the organic & non-gmo report...

T H E O R G A N I C & N O N - G M O R E P O R T • 1

4 • T H E O R G A N I C & N O N - G M O R E P O R T

THE ORGANIC & NON-GMO REPORTpublished 10 times per yearby Evergreen Publishing, Inc.ISSN: 1940-1094

©2012 Evergreen Publishing, Inc.

Staff

EDITOR/PUBLISHER: Ken RoseboroASSOCIATE EDITOR: Arianne PfoutzSALES AND MARKETING: Joe Boxerman GRAPHIC DESIGN: Carolyn BoyceOFFICE MANAGER: Will DavisPRINTING: Frontline Printing

Subscription Information$115/year—businesses$59/year—farmers, non-profit groups $39/year—email only

Advertising InformationCall 1-800-854-0586 or 1-641-209-3426Email: [email protected]

The Organic & Non-GMO Report

PO Box 436Fairfield, IA 52556 USA1-800-854-0586 • 1-641-209-3426Fax: 1-641-209-3428Email: [email protected]: www.non-gmoreport.com

Printed on recycled paper

Table of ContentsGM Food Labeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6GM food labeling advocates attacking issue from all sidesCalifornia ballot initiative moves to signature gatheringMembers of Congress urged to back GM food labelingOrganic & Sustainable Agriculture . . . . . . . . 9Organic equivalency established between EU and USMonsanto gets a red “F” in sustainable agricultureOrganic product sales increase 15-20% Organic farming improves pollination success in strawberriesNon-GMO Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Non-GMO Project Verified is fastest growing eco-labelRivara becomes first South American co. to join the Non-GMO

ProjectGMO-free labels now allowed in FranceNon-GMO Market News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Four of Canada’s premier non-GMO soybean companies merge Non-GMO soybean cooperative awarded USDA grant2012 Midwest Specialty Grains Conference & Trade Show set for

August 27-29 ProTerra Foundation Conference to focus on sustainable non-GMO soy 2012 Non-GMO and Organic Grain Production ContractsCompany News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14ORGANIC INDIA restores hope and livelihood to beleaguered

Indian farmersLegal Battles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Judge dismisses organic farmers’ lawsuit against Monsanto

Research News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Scientist says flawed science of GMOs jeopardizing future generationsGMO News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Consumer groups petition FDA to ban GE salmon as an unsafe food additiveGroup counters Gates Foundation’s emphasis on GMOs to “feed the world” NGOs blast findings of GM crop reportGM corn farmers violate planting regulationsMonsanto Roundup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Monsanto votes down shareholder proposal to study GMO impacts“Occupy” groups stage global protests against Monsanto Monsanto found guilty of chemical poisoning in FranceMonsanto’s GMO plans reopen Agent Orange wounds in VietnamInternational News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Organic production 30 times greater than GMOs in EuropeMonsanto pulls GM corn sales from FranceGreenpeace campaign leads China to stop development of GM riceWill Japan go for GM papaya?Company News/Announcements . . . . . . . . 23100% natural, solvent-free sunflower lecithin availableNature’s Path announces grants for organic gardensNurture, Inc. Introduces HAPPYNATURALS Baby FoodSK Food offers precooked bean, pea and lentil powders and flakes

Editor’s NoteGM food labeling heroespresent and pastLabeling of genetically modified foods isa hot topic. In my 12-plus years coveringthe GMO debate, I’ve never seen somuch grassroots action around labeling.

This is the subject of our lead article,which also focuses on heroic state law-

makers who are introducing labeling bills and taking on big moneyagribusiness interests to fight for the right to know whether foods areGM or not. State representatives like Maralyn Chase and Cary Con-dotta of Washington State, Richard Roy and Diana Urban of Con-necticut, Kate Webb of Vermont, and others are championing theright to know in their states and deserve great credit for their efforts.

Speaking of heroic actions, kudos to GM food labeling advocateAdam Eidinger for going to Monsanto shareholders’ annual meetingin January and speaking for a resolution from Harrington Investmentsthat would require the company to examine the risks of their GMcrops. Eidinger asked Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant very pointedquestions about the negative impacts of Monsanto’s GMOs andwhether the company would fight the California ballot initiative forlabeling.

In response, Grant said that Monsanto complies with and supportsUS laws regarding labeling. He also said, “There is an increasing cate-gory of GMO-free (labeled products) as well,” indicating that Mon-santo is keeping its eye on the growth of the non-GMO market. Afterthe meeting Eidinger spoke directly to Grant and other members ofMonsanto’s executive team and he said overall the interaction was cor-dial. Eidinger’s presentation was very well-done and professional.

The Just Label It initiative continues to gather more signatures toits petition to the FDA to require labeling of GM foods. By mid-Feb-ruary more than 750,000 people had submitted comments supportingthe petition.

This initiative reminds me of a similar campaign organized byLaura Ticciati of Mothers for Natural Law in 1999, which also peti-tioned the FDA for labeling. They submitted some 750,000 signa-tures. That initiative didn’t change FDA’s policy, which makes mewonder if Just Label It will either. But perhaps combined with all theother initiatives, there will be a breakthrough.

The best chance for a breakthrough may be California’s ballot ini-tiative, which was started by another hero, Pamm Larry.

In the coming months, we will be covering that closely.

Ken Roseboro



GM food labeling advocatesattacking issue from all sidesInitiatives include CA ballot measure, FDA petition,federal and state bills, congressional lobbying

B Y K E N R O S E B O R O

Since the introduction of genetically modi-fied foods in the United States in the mid-1990s, there have been many initiatives to

label GM foods at both the federal and statelevels, but there have never been as many ini-tiatives going on at once as there are now.Since last fall there has been a Right2KnowMarch from New York City to Washington,DC, an online petition to the Food and DrugAdministration calling for GM food labelingthat has generated more than 750,000 com-ments and counting, a ballot initiative in Cali-fornia to put a labeling law on the ballot forthis year’s election, federal labeling legislationintroduced by Congressman Dennis Kucinich,and most recently a “Dear Colleague” lettercirculating in Congress to encourage represen-tatives to support labeling.

Bills introduced in 20statesMeanwhile, lawmakers in 20states have introduced bills tolabel GM foods in the pastyear, an unprecedented level oflegislative activity on labeling.According to the Truth inLabeling Coalition, bills havebeen introduced in 20 states,including Illinois, Alaska, Cali-fornia, North Carolina, Iowa,Maryland, New York, Oregon,Washington, Rhode Island,West Virginia, Vermont, Ten-nessee, Hawaii, Connecticut,Massachusetts, Missouri, NewJersey, Michigan, and NewHampshire.

To date, none of the billshave passed, due to lobbying

from agribusiness interestswith their moneyed influenceon state and federal lawmakers.

Alaska has been the onlystate to pass a GM food label-ing law and this applies to GMfish only.

Bipartisan support forWashington labelingbillsIn Washington State, two label-ing bills were introduced intothe legislature in January. Thebills were bipartisan with thehouse bill (HB 2637) introducedby Republican Rep. Cary Con-dotta, and the senate bill (SB6298) introduced by Democrat-ic Sen. Maralyn Chase.

Chase argued that the label-

ing bill is critical to protectWashington’s wheat exports toGMO-sensitive markets suchas Japan. “If genetically modi-fied wheat is approved in theUnited States without a label-ing system, the effect on ourstate’s economy and farmerswould be devastating,” she says.

Neither bill passed theHouse and Senate AgriculturalCommittees. But Trudy Bialic,director of public affairs atPCC Markets, said bill sup-porters only had six days toorganize.

However, Bialic was encour-aged because the bills receivedstrong public support. “Theamount of public support withemails, calls, and people show-ing up at the legislature wasalmost as big as the turnout for(Washington’s) gay marriagebill,” she says.

Chase says there is goodbipartisan support for labelingfrom both wheat farmers ineastern Washington and sus-tainable food consumers inwestern Washington. “It repre-sents an unusual confluence ofagreement across the custom-ary divide,” she says.

Supporters plan to re-intro-duce the bills in the fall, whichwill allow more time for organ-izing and talking to legislators.

“They should be pro-moting their products,not hiding them”In Connecticut, Rep. RichardRoy has introduced a labelingbill in the state’s GeneralAssembly.

Roy, who is chairman of theenvironment committee, intro-duced the bill because ofincreasing dissatisfaction withthe industrial food system.“The industry is runningroughshod over our food, and Ifeel something should be done.If we have labeling, people willhave a choice,” he says.

Roy believes the lack oflabeling means the biotechindustry is hiding somethingfrom consumers. “If GMOs arethat good, they should be pro-moting their products, not hid-ing them.”

Roy believes his bill will passthe environment committeeand go to the floor of the Con-necticut Assembly for a vote.

Another Connecticut

GM FOOD LABELING


CONTINUED ON PAGE 8 �

assembly member, Rep. DianaUrban, also supports the label-ing bill.

Urban, who is also an econ-omist, argues that labelingmakes sense from an economicstandpoint. “Markets work bestwhen consumers have as muchinformation as possible. Theyare better able to choose andthat drives the market. Whenyou buy a car or washingmachine you want as muchinformation as possible, whynot with food?” she asks.

Urban is also concernedabout the safety of GM foods.“God knows what we aredoing. I shiver at the way scien-tists are manipulating DNA,”she says.

Urban had previously twiceintroduced GM food labelingbills in Connecticut. Ironically,Roy voted against her bills.Now he is on her side.

VermontIn Vermont, Rep. Kate Webb ofShelburne introduced H.722,the Vermont Right to KnowGenetically Engineered FoodAct on February 1. The bill hasbeen referred to the HouseCommittee on Agriculturewhere testimony was anticipatedto occur in February.

Webb says the bill hasstrong support. “In addition tomany of my colleagues, the billis also supported by the Ver-mont Right to Know GMOs

coalition that is made up of abroad range of farmers, con-sumer protection, agriculture,and public health organiza-tions.

“Based on the overwhelm-ingly positive response I havereceived to the bill I think thatVermonters want to see itpassed this session. I do expectthat we will see some signifi-cant pressure from largebiotech food producers as wecontinue in the process.”

Webb isn’t surprised by thenationwide grassroots action onGM food labeling. “We contin-ue to see more reports of theenvironmental impacts andpossible health effects (ofGMOs),” Webb says. “In theface of this Vermonters, andconsumers around the country,are simply asking for the rightto know—we want to make aninformed choice for ourselvesand our children.” �

California bal-lot initiativemoves to sig-nature gather-ing

The California GM foodlabeling ballot initiative isunderway with volunteersstarting to gather the

550,000 signatures needed toput the measure on the ballotfor this year’s election.

According to initiativeleader Maurizio Garzio, thegoal is to collect more than800,000 signatures by April 18to ensure enough valid signa-tures are collected.

Garzio is confident hisgroup will be able to collect therequired number of signaturesto put the initiative on the bal-lot.

The California Right toKnow Genetically EngineeredFood Act would require foodsold in grocery stores to be

“If GMOs are that

good, they should

be promoting

their products,

not hiding them.”


labeled if it contained geneti-cally altered products.

The initiative has receivedfinancial support from Dr.Bronner’s Magic Soap, Nature’sPath Foods, and Dr. Mercola.

If the measure is put on theballot, supporters of GM cropsincluding farm groups andbiotechnology companies arelikely to spend millions of dol-lars to defeat it.

In 2002, a similar GM foodlabeling ballot initiative wasdefeated in Oregon after majorfood manufacturers andbiotechnology companies, suchas General Mills, KelloggCompany, Monsanto andDuPont, spent more than $5million in advertising, claimingthat a labeling law wouldincrease food costs.

David Bronner, president of

Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soap, saidthat polling has showed that75% of Californians supportGM food labeling and thateven after being presented witharguments against labelingsuch as increasing food costs,67% continued to stronglysupport it. �

Members ofCongressurged to backGM food label-ing

In response to the legal peti-tion filed on October 4thwith the US Food and DrugAdministration demanding

that the agency require thelabeling of genetically engi-neered foods, Senator Barbara

Boxer (CA) and RepresentativePeter DeFazio (OR) haveauthored a bicameral Congres-sional letter in support of thepetition urging their fellowMembers on Capitol Hill tosign onto their letter.

As of mid-February Sena-tors Mark Begich (AK), JonTester (MT), and Ron Wyden(OR) had signed along withHouse of RepresentativesRichard Hanna (NY), ChelliePingree (ME), DennisKucinich (OH), James McGov-ern (MA), Jim Moran (VA),Pete Stark (CA), Sam Farr(CA), George Miller (CA), andJared Polis (CA).

The letter calls the US Foodand Drug Administration’s pol-icy to not label GE foods“decades old,” and points toconsumer polls showing that

overwhelming majorities ofAmericans believe GE foodsshould be labeled.

The letter states, “TheFDA should protect con-sumer rights and prevent con-sumer deception by requiringthe labeling of GE foods. Bygiving American consumersinformation fundamental totheir choices in the market-place, we protect and pro-mote the integrity and healthof our economy.”

The Truth in Labeling coali-tion is asking Americans to con-tact their congressional repre-sentatives and urge them to signthe Boxer-DeFazio Dear Col-league Letter and protect ourfreedom of choice.

To send a letter to yourrepresentatives, visithttp://gefoodlabels.org/. �

GM FOOD LABELING • F R O M P A G E 7


Organic equivalency establishedbetween EU and USThe world’s two largest markets for organic foodexpand organic market access

At a press event at the BioFach World OrganicTrade Fair in February, European Commis-sioner Dacian Ciolos for the European

Union’s (EU) Agriculture and Rural Develop-ment, and Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merriganof the US Department of Agricultureannounced the signing of an organic equivalencearrangement between the world’s two largestmarkets for organic food. Under the proposedarrangement, the EU and United States willwork together to promote strong organic pro-grams, protect organic standards, enhance coop-eration, and facilitate trade in organic products.

Officials noted the EU - USorganic equivalence coopera-tion arrangement will expandmarket access for organic pro-

ducers and companies byreducing duplicative require-ments and certification costs onboth sides of the ocean while


Taking part at the organic equivalence signingwere (from left) European Commissioner DacianCiolos, US Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Kath-leen Merrigan, and Ambassador Islam Siddiqui ofthe US Trade Representative’s Office.

ORGANIC & SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

continuing to protect organicintegrity.

“This monumental agree-ment will further create jobs inthe already growing and healthyUS organic sector, spark addi-tional market growth, and bemutually beneficial to farmersboth in the United States andEuropean Union as well as toconsumers who choose organicproducts,” said Christine Bush-way, Executive Director andCEO of the US-based OrganicTrade Association (OTA). Sheadded, “Equivalence with theEU will be an historic gamechanger.”

As a result, certified organicproducts as of June 1 can movefreely between the UnitedStates and EU borders providedthey meet the terms of the newarrangement.

Additionally, both programshave agreed to exchange infor-mation on animal welfare issues,and on methods to avoid con-tamination of organic productsfrom genetically modifiedorganisms. �

Monsantogets a red “F”in sustainableagriculture

The Union of ConcernedScientists (UCS) recentlypublished a new web fea-ture documenting how

agribusiness giant Monsanto isfailing to deliver on its prom-ise to make the US agriculturesystem more sustainable.

“Monsanto talks about‘producing more, conservingmore, improving lives,’ but itsproducts are largely not livingup to those aspirations,” saidDoug Gurian-Sherman, a sen-ior scientist with UCS’s Foodand Environment Program.“In reality, the company isproducing more engineeredseeds and herbicide andimproving its bottom line, butat the expense of conservationand long-term sustainability.”

UCS explores eight waysthat Monsanto has failed todeliver on its sustainabilityclaims. The company isundermining efforts to pro-mote sustainability by:1. Fostering weed and insect

resistance. Monsanto’sRoundup Ready and Bttechnologies lead to resist-ant weeds and insects thatcan make farming more dif-ficult and reduce sustainabil-ity.

2. Increasing herbicide use.Roundup resistance has ledfarmers to use more herbi-cides, which threatens biodi-versity, sustainability andhuman health.

3. Spreading gene contamina-tion. Engineered genes havea bad habit of turning up in

1 0 • T H E O R G A N I C & N O N - G M O R E P O R T

non-genetically engineeredcrops. When that happens,sustainable farmers—andtheir customers—pay a highprice.

4. Expanding monocultures.Monsanto’s focus on a fewcommodity crops con-tributes to reduced biodiver-sity and, as a consequence,to more pesticide use andfertilizer pollution.

5. Marginalizing alternatives.Monsanto’s single-mindedfocus on genetic engineeringfixes may come at theexpense of cheaper, moreeffective solutions, such asclassical crop breeding andecological farming methods.

6. Lobbying and advertising:Monsanto spends more thanother agribusiness compa-nies to persuade Congressand the general public tosupport the industrial agri-culture status quo.

7. Suppressing research. Mon-santo thwarts independentresearch on its products,making it more difficult forfarmers and policymakers tomake informed decisionsthat could foster more sus-tainable agriculture.

8. Falling short on feeding theworld. Monsanto’s geneti-cally engineered crops havedone little to increase cropyields. Regardless, the com-pany stands in the way ofproven, scientifically defen-sible solutions. �

Organic prod-uct salesincrease 15-20%

For the first time in fouryears, TABS Group Inc.,found a significantincrease in the number of

American consumers report-ing that they purchasedorganic products and a jumpin overall sales. Specifically,

the percentage of all con-sumers stating they purchasedorganics rose from 39.8 per-cent in January 2011 to 41.8percent in January 2012, a 5percent increase.

Total sales of organic prod-ucts rose an estimated 15 to20%. This robust growth insales is due in part to con-sumers deciding to expand theportfolio of organic productsthey purchase. The surveyfound an 11% increase in thenumber of product types pur-chased by a typical organicshopper.

Sales of organic beefincreased by 48% last year,followed by ice cream —which saw a 44% jump —then hair care products at28%, vegetables with 26%,milk at 25%, eggs with 21%and at 17% for chicken. �

Organic farm-ing improvespollinationsuccess instrawberries

Anewly published study hasfound that pollinationsuccess on organic straw-berries was higher than on

conventional strawberries. The study published in

PLoS ONE suggests that con-version to organic farming mayrapidly increase pollinationsuccess and hence benefit theecosystem service of crop polli-nation regarding both yieldquantity and quality.

Pollination of insect polli-nated crops has been found tobe correlated to pollinatorabundance and diversity.

Organic farming has thepotential to mitigate negativeeffects of agricultural intensifi-cation on biodiversity, and, asthis study showed, it also bene-fits crop pollination. (SOURCE: PLOS ONE) �

ORGANIC & SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE • F R O M P A G E 9

The $1billion figure is fromSPINS, a market research andconsulting firm for the naturalproducts industry. However, thefigure does not include foodssold at Whole Foods Markets orWalmart and is likely to under-estimate the total sales figure bya wide margin, especially consid-ering that Whole Foods’ 365private label range, which con-tains nearly 250 products, isNon-GMO verified.

“Consumers are more awareof which food products mostoften contain GMOs, and themovement to label those prod-ucts as such, whether voluntarilyor mandated by the FDA withan official seal, is picking upmomentum,” SPINS said in itsrecent 2012 Trendwatch report. (SOURCE: Food Navigator,USA) �

Rivarabecomes firstSouth Ameri-can co. to joinNon-GMOProject

Rivara S.A., an Argentineproducer of processed corn,sunflower, and soy prod-ucts, recently announced

they are enrolling their productsin the Non-GMO Project’s veri-fication program.

Rivara’s products goingthrough Non-GMO Projectverification include corn grits,corn hominy feed flour, sun-flower high oleic oil, sunflowermeal, soybean oil, and soy flour.

Rivara is the first SouthAmerican companies to partici-pate in the Non-GMO Project.

For more information aboutRivara, visit www.rivara.com.ar. �

GMO-freelabels nowallowed inFrance

Beginning July 1, Frenchfood companies can chooseto label their products freeof genetically modified

ingredients, according to a gov-ernment decree signed in January.

Trace amounts of less than0.1% are allowed for plant-based items including flour andstarch; animal-based ingredients(meat, eggs, etc.) are allowed tobe labeled GMO-free if the live-stock feed contains GM tracesbelow either 0.1% or 0.9%.

The French ministries saythe new “GMO-free” label willenable food companies to high-light their products as unique,while allowing consumers awider choice.(SOURCE: Bloomberg, USA) �

T H E O R G A N I C & N O N - G M O R E P O R T • 1 1

NON-GMO INITIATIVES

Non-GMO Project Verified isfastest growing eco-label

Non-GMO Project Verified is the fastestgrowing food eco-label in North America,as sales of certified products hit $1 billion in

2011, according to findings reported at Organ-ic Monitor’s Sustainable Foods Summit in SanFrancisco in January.

“We’ve built our business byunderstanding the needs of ourgrowers and our export cus-tomers,” says David Hendrick,president, Sevita International.“In 2005, we established a non-GMO breeding program toenable us to deliver the qualitygenetics our export customersare looking for along with theyield and performance that ourgrowers demand. With themerger, we can now deliverbenefits from the breeding pro-gram directly to our growersand to our end use customers.”

Sevita International willfocus on being market driven inthe development of superiornon-GMO food-grade soy-beans to strengthen their lead-ership position in identifyingand serving growing exportmarket opportunities for Cana-dian soybean producers. �

ProTerra Foun-dation Confer-ence to focuson sustainablenon-GMO soy

Sustainability has becomethe buzzword of the soyindustry. But what does“sustainability” mean? And

can the industry improve itssustainability performance inways that bring benefits ratherthan just extra costs? What arethose benefits? And what arethe tools for achieving them?

The ProTerra FoundationConference 2012 - SustainableNon-GMO Soy - is the leadingglobal event addressing thesequestions and more. The con-ference will be held at the Nat-ural History Museum in Lon-don, United Kingdom.

The aim of the event is toadvance sustainability in the soysupply chain by enabling dia-logue among leaders from gov-ernment, finance, academia,and industry.

The conference will deliverinformative presentations, anexhibition, and panel discus-sions that engage all conferenceparticipants, while providingabundant networking opportu-nities.

Topics that will be coveredwill include current sustainabili-ty strategies for soy, non-GMO-issues ranging from thefarmer’s field to the consumermarket, soy, sustainability andnon-GMO in the food retailmarketplace, and more

For more information and toregister email [email protected]. �

Non-GMO soy-bean coopera-tive awardedUSDA grant

USDA Rural DevelopmentState Director JasperSchneider recentlyannounced that Dakota

Pride Cooperative was selectedto receive business develop-ment assistance through theValue Added Producer Grant(VAPG) program.

Dakota Pride Cooperativein Jamestown, N.D. received a$49,000 grant to expand theirmarket reach into South Koreaby marketing identity-pre-served, non-genetically modi-fied soybeans. Since 1998,Dakota Pride has been creatingmarketing opportunities for itsmembers by adding value to


Four of Canada’s premier non-GMO soybean companiesmerge PRO Seeds Marketing Inc., Agworks Inc., HendrickSeeds Inc. and Hendrick AgriFoods merge to formSevita International Corporation

In a move to bring the full Identity Pre-served soybean value chain together, PROSeeds Marketing, Hendrick Seeds, Hen-

drick AgriFoods and Agworks announcedtoday that the companies have merged. Thebirth of Sevita International brings togeth-er the development of premium soybeangenetics, seed varieties and export brands todeliver the benefits of a fully integratedvalue chain to farmers and end users alike.The company will now operate as SevitaInternational with their domestic seed mar-keting arm continuing under the PROSeeds brand.

NON-GMO MARKET NEWS

Sevita International’s executives: Bob Hart, vicepresident, and David Hendrick, president

their crops through an identitypreserved marketing system.The cooperative has grownfrom strictly focusing ondomestic markets to capitaliz-ing on opportunities overseaswhere there is a high interest inknowing where products havebeen produced. �

2012 MidwestSpecialtyGrains Confer-ence & TradeShow set forAugust 27-29

The Midwest Shippers Asso-ciation’s 9th annual 2012Midwest Specialty GrainsConference and Trade

Show/Export Shipping Confer-ence will be held August 27-29,2012 in Minneapolis, MN.

A high-powered program is

under development that will fea-ture experts on the latest globalmarket and industry trends andtechnology to meet world con-sumer demand for safe, highquality food. MSA’s Trade Showwill be the center of activitiesthroughout the event. It will fea-ture leading industry suppliers inproduction, processing, shippingand handling of premium grainsand oilseeds – all geared for pro-viding superior service to foodmanufacturers worldwide.

“We have an excellent venuethis year for our trade show andoverall event. The MinneapolisHilton Hotel is one of the bestconference facilities in the TwinCities,” said MSA ExecutiveDirector Bruce Abbe.

For more information visitwww.grainconference.org oremail [email protected] andrequest to be put on the mailinglist. �

2012 Non-GMO andOrganic GrainProductionContracts

The following companies areoffering contracts to farm-ers for production oforganic and non-GMO

grains in 2012.

Hendrick AgriFoods Inc.Inkerman, OntarioCanada• Phone: 613-989-3000• Email: JanetM@hendricka-

grifoods.com• Contact: Janet Mackey• Contracts offered: Identity

Preserved, non-GMO soy-beans, and JAS/NOP certi-fied organic soybeans

• Premiums are offered for allcontracted soybeans. Pleasecall for current premiuminformation.

SB&B Foods, Inc.Casselton, ND• Phone: 701-347-4900• Email: [email protected]• Contact: Robert Sinner• Contracts offered: Non-

GMO soybeans, organic soy-beans �

T H E O R G A N I C & N O N - G M O R E P O R T •

1 3

The recommended herbwas Tulsi, or holy basil, knownin India as “Queen of Herbs”and revered as a sacred plantfor over 5,000 years. In 1997,Mitra, then president of theIndo Israel Trading Corpora-tion, sought small farmers togrow organic Tulsi in UttarPradesh and Madhya Pradesh,where the land was relativelypure. Many were reluctant,

seeing no market for thehousehold plant and jaded byfailed promises of other com-panies—but finally one farmeragreed. Now the company,which became ORGANICINDIA in 2006, employs 900contract farmers working11,500 acres of certified organ-ic land. With offices in Indiaand Boulder, CO, ORGANICINDIA exports 18 flavors of

organic Tulsi tea as well asherbal supplements and spicesto nearly 30 countries aroundthe globe. The company alsoproduces grains, organic psylli-um, and cane syrups fortifiedwith healing herbs.

With a dozen employees inthe US and several hundred inIndia, the company aims toserve as a “vehicle of conscious-ness” in the global market by

embracing a sustainable busi-ness model, a commitment toservice, integrity, and quality,and respect for all beings andfor Mother Nature. In a verytangible sense, ORGANICINDIA is changing the agricul-tural, social, and financial cli-mate for small, marginal farm-ers desperately in need of help.

Organic RevolutionOrganic farming was central tothe founders’ vision. “Theysaw how conventional agri-culture, along with biotech-nology, has destroyed theland, the economy and thespirits of the farmers,” saidMichele Sondheimer, generalmanager of ORGANICINDIA USA. “The numberof farmer suicides is huge. Sotheir mission became arestoration of healthy soil tonurture the farmers, so theycan grow products promot-ing health for consumersworldwide.”

“I knew this could be thebeginning of a revolution,”said Mitra in an interviewwith Organic Processing Mag-azine.

Beginning with the high-est quality organic seed, agri-cultural experts teach croprotation, sustainable harvest-ing, bio-dynamics, and har-vesting and dehydrationmethods that protect thepurity and potency of theherbs.

ORGANIC INDIA hashelped transition 130,000acres to organic (in additionto its own production land),and certified over 592,000acres of forest as organic,employing native tribes toharvest wild herbs used in itsproduct lines.

It has joined with theUttar Pradesh forest depart-ment to plant 1,000,000Tulsi saplings around the TajMahal to minimize the


ORGANIC INDIA restores hope and livelihood tobeleaguered Indian farmersCultivating organic Tulsi plants provides much more than a warm cup of tea

B Y A R I A N N E P F O U T Z

When Israeli Yoav Lev (Bharat Mitra) and Holly (Bhavani) Levcame to India in the 1990s in search of enlightenment, herbal teawasn’t foremost in their minds. But at the suggestion of their

teacher Sri H.W.L. Poonja, known as Papaji, they began developingorganic formulations to improve the health of the many followersflocking to Lucknow.

Indian girl plucking tulsi leaves for ORGANIC INDIA’s herbal teas

COMPANY NEWS

effects of environmental pol-lution. CEO Krishan Guptaalso announced a joint ven-ture with Andhra Pradeshfarmers to transition 600,000acres of mangos to organic.

ORGANIC INDIA prod-ucts have certifications fromSQF, HACCP, GMP, ISO9001:2008, and USDA, EU,and India’s National Pro-gramme for Organic Produc-tion organic certifiers.

Medicinal Herbs findglobal audienceDr. Narendra Singh, a pio-neering researcher of medici-nal herbal preparations forfour decades, has givenexclusive rights to his formu-lations to ORGANICINDIA. Dr. Singh specializesin anti-stress properties andtherapeutic applications ofclassical Ayurvedic herbs.Interestingly, the first farmerwho agreed to grow organicTulsi was from Azamgahr,Dr. Singh’s home village.

Tulsi is believed to sup-port longevity, reduce stressand inflammation, enhanceimmunity, and improvedigestions and metabolism.

Organic, non-GMO sta-tus: Core of the Mis-sion“Our organic umbrella pro-tects us from GMOs,” saidMichele. “Our productsdon’t have GMO alternativesyet…but we are nonethelessabsolutely against GMOs,valuing the health of peopleand the land.”

The company has beenvery active in GMO labelingefforts, including sponsor-ship of the Sustainable Liv-ing Roadshow (SLR) thisyear. SLR participated in theRight2Know March fromNew York to Washington,passing out ORGANICINDIA tea bags along the

way. ORGANIC INDIA alsoparticipated in the Just Say Noto GMOs rally in Denver;national sales manager HeatherHenning acted as emcee.

“Supporting the non-GMOmovement is at the top of ourlist,” said Michele. “Awarenessof the devastating effect GMOcrops have had on Indian farm-ers is behind everything wedo.”

The Tulsi teas are sold inover 10,000 outlets includingnatural food stores, crossovergroceries such as Wegmans,and through online marketers.ORGANIC INDIA also oper-ates 10 exclusive retail outletsin India.

The financial goal is tomake ORGANIC INDIA a Rs.200 crore (about $40 millionUSD) company in three years,Krishan said.

The effect on India of thiscommercial success? In the vil-

lage communities growing itsorganic products in rural India,asthma rates have droppedfrom 70% to less than 5%,miscarriages are at an all-timelow, and livestock mortality isdown as pesticide use has dis-appeared. Premiums have paid


for children to go to school.Biodiversity is alive again.Women are receiving the samepay as men and are given freeeducation and training. TheORGANIC INDIA Founda-tion opened its first free healthcare clinic in Azamgahr, wheretwo full-time doctors treat

patients with both Western andtraditional medicines. Andmost important, farming hasbecome a respected professiononce again.

“Farmers have dignity inbeing farmers again,” Mitrasaid. “They’re no longer slavesof the chemical industry.” �

ORGANIC INDIA'aherbal supplementscontain certifiedorganic herbs


US District Court JudgeNaomi Buchwald, for theSouthern District of NewYork, threw out the casebrought by the Organic Seed

Growers and Trade Associa-tion (OSGATA) and dozens ofother plaintiff growers andorganizations, criticizing thegroups for a “transparent

effort to create a controversywhere none exists.”

In her ruling, Buchwaldsaid Monsanto had not sued oreven suggested taking any

Protest against Monsanto outside New York City courtroom

LEGAL BATTLES

Photo by Food Republic

action against the plaintiffs.She found the plaintiffs claimsto be unsubstantiated, “giventhat not one single plaintiffclaims to have been so threat-ened.”

The plaintiffs filed the law-suit last spring seeking legalprotection from being sued byMonsanto if their crops arecontaminated by the biotechgiant’s patented geneticallymodified genes. They werenot seeking any monetarycompensation.

Last July, Monsanto filed amotion to dismiss the case,arguing that it would not sue afarmer if its patented GMOsare found in his field “as aresult of inadvertent means.”

On January 31 Judge Buch-wald heard oral argumentsagainst the motion from theplaintiffs who were represent-ed by Daniel Ravicher, anattorney with the PublicPatent Foundation.

Jim Gerritsen, OSGATApresident, said his group wasdisappointed by the judge’sruling. “We think the judgeerred in her ruling,” he toldReuters. “The reason we filedthis lawsuit is because familyfarmers are at risk. That riskhas not gone away.”

Gerritsen and Ravicherboth have indicated that theplaintiffs would appeal.(SOURCE: Reuters) �

Judge dismisses organic farmers’ lawsuit against Monsanto

Afederal judge recently dismissed a lawsuit filed by groups represent-ing organic farmers and seed companies against Monsanto.


Scientist says flawed science ofGMOs jeopardizing futuregenerations B Y K E N R O S E B O R O

Don Huber, emeritus professor of plantpathologiy at Purdue University, gave a two-and-a-half hour indictment of glyphosate herbicideand genetically modified crops at the Acres USAconference in December.

Dr. Huber detailed the negative impacts ofglyphosate and GM crops on plants,soils, and the environment and animal

and human health. He called glyphosate the“most abused chemical in the history ofagriculture” and described GM crops as a“failed system.”

Glyphosate’s negativeimpacts on plantsHuber first detailed the negativeimpacts of glyphosate oncrops, soils, and the environ-ment based on papers that heand other scientists, such asRobert Kremer, a microbiol-ogist with the USDA’s Agri-cultural Research Service,have published.

Huber said glyphosatemakes plants more suscepti-ble to diseases, increases thevirulence of soil-borne dis-ease organisms, and immobi-lizes plant nutrients such asmanganese. It is also toxic tobeneficial soil organisms andaccumulates in the soil.

There are more than 40plant diseases reported withuse of glyphosate, includingmany fungal diseases such asfusarium.

“There has been a 500%increase in fusarium andhuge increases in suddendeath syndrome (SDS) insoybeans,” Huber said.

He showed slides ofRoundup Ready GM soybeanfields in Iowa and Illinoisaffected by SDS. The plantswere brown while adjacentfields of non-GMO soybeanplants not treated withglyphosate were healthy andgreen.

Huber referred to a pub-lished paper showing signifi-cant reductions of mineralsin RR soybeans treated withglyphosate: 26% less calci-um, 13% less magnesium,49% less iron, and 45% lessmanganese.

Another slide demonstrat-ed how, contrary to claims,glyphosate doesn’t degrade inthe soil: plants growing in afield that had been treatedwith glyphosate for 10 yearswere stunted and yellowwhile plants growing in afield treated with glyphosatefor a year were taller andgreen.

Other problems Huberhighlighted included “bub-

Don Huber, Ph.D., emeritus professor of plantpathology, Purdue University

RESEARCH NEWS

ble” kernels on corn cobsthat received a late applica-tion of glyphosate, damage to

winter wheat from residualglyphosate in the soil, poorer



Consumer groups petition FDA toban GE salmon as an unsafe foodadditive

In February consumer groups Food &Water Watch, Consumers Union, and theCenter for Food Safety submitted a formal

petition asking the Food and Drug Adminis-tration (FDA) to classify and evaluateAquaBounty’s “AquAdvantage” geneticallyengineered salmon and all of its componentsas a food additive. The groups’ legal petitioncontends that the current agency reviewprocess that treats GE salmon only as a newanimal drug is insufficient to protect publichealth, and that the agency is required by lawto review the GE salmon under what shouldbe a more rigorous process for any novel sub-stance added to food.

RESEARCH NEWS • F R O M P A G E 1 7

GMO NEWS

growth of russet potatoesresulting from soils treatedwith glyphosate, and reducedyields in Roundup Ready corn.

Negative impacts onanimals Huber then detailed a litanyof feed and food concernsabout the effects ofglyphosate on animals andhuman health.

He referred to a 2002statement from the US Cat-tlemen’s Association to theUS Congress describing“devastating problems withpregnant cows and calves”and that “high numbers offetuses are aborting for noapparent reason.”

Huber links the problemsto feed from GM corn andsoybeans. He showed a slideof inflamed stomachs of pigsfed GM feed compared tonormal colored stomachs ofpigs fed non-GMO feed.

Another slide showed cat-tle stomachs suffering fromchronic botulism.“Glyphosate in animal feedcan cause a microbial imbal-ance and chronic botulism,”Huber said.

New pathogen causingabortions in pigs andcows?Last year, Huber caused a stirwhen he wrote a letter to USSecretary of Agriculture TomVilsack warning him about a“pathogen new to science”that has been linked toglyphosate and RoundupReady crops. Huber said thepathogen, which hedescribes as a microfungus, islinked to illness and repro-ductive problems in animalsand poses threats to humanhealth.

Since writing the letter,Huber has received many let-ters and emails from veteri-narians reporting problemswith animals fed GM feed. A

veterinarian in Michiganwrote him about a sow (hog)herd that has had an increas-ing number of deaths andreproductive problems. Thecause is unknown, and thevet wonders if it is thepathogen Huber identified.Similar reproductive prob-lems have been reported incows. Last November Hoard’sDairyman reported that cowsare losing up to 20% of preg-nancies.

“We shouldn’t expose theentire agricultural infrastruc-ture to a massive experi-ment,” Huber said.

“Willing to sacrificeour children”The introduction of GM crops,Huber said, was a “betrayal ofthe public trust by a failure toaddress potential risks. The irre-sponsible and premature wide-spread use is based on flawedand unsound scientific assump-tions.”

Huber said glyphosate andGM crops are likely harminghuman health. He cited signifi-cant increases in inflammatorybowel syndrome, Crohn’s dis-ease, and certain types of can-cers. Other diseases such as foodallergies, autism, endometriosis,Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’smay also be linked to glyphosateand GM crops, he said.

“Glyphosate has totallychanged the environment; it hasimpacted humans, vegetables,grains, fruits, plants, feeds, andanimals,” Huber said.

In conclusion Huber saidthat our basic responsibility inagriculture is providing safe andnutritious food. Instead, withcurrent GMO-based agricultur-al practices, “we are willing tosacrifice our children and jeop-ardize future generations basedon failed promises and flawedscience just to benefit the ‘bot-tom line’ of a commercialenterprise.” �

The groups warn that thepotential health risks of GEsalmon are no differentfrom a number of foodadditives the FDA hasbanned in the past, includ-ing those that are cancercausing.

“FDA’s choice to allowthe first proposed trans-genic animal for food to

somehow only be reviewedas a drug is contrary to law,science and common sense,”said George Kimbrell, Sen-ior Attorney for the Centerfor Food Safety. “Publichealth and transparencyshould be championed, notskirted, particularly whencontemplating such anunprecedented approval.” �



Group coun-ters GatesFoundation’semphasis onGMOs to“feed theworld”

In his annual letter from theBill and Melinda GatesFoundation, Bill Gatescalled for nations to

embrace biotechnology or facestarvation of their people.

The Center for Food Safety(CFS) published a response toGates’ letter, citing the docu-mented failure of GMOs todeliver results and suggestingthat agroecological approacheswould work far better, whileallowing communities to havesovereignty over their food.

Gates contends that GMOopponents are adding to theproblem of starvation, sincemost come from the richnations most responsible forclimate change, which isthreatening food supplies inpoor countries.

But CFS Executive Direc-tor Andrew Kimbrell blastedback: “The biotech industryhas exploited the image ofthe world’s poor and hungryto advance a form of agricul-ture that is expensive, input-intensive, and of little or norelevance to developingcountry farmers.”

The emerging consensus ofinternational developmentexperts—and the World Bank’s2008 International Assessmentof Agricultural Knowledge,Science and Technology forDevelopment (IAASTD)—isthat real solutions to addressingglobal hunger must be inex-pensive, low-input and utilizelocal/regional resources asmuch as possible—all areaswhere GM crops fail to deliver. (SOURCE: Associated Press) �

NGOs blastfindings of GMcrop report

An annual biotech cropreport points to “unprece-dented adoption of geneti-cally modified crop tech-

nologies,” with an 8% growthover 2010. In 2011, 12 millionhectares (29.6 million acres)were added globally, says thereport from the InternationalService for the Acquisition ofAgri-biotech Applications(ISAAA).

But a number of non-gov-ernmental organizations(NGOs) blasted the report aserroneous, misleading, and ablatant example of “cookingthe books.” For example,“acreage” is calculated notfrom actual hectares, butfrom how many GMO traitshave been planted—a cropstacked with 3 GM traitsplanted on 100 hectares ispresented as 300 hectares.

“Contrary to claims in thereport, GM crops remain aglobal failure with only about1% of global farmers culti-vating GM crops,” saidGreenpeace campaigner ÉricDarrier.

Greenpeace claims thatGM food and crops are stillrejected in most parts of theworld by farmers, consumers,and governments. After 16years of commercialization,just four countries (UnitedStates, Brazil, Argentina, andCanada) represent 80% ofthe GM crop acreage. �

GM corn farm-ers violateplanting regu-lations

The number of US farmersfailing to comply withrequirements for plantingMonsanto’s genetically

modified corn has tripled inthe last year.

Data from the AgriculturalBiotechnology StewardshipTechnical Committee (ABSTC)show that close to 41% of 3,053farmers inspected in 2011 didnot plant an adjacent area of

non-GMO corn to minimizepossibility of bugs developingresistance to the crops. The“refuge” area is important toprevent developments like theone found last July by Iowa StateUniversity – rootworms becameresistant to Cry3Bb1, a Bt gene

present in Monsanto’s GM corn.Resistance may also be occur-ring in Illinois and throughoutthe Midwest, where rootwormsare found consuming the corn.

The ABSTC releases com-pliance reports to the FDAeach January; in 2010, 15% of

farmers were found out ofcompliance.

According to studies done bySyngenta and Dow, between 14and 20 million acres of corn andsoy may be infested with resist-ant pests.(SOURCE: Bloomberg News) �


Monsanto votes down shareholder proposal to studyGMO impacts

At its annual meeting on January 24,Monsanto’s shareholders defeated ashareholder proposal to examine “mater-

ial financial risks or operational impacts” ofthe chemicals and genetically modifiedorganisms the company sells.

GMO NEWS • F R O M P A G E 1 9

MONSANTO ROUNDUP

John Harrington, CEO ofNapa-based HarringtonInvestments, presented theproposal to address currentconsumer, legal, and regula-tory challenges Monsanto isfacing. Monsanto urged theshareholders to reject theproposal, citing the impor-

tance of famers’ “freedom tochoose” their agriculturalmethods.

“While I am heartened byMonsanto’s sudden concernfor the freedom of farmers,the unfortunate reality facingAmerican farmers right now,is that genetic drift from

GMO crops is contaminatingtheir conventional andorganic crops,” Harringtonsaid. “The potential legalimplications for Monsantoare staggering.”(Sources: PRNewswire-USNewswire; The Associat-ed Press) �

“Occupy”groups stageglobalprotestsagainst Mon-santo

While shareholders ofbiotech giant Monsan-to met on January 24 atcompany headquarters

for a meeting, protestorsworld-wide staged events tooppose genetically modifiedcrops, herbicides, and the

impacts of biotechnology onsmall farmers.

In Maui, a week of rallies,marches and vigils beganwith a protest at Monsanto’soffices in Kihei, highlightingMonsanto’s role in control-ling the food supply, manipu-lating government, and poi-soning the environment.

In Cambridge, England,protestors from Occupy Lon-don held a “flash protest” atMonsanto’s office in Cam-bourne Business Park. RobertHall, a farmer from Devon,said “I’m a farmer and genet-ically modified seeds andproduce make me so, soangry. It’s our sacred right tochoose the food we eat; GMdeprives us of this.”

In Saskatoon,Saskatchewan, occupiersplanned a protest at Monsan-to’s Research Farm, focusing

on the danger of herbicides. In France, one hundred

anti-GMO activists dumpedbags of GM corn at Monsan-to Trèbes, in the Aude. Theywere denouncing the compa-ny’s plan to sell GM cornseed despite a ban onMON810 from the Ministryof Agriculture. (SOURCES : Maui Now; Cam-bridge Evening News; NewsTalk Radio; AFP) �

Monsantofound guilty ofchemical poi-soning inFrance

AFrench court ruled inFebruary that biotechgiant Monsanto wasguilty of chemical poi-

soning of a French farmer, ajudgment that could lead toother health claims due topesticides.

In the first such case heardin court in France, Paul Fran-cois, a grain farmer, says hesuffered neurological prob-lems including memory loss,headaches, and stammeringafter inhaling Monsanto’sLasso weedkiller in 2004.

He blames the company fornot providing adequate warn-ings on the product label.

Francois and other farmerssuffering from illness set up anassociation last year to make acase that their health prob-lems should be linked to theiruse of agricultural chemicals.Previous health claims fromfarmers have failed because ofthe difficulty of establishingclear links between illnessesand exposure to pesticides. “Iam alive today, but part of thefarming population is going tobe sacrificed and is going to diebecause of this,” Francois, 47,told Reuters.

Monsanto’s Lasso was

banned in France in 2007 fol-lowing an EU directive.

France, the EU’s largestagricultural producer, is nowtargeting a 50% reduction inpesticide use between 2008 and2018, with initial results show-ing a 4% cut in farm and non-farm use in 2008-2010.(SOURCE: Reuters) �

Monsanto’sGMO plansreopen AgentOrangewounds inVietnam

During the Vietnam War,between 2.1 to 4.8 mil-lion Vietnamese wereexposed to the toxic defo-

liant Agent Orange, manufac-tured by Monsanto, nowlinked to numerous cancers,birth defects, and chronic dis-eases afflicting the country’spopulation—and Americanmilitary veterans—since thewar.

As Vietnam now considerscultivation of genetically mod-ified products, will the coun-try be inviting in the same tox-ins that have destroyed thelives of many of its people? Infact, new GM corn varietiesare being designed to resist2,4-D, a toxic herbicide andcomponent of Agent Orange.

Monsanto, along with Syn-genta and Pioneer Hi-Bredhave been licensed to carryout lab research and GMcrops tests in Vietnam.

Senior Lieutenant GeneralNguyen Van Rinh and chair-man of the Vietnam Associa-tion of Victims of AgentOrange warned, “By introduc-ing [GMOs] paired with toxicweed killers, the tragic legacyof Agent Orange mightrepeat itself.”(SOURCE: Thanh Nien News) �


Greenpeacecampaignleads China tostop develop-ment of GMrice

The Chinese governmenthas suspended commer-cialization of geneticallymodified rice, according

to a report by GreenpeaceEast Asia.

According to the Green-peace report, Chinese scien-tists applied to commercial-

ize four varieties of GM ricein 2004.

Greenpeace then launcheda campaign to stop GM rice.First they exposed that scien-tists developing the rice wouldstand to gain financially fromits introduction. Then theylaunched a publicity campaignthat GM rice was a threat tofood sovereignty and thatmulti-national biotech firmswould profit and not Chinesefarmers. Greenpeace alsoreceived support from Chinesepoliticians and celebrities,including Mao Zedong’s

Mute Schimpf, food cam-paigner at Friends of theEarth Europe, said: “Thepublic’s rejection of geneti-cally modified crops hasensured that they are con-fined to small pockets of theEuropean Union. Politiciansneed to listen to public opin-ion and throw their weightbehind the demand forgreener and safer farming.Genetically modified cropsshould play no role in thefuture of Europe’s farming.” �

Monsantopulls GM cornsales fromFrance

Despite the fact that thehighest French courtrecently overturned athree-year ban on Mon-

santo’s genetically modifiedcorn (MON810), the firmwon’t be selling the GM cropin France in 2012 or there-after.

A company statementreads, “Monsanto considersthat favorable conditions forthe sale of the MON810 inFrance in 2012 and beyondare not in place.”

The governmentannounced in January that itwould stick to the ban thatthe court had annulled, andwould reinstate the morato-rium on the GM corn beforespring planting.

The company’s withdrawalfrom the French seed marketfollows BASF’s recent deci-sion to cease sales activity inGermany.(SOURCE: Reuters) �


INTERNATIONAL NEWS

Organic production 30 timesgreater than GMOs in Europe

Public resistance to genetically modifiedcrops has ensured that the area grown inEurope in 2011 remained at 0.1% of all

arable land, according to Friends of the EarthEurope. In comparison, organic farmingaccounted for 3.7%.


daughter. Several Chinesescholars also signed a peti-tion urging caution on GMrice and submitted it to theParliament.

In September of last year,the Economic Observer reportedthat China had suspendedcommercialization of GM rice.

Bloomberg News alsoreported that China hasn’tapproved large-scale commer-cialization of GM grain seedsand won’t produce GM cropsthis year. �

Will Japan gofor GMpapaya?

The genetically modified“Rainbow” papaya, grownin Hawaii, is now for salein Japan, labeled as a GM

food according to Japanese law.

It is the only GM fruit avail-able there, in a country longwary of GMOs.

In the US, pressure ismounting for the govern-ment to require GMO label-ing as Japan has implement-ed.

The Rainbow papaya wasdeveloped to save the papayaindustry from a devastatingvirus. It was “vaccinated” soto speak, by altering thegenes to produce a tinypiece of the virus in eachcell, which triggers thepapaya’s immune system.

Japan, the largest con-sumer of Hawaiian papaya,was finally convinced theproduct was safe enough forconsumption. US consumersremain skeptical.(SOURCE: Voice of America,USA) �

100% natural, solvent-free sunflower lecithin available

Austrade Inc., is adding a new product to itsexisting line of sunflower lecithins.GIRALEC SF is a solvent-free,

unbleached, liquid sunflower lecithin.GIRALEC SF is obtained via mechanicalextraction resulting in a raw lecithin withoutthe use of chemical solvents such as hexane. Bystrictly cold pressing the sunflower seeds wecan guarantee lecithin in its purest, most natu-ral state. GIRALEC SF has the same proper-ties and functionality as our conventional stan-dard grade liquid sunflower lecithin.

COMPANY NEWS/ANNOUNCEMENTS



GIRALEC SF is non-GMO,allergen-free, vegan approved,Kosher and Halal certified.

Applications include any nat-ural, clean label product requir-ing lecithin in its purest form,such as raw foods, infant formu-la and baby foods, cosmeticssuch as skin care, pharmaceuti-cals, and many others.

For additional informationor a sample, go towww.austradeinc.com orsend an email [email protected]. �

Nature’s Pathannouncesgrants fororganic gardens

In continued support of theirbelief that everyone has theright to fresh, organic, chemi-cal-free food, Nature’s Path is

pleased to announce the winnersof the second annual Gardens forGood Grant contest, which helpsput organic community gardenswhere they will serve those whoneed them most. The threedeserving non-profit organiza-tions that are recipients of thegrants are CAPI USA in Min-neapolis, MN; GroW Gardens inWashington, D.C. and Oliver’sGarden Project in Hamilton,ON, Canada. The Gardens forGood Grant program is part of theNature’s Path commitment tourban agriculture and aims toempower communities to takeaction and grow organicallywhere they live.

“These organizations are mak-ing such a difference in their com-munities and we are honored towork with them,” says ArranStephens, Nature’s Path’s Presi-dent and co-founder. “Our goal isnot only to provide organic foodfor those who might not haveaccess to it, but also cultivatesocially responsible communityleaders who will bring peopletogether to create positivechange.” �

Nurture, Inc.Introduces HAP-PYNATURALSBaby Food

Nurture Inc. recentlyannounced the launch ofHAPPYNATURALS, anew line of 100% natural

baby food designed specificallyfor families in Texas’ Women,Infants and Children (WIC)program. The products arebased on the principles set forthby the Environmental WorkingGroup’s Clean 15 and DirtyDozen list in order to reducepesticide exposure and providean affordable option while stillmeeting the guidelines of theWIC program.

All of Nurture Inc.’s pro-ceeds from the HAPPYNAT-URALS line will be donated toThe FEED Foundation tohelp feed America’s children inneed. �

SK Food offersprecookedbean, pea andlentil powdersand flakes

SK Food International intro-duces the addition of identitypreserved certified organicand conventional non-GMO

precooked bean, pea and lentilpowders and flakes to its exten-sive line of premium qualityingredients.

Custom-milled from variousvarieties of dry edible beans, peasand lentils, these precooked pow-ders and flakes offer a viable high-protein alternative to other ingre-dients that carry gluten and aller-gen risks.

SK Food offers a granulationfrom a coarse flake to a fine pow-der to fit customers’ specifica-tions.

For more information, email:[email protected] or visitwww.skfood.com. �

COMPANY NEWS/ANNOUNCEMENTSF R O M P A G E 2 3

THE ORGANIC & NON-GMO REPORTPO Box 436, Fairfield, IA 52556

Change Service Requested

the organic & non-gmo report...

Documents