In an especially passionate display of concern over food safety today, Food & Water Watch activists courted the chocolate giant Hershey's to their side, asking them to give U.S. consumers the same assurances about not using genetically modified (GM) sugar in their Hershey's Kisses™ the Brazilians receive.

What's the rumpus?

U.S. farmers planted have planted GM sugar beet crops for the first time this season. The beets are genetically altered to survive regular applications of Monsanto's weed killer, Roundup, and its active ingredient, glyphosate. Because the EPA increased the maximum allowable residues of glyphosate on the beetroots (from which sugar is extracted) by a staggering 5,000%, Food & Water Watch is concerned about:

• the possible impact on the environment
• gene pollution of other crops and plants, and
• human health
  

Since GM ingredients are NOT labeled, there is no way to know if consumers are eating GM beet sugar once it hits the market, which could happen as early as next year. That's why Food & Water Watch called on its activists. And their enthusiastic response may have surprised the food industry.

According to the New York Times article, Round 2 for Biotech Beets (registration required), several American food companies aren't resistant to the use of GM sugar in their products because they feel American consumers have come to accept biotechnology.

Ooops.

We wouldn't call it a "kiss-off," but the activists were clear: they want their sweets GM-free. Protect your Kisses™. Urge Hershey's to publicly reject the use of GM sugar.

Just weeks after Monsanto decided to divest of rBGH, Eli Lilly has acquired the artificial dairy hormone. Not surprisingly, Eli Lilly is now spreading the same misinformation about rBGH's safety and environmental benefits as Monsanto once did. 

Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone is a genetically engineered chemical that is injected into cows to make them produce more milk. Besides the documented increase of infections in dairy cows injected with rBGH, which necessitates increased use of antibiotics, there are ongoing questions about links to cancer in humans.

Despite Eli Lilly's claims, rBGH is not a 'vital technology.' Instead, it's a questionable one that has been shunned by several major dairy retailers this year alone. Help us maintain the momentum against the use of rBGH. Tell Eli Lilly that consumers want rBGH-free milk, and they want it to be labeled plain and simple.

-Filmona
Food & Water Watch
email

Last week, Monsanto – the corporation that produces recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) in order to increase milk production in cows – announced its intention to sell the division that handles the artificial hormone, marketed under the brand name Posilac. This is a small victory for consumers on the path to eliminating potentially harmful and dangerous methods of producing milk.

Although Monsanto denies that consumer pressure had anything to do with its decision to abandon its “leading dairy animal production product,” it is clear that they are feeling the pressure of consumer demand for clean, safe, healthy milk. However, the battle is not over. It is yet to be decided who will take over rBGH, so we must keep campaigning for rBGH-free milk to ensure that it will be unprofitable for any company to sell.

Recently, Monsanto attempted to greenwash rBGH with claims that it allows fewer cows to produce the same amount of milk, thus reducing the industry’s carbon “hoofprint.” While this is a nice theory, the only study to support this assertion was conducted by scientists on the Monsanto payroll. But consumers who demand rBGH-free milk have shown that they know that Monsanto’s bottom line is profit, not environmental protection or consumer health. Faced with this strong opposition, Monsanto is finally tossing in the towel, hoping for someone else to step in. Let’s keep up the good work and convince any potential successors that pushing artificial hormones is a battle they won’t win.