Print

1. Voters reject Sonoma ban on genetically modified crops
2..Americans split over buying cloned meat: poll

Campaigners in Sonoma County put up a great fight given the industry's shrewd strategy of getting the local farm bureau and its leading lights to front its case.
***

EXCERPT: "Regardless of the outcome, we think it's a tremendous victory because of the grassroots support in the community," said Daniel Solnit, campaign coordinator for GE-Free Sonoma County. "This fight's going to continue, and I believe this country will be GMO-free within a decade." (item 1)
***
Part of the problem seems to be the poor understanding of corporate capture in the US. If the biotech industry hides behind the farm bureau or the FDA, it seems they can get their message accepted.
***
EXCERPT: "Two-thirds of U.S. consumers said they would either buy or consider buying meat and milk made from cloned animals if the U.S. government declared cloning safe... About one-third of Americans surveyed said they would definitely buy food products from cloned offspring if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared the process safe. Another third said they would consider buying such products."
***
The FDA's record of protecting the financial interests of influential corporations should be apparent to everyone given its role in covering up for 4 years the truth about the drug Vioxx, which has been linked to thousands of deaths.

In congressional hearings, David Graham, an FDA drug safety reviewer, testified that the agency not only downplayed mounting negative data on Vioxx, but that it "seriously undervalues, disregards and disrespects drug safety" in general. He also listed a number of other potentially dangerous medications currently on the market.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1202-04.htm

This adds a whole new meaning to the comment of Monsanto's head of corporate communications, "Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job."

For more on the Farm Bureau: http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=267
---

1.Voters reject Sonoma ban on genetically modified crops
Associated Press
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/13117309.htm

SANTA ROSA, Calif. - A proposed ban on planting or cultivating genetically altered crops was rejected by Sonoma County voters Tuesday night.

With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Measure M lost 56 to 44 percent in one of the county's most expensive ballot fights ever.

Supporters and opponents of the proposed 10-year ban spent a combined $850,000. Only three counties in the nation - all in California - currently ban genetically altered crops.

Lex McCorvey, executive director of the Sonoma County Farm Bureau, which opposed the measure, said the margin of victory was a "strong show of support for local agriculture."

Opponents of the ban argued that most packaged foods in the United States have some genetically modified component, and a ban could hurt the local economy.

"To place our local farmers and ranchers at a competitive disadvantage to their peers in our state would have been devastating," McCorvey said.

Sonoma County joined Humboldt, Butte and San Luis Obispo counties, which also voted down similar biotechnology bans in November 2004.

"Regardless of the outcome, we think it's a tremendous victory because of the grassroots support in the community," said Daniel Solnit, campaign coordinator for GE-Free Sonoma County. "This fight's going to continue, and I believe this country will be GMO-free within a decade."

Mendocino County voters in March 2004 were the first in the nation to enact such a ban, overwhelmingly approving the measure despite a well-funded counter campaign from the biotechnology industry.

Voters in Marin County, a mostly suburban region just across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, followed suit later that year, enacting their own ban on genetically modified crops. The Board of Supervisors in tiny Trinity County also passed a similar ban.

Anti-biotechnology crusaders, who point to the health risks of eating genetically altered foods, have lobbied for outright bans in Hawaii and Vermont, but California remains the only state in the nation where voters have enacted such bans.

McCorvey said he hoped Tuesday's victory would "send a strong message" to other counties that similar bans should be blocked elsewhere in the state.

The bans are largely symbolic because few - if any - genetically engineered crops were grown in those counties. The same is true for Sonoma County, where the winemaking grape is king. No genetically engineered grapes are commercially available.
---

2.Voters reject Sonoma ban on genetically modified crops
Associated Press

SANTA ROSA, Calif. - A proposed ban on planting or cultivating genetically altered crops was rejected by Sonoma County voters Tuesday night.

With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Measure M lost 56 to 44 percent in one of the county's most expensive ballot fights ever.

Supporters and opponents of the proposed 10-year ban spent a combined $850,000. Only three counties in the nation - all in California - currently ban genetically altered crops.

Lex McCorvey, executive director of the Sonoma County Farm Bureau, which opposed the measure, said the margin of victory was a "strong show of support for local agriculture."

Opponents of the ban argued that most packaged foods in the United States have some genetically modified component, and a ban could hurt the local economy.

"To place our local farmers and ranchers at a competitive disadvantage to their peers in our state would have been devastating," McCorvey said.

Sonoma County joined Humboldt, Butte and San Luis Obispo counties, which also voted down similar biotechnology bans in November 2004.

"Regardless of the outcome, we think it's a tremendous victory because of the grassroots support in the community," said Daniel Solnit, campaign coordinator for GE-Free Sonoma County. "This fight's going to continue, and I believe this country will be GMO-free within a decade."

Mendocino County voters in March 2004 were the first in the nation to enact such a ban, overwhelmingly approving the measure despite a well-funded counter campaign from the biotechnology industry.

Voters in Marin County, a mostly suburban region just across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, followed suit later that year, enacting their own ban on genetically modified crops. The Board of Supervisors in tiny Trinity County also passed a similar ban.

Anti-biotechnology crusaders, who point to the health risks of eating genetically altered foods, have lobbied for outright bans in Hawaii and Vermont, but California remains the only state in the nation where voters have enacted such bans.

McCorvey said he hoped Tuesday's victory would "send a strong message" to other counties that similar bans should be blocked elsewhere in the state.

The bans are largely symbolic because few - if any - genetically engineered crops were grown in those counties. The same is true for Sonoma County, where the winemaking grape is king. No genetically engineered grapes are commercially available.
---

2.Americans split over buying cloned meat: poll
by: Christopher Doering
http://www.truthabouttrade.org/article.asp?id=4739

Washington (Reuters) - Two-thirds of U.S. consumers said they would either buy or consider buying meat and milk made from cloned animals if the U.S. government declared cloning safe, according to the results of a public opinion poll released on Friday.

The survey was funded by Viagen Inc., a Texas-based company that is working with cloned cattle, pigs and horses.

About one-third of Americans surveyed said they would definitely buy food products from cloned offspring if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared the process safe. Another third said they would consider buying such products.

The remaining consumers surveyed said they did not want to eat food or consume other products from cloned animals.

"The word cloning ... is science fiction. It seems very futuristic," said Jennifer Sosin, president of KRC Research, the firm hired by Viagen to conduct the survey of 1,000 people.

"If I had guessed before doing research on it, I would have expected that the word alone would be enough to be far more negative" to the results, she said.<br><br>Cloning animals involves taking the nuclei of cells from an existing adult animal, and fusing them into other eggs that are implanted into a surrogate mother. The technology produces a biological copy of a normal animal.

One of the most famous cloned animals, Dolly the sheep, was the first mammal cloned from an adult cell and was born in 1996. Dolly was euthanized at the age of 8 because of a degenerative lung condition. The Catholic Church has theological qualms about cloning, and President Bush has said he worries "about a world in which cloning becomes acceptable."

Advocates of livestock cloning say it will improve the quality of steaks and dairy products by propagating the animals that are disease-resistant, give lots of milk or produce lean and tender meat.

But critics, such as the Humane Society of the United States, say there are too many unanswered questions about the safety of food from cloned animals and the possibility of chronic health problems with the animals.

The FDA in October 2003 issued a draft risk assessment saying food from cloned animals and their offspring was as safe as conventional food. But an FDA panel urged more research into new technology, delaying a final decision on selling food from cloned animals.

The agency is widely expected to lift its ban sometime in the next few months.

The KRC survey found 45 percent of consumers said they knew "nothing at all" about animal biotechnology, while 26 percent said they knew "a little" and 21 percent knew "some."

Sosin said other technologies, such as the genetic modification of corn and other food crops, were initially opposed by the public. For animal cloning to be accepted, consumers need to continue to trust the regulatory process of the U.S. Agriculture Department and FDA in addition to understanding why the technology is used, she said.

"If those two things are communicated and get through you'll have plenty of consumers going, 'OK, I may not love the word 'cloning,' I may be a little squeamish about it, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it,"' said Sosin.

The telephone survey was conducted on October 21 to 23. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent.