RE: CONNECTING THE TRAGEDY IN CONN + BRAIN CHEMISTRY + THE MONSANTO PROTECTION ACT+
in the 80's, State Assemblyman John Vasconcellos, organized a committee in California that looked at Crime Prevention. I saw work by a man who showed that when certain kids ate something that caused an allergy, the brain would react. There was extreme violent behavior. I feel we need to look at what we have done to our food supply that causes so many allergic reactions. GMOs need to be out of our food supply to improve some of the violence. I send compassion to the families who are suffering now, and to our people in Congress who are further leading us down a Fiscal Cliff by allowing Biotechnology to continue to assault our food supply. We are morally and ethically bankrupt. We had better get a hold on the harm we are causing by violations to our food and the violence that is its natural outgrowth.
DELINQUENCY AND CRIME, AND NUTRITIONAL BALANCING SCIENCE
by Lawrence Wilson, MD
Pesticide exposure can induce homicidal behavior. Many pesticides affect cholinesterase activity. This enzyme affects the level of acetylcholine, a calming neurotransmitter. This can induce states of agitation and irritability. Studies show that many children by age five have reached a dangerous level of pesticide exposure.
Schools are often built today without windows for better insulation. Many have carpeting, which formerly was never used in schools. This creates a closed environment with sometimes elevated levels of carpet molds, dust, toxic cleaning products and formaldehyde in furniture and building materials. The result is called "sick building syndrome". Excellent books such as Is This Your Child's World? by Doris Rapp, MD document the harmful effects these chemicals can have on children's behavior.
GETTING EDUCATED ON THE DANGERS INHERENT IN "GENETIC ROULETTE"
ACTION NEED NOW TO PREVENT FURTHER DESTRUCTION OF OUR FOOD SUPPLY DUE TO BIOTECH VIOLENCE TO OUR SEEDS
Dear CA Representatives. Please sign on and prevent this from happening. This is so dangerous.--Leslie Goldman, Your Enchanted Gardener
I understand Congressman Peter DeFazio is circulating a "Dear Colleague" letter opposing the inclusion of language from Section 733 of the House FY2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill in any funding bill, including the "fiscal cliff" package. Please sign the DeFazio Dear Colleague to strike this dangerous and non-germane provision. Congress must protect the few safeguards we have in place for genetically engineered (GE) crops, not eliminate them to appease a handful of chemical companies.
Though wrapped in a "farmer-friendly" package, this provision is simply a biotech industry ploy to continue to sell GE seeds even when a court of law has found they were approved by USDA illegally. Congress should not be meddling with the judicial review process based solely on the special interest of the chemical and biotech industry. This provision is unnecessary and an unprecedented attack on US judicial review. Despite the number of jurisdictional concerns, it has not been the subject of any hearings in Congress.
The judicial review process is an essential element of US law and serves as a vital check on any Federal Agency decision that may negatively impact human health, the environment, or livelihoods. Yet this provision seeks an end-run around such judicial review by preemptively deciding that industry can set its own conditions to continue to sell biotech seeds, even if a court may find them to have been wrongfully approved.
The provision further forces USDA to immediately approve any permits for continued planting the industry requests, putting industry completely in charge by allowing for "back-door approval" mechanisms to counter inconvenient court decisions. USDA's duty is to protect the interests of all farmers and the environment, a duty that would be eliminated by this provision.
The provision is also completely unnecessary. No farmer has ever had his or her crops destroyed following such a court ruling. Every court to decide these issues has carefully weighed the interests of farmers, as is already required by law.
I understand a second biotech rider, which had been attached to the Farm Bill, may also be included in an omnibus funding bill. This rider would outlaw any review of GE crop impacts based on the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, or any other environmental law. And no agency other than USDA would be allowed to provide analysis. Even worse, even if negative information were allowed, this would have no effect on the approval of GMO crops.
For the sake of all American farmers, consumers, and the environment, I urge you to oppose these dangerous policy riders. Please sign the DeFazio Dear Colleague letter to strike the provision, and stand against the inclusion of any pro-GMO language in the funding bill!
A must-pass funding bill may include dangerous genetic engineering provisions. Action Alert!
The Budget Control Act of 2011 goes into affect at midnight on December 31. That is the bill already passed that raises taxes and cuts the budget. Congress does not like this scenario, so it is working on an omnibus 2013 Appropriations Bill that will address tax and spending cuts before January 1.
Even though no bill has yet been introduced, if Congress and President Obama reach agreement, the bill will be rushed through. Unfortunately, we have received word from sources on Capitol Hill that the GMO bills that previously were attached to the Agriculture Appropriations Bill and the Farm Bill could be part of this package. And because it’s a must-pass funding package, any GMO rider that is included will likely become law.
These are the same GMO riders we told you about last July. Section 733 of the Agriculture Appropriations Bill (the so-called “Farmer Assurance Provision,” though one might just as well call it the “Monsanto Protection Act”) would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale or planting of illegal, potentially hazardous GMO crops—even if a court has told them to stop—while USDA is still assessing potential hazards. The Secretary of Agriculture must, under this provision, grant any farm operator or producer upon request a temporary permit allowing GMO crops to be planted or cultivated, even if a court has called a halt to it until an Environmental Impact Statement is completed.
Monsanto wants agricultural 'czar' to have full authority over GMO approval process
In addition to this, another GMO Rider expected to sneak its way into the fiscal cliff bill would outlaw the scientific review of any and all GM crops under the guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, or any other federal or state environmental laws. Under this scandalous provision, only the U.S. Department of Agriculture would be allowed to provide any type of analysis for GMOs -- and even if the agency ultimately produced negative findings with regards to a particular GMO, such evidence would have no effect on the "Frankencrop's" approval.