Whole Foods Market Caves to Monsanto

Submitted by PRWatch Editors on

WholeFoodsMarketAfter 12 years of battling to stop Monsanto's genetically-engineered (GE) crops from contaminating the nation's organic farmland, the biggest retailers of "natural" and "organic" foods in the U.S., including Whole Foods Market (WFM), Organic Valley and Stonyfield Farm, have agreed to stop opposing mass commercialization of GE crops, like Monsanto's controversial Roundup Ready alfalfa.

In exchange for dropping their opposition, WFM has asked for "compensation" to be paid to organic farmers for "any losses related to the contamination of his crop." Under current laws, Genetically-Modified Organisms (GMOs) are not subject to any pre-market safety testing or labeling. WFM is abandoning its fight with biotech companies in part because two thirds of the products they sell are not certified organic anyway, but are really conventional, chemical-intensive and foods that may contain GMOs and that they market as "natural" despite this. Most consumers don't know the difference between "natural" and "certified organic" products. "Natural" products can come from crops and animals fed nutrients containing GMOs. "Certified Organic" products are GMO-free. WFM and their main distributor, United Natural Foods, maximize profits by selling products labeled "natural" at premium organic prices.  (A typographical error in the second sentence of this story was subsequently corrected.  We regret this minor error.)

Main Source: 
CounterPunch, January 28, 2011
Topics: 
Agriculture
Food Safety
Environment

Comments

Anonymous replied on

seedless grapes are created through natural selection, and can be done in the field with no special equipment. Grape plants are selected that have diminutive seeds over a few generations until a grape is produced that is so small that it isn't noticed, the plant is then propagated through grafting.

GMO foods are created in a lab with specialized equipment. Genetic material from multiple organisms are combined. For example bacteria resistant to roundup are injected into corn or beet's DNA creating corn that will not be killed by that particular pesticide. Another example is moving a gene from a bacterium into corn and cotton plants to produce their own pesticide.

Anonymous replied on

I love how are attention can go from a serious mistake caused by a huge multibillion dollar corporation to one of our fellows so quickly, this is the problem if only we were as critical to these coporations as we are to each other, we might start to see a change.

Anonymous replied on

the consumer is always taken for a ride by big corporations. Best advise is....grow your own food. R.C.

Anonymous replied on

In a Wisconsin law suit regarding right to consume unpastuerized milk, the judge ruled that humans:

“Do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;”
“Do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;”
“Do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer;”
“Do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice;” and
Cannot enter into private contracts “outside the scope of the State’s police power.”

Ruling against raw milk forces consumers to drink genetically modified, antibiotic-laden milk from cows fed an unnatural diet of pesticide-loaded feed. No doubt that makes Monsanto a major fan of Patrick Fiedler. His decision was rendered on Sept. 9 and he stepped down from the bench on Sept. 30.

He immediately went to work for one of Monsanto's law firms.

http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/%E2%80%98no-food-rights%E2%80%99-judge-quits-to-work-for-monsanto-law-firm/

Anonymous replied on

Even if you could grow your own, you would still get GMO products. Your body would still suffer years down the line with cancer or some other debilitating illness. We are fu**ed.

Denver Mike replied on

"Even if you could grow your own, you would still get GMO products. Your body would still suffer years down the line with cancer or some other debilitating illness."

Are you suggesting that because we would still get GMO products, we Will suffer years down the road, or are you suggesting that if we did Not get any GMO products, that we would Not suffer years down the road?

I would suggest that with or without GMOs, we may or may not suffer from cancer or some other debilitating illness, and that with 100% GMOs, we don't have any evidence either way! Suspicion, rumor, folklore, fearful thinking, and voodoo do not count as science.

Anonymous replied on

This really saddens me, but I am glad that the farmers are being reimbused for their losses. I was disillusioned I guess thinking that everything at Whole Foods was organic, free of pesticides, etc. I had no idea that All Natural products were not the same as Organic. This article was an eye-opener in more than one way!

AnonymousMe replied on

Unfortunately, 'losses' are hard to qualify and quantify. Many (like those that support Monsanto) do not believe GMO and associated practices cause 'harm' to other crops or individuals. And if any quantifiable 'harm' does occur, Mansanto et al will try to deny causability. This is a symbolic blow to the organic community, even if it does not immediately change products. Hopefully, losses do not occur and those that might cannot be disproved-

Anonymous replied on

so basically whole foods stopped fighting monstanto because they were two thirds full of shit anyway.

Pages