As you already know — if you read Greg Diamond’s post here yesterday, The March Against Monsanto last Saturday got zero coverage. Not just the marches in Southern California — I mean worldwide. Yes, there were a few local medias that covered them, but nothing major. Why? In my opinion, because Monsanto sees us a s a threat otherwise, they wouldn’t care who reported our protests. Even though there was no mention by the major networks, social media was on fire. Type in March Against Monsanto on Google or Twitter and hundreds of articles pop up. If mainstream media continues to ignore stories that impact us, they will become extinct. Just take a look at the Facebook pages of Pepsi, Kellogg, and any other major brand that uses GMOs in their food products. 99.9% of the comments mention their use of GMOs and consumers are refusing to buy them. Other companies who never used GMOs, or recently switched to NON-GMO are enjoying a larger market share. It won’t be long before companies like Kellogg are forced to switch to NON-GMO ingredients in order to keep shareholders happy.
The estimated attendance for the march was around 1,000, which is outstanding since the town of Laguna Beach has almost zero parking. Many moms and dads brought their kids, along with a lot of enthusiasm. This march was a perfect example of democracy in action.
D’Marie Mulattieri one of the organizers gave me her thoughts about the days events, “It was a perfect day and an even more perfect march. The people who volunteered to organize the march as well those participating are passionate about limiting our exposure to health debilitating GMOs, whether that be labeling or the complete eradication from the food supply. We don’t have an actual count, however, it felt as if we had as many people attending yesterday’s march as we did when we organized the International Day of Protest on October 15, 2011 in Orange County where 1,300 residents participated. So I think we had close to 1,000 people including men, women and lots of children. We created quite an impact in Laguna Beach. Our speakers were fantastic and gave a lot of science as well as first hand personal experiences why GMOs are so dangerous. This is just the beginning. We are forming an Orange County coalition so that all the GMO Free organizations, like LabelGMOs, Mothers Across America and others will all work together in synergy to put an end to Monsanto’s disastrous plan to own and infect the world’s food supply. United we win, divide we lose.”
The event started with people gathering at the main beach, many jumping right in and holding signs, chanting “Hey-hey – ho – ho — GMOs have got to go!” Many cars driving by either honked or gave the “thumbs up” sign to protestors. There were even a few Tea Party people there. The actual march began at 11 am — protesters wound their way through the downtown area … if there was anyone within hearing distance that did not know what a gmo was… they do now! — and ended up back at the main beach, where they listened to speakers from many walks of life.
I have to say my favorite speaker was six year old first grader, Alicia Serratos, who petitioned the Girl Scouts for GMO Free cookies. She also lead the Walmart, GMO FREE, Kelloggs “Honk N Wave” action a few months ago.
Dr. Deanna Windham from the Whitaker Wellness Institute spoke about GMOs and the scientific research concluding that GMOs cause a myriad of illnesses from allergies to cancer.
If Monsanto thinks this is it for protests…they are in for a rude awakening — this is the beginning… People are fired up! For those of you who are new to Monsanto’s game, here is how you can participate. First off, go to the Non-GMO Project homepage — you will find a list of food manufacturers who are verified GMO free. Get the Non-GMO app from I-tunes, it’s FREE! Don’t Eat That, an app that gives users personalized food safety information. Because today’s food labels are confusing. Don’t Eat That provides information on over 1,900 food additives and ingredients — you can download it for only $1.99… knowing what’s really lurking behind that label? Priceless! Want more information about your food’s safety? Go to CenterforFoodSafety.org/
Want to send your state legislator an email or call them to tell them you want GMO foods labeled? Here is the website that will give you that information, along with what bills are being discussed now. How easy is that? Now everyone can find some way to participate in our democracy. I understand most people are not comfortable standing on a sidewalk holding a sign (what if my neighbor sees me?) and many won’t post their real name when engaging in a debate on social media. It takes courage and plain-old-not-caring-what-others-will-think kind of attitude. If you think that’s hard –try fighting cancer — especially when you might have prevented it by knowing you were eating toxic food.
Keep the heat on em Inge. Nice work.
*Inge….this issue has long, long legs….and it will be a toughie….but guess what……you are on the side of right…and will get there! You really need to poll the Assembly, the Senate and Governor on this issue. You need electeds that are willing to stand with you in Laguna Beach and anywhere else may you gather. Ding Hao!
I want to testify before Congress about my story. I don’t know how to go about that or get myself heard….I have a feeling the only way might be to get myself arrested and make sure the media is there. Any other ideas are welcomed.
I say get arrested. It’s not particularly pleasant but not the end of the world… and then one less thing to be afraid of. And if you can use it to get the media present for something important… it’s worth it.
Inge, Vern and I have some friends from 99 Rise that really want to get arrested for something this meaningful . Do you want us to hook you up with them. I am not joking.
Would you please stop trying to establish a conspiracy to engage in criminal behavior on the pages of this website? Do I really need to explain to you why — merits of the cause aside — what you just wrote is weapons-grade stupidity?
Vern’s theoretically encouraging Inge to get arrested for a good cause is a problem, but probably falls short of creating a conspiracy. But now you — “not joking” — want to bring in a bunch of strangers who want to break the law in a concerted way? Go make this sort of solicitation on OC Weekly instead, if you’re really intent on getting something closed down. They can better afford to fight it in court.
What’s next — a comment saying “hey, I know some people who want to rob a bank! Anyone interested?” Go endanger someone else’s venue for free speech.
Oh. My comment got attached to Inge instead of double-eye. I was responding to him. The 99-rise people are all about doing nonviolent civil disobedience.
No, you posted about ten hours before double eye. Your reply to Inge makes sense — and I think is more general than saying “hey, let’s go break the law there and then! And I’ll bring friends!”
Whether they are right or wrong to break the law, 99 Rise doesn’t need to develop and broadcast its plans on this website. It would, among other things, be spectacularly stupid and self-defeating.
“Other companies who never used GMOs, or recently switched to NON-GMO are enjoying a larger market share. It won’t be long before companies like Kellogg are forced to switch to NON-GMO ingredients in order to keep shareholders happy.”
So it sounds like the free market is starting to work the problem out…consumers voting with their wallets and providers changing based upon what their consumers desire and are willing to pay for….great job!
You lend much credence to that “It won’t be long before…” statement.
I’m not so sure about that. We’re talking about VERY large, powerful processed food manufacturers and corporations like Monsanto who are fighting this tooth and nail. They’re going to protect their money machine. Prop 37 may have been poorly written, but that didn’t stop these companies from pouring millions of dollars into its defeat.
The statement above is from someone, Inge, who seems to be highly motivated to remove GMO’s (or at a minimum label) from our food supply. I believe that is a goal of hers and many others. My point is that since someone who is highly motivated for that result thinks that it won’t be long before companies act on the profit motive in non-GMO food and therefore switch without government intervention, it seems that the market is working.
If the market works and companies voluntarily switch because of the profit motive, then the need for outside (i.e. government) intervention seems to be lessened since companies will voluntarily move that direction (voluntarily due to the profits, in this case).
I am not sure if Inge’s statement is true or not, but I will take her at her word as it seems that it would be a counter productive argument to government intervention in that since the market is working with current regulation, there may not be a need for further regulation. Maybe I am stretching on my interpretation, but it seems that if companies move to non-GMO, then the goal is met. Additionally, at some point it will be apparent that if food is not labeled as “non-GMO” that it will be presumed to contain GMO’s and therefore labeling truth is there.
Furthering the statement, if the major food manufacturers (i.e. Kellog in her statement above) go non-GMO, I would think that the profit for Monsanto on their GMO products would decrease and then they would have to follow through with non-GMO product lines. Or, they dump a boat load of money protecting the GMO lines and convince the Kellogs of the world that the non-GMO profit is not worth it.
Boutwell…you are correct. The biggest hurdle is educating people about what a GMO is, and convincing them it will eventually make them sick. So many think that since they do not drop dead after one bite, it can’t be that bad. The second issue is that eventually GMOs will contaminate all the fields due to pollination and wind. Bees are dying at an alarming rate as well. And Monsanto is trying to get a law passed in North Carolina to make it criminal to expose them http://features.rr.com/article/0aJO91H19a2G0?q=North+Carolina. It looks to me that they are trying very hard to make themselves *untouchable* in a legal sense and that is scary.
“If the market works and companies voluntarily switch because of the profit motive…”
It’s surprising how naive and almost quaint you are Boutwell.
In this day and age where corporations write their own laws and our politicians pass them, the words “competition” and “the free market” are just relics of a simpler time. Monsanto controls 95% of the seed stock in the US (47% worldwide) it’s hard to “compete” with a monopoly.
From The Cleveland. com;
Monsanto uses patent law to control most of U.S. corn, soy seed market
By Associated Press
on December 16, 2009
Confidential contracts detailing Monsanto Co.’s business practices reveal how the world’s biggest seed developer is squeezing competitors, controlling smaller seed companies and protecting its dominance over the multibillion-dollar market for genetically altered crops, an Associated Press investigation has found. “They have the capital, they have the resources, they own lots of companies, and buying more. We’re small town, they’re Wall Street,” says Cook.
CHRISTOPHER LEONARD, AP Agribusiness Writer
ST. LOUIS, Missouri — Confidential contracts detailing Monsanto Co.’s business practices reveal how the world’s biggest seed developer is squeezing competitors, controlling smaller seed companies and protecting its dominance over the multibillion-dollar market for genetically altered crops, an Associated Press investigation has found.
With Monsanto’s patented genes being inserted into roughly 95 percent of all soybeans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S., the company also is using its wide reach to control the ability of new biotech firms to get wide distribution for their products, according to a review of several Monsanto licensing agreements and dozens of interviews with seed industry participants, agriculture and legal experts.
Declining competition in the seed business could lead to price hikes that ripple out to every family’s dinner table.” …
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2009/12/monsanto_uses_patent_law_to_co.html
And
From CS Moniter;
Corporate-controlled seeds are undemocratic
… “But these corporate-controlled seeds pose an even graver threat: Both the technology and economy of GM crops are intrinsically anti-democratic.
What’s wrong with having a few corporations control virtually every aspect of our sustenance? Far from abstract, the genetic and proprietary control of our diets by a handful of companies (Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta combined own an astounding 47 percent of the global seed market) directly robs consumers and farmers of the most basic right to choose what they will eat and grow.
The entire concept of creating and selling patented GM seeds is based on proprietary corporate control: The seeds are non-replenishing and must be purchased anew each season, eliminating the time-honored farmer tradition of saving and re-using seeds.
Anyone doubting Monsanto’s obsession with control can just ask just ask the thousands of farmers who have been sued and spied upon for alleged “seed piracy” – at least 2,391 farmers in 19 states through 2006, according to Monsanto website documents obtained by the Washington, DC-based Center for Food Safety (CFS). A report by CFS, using company records, found that “Monsanto has an annual budget of $10 million dollars and a staff of 75 devoted solely to investigating and prosecuting farmers.”
Or ask Monsanto. Under the headline, “Why Does Monsanto Sue Farmers Who Save Seeds?” on its website, the firm states: “When farmers purchase a patented seed variety, they sign an agreement that they will not save and replant seeds produced from the seed they buy from us. More than 275,000 farmers a year buy seed under these agreements in the United States.”
Threats to food safety, biodiversity
The USDA, and even some leaders of the organics business such as Whole Foods and Stonyfield Farms, endorse the notion of “coexistence” between GM and organic crops – a comforting yet flawed claim. Numerous organic farmers have reported the unwanted arrival of GM seeds contaminating their fields, rendering organic crops unmarketable.
Even more troubling, “Roundup Ready” and other herbicide-resistant seeds by their nature promote the use of toxic herbicides – the use of which, contrary to industry claims, has risen as GM crops have proliferated, according to USDA data.
Even with buffer zones to segregate GM and organic fields, “Some degree of cross-pollination will occur regardless of what mechanism is going to be put in place,” agronomist Jeff Wolt, of Iowa State University’s Seed Science Center, told the Associated Press.
The GM threats to biodiversity and democracy are closely related. When you pair proprietary technology that’s designed to retain company control of seeds (the very lifeblood of our food supply) along with highly concentrated market control, you get a hazardous blend of ecological, economic, and political centralization.
According to research of industry statistics by the non-profit ETC (Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration), “the top 3 seed companies control 65% of the proprietary maize seed market worldwide, and over half of the proprietary soybean seed market…Monsanto’s biotech seeds and traits (including those licensed to other companies) accounted for 87% of the total world area devoted to genetically engineered seeds in 2007.”
Of course, few of us think about market control when we’re hustling through supermarket aisles getting our shopping done. But when our elected leaders (from both parties) approve the expansion of risky seeds that endanger biodiversity as well as farmer and consumer choice, there should be more than a little outcry.” …
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0223/Control-over-your-food-Why-Monsanto-s-GM-seeds-are-undemocratic
Anonster, it is difficult to tell which is your thoughts versus the articles, but thanks for the words. Inge is the one who thinks that it won’t be long before companies are forced to move to non-GMO’s due to the profit motive. She has rightfully been very outspoken in her desire for non-GMO’s or at a minimum labeling. I on the other hand am not sure if it we are that close to having large food producers/manufacturers/growers switching, but I am certainly not as involved as Inge. I personally would rather see consumers control it rather than government, so I was happy, albeit rather surprised also, that someone involved in the non-GMO movement thinks that the consumer is making such a large impact that major food companies are about to switch to non-GMO’s due to profit.
As far as my comment about “If the market works and companies voluntarily switch because of the profit motive, then the need for outside (i.e. government) intervention seems to be lessened since companies will voluntarily move that direction (voluntarily due to the profits, in this case.” which you apparently feel is naive and quaint, I don’t really see how someone can disagree with my statement. You may disagree with the assumptions (which stem from Inge’s statement about it not being long before large companies will switch due to keeping shareholders happy), but the actual result…?
IF the food companies MAKE MORE MONEY by using non-GMO’s and hence the use of GMO’s is reduced and the goal of cleaner food is achieved, then the need for government regulation is lessened. How is that naive? Do you disagree with the statement or the assumption that companies will make more money by using non-GMO’s?
Now, do I think that the likes of Monsanto, Kellog, Nestle, etc…are going to make more money by using non-GMO’s compared to what they make using GMO’s? No. I think that they are going to continue to produce a product that so many people want- cheap food. Yes, there is a sector of the population who is concerned about it and wants clean food and is willing to pay for it, but when given a choice between a cheap GMO product and a more expensive non-GMO product, I personally feel more average consumers will choose the cheaper choice. Do I think that the large food companies are close to switching to non-GMO’s due to profits? No. I do think that they may have certain brands or product lines that are going to target the group that prefer non-GMO and are willing/able to pay for it. The large companies will continue to serve both sides…and do it profitably. They will not move a majority of products to non-GMO simply because I personally do not think the profits will be there because the buying public will not pay for the product and allow them to make an adequate profit.
I hope that I am wrong in that assumption. It will be much easier to be wrong if the economy were rolling strong though for sure as budgets would not be stretched so thin.
Boutwell,
First, I don’t know how to make it ANY more clear which words are mine and which are from articles than partitioning them off with “From” and ending with the corresponding website.
Secondly, when a company has a monopoly on something, like Monsanto has on our seed stock, that is exactly when you NEED “government intervention”. To pretend that there is still a “free market” at this point is just facile bullshit.
Break up Monsanto, like we did with Standard Oil! At this point, I’d like to see it broken into a separate company for every seed variety.
Thanks for the clarification on which is yours versus others…I was not familiar with that convention but it makes total sense now.
I am not pretending about anything…you seemed to have a problem with my comment about IF the food companies make more money then they will switch to non-GMO’s which I believe would be true, however I don’t think that they will make more because people will still buy the lower priced goods. I feel that you are attributing an argument to me that is not mine.
Your issue, it seems to me, is more concerned with the monopoly that a few very large multi-nationals have, and the ability to have a true fee market in that situation, which is very valid. Without gov’t intervention, monopolies will continue to exist if the consumer is forced, for whatever reason including need, to buy the monopolized product. Obviously we all need to eat, and the food is grown from seed which is a huge market force in of itself. The consumer does have some pull in it though…if we all chose to only buy non-GMO’s then the monopolizing companies would be forced to change…they probably would then also monopolize the non-GMO market also, but the food we eat would be better for us. They would also probably start, or expand, price maniupulation in order to control our buying behavior. Inge (who I believe to be very knowledgeable on the situation), thinks that it won’t be long before they switch due to market conditions. I don’t think I agree with her on it, but would love it if she was right.
Again, I was happy that someone who is heavily involved with this cause, Inge, seemed to think that companies such as Kellog were pretty close to being forced to change to non-GMO’s due to market conditions and profit motive. Do I believe that they will make more money…nope, but if someone else who is involved thinks so, maybe they are closer than I think.
Boutwell, by your logic, if the majority of the “market” demands access to marijuana, it should be legal. You OK with that?
Or are you OK with government stepping in and regulating certain products? Like marijuana. Or, say, by forcing processed food manufacturers to label when they use GMO products to make their crappy food?
I don’t believe that I am speaking of the legality of something in this context above…
However, I will bite on your hook…I am actually probably much more on the end of letting MJ become legal (and gasp, with some regulation) than you may think by your question thrown from the left field bleachers- and this is from someone who has never used MJ before.
As I have said above (actually, it will probably be below this comment, but earlier in time in this thread) and previously on this same topic, I do think that I should know what I am eating and want food companies to provide me with that information. There are areas that I am certainly fine with regulation coming into play however if (and that is a big IF) the consumer can shape the provider’s behavior then it certainly lessens the need for gov’t to step in and protect us from ourselves and others.
I should also clarify that I too want to know what I am eating…I just eat way too much crap as it is.
My statement about getting arrested was more rhetorical… hubby always tells me..daily..stay out of trouble.
Those must be interesting conversations. 😉
Wow, the goal of committing Civil Disobedience for a noble and just political cause. So Fing Extreme Greg! What in the world happened to you? Am I placing your blogsite in some kind of precarious legal position?
What The Fuk?
Time for you to make a decision, tow the Democratic Party Line or become a true issues oriented activist. You obviously can not do both.
And Shame on Vern and Inge for acting so shy about the matter!
Well, OK, if you want to play it that way: time for you to stop acting like you’re an paid agent provocateur.
I’m not saying that you are, of course — I’m saying that you might as well be.
And do you know how you can tell that it’s not my “blogsite”? You’re still posting here.
Actually Double Eye…I am not shy about anything. My shyness went-out-the-window when I had to expose my naked ass to every doctor, intern and nurse in Orange County. If and when I decide to do civil disobedience… I will not announce it to the world. The first time I met Greg was in front of Irvine City Hall when we had to march around like good little citizens to not get cited. I told him I refused. I sat in a lawn chair while the police looked on and the group walked around the sidewalk. Nothing happened, but I made my mind up on the spot. If I choose to do something like civil disobedience, I act alone…I do not want to be responsible for anyone else.
I am going to rally to create a legal fund for Vern and Inge to defend themselves against Greg’s legal threats against them for conspiring to commit crimes against his Party Loyalty.
No, you’re not going to do anything that useful — or anything that would be useful if it wasn’t aimed at my supposed “legal threats” at my friends — because it would involve more than belching hot air late at night.
If succeeded in getting Vern in trouble (and possibly losing the blog) for trying to arrange a criminal conspiracy here, though, I’m sure that you’d be the first to step forward and help — by saying something like “uh, sorry, dude.” And maybe even meaning it.
Sorry for what?
If 99 Rise were actively promoting some kind of risky declaration of something that involves breaking the law, or “conspires to break a law”, then why would they have it plastered all over their website?
Just to be clear, it is not proper protocol for me to be talking on behalf or giving subjective opinions in the name of some of these activist groups.
So I will avoid that, but I can certainly inform the public about some of the basic general facts about local activist groups that openly embrace (or do not rule out) the use or merit of Civil Disobedience.
Occupy Santa Ana is another group that does not ever rule out having to use civil disobedience. That is a general enough fact that I think can be shared.
Greg, are you using “Civil Disobedience” as an excuse to distance yourself from local activist groups? I don’t remember you talking that way in the early days of Occupy O.C., until you decided to become a personal liaison officer/legal adviser for the law establishment/ and established party system.
Go back and read your original comment.
Tell you what — have 99 Rise openly plan their action where they can get arrested in the comments section of the OC Weekly rather than here. Be sure to get Gustavo to sign off on it first.
You yourself seem to be doing a pretty good job of distancing yourself from local activist groups, as I recall from group e-mails.
I’m not going to discuss the theory of civil disobedience with you in a public forum until I am more convinced of your good faith. My position has not changed since Occupy started; I always would have said that “let’s plan on a publicly open blog how we can all get arrested!” was, aside from the merits of the action, so incredibly stupid that it would almost have to be a suggestion made by an agent provocateur. Until recently, I’ve just presumed that you were just drunk and foolish a lot of the time, but maybe not.
Greg, unlike with most people, me being drunk only results in more truth and beauty being disseminated to the blogosphere public.
I have spent three to four years worrying about what I typed the night before only to wake up and realize just how proud I should be of my semi-conscious “automatic writing” skills!
Long live Occupy Santa Ana and 99 Rise.
Be not afraid committed truth tellers/Activists!
Who Is Gustavo?
I do believe that a combination government and free market will get GMOs out of our food…just yesterday there was a lot of media attention to the contaminated gmo, unapproved wheat…Japan paid attention by canceling wheat orders…that’s got to hurt… http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/31/us-wheat-control-idUSBRE94U06H20130531
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/japan-cancels-us-wheat-order-on-gmo-fear-report-2013-05-30?link=MW_popular
these are major publications reporting this.. the tide is turning our way…we have to keep the pressure. Tell you grocer, one person uses her anti-gmo sign as a sun shield for her car, with the website for more info.
I won’t give up…I am too stubborn for that and any information from all us is worthy…we need to keep this conversation going…oh and go to Facebook…Kellogg, Doritos, Similac baby formula…add your comment about getting rid of GMOs… leave reviews on Amazon…I have lots. Knowledge is power.
I know you are not going to give up Inge. I support you! I mean us. The Common Peeps.
Yas, yas, those nasty GMOs. Here’s the fabulist that started the whole thing: http://www.naturalnews.com/. This guy is so full of shit even the truthers and anti-vaxers ignore him. We have NO evidence — i.e., evidence from any peer-reviewed studies — that GMOs are harmful. None. Zero. And Dr. Donna Windham? She’s barely a scientist. She’s an osteopath; that’s a chiropractor without the spine cracking. Take anything she says with a barrel of salt. Better yet, ignore her completely.
Anita…you either have stock in Monsanto or work for them. You obviously are too lazy or too busy eating your Cheerios laced with rBST milk and watching Fox news to do some actual research. I would love to talk out-of-my-ass like you, but unfortunately mine no longer works…due to eating gmo foods for 10 years.
I used to be polite to credulous flub-a-dubs such as yourself, but when the anti-vax dimwits refused to vaccinate their kids and threatened our herd immunity, I lost my patience. Unlike yourself, I did the research and found no peer-reviewed evidence whatsoever to support your claims that GMOs are harmful. In fact, you, me, and everybody else have been eating GMOs for centuries. Do you think that ear of corn you had over Memorial Day is the same as it was in Pre-Columbian America? It isn’t, you wouldn’t recognize it, and you could look it up. Maize was GENETICALLY MODIFIED ON PURPOSE. Do you really think that that waving field of wheat in Kansas or in the Ukraine has the same DNA it had in medieval Europe? Are you really that dim? Are you really that scientifically illiterate? You’ve got to have the science. Put up, or shut up.
Anita…you sound like schill for Monsanto. You obviously have NO idea what genetically modified means. if you actually researched you would know the difference between genetically modified and hybrid plants. You are embarrassing yourself. Now go back and watch American Idol and eat your Mac and Cheese.
want to know how gmos got started? read this…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food