March Against Monsanto
Posted by Michelle Moquin on May 25th, 2013
Good morning!
Social Butterfly: Thank you for posting about this very important day today. I will be in the area but working, otherwise I would love to meet you there! March against Monsanto for me too girlfriend! I will be there with you in spirit supporting the cause.
And just because this is such an important topic to me, I decided that I would post a write today to promote this even further, and get the word out to people who care and want to march.
On the eve of March against Monsanto Senate shoots down GMO labeling bill
As 200,000 people prepare to march against Monsanto, the Senate has overwhelmingly rejected a bill that would allow states to decide if genetically modified food products should be labeled.
The amendment shot down by the Senate would have allowed states to make their own decisions on whether or not GMO foods should be labeled – without mandating any action. Supporters originally believed that this measure was non-controversial, and simply gave states an option. But the Senate voted 71 to 27 against it on Thursday, days before Saturday’s March Against Monsanto.
“The concept we’re talking about today is a fairly commonsense and non-radical idea,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the bill’s sponsor, told the Huffington Post before the vote. “All over the world, in the European Union, in many other countries around the world, dozens and dozens of countries, people are able to look at the food that they are buying and determine through labeling whether or not that product contains genetically modified organisms.”
Sanders also explained that the Food and Drug Administration requires more than 3,000 ingredients to be labeled on food products, but that GMOs are not on this list.
But opponents of the measure argued that GMOs should not be labeled, since the FDA has not made scientific conclusions that would require it. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), chair of the Agriculture Committee, said the amendment that was shot down was not relevant to the farm bill. She also emphasized the importance of Monsanto in providing foods at lower prices that help feed people around the world – an argument often made by supporters of the biotech giant.
“I believe we must rely on the FDA’s science-based examination before we make conclusions about food ingredients derived from genetically modified foods,” she said.“They currently do not require special labeling because they’ve determined that food content of these ingredients does not materially differ from their conventional counterparts.”
On Thursday, Senate Republicans also objected to an attempt to repeal a provision that critics call the “Monsanto Protection Act”, which allows Monsanto and other biotech giants that use GMOs to plant and sell their products, even if legal action is taken against them. The provision protects Monsanto from financial damages and has generated petitions and a nationwide outcry from critics who claim the legislation allows the company to bypass the court system and dominate the seed industry.
“The provision [strips] federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of an illegal, potentially hazardous GE crop while the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) assesses those potential hazards,” dozens of food businesses and retailers wrote Congress before the “Monsanto Protection Act” was passed in March.
The Senate vote against the GMO labeling provision comes as the Vermont House and Connecticut Senate this month voted to force food companies to declare GMO ingredients on their packages – moves that indicate a growing support for GMO labeling while Congress continues to side with Monsanto.
The vote also occurred just two days before 200,000 people in 40 countries and 48 US states are expected to take to the streets to rally against the biotech giant. The global “March Against Monsanto” will occur in cities including New York, Chicago, Montreal, Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Moscow, and Melbourne.
Protesters will demand a ban on GMOs, which many believe have detrimental health effects. They will also rally against Monsanto’s patenting rights, which allow the corporation to monopolize the seed industry.
“For too long, Monsanto has been the benefactor of corporate subsidies and political favoritism,” states the Facebook page of the March Against Monsanto, Washington, D.C.“Organic and small farmers suffer losses while Monsanto continues to forge its monopoly over the world’s food supply, including exclusive patenting rights over seeds and genetic makeup.”
The global march initially began as a grassroots event, but has quickly garnered support from tens of thousands of people on Facebook pages and Google Documents. Kirsten Neus, a Washington, D.C. resident who starkly opposes Monsanto’s actions, told RT that she is trying to convince all of her friends to attend the protests and learn about the evils of the corporate biotech giant.
“I’m going because I want Monsanto’s leaders to know that we know who they are and what they’re doing, and we won’t sit back and watch as they collude with our elected officials to destroy our planet and our future in the pursuit of profit,” said Neus, in anticipation of Saturday’s march.
With Congress against him and tens of thousands of supporters rallying in support of his goals, Sen. Sanders will continue to push the GMO labeling provision in the Senate.
“The people of Vermont and the people of America have a right to know what’s in the food they eat,” Sanders told AP.
The House Agriculture Committee approved a version of the farm bill last week, which is expected to be voted upon this summer.
*******
Readers: It is time to occupy Monsanto. If you can be there too, I encourage you. Report back. I’d love to hear all about it. May you all march and protest peacefully, and most importantly may your voices be heard so that we can bring about the change that ensures that our GMO food products are labeled. We have the right to know.
Blog this BABE.
Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle
Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)
If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)
Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:
Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129
Thank you for your loyal support!
All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008-2012
“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream
" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"
May 26th, 2013 at 7:51 am
See what I mean when I say we need a demographic change to save the nation. Here the Senate vote was 71 to 27 against states to decide to label foods with genetically modified ingredients themselves.
The only time there is bipartisan agreement among white boys is when they are all BAPF by the same person. This time they were Bought And Paid For by Monsanto.
Until there are more OTW representatives in both houses of Congress, we will be controlled by anyone with enough money to by them dinner.
May 26th, 2013 at 7:53 am
moSaTANo has so much of the juice phony money they can buy off all Congressional scum that work for the juice banksters/USA corp..
there is but one & only one reason to have GMO seed & food..to cull the herd & mega profits for juice/Rockefella controlled pig farma..PERIOD
May 26th, 2013 at 8:02 am
In Europe Monsanto is getting kicked out!
May 26th, 2013 at 8:10 am
Many Colonoscopies Are Unnecessary
Did you have a screening colonoscopy less than 10 years ago, with perfectly normal results? Or are you over the age of 75? If either applies, you should think twice if your doctor recommends repeating the test now.
Reason: A shocking percentage of colonoscopies are done on people who don’t need them—and for whom the expense, discomfort and risks are wholly unnecessary—according to a recent study.
To understand the new research, you first need some facts about colorectal cancer…
THE GOOD, THE BAD
Colonoscopies are not inherently bad, of course. To the contrary, they are the undisputed gold standard of colon cancer detection and are proven to reduce the risk for death from colorectal cancer.
They also prevent cancers from developing. That’s because most colon cancers start out as small polyps (growths) that, over the course of 10 years or so, slowly grow and go through changes that turn them into cancer.
Colonoscopy gives doctors a chance to spot and remove potentially dangerous polyps, often before they turn cancerous.
Starting screening at age 50 is important because typically there are no warning signs that can be seen without a colonoscopy. But given how slowly the disease progresses, the current guidelines from the US Preventive Services Task Force recommend that subsequent routine screening colonoscopies be done only once every 10 years for patients who are not at increased risk for colon cancer.
For a person who is at increased risk—for instance, due to a family history of the disease or a previous colonoscopy that revealed something worrisome—earlier and more frequent screening is appropriate.
Colon cancer’s slow-growing nature is also the reason why the guidelines recommend that doctors stop routine colonoscopy screening once a person reaches age 76 and halt all colonoscopy testing after age 85.
By that time, frankly, a person is far more likely to die from something else before colon cancer could turn fatal. This shifts the pendulum, so that the benefits of colonoscopy no longer outweigh its potential harms, such as colon perforation, bleeding and/or temporary fecal incontinence from the procedure…and cardiopulmonary problems from the sedation.
Though these complications are not common, they are more likely to occur and harder to treat in older people.
Official guidelines aren’t infallible, of course. Recommendations can and do change as new information emerges. For now, though, the guidelines represent the consensus of opinion from top experts in the field—which is why it’s worrisome that they are so often being ignored.
SIFTING THROUGH THE RECORDS
For the new study, researchers scoured Medicare records for people over age 70 and older from all of Texas and from other areas around the US, trying to determine how many colonoscopies were being done inappropriately.
Because they didn’t have access to complete medical records, they couldn’t say for sure that certain colonoscopies were inappropriate, so they used the term “potentially inappropriate.”
For instance, colonoscopies deemed potentially inappropriate included screening colonoscopies done less than 10 years after previous colonoscopies that had been completely normal…and screening colonoscopies done on people older than 75.
If the records showed that the patient had had a barium enema or abdominal CT in the preceding three months, the researchers assumed that the patient was having the colonoscopy to diagnose a medical problem rather than to screen for cancer.
In a case like that, the colonoscopy was not deemed potentially inappropriate. Similarly, when there was a previous diagnosis of anemia, gastrointestinal bleeding, abdominal pain or some other potentially colon-related problem, the colonoscopy was considered to be diagnostic rather than routine screening and thus was not considered potentially inappropriate.
After reviewing nearly 120,000 records, researchers saw some startling patterns emerge…
Roughly 23% of the colonoscopies were potentially inappropriate.
In people between the ages of 76 and 85, a troubling 39% of colonoscopies were potentially inappropriate.
The physicians who were most likely to perform inappropriate colonscopies were gastroenterologists (as opposed to some other type of specialist)…had graduated from medical school before 1990…and were working in “high-volume” practices (those that performed more than 175 colonoscopies per year).
JUST SAY NO?
The lesson here is that, before you (or a loved one) agree to a screening colonoscopy, ask your physician why it’s being recommended. Then click here to see whether the reason given is in compliance with the current guidelines.
If your doctor’s recommendation differs from the guidelines, he or she may have a good reason. For instance, if you come a family with great longevity and can fully expect to live into your 90s or even to 100, your doctor may think that it’s in your best interest to get a routine colonoscopy in your 80s if you are in good health, particularly if you never had a screening colonoscopy before.
However, if there seems to be no valid reason for another colonoscopy and no reason to classify you as being at increased risk, ask your doctor whether a less invasive screening test, such a fecal occult blood test, will suffice.
If he still insists on the colonoscopy, you may want to seek a second opinion…or simply say no. It’s your colon, it’s your money, it’s your decision.
Source: Kristin Sheffield, PhD, assistant professor, department of surgery, University of Texas, Galveston. Her study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
May 26th, 2013 at 9:43 am
Obviously the Senators in Washington D.C. are working for Monsanto, not ‘we the people’. This is most despicable. They all need to be fired.
May 26th, 2013 at 9:44 am
Surprise !! Now you know who Rand / the Tea Party works for.
But all you had to do was “follow the money” right to the Koch Brothers / Cato Institute’s doorstep.
Of course, the Koch Bros also created the DLC with then-gov Clinton as its first director – so no help from the D’s, either.
When Bernie Sanders, the Proclaimed-Socialist, is the “states rights hero” in a fight, you know we are in trouble !!
May 26th, 2013 at 9:45 am
Of course you are right Robert,RT. I may be a white woman, but I can see through the lies.
May 26th, 2013 at 9:53 am
Rand voted for the Monsanto-Bayer gang the last time this came up for a vote. How about this time?
Does he still support the Federal Government silencing the states’ citizens?
… that the Feds should determine what states are “allowed” to label?
May 26th, 2013 at 10:23 am
It’s a domino effect:
A Tea Party crowd in Phoenix was heard chanting, “waterboard Obama, waterboard Hillary.” At another rally, tea partiers were carrying signs with Nazi symbols to attack opponents, the NYTimes reported.
And now, the dominos are falling — fast: hopefully you saw Guy’s email on Friday, but here’s an update: ABC News reports Tea Party rallies in Atlanta, Louisville, Chicago, Denver, Kansas City, Providence, and Philadelphia.
These rallies aren’t a fluke. They’re a nationally organized, calculated attempt to reorganize the Tea Party and take over the Democratic Senate. This is exactly what happened in 2010, when the Tea Party handed the House to John Boehner and Eric Cantor.
May 26th, 2013 at 10:24 am
Today is Sunday when will we see Zen Lill?
May 26th, 2013 at 10:26 am
If you control the food you control the population. We really need to think about what this means.
May 26th, 2013 at 10:27 am
If Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), chair of the Agriculture Committee, truly believes that the GMO version is the same as the non GMO version. Why is Monsanto raping farmers for millions over its patent? I call BS! Perhaps Ms. Debbie should do some actual research oh wait there is none.
May 26th, 2013 at 10:28 am
The senate is the enemy of every human being in this country. GMO = poison. It’s as simple as that
May 26th, 2013 at 10:29 am
They make you ill with this garbage then sell you drugs that do not realy fix you. If we want to change the law, we must pay politicians more than Monsatan does. That’s democracy.
May 26th, 2013 at 10:31 am
The MSM is so concerned about their rights but they aren’t concerned about the right of the people to know what is happening to there food.
The MSM has hardly mentioned what Mansonto is doing to our food much less how the Senate has sold us out.
May 26th, 2013 at 10:33 am
It’s simple.
What are they afraid of is people knowing what’s in their product?? If its not unhealthy than why so scared to label it?
May 26th, 2013 at 10:34 am
If a plant produces toxins that kill/repell bugs, than it is probalby a toxic plant. Our government and newsmedia is bought and paid for.
May 26th, 2013 at 10:35 am
If it doesn’t need a label because its no different, why do they need a patent to say it’s different?
May 26th, 2013 at 11:31 am
This Rosen fox press problem is an example of the differences between the Right and the Left.
if this had happened under a republican president the Right would be on the President’s side and against the press. Here they are on the press’s side. The Dems will not allow party to interfere if they think there side is wrong.
That’s one of the reasons dems lose at the polls. The Right makes sure their constituents don’t know that their representatives stink.