to anyone of us it is profits! at any cost, and damned the cost to health, environment.....this is another 'BP' just waiting to happen.

[Halsey]

12:20 PM on 06/24/2010

I don't have the scientific gray matter a lot of people here do. I just know, from my gut, that GM anything is not good. Just because it's modified in a lab, does not ensure that it won't continue to modify itself even more when planted. The science is ahead of the real life, real time ramifications. Just because for 5 growing seasons GM say alfalpha is better, does not mean it will be the same plant in 20 growing seasons. Birds will eat these seeds, cattle will be fed the product. Allergies, cancer, who knows maybe autism, since all seem to be on the rise, something is very wrong with what we put in our bodies and breath into our lungs.

We wont' know what the potential ramifications are until it's too late.

[organicconnect]

03:42 PM on 06/23/2010

The actions of the Supreme Court show that there is a tremendous amount of work to be done. Monsanto is just one major corporation whose shareholders' benefit from products that are essentially harmful to people. GM crops is just aspect of this. Widespread use of pesticides in foods, HFCS, herbicides, irradiation, etc., are just the tip of the food iceberg. The food-buying public consuming decades worth of these products then becomes a health-care dependent public. We are feeding and eating our way to ill health as a nation, in the name of profit. http://organicconnectmag.com/wp/2009/10/healthcare-the-high-cost-of-the-american-diet/

[loupbouc]

08:25 PM on 06/22/2010

This supplements my first two comments (posted about 15 minutes ago, 8:09 PM and 8:10 PM, today, 22 June).

GM producers and their cronies argue that GM agriculture is environmentally safe and more productive and reduces erosion, labor, and fuel use.

The argument is FALSE. See, E.G., these sources:

http://aaemonline.org/gmopost.html AND other sources cited there

http://web4.uwindsor.ca/users/w/winter/Winters.nsf/0/898473597652a3bd85257070007a9000/$FILE/Clark_GMOcrops_1999.pdf

http://springerlink.com/content/9084k02167124872/

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mlVh3ysN4ZwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA175&dq=GMO+GE+%2B+environment+%2B+soil&ots=3M5LrkvU6Q&sig=6l2SXrI7ERPkFxn2PFMIurEt2Tc#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://psrast.org/ctenvir.htm AND other sources referenced there

http://psrast.org/soilecolart.htm

http://purefood.org/GEFacts.htm

http://inmotionmagazine.com/geff4.html

http://mindfully.org/GE/GE2/Horizontal-Gene-Soil.htm

http://agrination.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35:effects-of-gmos-on-soil-fauna

ALL contrary publications/studies are produced, bought, or sponsored by Monsanto or other GM companies; and their arguments and “facts” have been proved false. See sources cited above and others they reference. All truly independent sources say either that GE foods and agriculture are unsafe or that the evidence suggests risks and does not support assertions of safety.

[loupbouc]

08:10 PM on 06/22/2010

In my first post (of about a minute ago), I wrote:

“The lurking horror is: The Court bought the CORRUPT erroneous position of Obama and the USDA and FDA—the FALSE & CORRUPT position that genetically engineered foods are safe. Monsanto has captured the USDA, the FDA, and Obama.”

This post addresses the spread and degree of Monsanto-favoring (and other-GE-company-favoring) CORRUPTION of the USDA, FDA, and Obama. Even the Supreme Court (for, Justice Thomas was a Monsanto man).

Below follow just a few of the sources that point up the CORRUPTION. To appreciate adequately that CORRUPTION is involved, you must read all of the entire set of sources.

http://www.grist.org/article/2009-09-24-usda-obama-monsanto-organic/

http://organicconsumers.org/usda_watch.cfm

http://iowaindependent.com/22980/iowa-law-firm-files-as-monsanto-lobbyist-in-advance-of-ag-antitrust-workshop

http://wannabetvchef.com/blog/?tag=monsanto-revolving-door

http://www.counterpunch.org/cummins12182008.html

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Crony-of-agriculture-chief-now-a-Monsanto-lobbyist-8612856-78264977.html

http://justgetthere.us/blog/archives/Obama-Chooses-Monsanto-Buddy,-Tom-Vilsack,-for-Secretary-of-Agriculture.html

http://politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=5580&name=monsanto

http://annieappleseedproject.org/monfdausgovc.html

http://communicationagents.com/sepp/2003/11/30/fda_monsanto_dangerous_relations.htm

http://mindfully.org/GE/Revolving-Door.htm

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Labeling_Issues,_Revolving_Doors,_rBGH,_Bribery_and_Monsanto

http://psrast.org/ecologmons.htm

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=1621&name=Tom-Vilsack

[loupbouc]

08:09 PM on 06/22/2010

The decision does little DIRECT harm: Merely, it lets Monsanto market seeds while the USDA reconsiders banning or permitting marketing. Few humans consume alfalfa—except indirectly, by eating meat/dairy of animals fed alfalfa.

The lurking horror is: The Court bought the CORRUPT position of Obama and the USDA and FDA—the FALSE position that GE foods are safe. Monsanto has captured the USDA, FDA, and Obama.

GM foods are carcinogenic, allergenic, cause sterility and birth defects, and are otherwise variously toxic, many grave ways. Rapaciously, GE pollens and seeds taint organic and other non-GM crops and fields and will extinguish organic and other non-GE agriculture.

http://truthout.org/1215091

http://biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm

http://aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

http://responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=4888#hair

http://truthout.org/article/three-approved-gmos-linked-organ-damage

http://organicconsumers.org/articles/article_19391.cfm

http://purefood.org/GEFacts.htm

http://huffingtonpost.com/samuel-s-epstein/american-publlic-health-a_b_399147.html

http://responsibletechnology.org/documentFiles/190.pdf

http://seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/TestimonytoEPA-May2007/index.cfm

http://responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/HealthRisks/index.cfm

http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=331718&CategoryId=14093

http://responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=212

http://responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=2469

http://responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=293

http://responsibletechnology.org/Public/L-tryptophan/index.cfm

http://responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=2554

http://seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?objectID=930

http://responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/HealthRisks/index.cfm (point on GM Dangers dropdown tab)

http://seedsofdeception.com/Public/GeneticRoulette/HealthRisksofGMFoodsSummaryDebate/index.cfm

[Sam Ellens]

08:01 PM on 06/22/2010

seed's, eh? Nice.

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe

[Sam Ellens]

08:14 PM on 06/22/2010

my bad, seed's is fine. thought it should be seeds', but seed by itself can clearly be plural too. I retract my sarcastic "eh" and "Nice".

[Lesscancer]

04:02 PM on 06/22/2010

Thanks for the post- Keep up the great work-
Bill Couzens, Founder Less Cancer

[John Larberg]

01:54 PM on 06/22/2010

Very true pinkibus. Now we have a situation where they can put out anything they want and it'll be alright until something goes wrong. The little testing and regulation it receives from the EPA and USDA are performed by "former" Monsanto employees. Everyone should look at the history of legal issues Monsanto has faced like the 5000+ farmers they've amazingly been able to sue for their land all because Monsanto managed to somehow patent a seed despite it being a living entity.

[Sheldon101]

06:13 PM on 06/22/2010

There are two reasons Monsanto files lawsuits against farmers with respect to their GMO seeds.

One, the farmer didn't buy GM seed from Monsanto, yet a very, very high percent of some crop was grown from Monsanto GM seed. These cases are rare.

More often, Monsanto alleges that the farmer broken the agreement under which the GM seed is sold. That agreement allows the farmer to plant the seed, grow a crop and sell the crop. The seed that it is the crop they can't use.

It is similar to buying and using hybrid seed. With hybrid seed, the seed company controls the seed by maintaining control over the plants that are crossed to produce the hybrid seed. Yes, the farmer can keep the seed from the crop and use it as desired, but that seed, which doesn't have hybrid vigor, won't produce as good a crop when planted again.

The difference is that Monsanto prevents any use of the seed from the crop grown from their GM seed.

I've mixed feelings about Monsanto's whole approach to GM seeds. However, it is important to understand what that control is.

Farmers who are being sued, are cheating on their agreement with Monsanto. Monsanto claims that a lot of the time, they get tips from neighbours who are upset.

[Grimway]

07:33 PM on 06/22/2010

Could you have possibly missed the point more?

[pinkibus]

01:08 PM on 06/22/2010

Monsanto is really worse than the oil companies and that is hard to believe.