 |
| Subscribe to RAGE Report
|
 |
| Quick Action Center
|
|
|
|
Northwest Resistance Against Genetic Engineering (NW RAGE) is a non-violent, grassroots organization dedicated to promoting the responsible, sustainable and just use of agriculture and science. We are working towards a ban on genetic engineering and patents on life. Our efforts focus on education, community building, advocacy and action.
NW RAGE works with neighbors, teachers, farmers and
friends to stop the reckless splicing and dicing of our genetic material.
We are not anti-science, we are pro-precautionary principle. We believe in a future that strives to do no harm to humans and to the ecosystems we all depend on. We believe in proceeding with new technologies only if a well informed civil society decides to do so after proper testing has been conducted.
Our activities range from postcard and letter writing, to education presentations,
to debates and public forums, to protests and direct action. We strongly believe that, in spite of the dangers of genetic engineering, people working together for change can and are making a difference in preventing this unnecessary and unsustainable technology from causing any further harm.
We warmly invite you to bring your voice and join in the struggle!
NW RAGE promotes active resistance to the intrusion of genetic engineering into our
lives, food and ecosystems. We are against corporate ownership of life. We believe so-called
"life science" corporations, like Monsanto and Dow, are attempting to privatize, patent
and own life to create huge profits and monopolies while ignoring the sanctity of creation.
We work to ban the release of genetically engineered organisms through education,
advocacy and action. We also work to promote sustainable agriculture through
activities like partnerships with organic associations and seed swaps. We see this
as a vibrant and viable future for life on the planet.
We work towards:
- A ban on genetic engineering
- A ban on patents on any life forms including animals, plants, cells, viruses, bacteria, genes, and proteins
- A ban on biopiracy - the theft of indigenous people's genes and knowledge
- A ban on cloning of humans and animals
- A rescinding of all current FDA approvals for genetically engineered products on the market
- An increase in the scale and scope of organic agriculture
- An increase in funding for research into organic agriculture and chemical-free growing techniques
- The cessation of factory farming Some steps you can take to get involved and to make a positive difference in your community:
- Sign up for our monthly newsletter so you can get more information and stay connected (see "Subscribe..." on the top left). Click here to see our privacy policy.
- Join us for our public meeting & screening of movies relating to Genetic Engineering and discussion on how you can help to promote a safe and sustainable food supply. Details here.
- Call us (503-239-6841) or email us (info@nwrage.org) if you have questions or comments.
- Send a tax-free donation.
Get involved now!! NW RAGE is one of the few groups in the Northwest working on the issue of genetic engineering, and we need your help!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If an age-old challenge in agriculture -- producing more on fewer acres -- finds a solution in biotechnology, a Tennessee company stands to profit.
Some 40 years from now, farmers will need to feed one-third more people worldwide than they do now, according to the World Bank. The farmland that will support those food crops will have more than one tenant, as biofuel feed stocks such as corn gobble up acreage, too.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Beginning in 2006, the Center for Food Safety (CFS) took legal action against the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) illegal approval of Monsanto's genetically engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa. The federal courts agreed and banned GE alfalfa until the USDA fully analyzed the impacts of the plant on the environment, farmers, and the public in an environmental impacts statement (EIS).
USDA released its draft EIS on December 14, 2009. A 60-day comment period is now open until February 16, 2010. CFS has begun analyzing the EIS and it is clear that the USDA has not taken the concerns of non-GE alfalfa farmers, or organic dairy farmers seriously, for example, having dismissed the fact that contamination will threaten export markets and domestic organic markets.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Confidential contracts detailing Monsanto Co.'s business practices reveal how the world's biggest seed developer is squeezing competitors, controlling smaller seed companies and protecting its dominance over the multibillion-dollar market for genetically altered crops, an Associated Press investigation has found.
With Monsanto's patented genes being inserted into roughly 95 percent of all soybeans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S., the company also is using its wide reach to control the ability of new biotech firms to get wide distribution for their products, according to a review of several Monsanto licensing agreements and dozens of interviews with seed industry participants, agriculture and legal experts.
Monsanto's methods are spelled out in a series of confidential commercial licensing agreements obtained by the AP. The contracts, as long as 30 pages, include basic terms for the selling of engineered crops resistant to Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, along with shorter supplementary agreements that address new Monsanto traits or other contract amendments.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Three Waterville wheat growers have formed a committee and launched a petition drive against genetically modified wheat.
They are concerned that if GMO wheat gets started in the region it could torpedo sales to Japan, the largest consumer of north-central Washington wheat. They are also concerned about potential health risks of GMO wheat.
Japan is opposed to GMO wheat but has accepted some GMO canola, said Tom Mick, chief executive officer of the Washington Wheat Commission and the Washington Grain Alliance in Spokane.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The American Public Health Association has officially come out in opposition to rBGH (rBST). The APHA is the world’s oldest professional public health organization, with a membership of over 50,000. The policy statement also opposes the use of non-therapeutic hormones in beef cattle, citing “clear evidence that hormones originating outside the body can interfere with our own hormone function.”
Guided by the common sense of the Precautionary Principle, the policy statement “strongly recommends,” in addition to further research:
1. “The FDA should act with public health precaution to ban the use of hormone growth promoters on the basis of certain exposure and possibility of human health risks, pending long-term epidemiological data demonstrating such exposures to be without harm to workers or the population as a whole.”
2. “Hospitals, schools, and other institutions, especially those serving children, should preferentially purchase food products from beef and dairy cattle produced without such hormones.”
3. “Companies producing and retailers offering products produced without rBGH or other hormones should retain the right to label such products in an easily readable and understandable fashion so that consumers in the free marketplace can be equipped to make an informed choice about which brands they buy.”
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
GMOBetter living through biotechnology? Pity executives at genetically modified seed giant Monsanto. Not only are they having to knock heads with Department of Justice lawyers over the company’s business practices, but some of their most-cherished PR talking points are being obliterated by researchers.
In the past few months, we’ve learned that its much-vaunted technologies don’t really increase yields after all; and aren’t really all that promising for adapting to climate change.
We’re also getting a trickle of information that calls into serious question the PR talking point on which the entire GMO seed industry hangs: that GMO products are safe to eat. This is a widely held assumption; but as Don Lotter showed in a recent paper in the International Journal of the Sociology of Food and Agriculture, there has actually been shockingly little research done on the long-term effects of eating GMO foods—and most of what has been was conducted by the industry itself.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Thursday, December 17, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
rage Genetics International, Monsanto and two alfalfa growers have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of Roundup Ready alfalfa.
They believe “the lower courts were wrong to ban planting of Roundup Ready alfalfa while the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is conducting additional environmental reviews.”
Roundup Ready alfalfa long ago completed review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and was approved by the USDA. It went on the market in 2005.
However, RR alfalfa has been tied up in the federal court system for more than four years.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Monday, December 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
An attorney in a lawsuit challenging federal approval of genetically modified sugar beet seeds says plaintiffs will try to stop growers from planting the seeds next year.
In September, federal Judge Jeffery White ordered USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to produce an environmental impact statement to support its deregulation of seed developer Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seeds.
The decision came in a suit filed in January 2008 by the Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed Alliance, Sierra Club and High Mowing Organic Seeds.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Monday, December 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Confidential contracts detailing Monsanto Co.'s business practices reveal how the world's biggest seed developer is squeezing competitors, controlling smaller seed companies and protecting its dominance over the multibillion-dollar market for genetically altered crops, an Associated Press investigation has found.
With Monsanto's patented genes being inserted into roughly 95 percent of all soybeans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S., the company also is using its wide reach to control the ability of new biotech firms to get wide distribution for their products, according to a review of several Monsanto licensing agreements and dozens of interviews with seed industry participants, agriculture and legal experts.
Monsanto's methods are spelled out in a series of confidential commercial licensing agreements obtained by the AP. The contracts, as long as 30 pages, include basic terms for the selling of engineered crops resistant to Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, along with shorter supplementary agreements that address new Monsanto traits or other contract amendments.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Posted on Monday, December 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home Page 
