Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Selling out to Big Ag
How your college is selling out to Big Ag
By Tom Philpott
Mother Jones
May 09, 2012
Major universities have become de facto R&D and marketing outposts for companies like Monsanto
Last week, the University of Illinois’ College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES) in Champaign-Urbana made a momentous announcement: it has accepted a $250,000 grant from genetically modified seed/agrichemical giant Monsanto to create an endowed chair for the “Agricultural Communications Program” it runs with the College of Communications.
The university’s press release quotes Monsanto’s vice president of technology communications giving a taste of its vision for the investment:
A cynic might translate that statement this way: In order to maintain our highly profitable and hotly contested business model, we’ll need a new generation of PR professionals to construct and disseminate our marketing message.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Gates and high-tech ag
When Bill Gates pushes high-tech agriculture, who benefits?
By Eric Reguly
Globe and Mail
April 26, 2012
Microsoft chairman’s recipe for boosting world food output may fatten Big Ag’s bottom line, but not small farmers
When Bill Gates speaks, the world tends to listen. The second-richest man on the planet is treated like a god when he opens his mouth. He’s still chairman of Microsoft. The billions of dollars of donations he has made through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have captured the attention of the World Health Organization and set the agenda for vaccine development and inoculation over the past decade. Now, through sheer wealth-driven clout, his plan to reduce world hunger has found a rapt audience in the United Nations’ food agencies.
Gates descended on Rome, home of three UN food agencies, in February like a rumpled angel. In a speech at the International Fund for Agricultural Development (disclosure: my wife is an employee), and at a related media event, two themes emerged: technology and big business.
His talk was peppered with phrases and references to “yield,” “global productivity target” and “digital agriculture.” He mentioned some of the biggest food processing corporations, among them Procter & Gamble and Nestlé, and seemed enthusiastic about their potential role in the food development chain. “I’m a huge believer in the private sector and drawing them in,” he told the dazzled crowd.
But I was left wondering whether Gates’s agenda would contribute to the public good or the good of big business. Philanthrocapitalism, as it has been dubbed, has a dark side. Relying on genetically modified (GM) crops and chemicals to push up output per acre may help Monsanto (which was one of the stocks in the Gates Foundation’s investment portfolio), Syngenta and other tech-driven food biggies, but won’t necessarily support those who need the most help-poor smallholder farmers and underdeveloped countries. Making them part of Big Ag’s global supply chain might not help either.
New U.S. “Bioeconomy”
In New U.S. “Bioeconomy”, Industry Trumps Environment
By Carey L. Biron
IPS (Inter Press Service)
April 26, 2012
WASHINGTON - The White House on Thursday announced the formulation of the National Bioeconomy Blueprint, aimed at shoring up the U.S. commitment to bioscience-related research.
But critics warn that the new programme focuses too much on economic concerns, placing too little emphasis on either social issues or on the environment itself.
“We’re disappointed to see what finally came out,” Eric Hoffman, a Washington-based campaigner with Friends of the Earth, an international NGO, told IPS. “This report largely seems to be an endorsement for the biotechnology industry to rush ahead without any real oversight.”
The biotechnology industry “says that it has been calling for this type of legislation for long time,” Hoffman notes. “That makes sense, given that the industry stands to gain the most from the types of policies laid out in the Blueprint.”
Friday, April 13, 2012
GM trials hit hurdle
States say no, GM trials hit hurdle
By Chetan Chauhan
Hindustan Times
April 13, 2012
India’s biotechnology regulator will be apprising the state governments of benefits of Genetically Modified (GM) food crops as country’s biotechnology industry is hitting a roadblock because of many states saying no to GM crops.
The latest in the list is Congress ruled Rajasthan which has refused to allow field trials of GM crops. ”No trials of GM crops should be conducted in the State until final decision in this matter is taken,” said an order issued by state government. ”The government, after considering different aspects of it, has taken a view to wait until a national consensus is evolved.”
Like many other state governments Rajasthan government also felt that unless the Central government decides on the fate of GM food crops such as BT Brinjal, on whose commercial release environment ministry issued a moratorium in 2010, the field trials may not be allowed.
Most of the bigger states such as Bihar, Chattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal had refused to give no-objection certificate for field trials.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Weedkiller causes deformities
Popular weedkiller causes deformities in amphibians
By Bob Berwyn
Summit County Citizens Voice, USA
April 3, 2012
SUMMIT COUNTY - Exposure to sub-lethal doses of a widely used weed killer caused tadpoles to grow abnormally large tails, according to University of Pittsburgh biologist Rick Relyea, who has been studying ecotoxicology and ecology for two decades.
Relyea has conducted extensive research on the toxicity of Roundup® to amphibians. Monsanto has challenged some of the studies and Relyea has responded to the criticism.
In his latest study, Relyea set up large outdoor water tanks that contained many of the components of natural wetlands. Some tanks contained caged predators, which emit chemicals that naturally induce changes in tadpole morphology (such as larger tails to better escape predators).
After adding tadpoles to each tank, he exposed them to a range of Roundup® concentrations. After 3 weeks, the tadpoles were removed from the tanks. “It was not surprising to see that the smell of predators in the water induced larger tadpole tails,” Relyea said. “That is a normal, adaptive response. What shocked us was that the Roundup® induced the same changes.