Posted by & filed under GMOs.

Calling all food activists! Monsanto is seeking deregulated status of their newest genetically engineered corn “MON 87460”. The public has a chance to comment until August 12, 2011.

Monsanto has yet another genetically engineered corn they want the US government to allow to contaminate the food stream. Of course, they aren’t describing it that way, but contamination will be the inevitable result. We already know this from the introduction of their pesticide-producing BT corn in the 1990s.

If you’ve practiced or studied seed-saving, you know that corn is wind-pollinated from up to a mile away. Catch that? A mile (or 1.6 kilometers). That means that anyone growing corn within at least a mile of their genetically engineered crop will likely have their crop contaminated through cross-pollination, altering those genes forever. There’s no going back once we lose a pure gene pool. These genes can spread into organically certified corn crops as well, and may have already.

This is a huge risk to not only our food supply, but to our economy as well. Monsanto has already produced several duds – GE plants that are not living up to their promises of increased production and that instead worried consumers. Allowing another GE crop into the food stream will put us at further risk of loss of genetic diversity and food contamination with an organism that has no proven safety record.

Growing up in Oregon, I never would have guessed how much of my adult life would be spent trying to stop what is, essentially, food piracy. Neither would I have guessed how much easier it would be to communicate with a large group of people. Thank you, Internet.

Also, check out my sample comment. My comment covers a couple key factors that the food industry cares about – consumer confidence and economics.

To take action, click here and then click on ‘Submit a Comment’ on the right side.

An example comment that can be tailored as you wish is below for your convenience.

Thanks for reading.

~~~~

Attn: Department of Agriculture

I am a concerned consumer who does not want this genetically engineered corn to be deregulated. I understand that corn is wind-pollinated, and that there is no feasible way to prevent cross contamination of other farmer’s crops. How will cross-contamination be prevented by growers of MON 87460 so that non-genetically engineered foods will be certain not to be contaminated by genetically engineered genes from this new GE corn?

I have a right to not eat specific foods, yet the release of this crop into unregulated areas could easily contaminate the food I choose, and pay significantly more, to eat. I have found no research to prove that GE foods are safe to eat, and like many people, I choose to avoid them.

I am concerned this deregulation could also harm our country, and farmers, economically. Many people do not want to ingest any GE foods, and if it is discovered that all corn has become contaminated with these genes, we will immediately stop buying all corn-containing products, as well as meat and eggs from animals fed corn. I recognize that this includes by-products such as most citric acid, dextrose and glucose, maltodextrin, maltitol, sorbitol and other sugar substitutes, food starches, etc.

This could significantly harm the processed food industry, which depends heavily on these corn-based additives for their low cost and usefulness. This could also harm hospitals financially, which often use glucose in IV nutrient supplementation. I believe GE corn is already harming the meat industry, and the addition of another contaminant will further frighten consumers away from meat and eggs. I have already stopped buying meat that is fed corn or soy, and know many others who are feeling increasingly concerned about GE foods and grain-fed meat.

There is a tremendous apprehension building in America about genetically engineered foods. Please do not allow any possible contamination of our food, and please work to prevent what could be an economic catastrophe for our farmers and ranchers.

6 Responses to “There’s Still Time to Comment Against Monsanto’s Newest GMO Corn”

  1. Winston

    The acceptance dates for comments are inconsistent:

    “DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July
    11, 2011.”

    Where as the header says August 12.

    Also, I tried to post comments twice and the site throws errors.

    I did suggest it to Avaaz though, nice find!

    Reply
  2. Bernie Edwards

    While this is an action internal to the USA it does have the potential to affect people in all countries around the globe. I therefore welcome the fact that it appears comment may be made from any country by individuals, organisations and even government departments. I have sent a comment from Australia and encourage anyone else who has a concern about Monsanto activities to also do so. You need to provide your full name, mailing address and email address. Let’s get behind this before it is too late.

    Incidentally, if you are intending to cut and paste the sample comment, I found it to be a few characters too long, so you may need to do a little editing.

    Reply
  3. Kim

    The comment period is still open. Here is another link to the regulations.gov site where I’ve searched the keyword “Monsanto”. It lists all of their current appeals for deregulation that are still open for comment – including the drought-tolerant corn and a couple herbicide-producing and herbicide-resistant soybeans:

    http://www.regulations.gov/#!searchResults;cp=O;rpp=10;po=0;s=monsanto

    If you can, please take the time to comment on these, as well.

    I’m sorry the link didn’t work for Winston, but it worked for me. If the above link doesn’t work for you either, you can go directly to http://www.regulations.gov and search the keyword “monsanto”. Be sure to check the “open” check box under “comment period” first, so you only receive results that you can still comment on.

    Kim

    Reply
  4. Peter Greg

    Great to see more attention brought to this most serious crime against humanity and nature. When communicating to others or public servants about this topic we should keep the context relevant and accurate, in that it is not about ‘being concerned’ or being a ‘concerned consumer’ but you will be prosecuting all parties for crimes against humanity in being participants to this terrorism, or words to that effect, which is what it is. We need to expose those who are supporting these evils for what they are really doing, because when they are able to support mass death and position themselves as just being ‘uninformed’ it protects them from liability. If we werent afraid of them that is how we would speak

    Reply
  5. James T. Fisher

    The official U.S. position on genetically-modified organisms is that there is no difference between them and natural organisms. The issue goes even further to suggest that no country should be able to require mandatory GMO labeling on food items, even though science shows that GMOs act differently in the body than do natural organisms and are a threat to health.

    Reply
  6. David Petersen

    When I first heard of the idea of genetically engineering certain foods, back in the 70s, I thought it was about their claim that it would increase yield. That seemed good. I had no idea that, in their inevitable infection with the good old corporate greed-bug, they would carry it so far as to endanger not only our health, but the people who actually produce the crops and thus the economy. Then, to hide the facts by their refusal to label foods that have come from GE crops as such, and let people decide for themselves, is outrageous. Apparently, it’s getting to be time to make some truly major changes in the way this country runs and what it will and won’t let the corporate giants get away with.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

  • (will not be published)