Roundup Ready soy is now being cultivated on a massive scale across the globe, along with the exponentially increasing use of the herbicide Roundup. Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” soy beans are  genetically modified to survive otherwise lethal doses of glyphosate, the active ingredient in the company’s herbicide Roundup.

It’s a win-win for Monsanto. But it’s a loss for just about everyone else.

One of the countries most affected by genetically engineered soy is Argentina, whose population is being sickened by massive spraying of herbicides across the country’s Pampas (the country’s “fertile plain”).

Argentina’s Pampas used to be dotted with dairy and vegetable farms, but now, large-scale soybean monoculture blankets most of their cultivated land, making them especially susceptible to the damaging effects of genetically engineered soy. The impact can be better appreciated by considering the following statistics:

Soy is the main income source for landowners and the state—soybeans are considered a “gold mine” by Argentinians; soy exports generate 16,000 million dollars a year

The area cultivated with soy has reached 19 million hectares, representing 56 percent of Argentina’s cultivated land

98 percent of Argentina’s soybean production is genetically modified.

190 million liters of glyphosate (the active agent in Roundup) are sprayed in Argentina annually, which is leading to not only illness among the population but to widespread deforestation, as trees are among the victims these herbicides leave in their wake of destruction.

Soya burgers are a staple of today’s Argentinian diet. Argentinian children were consuming so much genetically engineered soy that they began developing breasts from the estrogenic effects, before authorities stepped in with warnings. Studies also strongly suggest that the glyphosate that these crops are doused with can cause cancer and birth deformities; both of which are occurring at increasing rates in areas where spraying is done. Sterility and miscarriages are also increasing. Experts warn that in 10 to 15 years, rates of cancer, infertility and endocrine dysfunction could reach catastrophic levels in Argentina. But few people are listening.

“It’s Food for Today, Hunger and Cancer for Tomorrow”

The immediate symptoms are always the same for Argentinian bystanders in the spray zone: dizziness, allergic reactions and itching, mouth swelling, and general malaise that’s similar to the feeling of coming down with the flu. People are warned to stay inside when spraying is underway, but they report getting sick in spite of this confinement.

When those affected visit their physicians, they’re told it’s “all in their heads.” Authorities also turn a deaf ear—as does the government when it’s presented with scientific evidence of the dangerous effects of Monsanto’s products for their people and environment. Fortunately, increasing numbers of scientists are now starting to speak out. For example, the engineers’ school in Santiago del Estero announced that chemicals are causing 100 babies to be born with deformities every year. One of the most influential studies was conducted by one of Argentina’s leading scientists, Andres Carrasco, who works in Argentina’s Ministry of Science.

Andrés Carrasco Attacked for Exposing the Truth

Embryonic specialist Andres Carrasco decided to investigate the health effects of glyphosate for himself after hearing so many reports by desperate peasant and indigenous communities who were suffering from exposure to toxic herbicides. According to Dr. Carrasco, his studies show glyphosate exposure can cause defects in the brain, intestines, and hearts of amphibian fetuses, and these results can be applied to humans. Moreover, the amount of Roundup used on genetically engineered soy fields was as much as 1,500 times greater than that which created the defects.

According to an article in Grain, the biotech industry “mounted an unprecedented attack on Carrasco, ridiculing his research and even issuing personal threats.” In addition, four men arrived unannounced at his laboratory and were extremely aggressive, attempting to interrogate Carrasco and obtain details of his study.

“It was a violent, disproportionate, dirty reaction,” he said. “I hadn’t even discovered anything new, only confirmed conclusions that others had reached.”

The conclusions to which Carrasco is referring are those from independent researchers who have found strong evidence glyphosate causes the following:

Carrasco’s and others’ work point to the fact that the public, in Argentina and elsewhere, is being subject to a massive biological experiment involving the effects of genetic manipulation of the food supply. Genetically engineered food products have NEVER been tested for safety—so the long-term effects are largely unknown. The warnings science has provided demand a thorough investigation into just how much glyphosate human beings and animals can safely ingest. At present, no such investigation has taken place, and most regulatory agencies choose instead to rely in industry studies claiming glyphosate is safe.

Roundup has been shown to be lethal to amphibians. Are we next? Where is the tipping point for the human race? How much more can we tolerate in the adulteration of our food supply?

Why We MUST Insist on Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

Labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the U.S., but simple petitions will likely fail. We strongly support state initiatives, such as California’s ballot initiative to require labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state.

Many don’t fully appreciate the strategy of seeking to have genetically engineered foods labeled in California. The belief is that large food companies would refuse to have dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be very expensive, not to mention a logistical nightmare. To avoid the dual labeling, many would likely opt to not use genetically engineered ingredients in their product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. This is why we are so committed to this initiative, as victory here will likely eliminate most genetically engineered foods from the US.

Powerful confirmation of this belief occurred in early 2012 when both Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo Inc. chose to alter one of their soda ingredients as a result of California’s labeling requirements for carcinogens:

“Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas as a result of a California law that mandates drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label. The companies said the changes will be expanded nationally to streamline their manufacturing processes. They’ve already been made for drinks sold in California.”

This is a PERFECT example of the national impact a California labeling law can, and no doubt WILL, have. While California is the only state requiring the label to state that the product contains the offending ingredient, these companies are switching their formula for the entire US market, rather than have two different labels. According to USA Today:

“A representative for Coca-Cola, Diana Garza Ciarlante, said the company directed its caramel suppliers to modify their manufacturing processes to reduce the levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, which can be formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. “While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning,” Garza-Giarlante said in an email.”

Learn More about Genetically Engineered Foods

Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what genetically engineered foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about genetically engineered foods and helping your friends and family do the same.

To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.

Your BEST strategy, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit genetically engineered ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) you’re exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you’re not inadvertently consuming something laced with altered ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.

By Dr Mercola

If you keep your cooking knives in a drawer with the rest of your utensils, you may be doing some serious damage to them, partially because they’re rattling around in there and bumping up against other utensils, and partially because they’re running into corners and the sides of your cabinets. In addition to keeping them sharp and well-honed, getting them out of that cabinet will drastically improve their longevity.

Over at Kitchen Daily, they run down a list of common knife storage and cleaning mistakes that could be inadvertently dulling your blades, but keeping them in the utensil cabinet is one of the bigger ones we can see more people doing, especially if you don’t have a block to keep them in. They even have a great shot of a damaged knife that was improperly stored to prove the point.

Mayday! Mayday!

I’m pleased to announce that the Money Bomb Against Monsanto has been officially launched!

Yes, it is official.

Volunteers and staff from the California Right to Know Campaign are submitting nearly 1 million signed petitions from registered voters across the state of California to county officials, to place Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act on the Ballot for November 6.

Starting May 1, and extending through May 26, a broad coalition of farmers, health groups, and organic food manufacturers, will attempt to raise one million dollars (i.e. “The Money Bomb”). Donations can be made online, via regular snail mail, and over the phone. All donations will support state GMO-labeling campaigns and their defense from biotech bully lawsuits.

The Right to Know Gentically Engineered Food Act

This Act will require food manufacturers to identify genetically engineered ingredients on the labels of foods sold in California.

When California voters pass this ballot initiative, the Label Genetically Engineered Food Act will also not allow the common practice of mislabeling genetically engineered foods as “natural” or “all natural.” It’s imperative to understand why this initiative is so important and how it can affect all Americans, regardless of where you live.

California has the eighth largest economy in the world, so passing a labeling law for genetically engineered foods in California can have the same impact as passing a federal law.

Large food companies are unlikely to accept having dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be an expensive logistical nightmare, not to mention a massive PR problem.

To avoid the dual labeling, many would likely opt to not include using any genetically engineered ingredients in their product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. Those who opt not to replace GE ingredients from the get-go will likely find themselves unable to sell their products, as a majority of consumers reportedly will not buy foods once they know they’re genetically engineered. Unable to sell their products, such companies will eventually be forced to stop contaminating our food with genetically engineered ingredients, or risk going out of business.

This is what happened in Europe and over 40 countries around the world. It can happen in the U.S. This is why we can’t leave California to battle the biotech giants on their own. They need your help! Donating funds to this campaign may be the best money you’ll spend all year to safeguard your health, and the health of your children.

Do you know which foods are genetically engineered when you go grocery shopping for your family? Wouldn’t you want to know? Genetically engineered foods have been on the market since 1996. It’s time they tell us what’s in the food we’re eating on a daily basis. Making a generous donation to this campaign is the best chance every American has at this point to make that happen!

The Proverbial David versus Goliath

Naturally, the biotech industry is not about to let this pass without a fight. Monsanto, the Farm Bureau, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, along with corporate agribusiness, are all raising millions of dollars to spread their propaganda in an effort to defeat the California Ballot Initiative, just like they did a decade ago in Oregon. At that time, a cabal of corporate giants, including Monsanto and DuPont, calling themselves The Coalition Against the Costly Labeling Law, outspent the pro-labeling group 30-1, and successfully defeated the labeling initiative by scaring voters into believing that labeling genetically engineered foods was unnecessary and would raise food prices.

They did it again in Washington state last month, where campaign contributions to three of the eight politicians on the Senate Agriculture Committee—Democrat Brian Hatfield, and Republicans Jim Honeyford and Mark Schoesler—guaranteed the bill’s demise in committee. Right now, the biotech industry is also working to defeat similar GE labeling bills in Vermont, Hawaii, Connecticut, and other states. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, Monsanto spent $8 million on their lobbying efforts in 2010 alone, and gave more than $400,000 in political contributions. Monsanto also spent $120 million on advertising, to convince consumers that genetically engineered foods are safe – despite the overwhelming scientific evidence showing otherwise.

Let’s send them a message, loud and clear: We have the right to know what they put into our food!

You can do so by making a donation right now. The money will be used to counter the industry propaganda so that we can win this ballot.

We’re Dropping the Money Bomb!

About twenty years ago, the FDA decided to deny consumers the right to know whether their food was genetically altered or not. This shameful regulation was spearheaded by Michael Taylor, a former Monsanto lawyer who transferred into the offices of the FDA. Taylor is not the only ex-Monsanto employee that ended up in a position of power within the US federal government and its regulatory agencies, and this is precisely why previous efforts to get genetically engineered foods labeled have been blocked.

Not so this time!

Ballot Initiatives like the one in California is one way for citizens to take back control from compromised politicians and government officials and bypass them entirely. To sweeten the deal further, a group of “Right to Know” public interest organizations and organic companies have pledged to match the first million dollars raised in this nationwide “Drop the Money Bomb on Monsanto Campaign.”

So click here, and help us raise 1 million dollars to win this historic campaign! These “Right to Know” groups include:

Can We Win?

Yes, I believe we can! But we need to get the word out, which requires a strong campaign to educate the citizens of California to vote for the initiative on November 6. According to Ronnie Cummins of the Organic Consumers Association, we stand a good chance of winning in California because:

This time, we have far more scientific information and greater public awareness on our side. GE contamination is now a mainstream media issue. Monsanto has become the most hated corporation in the world.

This time, we have overwhelming public support. Polls show that more than 8 out of 10 voters in California want mandatory GE labeling.

This time, we have built the strongest coalition of concerned food consumers in history, for the exclusive purpose of passing this law.

The Time for Action is NOW!

Today, I ask you to invest in this Initiative. Invest in your future. And invest as generously as you can. If you’ve already sent in your donation, thank you! If not, please contribute to this historic and critical campaign today. And then please forward this email to your friends. Share it on Facebook and Twitter. Print it out, hand it to all your friends. Every action counts!

As stated by Ronnie Cummins with the Organic Consumers Association:

“Monsanto is one of the most powerful, arrogant and destructive companies in the world. For decades, they have controlled the world’s food supply by buying off politicians and regulatory agencies, intimidating small farmers, manipulating the outcome of scientific studies, lying to consumers – and threatening to sue states like Vermont if they dare to pass a GMO labeling law.

… Despite Monsanto’s claims to the contrary, scientists are clear: genetically engineered food has been linked to a wide range of health hazards, including kidney and liver damage, infertility, auto-immune disorders, allergies and autism, accelerated aging, and birth defects…

We have the right to know if the food we buy has been genetically engineered…. It’s time to take back our food. Our farms. Our power. It’s time to show Monsanto what ordinary people like us can do when we come together. It’s time to drop the money bomb on Monsanto.”

Hundreds of thousands of people making small donations can help the coalition behind this initiative run a dynamic, effective campaign to bring down Monsanto and the rest of the Biotech Bullies.

So please, join us, and make a donation right now! You can donate online, by phone, or by dropping a check in the mail.

Source article written by Dr Mercola at Mercola.com

According to America’s Test Kitchen, most cooking problems start from one of three small mistakes: inaccurate measurements, careless ingredient substitution, or poor ingredient preparation. To help you avoid those problems and become better cooks, the school created these illustrations explaining the mistakes and solutions.

For each common cooking mistake, America’s Test Kitchen describes how the mistake applies to a different ingredient. For example, careless ingredient substitution is a common problem with salt, dairy, sugar, and herbs. Read across each quadrant to see how recipes are affected and how to solve the problem (e.g., use half as much table salt as you would kosher salt to avoid making food tasting too salty).

Here are all three “Recipe Roulette” images (click to expand or right-click to save):

We are pulling out all the stops for this one! If you haven’t attended yet, don’t miss out!

By Dr. Mercola

A major part of achieving optimal health is living in partnership with nature.

Growing your own food is a great way to rekindle this connection with nature.

But have you thought about eating plants that grow wild—perhaps in your own backyard?

Some “weeds” can be delicious if prepared properly, and they are absolutely free.

In an article published earlier this summer, Live Science collected some easy-to-identify healthful weeds, including:

Dandelion:

The entire plant is edible, and the leaves contain vitamins A, C and K, along with calcium, iron, manganese, and potassium.

Purslane:

Purslane tops the list of plants with omega-3 fats.

Lamb’s-quarters:

Lamb’s-quarters are like spinach, except healthier, tastier and easier to grow.

Plantain:

Not the better-known banana-like plant with the same name.  It has a nutritional profile similar to dandelion.

Stinging Nettles:

If you handle them so that you don’t get a painful rash from the tiny, acid-filled needles, these are delicious and nutritious cooked or prepared as a tea.

This is of course how our ancestors ate. They hunted and gathered, and ALL of it was wild. And by all accounts, they were far healthier than we are.

Of course, like anything else, identification and use of wild plants requires spending some time educating yourself, lest you eat something inedible or even poisonous. But with some attention to learning what to look for, you can avail yourself of some of the most highly nutritious, health-promoting plants for FREE—and have a lot of fun doing it. With the availability of the Internet, in addition to a number of excellent printed books and even wild-food foraging classes, this information is now easy to access.

Chef Ken Gordon has previously written about what he calls ‘the dance’, a negotiation that occurs almost nightly in restaurants in which diners with health concerns or dietary restrictions attempt to find something they can eat.

As translated by the server and often reluctantly carried out by the kitchen, this usually results in some transmutation of a dish on the restaurant’s menu, usually stripping whatever elements made the dish tasty and worthy of inclusion on the menu in the first place.

The pork tenderloin with morel butter and frizzled leeks on a bed of garlic and crème fra‹che linguini … hold the butter, hold the creme, hold the frizzle and substitute some steamed broccoli for the linguini? Why is it so hard to just order something healthy from the menu that’s, well, actually on the menu?

Chefs and restaurant owners are not trying to deny you, or make your experience uncomfortable. On the contrary, they’re sincerely trying to give you what they think you really want: yummy, rich food that is creative and beautiful and just too delicious to resist. And resist you don’t, though a lot of diners need to resist once in a while, at least with the portion sizes and calorie and carb counts contained in most restaurant dishes.

There’s another element to this, as well, and that’s basic restaurant economics. It goes like this: It’s expensive operating a restaurant — there’s rent, utilities, payroll, ingredients and supplies, license fees, breakage and theft, insurance, advertising, waste and a thousand and one other incidentals. The restaurant needs to cover all of these costs with the number of seats they — potentially — fill, multiplied by the average amount that — potentially — the customers occupying those seats will spend. Plus — in theory — have a little left over for something foreign to many restaurant owners: profit. That per-seat amount is called “check average.”

When diners eat at the restaurant of their choosing, they tend to make a judgment. That judgment is what’s known as perceived value. Perceived value is what’s going through a customer’s mind when they’re three bites into the aforementioned pork tenderloin they’re paying $28.50 for. This $28.50 is what the restaurant needs to charge for the dish to make its “check average.”

But the pork tenderloin consumer isn’t thinking about it that way (because they haven’t read my column yet). All they’re thinking is: “This is really tasty, but a bit pricey for what I’m getting.”

Now, take the same diner, the same restaurant and the same restaurant economy, but substitute a dish that’s healthier and of smaller portion-size and stripped down of all the calorie-producing bells and whistles. The restaurant still needs to charge about the same because all their costs are about the same, plus the busboy just dropped a tray of costly Riedel glassware.

Restaurants need to put some healthier options on the menu, and diners need to order these items while appreciating that the restaurant is a business and needs to charge what it charges, even if it seems the portions are smaller and the ingredients more modest.

Dining out is a partnership. It’s the customer letting the chef and restaurateur know what they like or want — and what they need — while appreciating that the restaurant is a business like any other, and that if the customer wants that restaurant to be around the next time they visit, the restaurant needs to charge an adequate amount for its product. And the chef and restaurant need to listen, and respond to changing tastes and the needs of an aging and possibly health-challenged clientele that sometimes wants foie gras, but sometimes needs some leaner fare and smaller portions.

Customer concerns key

There are some amazing chefs and restaurants in our community. It seems like there are good restaurants opening every week. And the dishes on their menus reflect a wealth and breadth of talent and creativity. But they often don’t reflect many of the current and widespread concerns for the health of the diners at these restaurants. There should be room on the menu for all the delicious, rich food that draws the foodies to these destinations. But I now believe there should also be some dishes that are just plain good for you, while still delicious and beautifully prepared and reflecting the talent of these amazing chefs.

And not just on the menus of our high-end restaurants, but at ethnic places and taquerias and food carts and franchises as well. How about Asian restaurants adding one more rice cooker and offering a brown rice option? Or Mexican restaurants offering an option for beans without the lard? You get the picture. I believe that in responding to customer concerns in this way, the restaurants will see their sales go up as a result.

And as I believe in putting my money where my mouth is. I’m rolling out a new, small, separate menu at Kenny & Zukes that will feature healthier versions of some of our popular fare, including a smaller, leaner pastrami sandwich on a whole grain rye my bakers have just developed. And a lean burger slider on a whole wheat bun with guacamole and salsa, salad on the side. Just adding some opportunities for moderation.

I’ll be contacting friends and others on the local scene and asking them to join me in this as well. Let’s see the addition of a dish or two that a diabetic — or someone with some of the challenges of metabolic syndrome — can enjoy and feel comfortable eating without doing the dance. Start with a couple of things, or a brown rice option. And I’ll let you readers know when they do.

I think it’s time we started another kind of food revolution in Portland, this time with first-class, delicious food that my naturopath would approve of.

Next: The first blood test — a reality check.

Any questions about Ken’s regimen or, well, anything? Email him at kgnyport@aol.com; you can also find him at facebook.com/chefkengordon or on Twitter; search for chef Ken Gordon

Source article found at OregonLive.com

Join us for a series of monthly dinners hosted and prepared by Chef Chris of Palm Beach Organics

Watch it all come together in the kitchen theater at Cook’s Studio!

How do you know when something in cupboard or refrigerator has gone bad –or on the flip side –may look a little weird but is perfectly fine to eat?

It can be easy to know when dairy and meat products go bad because of “use by” and expiration dates. Also our nose knows when those foods go bad. It can be harder, though, with everyday items that many of us keep stocked in our homes.

There’s also the issue of flavor. While some products may not go bad per se, they may start to develop an odd taste.

Jay Weinstein, a culinary professor, at The Natural Gourmet Institute in New York City walks us through what to look for with some of the most popular items we have around our kitchens. Some of the answers may surprise you.

Oh, and get a garbage bag handy, you may be dumping a lot of things. The last thing anyone wants is to get food poisoning, especially when it can be prevented.

The market for organic food has grown from just $1 billion in 1990 to nearly $30 billion today. As big corporations enter the market, concern has grown about enforcement of organic standards, and some see the movement drifting away from its founding principles of sustainability and local farming. They are alarmed by organic tomatoes grown in far-off, Mexican deserts that require constant irrigation, organic cows living on industrial-sized feedlots, and chickens laying organic eggs while confined in high-capacity barns. But others say that big farms bring organic food to the masses. For this month’s Environmental Outlook series: the organic food paradox.

Listen to the full program.

**Note from Chef Chris~ This program illustrates the importance of what we do here at Palm Beach Organics! We only buy from trusted sources, and do not import a single thing!

Story found here at The Diane Rehm Show