One man's battle against GM sugar beets

cont.

But don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-science as the biotech lobby PR would like people to believe of those who oppose GM organisms in our food. I am one like millions (including scientists, doctors, environmentalists, consumers, businesses, and politicians like Dennis Kucinich who actually fight for the American people) who want responsible technology, ethical technology, and technology that protects the health and safety of humans and all other species and that also protects the delicate balance of our planet. GM foods do not do this and the proof is now evident and this is why I oppose them and now look to you to be a catalyst for the change you claimed would come.

How do you trade off a “good yield” against a human life if that yield is unhealthy?

I give you this quote by Rachel Carson, author of Silent Spring:

“Only within the moment of time represented by the present century has one species -- man -- acquired significant power to alter the nature of his world.”

We have tremendous power and great responsibility comes with that in not abusing that power. I hope you understand that and work to use that power more responsibly in the years to come.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your response.

Signed:
XXXX

And others who join me here as well as thousands (including American farmers) who did not get the chance to see this letter:

cont.

President Obama, this is why these organisms require more testing, and this is what I and many others believe we need:

1. Peer reviewed independent testing of every GMO organism currently on the market and in the lab. This testing must be done by a thoroughly independent source free from industry and political ties and the test results must be made available to the public.

2. If such testing corroborates current testing of GMOS in regards to potential dangers and health threats as well as environmental risks through transgenic contamination and threats to other species such as bees and birds, a moratorium on all GMOS must then commence.

3. Labeling of all foods in America that carry GMO ingredients. That is why I support Dennis Kucinich’s bill HR 6636, The Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act, and I hope you support it as well. It is a fundamental democratic right of consumers to know what is in their food and if there are any ingredients that could potentially be unhealthy for them. To simply assume that all Americans would have no reaction to these organisms over time or that there would be no environmental repercussions with or without testing is naive at best, irresponsible and immoral at worst.

4. Transgenic contamination is a huge problem regarding GMOS that is now threatening biodiversity. We cannot continue on this road if we are to have a sustainable planet. Transgenic contamination has already killed off the traditional corn varieties of Mexico and GM soy is reportedly causing soil depletion in places like Argentina where the economy is now also suffering because of this monocrop. Without testing as to long term effects of these crops, if they somehow fail long the way, we could see a worldwide famine. This must be addressed by your administration with an investigation also regarding farmers right here in America being bullied and sued by Monsanto for contamination they did not initiate. Transgenic contamination is not being addressed; it is being used by Monsanto to bully farmers into lawsuits and settling out of court to avoid more harassment. Our farmers deserve better than that.

5. More stringent guidelines and enforcement of those guidelines regarding pharma crops that contaminate food crops, and a moratorium on industrial corn to be made into ethanol. With all of the information currently coming out regarding food prices and their effect on world markets, I do not understand how the USDA can deregulate industrial corn to be made into ethanol knowing it will contaminate the food supply. President Obama, we do not need corn to run our cars, we need hemp and biofuel made from cellulosic sources such as switch grass, and we need electric cars, and perhaps even solar in the future. I believe ethanol which is also CO2 intensive itself in production is clearly a profit making scheme and companies like Monsanto are now taking advantage of the climate crisis for this purpose. Even so far as to buy land in Brazil tog row their corn and soy, thus perpetuating climate change. We need our land to grow traditional natural food; we already have adequate non food sources for fuel that we need to get to market now.

President Obama, I have a son who I love very much just as you love your daughters. He is my heart and my life. All I do in regards to working for sustainability and peace is for him and other children in our world who are not as fortunate as he is. I don't want him living in a world dominated by dirty, dangerous, unhealthy energy sources (and btw, President Obama, there is no such thing as clean coal ;-)) and I do not want him living in a world where all there is to eat are genetically altered organisms.

To those who responded to my video letter to President Obama here a couple of weeks ago regarding GMOS, this is to let you know that I have mailed it to him and attached your names to it. As soon as or if I get a response I will copy it here for you to read. Again, THANK YOU, and this is just the beginning. We and our children will have safe healthy food and a clean environment if we make it happen.
~~~
Dear President Obama:

Genetically modified organisms which sailed through the regulatory process to our fields and dinner plates in the nineties are one of the most dangerous changes to our food supply. Currently these unregulated GMOs are found in 60-70% of the processed foods in America, and current testing from other outside sources is finding that the toxin in BT which is used in Gm corn (a registered pesticide) causes adverse behavioral effects in bees (related to questions regarding colony collapse disorder,) immune system problems, and cell damage from the Round Up pesticides.

And the FDA’s own scientists issued reports that claimed these organisms could cause adverse effects to human health such as allergies and immunological effects and called for long term studies which were ignored. Political appointees in the FDA reportedly did not listen to these scientists (and there were 44,000 internal FDA documents made public via lawsuit that showed this) and GMOs were thrust upon the environment and our bodies without the proper regulatory procedures as they were considered “GRAS” which means generally regarded as safe.
Now, I don’t know what “generally” means but it certainly was not and is not good enough in light of what we are now seeing taking place regarding GMOs worldwide. This is why Europe requires labeling of all GMOs, and has banned rbgh from its dairy products.

Recent news regarding Monsanto:

On 17th December 2007 Monsanto was found guilty of contempt of the South African Advertising Authority (ASA) for publishing false claims about the safety of GM foods.

In January,2007, Monsanto was fined 15,000 euros (US$19,000 ) in a French court for misleading the public about the environmental impact of herbicide Roundup.

A former chairman of Monsanto Agriculture France was found guilty of false advertising for presenting Roundup as biodegradable and claiming that it left the soil clean after use. Monsanto's French distributor Scotts France was also fined 15,000 euros.
In 2005 Monsanto was caught smuggling South African produced GM Bollgard cotton seed into Indonesia disguised as rice. Monsanto was fined for bribing Indonesian officials.

In 2006 Monsanto suppressed evidence of serious damage to the liver and kidneys of rats in their MON 863 GM maize trials until ordered to release this evidence by a German Court.

In June, 2007, a second peer-reviewed case involving another variation of Monsanto's GM maize, namely, NK 603, has been shown by studies to be potentially toxic to humans. NK 603 has been approved for food, feed, processing, and propagation in Europe and the Philippines The new research, carried out by the French scientific research institute CRIGEN, involves biotech firm Monsanto's NK 603 GMO corn (marketed commercially under the name Round-up Ready).
Rats that were fed GM maize showed significant differences in measurements, as well as significant weight differences compared to those fed with normal maize. Almost 70 statistically significant differences were observed and reported - 12 for hematology parameters, 18 for clinical chemistry parameters, nine for urine chemistry parameters, six for the organ weights (brain, heart, liver), 14 for body weights and body weight changes, and eight for food consumption. toxicity, The most alarming was the diminished brain size.

Scientists warned that diminished brain size sent out an urgent danger warning for growing children fed `GM food.

Enablement in patent law according to 35 U.S.C. 112(1): "contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same."

I don't know what the patent for Monsanto's round up ready GMOs states, or if it would be exempt from enablement. Is it public knowledge that we can get a hold of?

I'm posting this because hopefully, someone will understand.

I posted an honest question earlier asking why no one just opposes the patent.

Again, I believe they have failed to satisfy the disclosure requirement by not providing adequate enablement (how can one claim enablement IF, you can't practice as described without forcing others to also practice??? -- assuming what JanforGore claims is true - not disputing here, just saying if what is claimed is true).

Now, for not yet granted patents (btw, you are watching the federal publication for like patent applications -- right???), ANY MEMBER of the public can file a protest (as long as the protest is based upon section 102 or any other statutory requirement). This protest (the initial one) can be filed FREE of charge. It DOESN'T go to the courts, it goes to the USPTO. Just specifically point out the lack of enablement.

Now, for an already granted patent, just file a request for reexamnation. There are two flavors - ex party and inter party. I believe you meet the standard - substantial question of patentability.

There is a charge for reexamination but its not that much. And, like before, there is no court involved (at least not at first).

The sections of the MPEP you want to review are: 600, 700, 1200, 1300, 2200.

I would like to ad a disclaimer here. I don't do bio-patents. There could be a ruling that negates my reasoning about enablement. If there is, could someone please, politely point it out to me.

TY in advance

Monsanto vs.the American Farmer.
A must read. They are truly despicable.

not only livelyhood. but all our health as well.

I will drive up there on the 3rd if it will help. I have a little Scion van if anyone wants to come. I live in So. Cal.

Will it help Jan?
Should we find out and recruit a ton of people and make some history?

Anyone?

I am far from a vegan, but what Monsanto is doing is criminal. They are in the process of making the world dependent on their seeds. They have already engineered corn to the point that it will not grow in the wild anymore. I really think, and this goes against almost everything I believe in, that the government needs to step in and disband this company. After it forces them to make all of theses crops able to self replicate.

ASPARTAME anyone is good for your brain! NOT.
people READ THE LABELS!

Their secrecy and unwillingness to cooperate is very telling, SeaJade. The outrageous part of all of this is that it has already been released into or environment and we do not yet know the full extent of the damage it has done. This is what you get with a distracted public and a corrupted government.

Perhaps a set of precedents in court need to be set before patents can be revoked to give it more weight along with the independent testing being done. One has already been set with a ruling against the selling of GM alfalfa seeds. Of course, we can only imagine the lobbying in the higher eschelons of our own government and others involved in this scheme spurred by Monsanto looking to stop that just to save their own face. It would be an all out war. I am sure there are groups thinking of this and frankly, I would be all for it. The patent never should have been granted, but then again we go back to the Monsanto Revolving Door with this government and their boy Clarence Thomas in the USSC who gave it to them. Nothing would please me more than to see Monsanto's patent on life null and voided. It most certainly is something to work for along with then keeping GMO out of our food altogether.

Damn all this fuss about beet sugar(+ I'm about as anti GMO as one could be), & several months when I was really looking for it ago couldn't find any in stores.
Really wanted to bake with beet sugar, organic or course I have heard it's awesum in vegan baking.

I'll be happy to offer up my efforts w/ you all April 3rd!

I say HELL NO TEW MONSANTO!

when i was googling 'kellogg's boycott' regarding the michael phelps pot scandal, apparently there was already another boycott proposed for kellogg's over their use of monsanto GM beet sugar.

Just curious....

“GMO contamination is inevitable”

if you have any proof of this, why not just have the patent declared invalid when it is granted? Alternatively, why not argue that the enablement isn't met when the patent application is published 18 months after filing (assuming that they haven't requested no publish at the 18 month period)?

Part of the requirement for a patent is enablement. Seems to me that the disclosure fails to meet that standard if one can't practice as described without forcing others to also practice.

Seriously, its not even a lot of money to file such an action w/ the USPTO. There's no court involved (later perhaps, but not right away), there's not even a requirement of continued action.

Without the patent being valid (even for a short time), others can practice for free. -- now follow this part carefully. Those who do, may continue to enjoy such privilege even if the patent is eventually restored/granted. This coupled w/ the wide spread dissemination of the patent during its non-valid stage then serves to eliminate the market for that patent.

Once the market is gone, there is very little market incentive for the patent owner to continue with its activities.

Just a thought...

Yes, I agree. I am glad Frank Morton is not alone in this lawsuit.

"According to Morton, 5,000 acres of GM sugar beet seed are grown in the valley. He is angry that GM seed production was introduced into the valley secretly. “The initial stages of GM beet seed production were carried out in secrecy for at least two years without other sugar beet seed growers having any knowledge or notification that GMOs were in the air, literally,” he says."

This statement from above says a lot about Monsanto - why the secrecy? If it was a good product and the company had any integrity at all, they wouldn't need to be secretive in the first place.

I am so pissed off that my food is being messed with!
Heaven help us with this dilemma - there will be a lot of other pissed off people when their stomachs start to ache and hurt because they can't digest what they are eating or afford to pay for their medical bills! Yep, God help us with this one!!! (and that is an official prayer...)

I think we should support this farmer on April 3rd. I think many messages sent to the District Court in California in time for this hearing to show our support for him and all American farmers who want to grow natural food would send a message. Anyone agree?

The plaintiffs, which include Organic Seed Alliance, Sierra Club, High Mowing Organic Seeds, and the Center for Food Safety, want the court to stop sales of Roundup Ready GM sugar beet seed and require the US Department of Agriculture to thoroughly assess the environmental, health, and economic impacts of the GM beets.

“GMO contamination is inevitable”

Frank Morton, owner of Wild Garden Seeds and a plaintiff in the lawsuit, says the GM beets threaten his livelihood. Morton produces seed for organic chard, table beets, and other vegetables in Oregon’s Willamette Valley where seed for the GM beets is also grown. Pollen from the GM beets grown here could easily contaminate his seed, destroying the organic status of the seed and ruining his business.

According to Morton, 5,000 acres of GM sugar beet seed are grown in the valley. He is angry that GM seed production was introduced into the valley secretly. “The initial stages of GM beet seed production were carried out in secrecy for at least two years without other sugar beet seed growers having any knowledge or notification that GMOs were in the air, literally,” he says.

The Willamette Valley Specialty Seed Association established a three-mile isolation distance between the GM sugar beets and conventional and organic plants. Morton says the isolation distance is inadequate. “GMO contamination is inevitable under the current situation.”

60% in 2008, 90% in 2009

GM sugar beets were grown and harvested for the first time in the US in 2008. According to industry estimates, about 60% of the 1.2 million acres of sugar beets grown last year were Roundup Ready GM varieties. The beets were grown in Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming. California grew only non-GMO, conventional varieties. Tom Schwartz, executive vice president of the Beet Sugar Development Foundation, told the San Francisco Chronicle that 90 to 95% of this year’s US sugar beet crop will be GM.

“Roundup Ready salad greens”

Cross pollination between GM sugar beets and related plants, such as chard and table beets, is a major threat in the Willamette Valley where sugar beets are the predominant crop. Morton says there are many areas where chard and sugar beet fields are “rubbing up against one another.” The two plants cross pollinate because they are the same species.

Morton now sends his seed to a laboratory that tests for GMO contamination. “I’m watching for contamination, and if it happens, people will hear about it,” he says. “I have to pay an expense on account of a technology that will destroy the value of our crop if we get positive results. Nobody considered that Roundup Ready sugar beets in one generation might turn up as Roundup Ready salad greens in the next.”

Lawsuit to stop GM beets

As a result of the threat to his business, Morton joined a lawsuit organized by the Center for Food Safety to sue the US Department of Agriculture for failing to conduct an environmental impact statement (EIS). “USDA didn’t consider the impact on all these farms and markets to where we sell seeds. My markets have zero tolerance to GMOs,” he says. “If there is any GMO contamination, my customers won’t buy the seed. Who is going to pay for that?”

The case goes to court on April 3. Last August, Monsanto petitioned the court to become party to the suit along with sugar beet processors and seed growers cooperative. The judge denied the petition, which Morton says was a victory.