tagged w/ Dow
-
There will definitely not be any Dow Chemical branding on the [stadium] wrap before, during or after the Olympic Games," announced a spokeswomen for the London 2012 organizing committee.
The October 18 development marks progress in a global campaign to shame Dow into admitting accountability to victims of the Union Carbide pesticide plant explosion in Bhopal in 1984. Dow merged with UC in 1999, yet has denied liability for the ongoing suffering of tens of thousands.
In 2010, Dow signed a 10-year deal with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as "Worldwide Olympic Partner." IOC rules forbid advertising on game venues, but Dow is paying for the $11 million fabric wrap encircling the stadium, and had planned to emblazon its logo on five "test panels" in preparation for the games.
As GroundTruth reported in October, victims of the Bhopal disaster, including the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, have been working with Members of Parliament in Britain to remove Dow as sponsor of games. Pulling the logo signals that public outrage and political pressure is having an impact.
Some in India's government, the Sports Ministry, and the Indian Olympics Association (IOA) have joined in the campaign. IOA acting president VK Malhotra told The Times of India that removal of Dow's logo is not enough: "Our demand is that Dow should be removed as a sponsor and we have expressed strong reservation with the Olympics. We are sending our communication to Dow as well as IOC on this regard."
More at the linkThere will definitely not be any Dow Chemical branding on the [stadium] wrap before,... more
-
-
Truth be told, there were tears in my eyes as I sat there, translating and tweeting amongst the bustling crowd of media and hundreds of people, most of them farmers. After an intensive public trial covering a range of human rights violations, on December 6, the jurors issued a scathing verdict to the six largest pesticide and biotechnology corporations, urging governments to take action to prevent further harm. The crowd erupted in a roar of applause, and later, congratulations were shared in at least seven languages.
The verdict was handed down to the six largest pesticide corporations — Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, BASF, Dow and Dupont — collectively known as the “Big 6,” for their human rights violations, including internationally recognized rights to life, livelihood and health. The agrichemical industry is valued at over $42 billion and operates with impunity while over 355,000 people die from pesticide poisoning every year, and hundreds of thousands more are made ill. In addition, pesticide corporations have put livelihoods and jobs in jeopardy, including those of farmers, beekeepers and indigenous peoples.
The preliminary findings, to be elaborated and finalized by the jury over the next two weeks, include these recommendations for governments:
Prosecute corporations for criminal liability, rather than civil liability only;
Fully commit to and legislate for the precautionary principle; and
Prevent corporations from directly or indirectly harassing and intimidating scientists, farmers and human rights and environmental defenders, in any form.
The tribunal was only made possible through the incredible collaboration of many people — and the support of 400 organizations and more than 7,000 individual people, worldwide. The Center for Food Safety, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, and Farmworker Association of Florida were key contributors in United States.
As for my part, I'm elated and exhausted, both. But that's just tonight. Tomorrow, it's time for the planning meeting for what comes next, and I'm energized and honored to take part, and for PAN to be part of the growing momentum around the world that seeks an end to corporate abuse, putting fairness and dignity in its place.
Nearly 30 years after the the original "Dirty Dozen" campaign that launched PAN International, I feel another global groundswell coming on.
more at the linkTruth be told, there were tears in my eyes as I sat there, translating and tweeting... more
-
-
Monsanto Co. corn that's genetically engineered to kill insects may be losing its effectiveness against rootworms in four states, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said.
Rootworms in Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska are suspected of developing tolerance to the plants’ insecticide, based on documented cases of severe crop damage and reports from entomologists, the EPA said in a memo dated Nov. 22 and posted Nov. 30 on a government website. Monsanto's program for monitoring suspected cases of resistance is "inadequate," the EPA said.
"Resistance is suspected in at least some portions of four states in which 'unexpected damage' reports originated," the EPA said in the memo, which reviewed damage reports.
The insects, which begin life as root-chewing grubs before developing into adult beetles, are among the most destructive corn pests, costing U.S. farmers about $1 billion a year in damages and chemical pesticides, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Monsanto, the world's largest seed company, introduced its rootworm-killing corn technology 2003. The modified corn was planted on more than 37 million acres this year, Lee Quarles, a spokesman for St. Louis-based Monsanto, said yesterday. Corn is Monsanto's largest business, accounting for 41 percent of its $11.8 billion of sales during the fiscal year ended Aug. 31.
University Study
An Iowa State University study said in July that some rootworms have evolved resistance to an insect-killing protein derived from Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt, a natural insecticide engineered into Monsanto corn. Entomologists in Illinois and other Midwestern states are studying possible resistance where the insects devour roots of Monsanto's Bt corn.
Monsanto continues to believe there's no scientific confirmation of resistance to its Bt corn, Quarles said by telephone. Still, Monsanto takes the EPA report "seriously" and is increasing efforts to teach farmers how to respond to unexpected damage in their fields, he said.
Less than 0.2 percent of the acres planted with Monsanto's Bt corn were affected by unexpected rootworm damage this year, Quarles said. Farmers with root damage in their fields should consider changing practices to "stay ahead of this insect," Monsanto said in a statement. That could include rotating corn with soybeans or using a product such as Monsanto's SmartStax corn, which kills rootworms with two types of Bt, the company said.
SmartStax Corn
The agency said in the memo that using SmartStax in fields where the bugs have developed resistance to Bt corn could hasten resistance to SmartStax because SmartStax's effectiveness is predicated on both types of Bt working as designed. SmartStax corn produces the second type of Bt with a gene licensed from Dow Chemical Co. (DOW)
The EPA tries to deter resistance to Bt corn by requiring farmers to plant corn that doesn't produce the pesticide alongside the modified crop. This creates a so-called refuge of unexposed bugs that can mate with insects developing resistance, creating a second generation of bugs that's susceptible to the toxin.
The EPA's requirement of a refuge equal to at least 5 percent of a SmartStax crop, compared with 20 percent for Bt corn, "will be substantially less durable and could ultimately compromise the second unrelated toxin used to control the pest" if insects are already resistant to Monsanto’s Bt, the agency said in the memo.
Monsanto Tests
Monsanto should enact a remedial action plan in fields where resistance to the Bt insecticide is suspected, the EPA said. That includes having growers use conventional pesticide to kill adult rootworm beetles late in the season and alternate pest control methods in the following season.
Monsanto tested rootworms for resistance in Nebraska, Illinois and Iowa and should expand the monitoring to Colorado, Minnesota, South Dakota and western Wisconsin because questions about the performance of Bt corn extends to all seven states, the EPA said in the memo.
http://www.agricorner.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/monsanto-corn-300x225.jpgMonsanto Co. corn that's genetically engineered to kill insects may be losing its... more
-
-
Miscarriages. Cancers. The loss of a job or an entire way of life. It's never easy to talk publicly about personal pain. That's why the stories of Vi, David, Juana, Mildre and Jeff are so powerful. In their own words, they talk about the harms that pesticides cause. On video, to millions of people.
Their point: ensure that someday, pesticide corporations are no longer above the law when it comes to our health, our economy and our well-being. Watch these extraordinary, brave individuals tell their truths.
This week, PAN International launches our 'people's trial' against the Big 6 pesticide corporations in Bangalore, India. People around the world are showing up and testifying. A jury will listen, confer and issue a verdict.
PAN's point: hold global pesticide corporations to account for damages done.
snip
During the next seven days, join Vi, David, Juana, Mildre, Jeff and many others by watching the video, and sharing their stories with others through your own networks — by email, on facebook or twitter. Only together can we stand up and hold these corporations to account.
More news and videos at the link.Miscarriages. Cancers. The loss of a job or an entire way of life. It's never... more
-
-
Last week Toxic Free North Carolina released our latest Farm Worker Documentary Project film, Overworked & Under Spray. It’s a short piece featuring six high school-aged farmworkers’ stories about being sprayed with agricultural pesticides while tending crops in fields across the state.
For two months this summer, I crisscrossed the eastern side of North Carolina with our Student Action with Farmworkers intern Abi Bissette. We visited farmworker families in their homes, giving out pesticide safety information and discussing their rights as farmworkers. By midsummer we had assembled a group of motivated, articulate teenagers willing to speak out on film.
The young farmworkers cultivated and harvested blueberries, strawberries, sweet potatoes, green beans, grapes, cucumbers and tobacco. Here’s Felix Rodriguez, one of the youth featured in the film:
You could see the spray coming at you...but we kept on working. The next day I didn't feel so good. I wouldn't feel comfortable talking about pesticides to the owner or supervisor because they'll see you as nagging. They just really want you to work.
Enough is enough
When we asked the youth how they would fix the situation, they had a lot of impressively astute answers: put more inspectors in the fields, get rid of child labor in agriculture, make stronger regulations for crew leaders. But one message we heard loud and clear from everyone interviewed was “enough is enough.”
The exploitation of children (or anyone) for cheap food — and the poisoning of the people who work to fill our grocery store shelves — has gone on far too long. It’s time for eaters of conscience to demand an end to abusive, toxic agriculture.
More at the linkLast week Toxic Free North Carolina released our latest Farm Worker Documentary... more
-
-
The Indian Olympic Association may boycott the London Olympics in protest at Dow Chemical's involvement as a sponsor after a group of India's current and former Olympians organised a petition calling for athletes not to travel to London.
"We feel that it will be against the basic principles of the Olympics charter to partner with Dow Chemical, which is responsible for the ongoing disaster in Bhopal," the athletes wrote in a petition sent to the Indian government.
Dow, which will create the £7m wrap around the Olympic Stadium, has links to Union Carbide Corporation, the firm responsible for the Bhopal gas disaster in 1984 that led to thousands of deaths at the time and which many campaigners believe is still affecting the health of people in the area.
Shivraj Singh Chauhan, a minister in the Bhopal region, has backed the athletes' firm stance and demanded in a letter to India's sports minister, Ajay Maken, that the government support a boycott if Dow's sponsorship continues.
V K Malhotra, the acting president of the Indian Olympic Association, said a meeting was scheduled in 10 days' time in which the matter would be discussed after first hearing the response of the government to the petition.
The Indian government is still pursuing a further £1.1bn from Dow for victims after Union Carbide paid £300m as compensation.
Talk of a boycott will put more pressure on the London 2012 Organising Committee, which has defended the deal with Dow, despite protests from campaign groups and MPs who claim it has outstanding liabilities relating to the disaster.
The London 2012 chairman, Lord Coe, said: "I am satisfied that the ownership, operation and the involvement either at the time of the disaster or at the final settlement was not the responsibility of Dow."
More at the linkThe Indian Olympic Association may boycott the London Olympics in protest at Dow... more
-
-
If Oregon allows GM sugar beets to be deregulated, we may not stand a chance against full federal deregulation of all GM crops.
(SALEM, Ore.) - A public hearing is being held in Corvallis, Oregon this Thursday, November 17th to determine if Genetically Modified sugar beets will be deregulated in Oregon.
Meanwhile, the public comment period maybe just a local distraction giving way to full federal deregulation without any representation of organic and conventional crop farmers.
Let us not forget that the U.S House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture held a formal hearing on Genetically Modified (GM) Alfalfa on Jan 20, 2011.
The hearing corresponded with an open 30-day comment period, designed to provide relevant testimony with regard to deregulation of Genetically Modified Alfalfa.
The democratic process neglected to include a single organic or conventional farming representative. Throughout the two hour hearing various legislators publicly humiliated the Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsak for even suggesting any compromise through talks with the organic and conventional communities. They all but ordered him to stand down his conversations with anyone but pro-GM enthusiasts (1:43:16).
Representatives left no seed unturned in honor of their allegiance to biotech crops and complete penetration into all foreign and domestic markets. In fact, Minnesota's Representative Collin Peterson referred to organic producers and consumers as "our opponents"[1](12:29).
Vilsak, even with his ties to Monsanto, was attempting negotiation with "so called Option 3" containing a minimal stop gap as an alternative to absolute contamination of organic and conventional alfalfa. In essence, planting barriers would have been implemented to maintain protective measures for the integrity of all seed varieties. Legislators blatantly mocked him and even pulled rank, saying that the Secretary of Agriculture does not have the authority to do anything but fully deregulate the crop without further ado. (35:38, 1:25:50, 1:29:15, 2:18:47)
It can be noted that Vilsak testified no less than three times that we were in the midst of the 30 day comment period, and in his opinion, the talks among all sides were providing necessary elements worthy of analysis for all agricultural markets concerned. (29:00, 1:44:00, 1:51:54)
The theme of the hearing centered around the economic burden of GM farmers if full deregulation didn’t go forth immediately (1:44:00). It was insisted by every representative that their loyalties were to the biotech community and that full deregulation was unquestionable without consideration for any form of barrier to protect other crops from cross contamination.
In regard to preservation of non GM crops, Texas Representative Michael Conaway begs the question, "how much of this is a definitional issue"? He questions organic standards and even insists that he "suspects that Genetically Engineered seeds will become the new organic". He blatantly suggests that legislative steps be considered to modify the language and thus re-define organic standards so that Genetically Modified crops can freely contaminate without restriction. He insists that it is merely a marketing issue and not an issue of health and safety. Conaway asks if we are just "hung up on the phrase organic, meaning something we grew ourselves in the backyard with whatever?"(2:33:00).
Concern was expressed by a number of speakers that GM crops are being promoted throughout the world as being no different than conventional crops, and if word got out that we established restrictive planting barriers, then it might be assumed that the GM crops were somehow different. That could put a damper on GM producers and their marketing potential. (30:45, 1:58:17, 2:18:47)
It was apparent, by the end of one sided discussion, that full deregulation and contamination remains unquestionable from the perspective of our democratic leaders. In other words, it is most notably a flagrant case of Contamination without Representation.
If Oregon allows GM sugar beets to be deregulated, we may not stand a chance against full federal deregulation of all GM crops. Public comments are being heard on Thursday from 4 PM – 9 PM at LaSells Stewart Center Construction and Engineering Hall 875 Southwest 26th St., Corvallis, Oregon.
Please see the full length video of the U.S House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture forum on GM Alfalfa, Jan 20 2011.
http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/hearingDetails.aspx?NewsID=1269If Oregon allows GM sugar beets to be deregulated, we may not stand a chance against... more
-
-
Permanent Peoples' Tribunal accuses biotech giants Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont and BASF of promoting dangerous pesticides including endosulfan, paraquat and neonicotinoids
The world's major agrochemical companies, Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont and BASF, will face a public tribunal in early December accused of systematic human rights violations.
They are accused of violating more than 20 instruments of international human rights law through promoting reliance on the sale and use of dangerous and unsafe pesticides including endosulfan, paraquat and neonicotinoids.
The Permanent Peoples' Tribunal (PPT), an international opinion tribunal created in 1979, will hear expert testimony from scientists, medical doctors and lawyers to prove the charges. Victims who have been injured by these products - from farmers, farmworkers, mothers and consumers from around the world - will also testify to the causes and nature of their injuries.
The cases will be heard over a four-day trial in Bangalore, India beginning December 3. While the Tribunal has no legal weight, and cannot force sanctions on companies, it aims to expose and raise awareness of large-scale human rights violations.
Pesticides Action Network (PAN) International, a global network comprised of 600 organisations in 90 countries, has spent years collecting information to bring about the indictments and is seeking justice for more than 25 specific cases - such as Silvino Talavera, an 11-year-old from Paraguay who died days after breathing in a cloud of Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide sprayed by a crop duster. The trial will also hear evidence of the link between pesticide use and a decline in bees.
The corporations, known as the 'Big 6' control 74 per cent of the global pesticide market, as well as dominating the global seed market.
Bayer reject the allegations saying they are a 'wholesale distortion of the role of pesticides in our society.' Monsanto, Syngenta and Dow, after being contacted by the Ecologist, were unavailable for comment.
Pesticide poisonings
An estimated 355,000 people are believed to die each year from unintentional toxic chemical poisoning, according the World Health Organization, many of these from use or exposure to pesticides and other agrochemicals. Nick Mole from PAN UK said the trial would give a voice to the otherwise voiceless victims of pesticides.
‘The pesticide industry is massive and incredibly powerful. It is difficult to prove corporate manslaughter even when these products are killing hundreds of people a year,' he said. ‘We've spoken to people who have been abused and we are allowing them to give voice to their individual stories. We will be presenting the outcome of the Tribunal to the corporations and will be inviting their response,' he said.
It is hoped that the verdict, to be delivered on December 6, will lead to greater discussions at UN institutions on holding agrochemical corporations accountable for crimes relating to the impact of their products.
More at the linkPermanent Peoples' Tribunal accuses biotech giants Monsanto, Dow, Bayer,... more
-
-
*Gates plan spends 40% of R&D funding on risky "silver bullet" GM projects with DFID help
As the world population reaches 7 billion GM Freeze says in a new report published today [1] that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s policy on agricultural development to tackle hunger is "swimming against a tide of informed opinion".
The report reveals the Gates Foundation has allocated over 40% of its committed research expenditure from 2005 to 2011 on projects involving risky “silver bullet” GM technology.
The collaboration between the Gates Foundation and DFID, announced in February 2011, includes a commitment to carry out GM research into altering the photosynthesis of rice to make it more tolerant of drought. [2] This theoretical switching of rice metabolism has been described as "high risk" by many, including the Royal Society, because of the complex changes required to make it work and the high chance of failure. [3]
In contrast GM Freeze reveals that the Gates Foundation has only allocated some US$20 million (4% of the total budget of US$521 million) to all soil research despite acknowledging the poor state of some African soils. However the Gates Foundation has pledged nearly US$214 million to research involving GM techniques from 2005 to the present – ten times the budget for soil research.
The group's report says the Gates Foundation and DFID are ignoring the recommendations of key research, including the unprecedented IAASTD report in 2008, endorsed by the UK Government, which recommended agroecological approaches to farming to restore natural resources, such as the soils, biodiversity and water and a switch away from fossil-fuel based artificial fertilisers and pesticides. [4]
GM Freeze also reveals the Gates Foundation funding of the Alliance for a Green Revolution for Africa (AGRA) to distribute artificial fertilisers to small farmers. AGRA plan to deliver 187,000 tons of fertilizer "to small farmers through wholesale and retail networks by December 2012" at a overall cost of US$164 million to the Gates Foundation – eight times their allocated expenditure on soil research.
The Gates Foundation collaborate closely with agri-biotechnology companies including Monsanto, BASF, Du Pont, Dow and the Syngenta Foundation in projects to develop GM seeds and promote fertilisers, pesticides and hybrid seeds to small African farmers through bodies such as African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) and projects like Harvest Plus – both also funded by DFID.
Pete Riley of GM Freeze said:
"The Gates Foundation approach to agricultural development is swimming against of tide of informed opinion if it is serious about tackling hunger.
"Instead of promoting proven, low-cost solutions, the Foundation is mimicking discredited high input farming that has cost millions in Northern countries due to pollution, soil erosion and disastrous impacts on biodiversity above and below the soil. DFID is meekly following this lead despite expert analysis showing that in a world with eroded natural resources, climate change and rising demand and costs of energy and fertilisers, a switch to agroecological approaches is urgently needed.
"Offering small and family farmers GM technology will only lock them into expensive and failing intensive farming approaches that benefit big business.
More at the link*Gates plan spends 40% of R&D funding on risky "silver bullet" GM... more
-
-
It is something that many farmers of genetically-modified (GM) crops are already trying to do and failing to succeed in, but that the chemical companies responsible for the problem may soon be pushing as an alleged "solution." The Dow Chemical Company has sponsored a study that aims to position the 2,4-D herbicide, a popular commercial herbicide, as the solution to Roundup-resistant "superweeds." But 2,4-D-resistant "superweeds" have already begun emerging as well, which suggests that increased chemical interventions of any kind will only make the superweed problem worse, not better.
Year after year, GM crop farmers have to battle mutant superweeds that continue to grow stronger and more resistant to the toxic pesticides and herbicides used in GM crop cultivation. But the practice is polluting the environment, contaminating the food supply, and spurring the rampant growth of harmful superweeds.
Rather than admit they are responsible for the problem, agri-giants like Dow and Monsanto say that using different pesticides and herbicides will help solve the problem. But such a suggestion could not be further from the truth. Treating plants with increasingly higher levels and more potent concoctions of toxic chemicals is a recipe for disaster, and one that will only make the superweed problem worse.
Dow, of course, found in its own study that using 2,4-D is a successful intervention to help prevent the growth of superweeds, But a review by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, which tends to be conservative in its estimation of the environmental harm caused by pesticides and herbicides, says 2,4-D leads to "risk quotients that exceed the level of concern." In other words, Dow's "solution" is highly problematic in terms of environmental and human health.It is something that many farmers of genetically-modified (GM) crops are already... more
-
-
When cycle forecaster Charles Nenner told the Fox Business network yesterday that the Dow Jones was set to collapse to the 5,000 level on the back of a “major war” that will shake the globe at the end of 2012, hosts David Asman and Elizabeth MacDonald sat in stunned silence.
Nenner, a former technical analyst for Goldman Sachs, is head of the Charles Nenner Research Center, which purports to be able to predict market trends with a computer program based around pattern forecasting and securities analysis. Nenner predicted the stock market and housing collapse over two years before the fall of Lehman Brothers.
Nenner predicts that the Dow is heading down to just 5,000, a gargantuan drop given that it now hovers above the 12,000 level and only sunk as deep as 6,547 during the lowest ebb of the economic collapse in March 2009.
On the back of this forecast, Nenner has advised his clients to vacate the market almost entirely.
“I told my clients and pension funds and big firms and hedge funds to almost go out of the market, almost totally out of the market,” said Nenner, saying that the collapse will unfold over the course of a couple of months and that the reversal will come when the Dow hits just above the 13000 level.
What could prompt such a dramatic fall? An oil shock that could be kick-started by Friday’s “day of rage” protests in Saudi Arabia or something else?
According to Nenner, who studies war and peace cycles, the collapse will be initiated by “a major war starting at the end of 2012 to 2013,” a startling claim to which the host David Asman merely responded, “wow”.
Excuse me? A financial strategist who has been deadly accurate in the past and has just told all his clients to get out of the market predicts a “major war” that will lead to a stock market collapse and the best Asman can come up with is “wow”?
Since the hosts failed to follow up on Nenner’s astounding statement, who this war will be between and how it will start is anyone’s guess, but it seems inevitable that its roots will be in the current unrest we see spreading like wildfire across North African and the Middle East.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vcTm4XE4EAWhen cycle forecaster Charles Nenner told the Fox Business network yesterday that the... more
-
-
For most of three decades, the U.S. has financed massive aerial spraying of pesticides over a large part of Guatemala in an attempt to eradicate the Mediterranean fruit fly, but common precautions to limit exposure to the toxic chemicals are not being followed.
In the 1980s and 1990s, malathion was sprayed from aircraft over thousands of acres of Guatemala's forests and farmlands. More recently the U.S.-financed program has been spraying Spinosad GF 120 Naturalyte Fruit Fly Bait, produced by Dow Agrosciences.
According to Guatemalan government data, the U.S.-backed program has applied more than 6 million liters of GF-120 since 2002, equivalent to more than 5,000 tons of this pesticide-bait.
Dow scientists say that Spinosad is highly toxic to beneficial insects and aquatic species, and that precautions should be taken to avoid daytime spraying and avoid bodies of water.
However, in Guatemala, spraying occurs during the day and over water. In contrast, in California, which is also waging an ongoing battle with medflies, the use of Spinosad sprays to control the pests is carefully regulated, and residents and farm workers are warned prior to spraying to keep out of sprayed zones for at least four hours.
This is not the case in Guatemala.
The U.S. has spent $266 million on the fruit-fly eradication program since 1976. The original purpose of the program was to create a barrier that would keep the Medfly from "migrating" to California fruit farms about 2,200 miles away.
But the characterization of the medfly as a destructive "illegal alien" is challenged by Dr. James Carey, an entomologist with the University of California, Berkeley, who has concluded from DNA tests that the medfly is a permanent resident of California, detected in 167 municipalities --one third of the state -- since 1975.
Carey is recognized as a pre-eminent expert on the medfly, who served on the California Department of Food and Agriculture´s Medfly Scientific Advisory Panel from 1987 to 1994.
Campesinos, beekeepers, environmentalists, coffee growers and others who work the land and study it have opposed the program for years.
Israel Gramajo, the mayor of San Antonio, Suchitepequez, in southern Guatemala, is currently leading an effort to remove a Mosca Del Mediterraneo (or MOSCAMED) quarantine post from his town and prohibit aerial spraying. The medfly larvae develop in fruit such as coffee berries, oranges and mangos. The quarantine posts are set up on highways to keep potentially contaminated fruit from entering into regions considered free of the medfly. Ironically, the quarantine in San Antonio has been designed to keep contaminated fruit from entering a region already infested by the fruit fly.
Guatemala is the only Central American country using massive aerial spraying of pesticides to control the medfly. According to medfly program protocol, the plane sprays up to seven times each area treated, for a total of 500 droplets per 10 square feet.
According to a 2009 medfly report by a Mexican scientist working with the MOSCAMED Program, 1,650 square miles were infested with the Medfly in Guatemala, and another 5,600 square miles were subject to "suppression".
Guatemalans complain of damages to their crops, along with allergic reactions and conjunctivitis. MOSCAMED authorities deny the charges and say they provide important support to beekeepers, along with baking classes and medical campaigns in towns where the program is active.
When scientific studies in the 1980s and 1990s began raising concern regarding the potential environmental and human risks from massive aerial spraying of malathion, the MOSCAMED program sought out alternative pesticides, and began using GF-120. In 2002 the Guatemalan government requested an environmental impact study, to assure that the spraying is benign.
But that study, approved by the Guatemalan Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources in 2005, heavily relied on data from Dow Agrosciences and the U.S. and Guatemala agencies involved in the MOSCAMED program.For most of three decades, the U.S. has financed massive aerial spraying of pesticides... more
-
-
Is living a green and healthy lifestyle wearing you out? Now you can protect your health and your environment while you sleep. I'm Rich Awn and this is your Green Air Minute.
Out of all the items in your home, your mattress is likely the most indispensable and at the same time, taken the most for granted. Manufacture and supply schemes of the leading mattress companies require long, costly shipping chains often originating over seas, shipped, and then trucked from storage warehouses to retail stores where they end up getting trucked again to be delivered to your home.
The other problem with synthetic, petroleum-based foam mattresses is the issue of "off-gassing." The scent, or VOC, produced when a mattress is taken out of its package may contain toxic vapors like acetone and toluene that can lead to serious irritation of the eyes and mucus membranes and can accumulate in the body, never to be expelled.
One company hasn't been sleeping on the ill effects of the mattress industry and has developed an innovative, completely centralized manufacture and direct supply chain from the product's inception to your bedroom. Keetsa Mattress Company figured out a way to eliminate harmful off-gassing using a natural, plant-oil based foam which can be recycled when it's life cycle is complete.
Joe Alexander, General Manager of Keetsa Mattress.
You know, “green” doesn’t just mean you throw an organic cover on your mattress and now you’re a green company. We’ve addressed it from the manufacturing, from the shipping, from the distribution, to getting it to the customer’s home, to the product itself, and to ultimately, the demise of the product.
I'm Rich Awn and this is your Green Air Minute. For more ways to save the planet while you sleep and the full interview with Joe Alexander, visit GreenAirRadio.com.Is living a green and healthy lifestyle wearing you out? Now you can protect your... more
-
-
A few weeks back, the New York Times made mention of an astounding development, which has, for whatever reason, received little fanfare or recognition. Despite its Vietnam War notoriety, Agent Orange is in vogue again, this time down on the farm. Its reemergence, and in this particular setting, raises a host of troubling questions that are not being well considered.
Over the past year, there have been increasing reports of emerging superweeds resistant to Roundup, the preferred weedkiller of America’s farmers. Roundup is sold in tandem with Roundup-ready seeds, both marquee products of the Monsanto Corporation. In the 1990s, when the latter product hit the market, it was momentous, revolutionary – a godsend: Roundup-ready seeds are genetically designed to resist application of the potent herbicide. By sowing Roundup-ready seeds and dousing their fields with the trademark weedkiller, farmers could forego the expense and toil of tilling the land, and losing valuable topsoil in the process. Production was enhanced, time and money saved. It was quite an economic boon to farmers, at least in the short run. Environmentalists were also pleased in light of the topsoil angle. Needless to say, Monsanto was thrilled that farmers were even more dependent on its products.
But for years critics ominously warned that, as is the nature of ‘nature,’ weeds would eventually evolve to withstand Roundup. Monsanto brushed aside such concerns, saying it would be ages before anyone had to worry about something like that. The glory days lasted about a decade. The superweeds evolved faster than anyone imagined-- and with a vengeance. Farmers accustomed to drenching their fields with Roundup are now battling a monster breed of pigweed that, the New York Times reports, “can grow three inches a day and reach seven feet or more…so sturdy that it can damage harvesting equipment.”
Nature has issued quite a challenge to our ‘weed solution.’ The chemical industry has decided to respond in turn with Agent Orange. To be precise, Dow Chemical is working on seeds that are resistant to 24-D, a component of Agent Orange… presumably because it intends on spraying farmland with wartime defoliant.
This is alarming on a number of fronts. But let’s be clear on one thing at the outset: we don’t necessarily need Agent Orange to deal with weeds. The Amish don’t. Never have. Superweeds-- like superbugs (or superbacteria) emerging in concentrated chicken farms-- are the product of industrial agriculture, which aims to squeeze as much as possible from the land, and has selected monoculture as the optimal means of doing so. Grow one crop, in great density, on huge tracts of land, demanding tremendous output. Hence the Iowa corn fields, which stretch as far as the eye can see. There’s only one problem with this: nature does not ‘farm’ this way. Monoculture is highly vulnerable to pests, disease and weeds. In monocultivated fields, predators find a vast pool of identical, fat, helpless victims. In contrast, nature ‘farms’ a diversity of crops amidst one another, which do not succumb en masse to any given plague.
We have insisted on monoculture in order to produce as much as possible. Today, we’re able to extract 6 times more corn from an acre of land than 100 years ago. Industrial agriculture is to be commended for that impressive efficiency. And I know how its apologists – Dow and Monsanto included-- would defend the institution and its manic drive for production. Industrial agriculture is necessary, they would say, to feed the world: you can’t feed upwards of six billion people by farming like the Amish.
Though I am not qualified to contest this claim fully, I can think of one important fact that casts doubt upon it. In this country, industrial agriculture’s immense bounty has wrought skyrocketing rates of obesity, heart disease, diabetes. Agribusiness has not exactly harnessed its awesome technological advances to feed the world, but rather, to cram as many excess calories as possible into citizens of the industrial world. In particular, its bounty has subsidized a profusion of cheap fast and processed foods. Indeed, two of Monsanto’s most popular Round-up ready products are corn and soy, the building blocks of our processed foods.
So, it seems clear, at least in the US, industrial agriculture can step off the gas pedal. We could use an Amish revolution across the farm belt. If we adopted Amish style polyculture, our farms might well produce less. But would that be such a bad thing? Polyculture would certainly produce less of the staple commodities, corn and soy, and less processed food in turn. It would make for a healthier—lighter-- nation.
But we cannot settle for less. We must have more.
We’re so hell-bent on maintaining our voracious consumption habits, that we’ll engage the services of the defense industry. We’ll use Agent Orange to fight off weeds and ensure the delivery of cheap corn to Frito-Lay, Coke and Kelloggs; and when megaweeds evolve to withstand Agent Orange—eighteen-foot-tall weeds, stems like tree trunks—we’ll reach for the napalm. ‘Napalm-ready’ soy; that’s our future.
All in the name of productivity, efficiency, convenience-- profit. For you see, farming as nature ordains it fails on all fronts. Nature does not cut it in the USA.
We think nothing of wantonly poisoning the land on which we depend for sustenance. We have gravely degraded the rich topsoil of the Prairies, much of which has flowed down the Mississippi into the Gulf of Mexico (and is now covered in a slick of oil, I presume). Our herbicides, pesticides and fungicides have stripped the land of natural nutrients, which we aim to supply in chemical doses. And when agricultural problems arise-- problems that are the product of our industrial, chemical practices-- we administer more of the same. Actually, I’m wrong: in the case of Agent Orange, we administer stronger poisons, as if we aim to twist Nature’s arm—as if we could. As if we could subdue her, and force her to do our bidding: ‘You WILL give us Cheetoes at 20 cents to the pound-- or else!’
It is of course hubris. Not to mention tremendously short-sighted. What do we think, soaking the fields in Agent Orange? Surely, Dow must know that the very application of this chemical in strong, widespread and longterm doses is precisely the doom of this product: these are the very conditions that encourage—dare!-- superweeds to evolve. So what are the chemical companies playing at? What’s the game plan? Do they intend to graduate to ever more potent and dangerous herbicides? Surely that can’t be sustainable. Or do they hope to mix and match chemical herbicides, to keep the weeds off balance? That seems marginally safer, at best. And does anyone know how these chemicals fare in the environment, once combined, over the course of years? Or is Dow simply aiming for Monsanto’s promised land, an herbicide-seed combination that will corner the market, and inflate company stock in the short run?
Besides the fact that we would use these chilling chemicals in the production of our food, no less. Agent Orange is accused of having caused birth defects in Vietnam, and increased rates of cancer among American veterans of the war there. Dow has disputed these claims. And yet, in light of Agent Orange’s reputation, it is surprising that Dow would press on with its use in food production nonetheless. This shows tremendous gall. Or shocking disrespect for the consumer.
cont.A few weeks back, the New York Times made mention of an astounding development, which... more
-
-
Rights groups representing survivors of the Bhopal disaster expressed outrage at what they called "insulting" sentences given to seven men for their roles in the tragedy.Rights groups representing survivors of the Bhopal disaster expressed outrage at what... more
-
-
Al Gore’s environmental organization Live Earth has taken money to raise awareness about the need for clean water from a controversial chemicals company involved in the aftermath of one of the world's worst pollution disasters.
Dow Chemical, the US firm which now owns the leaking pesticides factory responsible for thousands of deaths in Bhopal, India, sponsored Live Earth events in 150 cities this past week. The event aimed to raise money for clean water programs. Research by environmental organizations has found dangerous levels of highly toxic chemicals in rivers, lakes and other water supplies close to several other factories owned by Dow and its subsidiaries in countries including the United States, Brazil and South Africa.Al Gore’s environmental organization Live Earth has taken money to raise... more
-
-
Greenwashing has made it hard for discerning consumers to know which companies are truly eco-friendly. This year’s Earth Day winner of Most Obscene Greenwashing goes to DOW Chemicals (DOW). The global chemical giant was the platinum sponsor for Live Earth’s “Run for Water” event.
Wow. Dante has a special circle in hell for this level of hypocrisy. DOW is one of the largest polluters in global history. Here’s just a sample of the damage they’ve caused (Google has an endless list):
* In June 2008, DOW (and Boeing – BA) were fined $926 million over nuclear plutonium pollution in Rocky Flats, CO;
* Air pollution in Connecticut;
* Air pollution in Texas;
* Water pollution in Indiana;
* Water pollution in Cape Cod, MA;
For the record, I believe the environment will benefit most when large corporations go green. I disagree with cause-heads who bash corporations no matter how much progress is made. In fact, Fortune 500 companies are the key to reducing pollution and bringing safer products to the mass market. I love seeing Walmart (WMT) sell organic products. That’s change which will positively affect future generations.
With that said, companies like DOW should spend more time keeping cancer causing chemicals out of our water and less time insulting the intelligence of anyone who can run a simple Google (GOOG) search. It’s outrageous, but legal …
http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/earth-days-outrageous-but-legal-dow-chemical-sponsors-live-earths-run-for-water/?p=9865/Greenwashing has made it hard for discerning consumers to know which companies are... more
-
-
Great video of some of the protests here, including amazingly articulate 12 year old!
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL0w9id9hUA
---
---
Dow throws a party, mainly zombies show up
Andy Bichlbaum (for the Yes Men)
April 19 2010, FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
http://theyesmen.org/dowliveearth
DOW THROWS A DISMAL PARTY, FEW ATTEND
Underattended "Run for Water" plagued by death scenes, zombies, and dozens of "Dow spokesmen"; truth seems to run free
Contact: Whitney Black (803)466-3786; press@theyesmen.orgThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Brooklyn, NY -- Bucolic Prospect park in Brooklyn, NY played host to a bizarre spectacle on Sunday, as a dramatically under-attended Dow-sponsored "Run for Water" was infiltrated and turned upside down by hundreds of furious activists, including a hundred dressed as Dow spokespeople.
New Yorkers who came to the park expecting a light run followed by a free concert found themselves unwitting extras in a macabre and chaotic scene as runners keeled over dead, Dow-branded grim reapers chased participants, and a hundred fake Dow representatives harangued other protesters and handed out literature that explained Dow's greenwashing program in frank detail.
The actions called attention to Dow's toxic legacy in places like India (the Bhopal Catastrophe), Vietnam (Agent Orange) and Midland Michigan (Dioxin Contamination), and to the absurdity of a company with serious water issues all over the world sponsoring the Live Earth: Run For Water.
After race cancellations in London, Milan, Berlin, and Sweden, on-site Dow brand managers were in damage-control mode. But their job was made harder by the hundred fake "Dow" spokespeople who loudly but clumsily proclaimed Dow's position ("Our race! Our earth!" and "Run for water! Run for your life!"), spoke with many runners, screamed at the other protesters, passed out beautifully-produced literature, and all in all looked a whole lot better than the real Dow reps, who seemed eager to make themselves scarce.
"I don't know what's going on here," said Tracey Von Sloop, a Queens woman who attended the race. "All I know is these people are both crazy, and Dow is f*ing sick. I'm outta here."
The event was the latest blow to Dow's greenwashing efforts, the most visible element of which is the "Human Element" multi-media advertising campaign, one of the most expensive, and successful, marketing efforts in recent history. It even won an "Effie Award" for the most effective corporate advertising campaign in North America.
"Effective," perhaps -- but also completely misleading. To name just a few examples of Dow's water-related issues: Dow refuses to clean up the groundwater in Bhopal, India, site of the largest industrial disaster in human history, committed by Dow's fully-owned subsidiary, Union Carbide. As a result, children continue to be born there with debilitating birth defects. Dow has also dumped hundreds of millions of pounds of toxic chemical byproducts into wetlands of Louisiana, and has even poisoned its own backyard, leaving record levels of dioxins downriver from its global headquarters in Midland, Michigan.
"We thought it must be a joke when we first heard that Dow Chemical Company was sponsoring a run for clean water," said Yes Woman Whitney Black. "Sadly, it was not. One of the world's worst polluters trying to greenwash its image instead of taking responsibility for drinking water and ecosystems it has poisoned around the world? What an awfully unfunny way to start off Earth Week. We decided the event needed a little comic relief."
cont.Great video of some of the protests here, including amazingly articulate 12 year old!... more
-
-
-
According to the standard unemployment rate 12.2 percent of Californians are out of work. But there's another figure kept by the Employment Development Department called 'underemployment' which represents people without jobs, people who have to take lesser or freelance employment or people who have given up looking. That number is 21.9 percent of Californians.
When we talk about the recession, we tend to follow economists' lead on when the recession begins, ends, etc. In theory, our national economy in aggregate will start growing (or has already started growing) and we will soon 'be out of the recession'. However most economists are saying it will be a 'jobless recovery' - meaning that the economy will grow but unemployment will stay the same. And if unemployment stays the same - just how much bigger is the national underemployment number? How much longer will people who took lesser paying jobs or moved into the freelance world or just plain stopped looking for work to live off their savings while the clouds passed - how much longer will those people be affected by the recession?
As the Dow goes up and the bankers at Goldman Sachs get fat bonuses again, I think this is a concerning number. The difference between economists' balance sheets and the experience of the rest of the country. What do you think? Are you affected by this? Is this something that concerns you? Something you would want to know more about?
Let us know what you think over on Current News.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Afghanistan round-up: Helicopters and a third surge
- Psst...tell Castro I said Hi-k thx Obama
- Deadly Baghdad blasts raise specter of security
- 7 stories you missed this week: Goldman Sachs jerk, threats to Obama, Andy Garcia as Saakashvili and swine flu in Iraq
- Rage Against Guantanamo - Rage Against the Machine, REM, Pearl Jam and more call for Gitmo closureAccording to the standard unemployment rate 12.2 percent of Californians are out of... more
-
