With GM crops come herbicides, which breed resistant weeds.
This has happened in about a decade for the worse mutants.
We can reverse the problem by reversing the spraying,
using plowing, cultivation, and crop rotation instead.
Mark Jeschke wrote for Pioneer Dupont,
Crop Insights: Weed Management in the Era of Glyphosate Resistance, Continue reading
Got enough Roundup and Paraquat drifting onto you? Want some 2,4-D with that? If not, you can send your comments to USDA now. Hey, what if we all plowed under the mutant pigweed instead of breeding more with poison soup!
Tom Philpott wrote for Mother Jones 18 July 2012, USDA Prepares To Greenlight Gnarliest GMO Soy Yet,
In early July, on the sleepy Friday after Independence Day, the USDA
quietly signaled its intention to greenlight a new genetically engineered soybean seed from Dow AgroSciences. The product is designed to produce soy plants that withstand 2,4-D, a highly toxic herbicide (and, famously, the less toxic component in the notorious Vietnam War-era defoliant Agent Orange).
Readers may remember that during an even-sleepier period—the week between Christmas and the New Year—the USDA made a similar move on Dow’s 2,4-D-ready corn.
If the USDA deregulates the two products—as it has telegraphed its intention to do—Dow will enjoy a massive profit opportunity. Every year, about half of all US farmland is planted in corn and soy. Currently, Dow’s rival Monsanto has a tight grip on weed management in corn-and-soy country. Upwards of 90 percent of soy and 70 percent of corn is engineered to withstand another herbicide called glyphosate through highly profitable Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seed lines. And after so many years of lashing so much land with the same herbicide, glyphosate-resistant superweeds are now vexing farmers and “alarming” weed-control experts throughout the midwest.
And that’s where Dow’s 2,4-D-ready corn and soy seeds come in. Dow’s novel products will be engineered to withstand glyphosate and 2,4-D, so farmers can douse their fields with both herbicides; the 2,4-D will kill the weeds that glyphosate no longer can. That’s the marketing pitch, anyway.
There’s more in the article.
It can also get into your well water, and then, according to EPA:
Rodale Institute has been running a side-by-side comparison of organic
and chemical agriculture since 1981.
They
report:
After an initial decline in yields during the first few years of
transition, the organic system soon rebounded to match or surpass the
conventional system. Over time, FST became a comparison between the long
term potential of the two systems.
Year after year, Rodale found:
Organic yields match conventional yields.
As Tom Philpott reported for Mother Jones 17 November 2011,
Yet Again, Organic Ag Proves Just as Productive as Chemical Ag,
And now comes evidence from the very heart of Big Ag: rural Iowa, where
Iowa State University’s Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture runs
the Long-Term Agroecological Research Experiment (LTAR), which began in
1998, which has just released its latest results.At the LTAR fields in Adair County, the (LTAR) runs four fields: one
managed with the Midwest-standard two-year corn-soy rotation featuring
the full range of agrochemicals; and the other ones organically managed
with three different crop-rotation systems. The chart below records the
yield averages of all the systems, comparing them to the average yields
achieved by actual conventional growers in Adair County:
Norman Borlaug, instigator of the “green revolution”
of no-till and pesticides, when asked in 2000
whether organic agriculture could feed the world, said:
Increase your income and your yields with traditional farming methods?
That’s what’s happening in India.
Nishika Patel blogged 11 May 2011 in The Guardian,
Organic farming – India’s future perfect?
India’s struggling farmers are starting to profit from a budding interest
in organic living. Not only are the incomes of organic farmers soaring
– by 30% to 200%, according to organic experts – but their yields
are rising as the pesticide-poisoned land is repaired through natural
farming methods.
How did this happen?
Organic farming only took off in the country about seven years
ago. Farmers are turning back to traditional farming methods for a number
of reasons.First, there’s a 10% to 20% premium
Dr. Stanley Culpepper of UGA Tifton says 52 counties have the mutant pigweed.
He says they’re looking at cover crops and deep turning.
(You may know that as plowing.)
He hastily adds that they’re looking at other herbicides.
But he wraps up by saying we have to look at other methods
than herbicides: tillage and cover crops.
He frames it as diversity and integration.
What it really means is spraying poisons eventually
breeds weeds that refuse to be poisoned.
People, of course,
are not so lucky.
This is the same Dr. Culpepper
whose extensive slides on this subject I reviewed last summer.
-jsq
The promise of Roundup:
“No tilling, just seed, spray, and harvest.”
Adriana Alvarez, who lives next door to an Argentinia GM soy field, says:
“They came from this side and sprayed the entire field.
Here he turns, spraying all the time.”
The farmer was wearing a mask.
That’s more than no-till farmers around here do.
Interesting statistic that in Argentina
soy production increased
35-fold between
1996 and 2003
while Roundup use increased
56 times.
And eventually it doesn’t work at all, because it breeds resistant weeds.
In Georgia it took only ten years to produce
mutant pigweed
that not just Roundup but not even paraquat can kill.
Many farmers are realizing that
it’s cheaper, more effective, and more profitable to plow the weed under
in the fall and plant a winter cover crop.
Even mutant weeds are not resistant to cold steel.
The documentary points out many products in German stores that
include GM soy.
In Argentina, it’s even worse, with increasing numbers of birth defects.
They interview
Prof. Andrés Carrasco about his research on amphibians:
“The hemispheres do not separate, like you can see here.
If you look closely you can see one brain.
Glyphosate can cause this kind of mechanisms, for it is an enzymatic toxin.”
Monsanto refused an interview,
responding in writing:
“Monsanto is convinced of the safety and usefullness of its products
and its contribution to efficacious agriculture.”
As Dr. Carrasco
has been known to say:
“Son hipócritas, cipayos de las corporaciones, pero tienen miedo.
Saben que no pueden tapar el sol con la mano.”“They are hypocrites, those corporate lackeys, but they are afraid.
They know they can’t cover the sun with their hand.”
The documentarians interviewed
Gilles-Eric Seralini in Caen, France.
“To human cells glyphosate is already toxic in a very low dose.
A farmer uses a much higher dose on the field.
Roundup is even more toxic than glysophate,
for that is only one of the ingredients in Roundup.”
Roundup says none of this applies to humans and Roundup is safe.
Seralini
says:
“Transgenics are toxic for human health.”
This is the same Monsanto that
made Fox rewrite 80 times about RBGH in Florida cows.
The same Monsanto that
was convicted by the French Supreme Court of lying about leaving the soil clean.
The same Monsanto that
was fined $2.5 million by the U.S. EPA for
selling genetically modified cotton seeds without labeling them as such.
Who should you believe?
A corporation repeatedly convicted of deception,
or scientists who say that GM crops
cause liver and kidney damage in animals,
according to research using Monsanto’s own data.
The Roundup-spraying farmer said:
Roundup, mas algo! mas algo!
Roundup, more and more!
It’s time to say:
Ya basta!
Enough already!
-jsq
PS: Credits to
the German TV consumer series ‘plus minus’:
Bericht
D. Flintz
M. Rauck
Kamera
J. Fenske
C. Kültür
J. Midú
Schnitt
H. Bischoff
E. Elsner
GM toxic soy in animal feed broadcast
(© WDR) by
Detlef Flintz and Mathias Rauck.
Translation and highlighting provided by TraceConsult.
Broadcast Tue, 08 Feb. 2011 | 9:50 PM.
Ronnie Cummins writes in Counterpunch,
Coexistence With Monsanto? Hell No!
Monsanto’s Roundup, the agro-toxic companion herbicide for millions of
acres of GM soybeans, corn, cotton, alfalfa, canola, and sugar beets,
is losing market share. Its overuse has spawned a new generation of
superweeds that can only be killed with super-toxic herbicides such as
2,4, D and paraquat. Moreover, patented “Roundup Ready” crops require
massive amounts of climate destabilizing nitrate fertilizer. Compounding
Monsanto’s damage to the environment and climate, rampant Roundup use
is literally killing the soil, destroying essential soil microorganisms,
degrading the living soil’s ability to capture and sequester CO2,
and spreading deadly plant diseases.
In just one year, Monsanto has moved from being Forbes’ “Company
of the Year” to the
Worst Stock of the Year. The Biotech Bully of
St. Louis has become one of the most hated corporations on Earth.
All that and
paraquat doesn’t work on mutant pigweed, either.
The whole “no-till” fable is unravelling.
The article mentions scientific studies about bad health effects
of genetically modified foods,
and goes on to warn of Monsanto maneuverings through the EPA
and the Gates Foundation.
Then he points to the European Union as leading the way:
Tom Philpott asks in Grist about
Why Monsanto is paying farmers to spray its rivals’ herbicides
…Monsanto has been forced into the unenviable position of having to
pay farmers to spray the herbicides of rival companies.If you tend large plantings of Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” soy or cotton,
genetically engineered to withstand application of the company’s Roundup
herbicide (which will kill the weeds — supposedly — but not the crops),
Monsanto will cut you a $6 check for every acre on which you apply at
least two other herbicides. One imagines farmers counting their cash as
literally millions of acres across the South and Midwest get doused with
Monsanto-subsidized poison cocktails.The move is the latest step in the abject reversal of Monsanto’s longtime
claim: that Roundup Ready technology solved the age-old problem of weeds
in an ecologically benign way.
Roundup, trade name for glysophate, doesn’t work anymore because
the weeds mutated:
Richard Harris reports on NPR, 21 Oct 2009, about
Prairie Pioneer Seeks To Reinvent The Way We Farm.
Wes Jackson wants to solve
the 10,000 year old problem of agriculture:
The problem, Jackson explains, is that agriculture in most places is based on practices that use up limited resources. The major grains, like wheat and corn, are planted afresh each year. When the fields are later plowed, they lose soil. The soil that remains in these fields loses nitrogen and carbon.
This worries Jackson because vast quantities of soil are washed out of the fields and down the rivers, and the soil that’s left is gradually losing its nutrients.
Trying to figure out how to solve this problem, Jackson realized the answer was right in front of him. It was the patch of native prairie on his own farm — full of grasses from ankle to shoulder height, peppered with white and purple flowers, and surrounded by shrubs and cottonwood trees.
“Here is a steep, sloping bank with a lot of species diversity, featuring perennials,” Jackson says. “This is what I call nature’s wisdom.”
Perennials are plants that put down strong roots 10 feet or more into the ground and hold the soil in place. Perennials live year-round, unlike annual crops that get planted every year. In Kansas, perennials survive the harsh winters and the blazing hot summers.
The solution will have to be somewhat different for each region,
