Monday Morning Bastards

Well, well—Monday morning, and time to find out what all my favorite bastards are doing.

They don’t stop, you see—which is curious, because...aren’t they reading? Aren’t they paying attention? Surely this blog should put the fear of God into at least a few people….

There’s Monsanto, for example, and what, by the way, ever became of that genetically modified wheat that somehow sprang up in a farmer’s field in May of last year? Remember that? An Oregon farmer sprayed the herbicide Roundup on his field, and some wheat plants refused to die. So he sent them off to Oregon State University—which unsurprisingly is quite interested in wheat, since the state sells 700 million bucks of it mostly to Asia—and yup, it was Monsanto’s experimental wheat. And the experiment? It had ended more than a decade before.

Japan suspended purchases of wheat; the USDA guys were scrambling to try to determine how the wheat got there. Then, in a conference call, some Monsanto spokesman came up with an ingenious idea: sabotage. One of those nutty foodies, you see, had snuck into Monsanto—presumably any soul can drift in and out of their facilities, rather like a mall—and copped the wheat. Then, he had gone into a field, planted the seed, and pointed the finger at Monsanto, to tarnish the company’s reputation! Hah! Foiled that dude!

The complete inanity of the explanation was of no importance. What’s important, as anybody in corporate America knows, is that somebody says something. Anything. Whatever….

Because they know—the public forgets. We go on. We worry about North Korea until it’s time to worry about the Crimea, and then, guess what? The North Koreans detonate a nuclear missile and then we all start worrying again.

And so I googled “GMO wheat Oregon,” and was unsurprised to learn: we still don’t know, the story went cold. I did, however, discover the name of the professor who identified the wheat—Carol Mallory-Smith, professor, Weed Science.

Weed Science?

This, I have to say, greatly improves the Monday morning experience. Who knew, for example, that there is the Weed Science Society of America, or the WSSA, which takes its weeds very seriously? And I regret to inform the readers of this blog that I completely screwed up by not informing you guys about National Invasive Species Awareness Week, which was February 23-28. (Though it does seem curious—don’t most weeks have seven days? Or do invasive species move so fast….)

Right—so I have emailed Professor Mallory-Smith, to see if there’s any more information on the Oregon wheat situation; the professor, curiously, has not immediately responded. She may be out in the field; stay tuned.

What else did I find? Well, take a look at this….

And the caption for this photo?

Michael Doane, Monsanto's wheat industry affairs director, looks at growth in a wheat field in an undisclosed location in North Dakota in this undated file photo. (Reuters / Carey Gillam)

And the date of this article? January 15, 2014.

Guys? Who the hell decided to allow Monsanto to test their new GMO wheat in—of all places—a North Dakota field? And why, by the way, did The New York Times publish an opinion piece entitled “We Need G. M. O. Wheat?”

Well, I read it, which turns out to be an op-ed written by guys seriously in bed with the “biotech industry.” One of the authors, in fact, has written a book, The Frankenfood Myth: How Protest and Politics Threaten the Biotech Revolution—does that tell you the story?

According to the authors, the soybean and corn farmers made the switch to GMO seeds in the 1990’s, and they’ve been happy as Chesapeake Bay clams ever since—enjoying increased yields, using less herbicide, making more money. But those fussy foodies won’t let the biotech industry approve GMO wheat, since 15 percent of it is exported to countries that don’t want the stuff. Oh, and the authors go on to say:

The scientific consensus is that existing genetically engineered crops are as safe as the non-genetically engineered hybrid plants that are a mainstay of our diet.

Whew—what a relief!

Or is it? Because I had been watching a documentary about Monsanto, and something stuck in my mind. So I googled “GMO food autism” and sure enough, there’s a body of research out there—done in admittedly iffy institutions like Harvard and Massachusetts General—that suggest that there may be a link between autism and GMO foods.

Why? It appears that GMO foods cause the intestines to weaken and become inflamed. Here’s what one article had to say:

One of the earliest indications that GMOs might cause GI tract distress was a 1999 study published in the Lancet. After rats were fed experimental GMO potatoes for just 10 days, the cells of the stomach lining and intestines were significantly altered.[¹²]

When California pediatrician Michelle Perro reviewed the study in 2011 and saw the photos of the increased cellular growth and abnormal architecture, she thought to herself, “Uh oh -- we’ve got some problems.” Based on her experience treating children for 30 years, she said, “You can extrapolate that the same thing may be occurring in babies clinically. They are not digesting their food. They are malabsorbing. . . . And I’m seeing that commonly now.” Digestive issues are skyrocketing among her patients. 

Does this gastric distress lead to or cause autism? Nobody knows. What’s more interesting, though, is the research on rats fed GMO. Consider this:

Dr. Irina Ermakova, PhD, a senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences, reported to the European Congress of Psychiatry in March 2006 that male rats fed GM soy exhibited anxiety and aggression, while those fed non-GMO soy did not [³]. Ermakova reported the same behavior in GM soy-fed female rats and their offspring in her study published in Ecosinform. The animals “attacked and bit each other and the worker."[⁴]

(Far more shocking, however, was that more than 50% of the offspring from the GMO-fed group died within three weeks when compared with a 10% death rate among the group fed natural soy. The GM group also had high rates of infertility and had smaller members.)

In one of his books, Michael Pollan writes of being given GMO potatoes, which he kept for a while. Then the question came up—could he make a potato salad and take it to a pot luck supper? And if so, was he morally obliged to let people know? Pollan eventually tossed the potatoes, and came to the conclusion any sane person would: even if the potatoes were safe, why take a risk?

In fact, we have all taken the risk—everyone who has eaten “normal” food for the last 20 years. And now, one in 68 kids in the US may have autism; in New Jersey, one in 28 boys has autism.

Oh, and the guys who are regulating the “biotech industry?” Unsurprisingly, they’re not even in bed with the industry, they’re in flagrante with them.

It’s a cynical as it is evil.

PS—The good professor came through!

A Change of Bastards

It’s a relief, almost, to take a break from wrestling with seriously bad bastards—that would be the National Rifle Association, and do they know, I wonder, that I’m after them?—to deal with another seriously bad bastard.

That would be a little company called Monsanto—which, by the way, my computer seems to know, it corrected me when I spelled it with an “a”--founded in 1901 and located in Creve Coeur, Missouri.

And you probably know that it’s an “agribusiness” and producing genetically modified seeds—indeed, it was one of the first companies to produce and market a genetically modified seed, a soybean that was created in 1983 and tested in the field in the late 80’s.

What you may not know—I didn’t—was that Monsanto started out as a chemical company, and it produced everything from plastics to DDT, Agent Orange, and PCBs.

At about the time that they discovered how to play with genes, they got rid of most of that part of the business. They are still making, however, an herbicide that they tout as “as safe as table salt.” (Or at least they did, until the New York Attorney General got after them. They settled out of court, agreed to drop the slogan in New York, and paid $250,000—small change for them—and denied wrongdoing.)

Roundup is by far the most commonly used herbicide, and its toxicity was for years thought to be low. Is it? As always, it depended on whom you asked—when I was gardening in a public park, I would avoid the garden for days or until a good rain after the city had used the stuff. Oh, and I was growing flowers, not food.

And there is evidence that the studies—funded by guess who!—may have been either poorly done or frankly fraudulent. But two things are known: the stuff is all over the place and farmers who refuse to use the herbicide are at a great disadvantage.

Now then, having created an herbicide of questionable toxicity, Monsanto cooked up a great scheme—create a seed that is resistant to Roundup! This way, the farmer sows the seed, waits around until the weeds appear, and then douses the hell out of his field with Roundup. So Monsanto wins twice, if not three or four times (depending on how often Farmer Jones sprays his field). 

Monsanto wins—but does the farmer? Do we, eating the farmer’s crop? One source reports that over 90% of the soy and canola harvested come from Roundup Ready (as the seeds are called) seeds. Since a lot of soy is used for livestock, nobody knows how high up the food chain Roundup really has gotten.

And Monsanto is not a company particularly easy to like. It tends to go after the people least likely to be disliked—those good farmers out there in the field. Such as the Canadian farmer, who the company charged had a Roundup Ready canola plant growing in his field.

“Hey,” said the farmer, “I don’t use that stuff. The pollen blew in from my neighbors field…”

And are you wondering—how can a company go after a farmer for having a plant in his field?

Because that’s no plant, that’s intellectual property. Yes, in 1980, the Supreme Court decided that the patent laws applied to manmade living organism. So now, 93% of soybeans are from Roundup Ready seeds. Oh, and guess what? The price of seed has tripled since then.

Nor is Monsanto content just to operate this scheme, it is today arguing before the Supreme Court that a farmer violated the law by first buying seeds from Monsanto and then buying seeds from a local grain elevator to plant a second crop. The farmer argued that he had already bought seed for the season, and that the second crop would be less productive, and less profitable. Monsanto said he had no right to buy Roundup Ready seed from anyone except the company.

Can it get worse?

Of course. If memory serves from reading Michael Pollan, Monsanto is now developing sterile seeds, which will have the farmers really locked in a corner. And what will happen if the genes causing the sterility in the seed are transferred to other seeds—not genetically modified? Oh, and what will happen—as it has happened—when the plants develop resistance to Roundup? Already, farmers are told to use multiple herbicides.

Five minutes ago, I decided I was hungry, and so I am eating a peanut butter sandwich. Since I didn’t grow the peanuts, and since the peanut butter in not organic, I am very likely eating a food made from genetically modified seed. Shouldn’t I know? Shouldn’t Skippy be required to label that?

Wanna guess my answer?

On Whimbrels and Monkeys (reposted)

(Note from the webmaster: Mr. Newhouse is on holiday, so here's an older post of his, originally published on August 27….)

Well, the news out of Puerto Rico is typically bad—at least eight murders over the weekend, cops getting thrown off the force for falsifying statistics, protests at the University of Puerto Rico in Río Piedras. 

Who needs it?

So I turned to a blog doña Taí recommended—repeatingislands.com. And discovered a bird I never knew existed—the whimbrel. Here it is.

OK, not too attractive—certainly no motmot—but boy, can it fly! Through hurricanes, in fact—two whimbrels went right through Irene last year. And apparently they use the back part of the storm as a sort of slingshot. Don’t know how that works, but that’s what the American Bird Conservancy says.

Shouldn’t they know?

The other thing is that they fly thousands of miles nonstop.

Well, that’s tremendous news—stuff we should all know about.

There is a little downside.

Several of the birds have made it through hurricanes only to be shot by hunters.

It seems that on some islands of the Caribbean, there are illegal shooting ranges. Just for fun. And there was the whimbrel and there was the guy with the gun, so…

…he shot it.

No, not as a trophy, not to protect his crop. Just for fun!

In fact, the article reports, it’s not unusual for the killers to leave the killed dead on the beach.

The point was just to kill.

This is a part of the male psyche that I don’t get. I can understand—just barely—the allure of hunting. Michael Pollan, of all people, fell prey to it, and likened it to the time-altering effects of marijuana. And it’s certainly in our collective genes.

But this isn’t hunting, it’s slaughter.

May be something more. There are people, I think, who have an indifference to beauty and to nature that verges on hate. They see something brown and white and moving and they kill it.

Why?

Just because….

Well, well—I was determined NOT to be delivering a downer this morning. What else is stirring in the Caribbean?

Monkeys in Santurce!

Well, I knew that they were running around in the mountains down south, but here? In a very much populated section of San Juan? Just look at ‘em!

It turns out that it’s not just iguanas that are overpowering our eco-system, it’s monkeys as well. (By the way, the iguana population in Puerto Rico is estimated at four million—meaning we have more iguanas than people….)

And these monkeys have an interesting pedigree. They were brought here not as pets but as lab animals in the 1970’s. Originally they were let loose on small islands off the southern coast of Puerto Rico. Just one problem…

Monkeys can swim!

Well, the researchers went away, but the monkeys stayed. And now they’re invading the metro area! It’s too much! 

May watch the Republican Convention after all….

On Whimbrels and Monkeys

Well, the news out of Puerto Rico is typically bad—at least eight murders over the weekend, cops getting thrown off the force for falsifying statistics, protests at the University of Puerto Rico in Río Piedras. 

Who needs it?

So I turned to a blog doña Taí recommended—repeatingislands.com. And discovered a bird I never knew existed—the whimbrel. Here it is.

OK, not too attractive—certainly no motmot—but boy, can it fly! Through hurricanes, in fact—two whimbrels went right through Irene last year. And apparently they use the back part of the storm as a sort of slingshot. Don’t know how that works, but that’s what the American Bird Conservancy says.

Shouldn’t they know?

The other thing is that they fly thousands of miles nonstop.

Well, that’s tremendous news—stuff we should all know about.

There is a little downside.

Several of the birds have made it through hurricanes only to be shot by hunters.

It seems that on some islands of the Caribbean, there are illegal shooting ranges. Just for fun. And there was the whimbrel and there was the guy with the gun, so…

…he shot it.

No, not as a trophy, not to protect his crop. Just for fun!

In fact, the article reports, it’s not unusual for the killers to leave the killed dead on the beach.

The point was just to kill.

This is a part of the male psyche that I don’t get. I can understand—just barely—the allure of hunting. Michael Pollan, of all people, fell prey to it, and likened it to the time-altering effects of marijuana. And it’s certainly in our collective genes.

But this isn’t hunting, it’s slaughter.

May be something more. There are people, I think, who have an indifference to beauty and to nature that verges on hate. They see something brown and white and moving and they kill it.

Why?

Just because….

Well, well—I was determined NOT to be delivering a downer this morning. What else is stirring in the Caribbean?

Monkeys in Santurce!

Well, I knew that they were running around in the mountains down south, but here? In a very much populated section of San Juan? Just look at ‘em!

 

It turns out that it’s not just iguanas that are overpowering our eco-system, it’s monkeys as well. (By the way, the iguana population in Puerto Rico is estimatedat four million—meaning we have more iguanas than people….)

And these monkeys have an interesting pedigree. They were brought here not as pets but as lab animals in the 1970’s. Originally they were let loose on small islands off the southern coast of Puerto Rico. Just one problem…

Monkeys can swim!

Well, the researchers went away, but the monkeys stayed. And now they’re invading the metro area! It’s too much! 

May watch the Republican Convention after all….