Russia has just announced a game-changing move in the fight against Monsanto’s GMOs, completely banning the use of genetically modified ingredients in any and all food production.
In other words, Russia just blazed way past the issue of GMO labeling and shut down the use of any and all GMOs that would have otherwise entered the food supply through the creation of packaged foods (and the cultivation of GMO crops).
“As far as genetically-modified organisms are concerned, we have made decision not to use any GMO in food productions,” Deputy PM Arkady Dvorkovich revealed during an international conference on biotechnology.
This is a bold move by the Russian government, and it sits in unison with the newly-ignited global debate on GMOs and the presence of Monsanto in the food supply. It also follows the highly-debated ruling by the World Health Organization that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup is a ‘probable carcinogen.’
But I also want to put it into perspective for you. If this announcement were to be made in the United States, for example, it would mean a total transformation of the food manufacturing industry. But in Russia, the integration of GMOs is not close to the same level as in the U.S.
We know that, in the United States, 90 plus percent of staple crops like corn are genetically modified, along with 94 percent of soybeans and 94 percent of cotton. A ban on GMOs in food production would radically change the entire food supply. In Russia, however, the country is much more poised for a GMO food revolution. [1]
As RT reports:
“According to official statistics the share of GMO in the Russian food industry has declined from 12 percent to just 0.01 percent over the past 10 years, and currently there are just 57 registered food products containing GMO in the country. The law ordering obligatory state registration of GMO products that might contact with the environment will come into force in mid-2017.”
President Vladimir Putin believes that he can keep GMOs out of the country, even while staying in compliance with the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) commandments. In a past meeting addressing the members of the Board of the Russian Federation Council he stated:
“We need to properly construct our work so that it is not contrary to our obligations under the WTO. But even with this in mind, we nevertheless have legitimate methods and instruments to protect our own market, and above all citizens.”
Do you think we will we ever see something like this is in the United States? Let us know in the comments below.
Additional Sources:
Just proves once again that the Russian Federation cares more about her people than any government in the West.
exactly
How so? By declining food that is easier to produce in certain climates or that can survive the different conditions? By making a potato that does not go bad the minute you take it out of ground or that it can take hit or two when being transported from one location to another, i.e. from field to store, saving the costs and minimizing the number of how much bad food you should toss out before you even get to have it? Sure this is awesome IF Russian can boost its own food industry by doing this, providing jobs for thousands of people in that country who would make the food that goes directly to the stores for cheaper and more efficiently, but I do not think that is the case here (and I hope I am wrong). Saying no to food that can survive a extra harsh winter or a swarm of locusts swarm may not be the best course of action.
Genetic manipulation can have unanticipated side effects, such as massive tumors, as discovered during testing of at least one crop on laboratory rats. While many prescription drugs are nearly identical to a natural herb, a single manipulation of a molecule can make the “patent medicine” deadly. Would you consume a product not knowing it contained a potentially deadly patent medicine? However, Monsanto owns so much of our Congress, it is succeeding in banning even LABELING products containing GMOs.
Surely you’re not suggesting that GM-corn and soya can withstand extra-harsh weather and swarms of locusts more than carefully-bred “normal” crops. They can’t. They’ve never been demonstrated to do that. In fact, GMOs are not living up to most of the “promises” (read the report called “Failure to Yield”).
Oh, and regular potatoes can indeed survive being taken out of the ground, transported, and then stored for a time under proper conditions. Aside from that, we have a lot of preservation methods available to us in the year 2015, which can be used on potatoes that need longer storage. We definitely don’t need GM-potatoes when normal potatoes have been just fine for us. What do you think we’ve been eating all these hundreds of years before GMOs came into being? The only thing GMOs are doing is destroying the existing diversity in crops and making big profits for a handful of seed and chemical companies. We can manage any and all “food issues”–without the use of GMOs.
Showing you stupidity again? Failure to yield? Last year was the largest U.S. Harvest on record for corn and soybeans with over ninety percent gmos on both crops. This year is estimated to be the second largest. Why lie?
Oh, you again. Gee, how surprising. Have you read the report I’m talking about or are you going to ignore the facts? GMOs do NOT produce substantially more than “conventional” agriculture, and conventional crops don’t even produce substantially more than organic, when the organic crops are grown in the most efficient ways (see Farming Systems Trial at Rodale). We do NOT need GMOs to “feed the world”.
Living in fantasyland again aren’t you. Your efficient ways are very labor intensive which would make prices skyrocket, plus you would have to actually find people to actually work. As far as gmo production all you have to do is to look at the last two years of grain production. Unlike your fantasies, those yields are very real and with 90%+ gmos.
Organic food is NOT that much more than conventional food–and that’s right now in its most expensive stage in commerce. Meaning the prices are only going to go down over time as more of it is available and more farmers start out that way or transition to organic. You are the one living in a fantasy, it seems. Why don’t you actually go out and buy some organic foods in the way that I do? You would see that it’s not that much more for most things (there are exceptions, of course, like coffee and chocolate). I make it even more affordable by buying in bulk. Of course, you actually have to care about what you’re eating; if you don’t then fast food will keep you alive.
And the only reason grain productions are up is because they’re planting more fields. The US government is known to pay farmers to NOT plant in some years, and it looks like they’ve stopped doing that. It was probably done so that it would look like GMOs are making some kind of “come back”. As if. Lol.
Are you always this stupid? Why don’t you actually look things up before you speak. Last year was not only our largest yield in total bushels, but also in bushels per acre. That is amazing if you consider the ONE thing you were correct about. We did plant millions of more acres last year, acres that never should have been planted. Acres that should have brought the average yield DOWN. Instead it went up, way up, in a year where the corn belt experienced less than ideal conditions.
Your next stupid assumption is that anything not organic must be fast food. Maybe you are need to actually get out and visit local farmers like I do. Buy a locally raised beef fed good wholesome gmos and then go to another local farmer for the good roundup sweet corn and actually freeze it yourself so you know exactly what you are getting instead of wasting money on organic that has been proven time and again to be no better and no more nutritious. Maybe that way you wouldn’t have to work two jobs and turn tricks on the side just to put food on the table.
Oh, bobo, are you butt-sore now that the truth about GMO worthlessness is out? Lol.
Worthlessness? Strange how farmers just keep receiving money for them then isn’t it.
We’ve been growing food for WAY longer than “GMOs” have existed. They are NOT needed to feed the world, so the technology is irrelevant and therefore worthless. I’m pretty sure you already knew what context I was using, though. Those farmers you speak of would be receiving money for conventional or organic crops, too, so your point is also worthless. Heck, they’d make even more profit than they do now if they transitioned to organic agriculture, so it only makes sense to do so, although the transition period is too much of a sacrifice for some.
Yes going from two hundred and fifty bushels of corn per acre down to fifty would take some getting use to.
Are you nuts? ROFLMAO. Farmers get WAY more money for organic corn and soy–plus they aren’t required to use certain chemicals, and the seed is cheaper (and able to be “saved” to use the next year). If they’re doing it right and they have some contacts/resources, the fertilizer is often close to being free (it doesn’t take anything but “waste” to make compost, after all). So not only are they making more money for the harvest, but they’re also saving money on production.
Not very smart to save corn seed for replanting if it is a hybrid. As far as price yes organic pays better per bushel, it has to in order to compete with the substandard yields, duh!!!!! As far as you fertilizer is concerned sure that is all it takes, usually 2-3 tons per acre if you actually wish to get a crop, oh I’m sorry it doesn’t take that much to get the poor yields organic kicks out. Sure you only use organic approved chemicals, which in many cases don’t work as well and are more dangerous than the conventional ones.
ROFLMAO. That was certainly a crapload of drivel. You obviously don’t know anything about organic farming practices. Rodale’s Farming Trial Systems has already demonstrated that organic can yield quite high when done right. It doesn’t take tons of fertilizers when you’re using the right kind and when the soil is healthy. Your farmers only use so much because their “soil” is actually just “dirt” and the fertilizer just runs off.
Oh, and prices aren’t higher for organic crops because of low yield; they’re that high because the supply is smaller and the demand is higher than it is for crappy conventional crops. 😉
Wow, what a business major you must be. If the organic demand was higher then we would count gmo corn and soybean yields by the Billions of bushels. What do you do? Obviously with your “Vast” knowledge it can’t have anything to do with farming or business, or do you supplement your income with food stamps?
Again, bobo, you’re just sore in the butt. You know very well that the demand for organic is outpacing the supply, and you just don’t want to think about it or admit it. 🙂
No I admit it. The simple fact is no one wants to raise it. They actually like yield and making a living, so they raise gmos!!!!! (or at least non-gmo crops, but not organic)
Wrong again (about yield). You’re right that your type of “farmer” doesn’t want to raise crops that take a little more effort to raise. Your farmers have gotten very lazy. I’m betting it has little to do with organic yield. Also, the transition period is too economically hard for some farmers–even though they see the end value in switching–so they just stick with what they know so that they aren’t going 3 years with lower profits.
LOL, a little work? Much more work for much less yield. You need to open your eyes.
Like I said, your farmers have gotten lazy. They are not “farmers” in the true sense of the word. Or at least what the word used to be before the Industrial Revolution. IMO, a real farmer is one like I buy from in the growing season. They are a small family farm growing many different crops. They manage and work the farm without employees and it looks to me like they’re doing pretty well financially. Mono-culture farmers such as those growing GMOs may as well be working in a lab by comparison–in more ways than one.
LOL, the grass is always greener isn’t it. If small family farms could make it, then there would be more of them. That isn’t very hard to understand, oh wait you must have at least a little common sense.
BS. There is little room for small farmers when the food industry switches over to using crap for ingredients and factory farms are fattening animals with grain crops. That’s why small farmers were being lost over the decades–because food producers radically changed the way people eat by offering what they want people to eat. In turn, the farmers had to start catering to that. And now many people are suffering, not to mention the land that pays for our mono-cropping. Thankfully, there is a resurgence of small farmers all over the country so all is not lost. It’s called a food movement, bobo. Get over it.
food movement? It must be a well kept secret as I know many farmers that are getting out, and zero entering and a few getting larger.
Just goes to show you don’t know everything. That may be what’s happening in conventional agriculture but thankfully that’s not the only way to grow food…
Never said I know everything, just obviously more than you.
I am an exfarmer. It doesn’t sound like either one of you know much about the realities of farming today. Organic farming is labour intensive, with low yields due to weed competition. Because of the labour involved it is, by necessity, done on a small scale. Small scale equals small money so most have other income revenue. Off farm jobs or wives who bring in a living wage.
As to yields, my 10 year average for wheat was 40 bushelacre, canola was 22. My brothers average today is 60 and 40 respectively. Throw in a couple of disasters in that 10 year time frame and you see the difference in yield possible with GMO crops. BUT, I am against GMO’s for a simple reason. Untested and ruled by a couple large companies. Monsanto OWNS the USDA. Figuratively speaking anyway. I could cite real world examples disputing both of you but it isn’t worth my time. Good luck in your bickering.
My experience is more in corn, beans and livestock. GMOs have made life much easier and reduced certain chemicals (yes while increasing some as well). As for being owned by a few companies, that is true but lets look forward thirty or forty years when all of the current patents are long since expired. There will be plenty of opportunities to save seed or for smaller companies to put the traits in their own seed. As for untested, I disagree the most, gmos are the most tested food in history. They have been here for twenty years proving themselves in and out of the lab. Things like seedless watermelons were released on the public with much less testing and fanfare, and everyone just assumes they are safe.
Well, I guess I know enough about farming…I know that organic poly-culture farming takes more effort–that’s why bobo’s type of farmer won’t do it. They’re too used to sitting on their arses on top of those huge machines. Oh, and the small farmers I know around here who grow without pesticides and GMOs are making just fine of a living. They are very busy selling quite a bit of diversified produce. They love what they do, and they make a living wage. I’m guessing the reason they can do that is because they’re not growing just mono-crops.
When you only care about “yield” then we all suffer–people and the land.
ROFLMAO.
Some say the truth is funny.
Only idiots.
I didn’t know you said it!!
This “conversation” is over, troll-boy. I don’t have time for this childish BS. I don’t do this for a living–unlike you.
LOL, dealing with you a loser like you wouldn’t even qualify for part time.
We all have our own opinions of Russia, but it appears they are way ahead of the curve when it comes to safe food. Why fight a war with America. We will all die from food poisoning in one form or another, and Russia will be able to waltz right in.