You are viewing the NationofChange archives. For the latest news and actions, visit the new
Get Email Updates | Log In | Register

GMO Protesters Shut Down California Monsanto Office

Anthony Gucciardi
Natural Society / News Report
Published: Wednesday 21 March 2012
“If a small group can take down their office for a day from some mild protests, a few hundred thousand can take down the entire company — permanently.”
Article image

While proposed government regulation, previous legal action, and the threat of agricultural collapse does not seem to affect Monsanto’s daily operations, it appears protesters can and do. Dozens of protesters disrupted Monsanto’s California office in Davis, an area close to Sacramento, through vocal activism and calls to shut down the biotech giant with deep known ties into the United States government. Braving the rain, the dozens of protesters — not thousands — were successful in shutting down the entire office for the day.

The response to the activism presented by the protesters highlights just how powerful of a voice even just a few individuals have. If even a small group of anti-Monsanto grassroots activists can pause the entire business operations of a Monsanto corporation hub for the day, imagine what thousands or millions of concerned citizens could do. Monsanto is afraid of public outrage, which is why they are continually trying to squash labeling initiatives that would visually demonstrate to consumers just how ubiquitous their genetically modified ingredients are throughout the food supply. Many consumers now know and understand the negative effects of Monsanto’s creations, and oftentimes are consuming them unknowingly thanks to a lack of proper labeling guidelines.

“We were successful today in shutting down Monsanto,” said Steve Payan, the event organizer.

These developments have hit the news following two vital stories revealing the true nature of both Monsanto’s GMO crops and best-selling herbicide Roundup. Monsanto’s Roundup and a modified ‘biopesticide’ known as Bt were found to be killing human kidney cells by scientists, actually exhibiting direct toxicity to human biology. In the same vein, a group of 22 expert agricultural scientists warned the EPA that Monsanto’s GMO corn was extremely ineffective despite being toted as a method of increasing crop yields and reducing pesticide usage. Beyond the ineffective nature of the crops, the scientists warned that the GMO crops are developing mutated rootworms. The ‘super’ worms actually threaten the future of corn production as a whole, and could be a wrench in the agricultural wheel of progress.

It’s time for more than just a few dozen to stand up to Monsanto. If a small group can take down their office for a day from some mild protests, a few hundred thousand can take down the entire company — permanently.

Author pic
ABOUT Anthony Gucciardi

Anthony is an accomplished investigative journalist whose articles have appeared on top news sites and have been read by millions worldwide. A health activist and researcher, Anthony’s goal is informing the public as to how they can use natural methods to revolutionize their health, as well as exploring the behind the scenes activity of the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA.


Page 1 of 2
Global research consortium presents findings on long-term studies of genetically modified foods
On Thursday, March 8th, the European Commission Framework 7-funded GMSAFOOD consortium will announce significant results regarding the safety of GM foods to members of the press, as part of a three day conference to disseminate the results of over three years of research by Austrian, Australian, Norwegian, Irish, Turkish, and Hungarian scientists. The press conference will be held in English.
One study, conducted at the Medical University Vienna, refutes the findings of a 2005 study by Prescott et al., which initiated extensive controversy with the claim that field peas modified to inhibit alpha-amylase induce an allergic response in mice. After the 2005 study, development of the GM pea was immediately abandoned. The incident is regularly cited by those on both sides of the GM debate as an example of either the inherent dangers of genetically modified foods or the effectiveness of pre-market studies in identifying potential risk factors. The latest findings by the MedUni Vienna call for a re-evaluation of both positions.
One of the consortium’s most urgent contributions is its proposal for a novel approach to post-market monitoring. Despite the 114,507 hectares of biotech crops planted in the EU in 2011 (, there is currently no adequate system in place for monitoring the effects of GMOs on animal and human health once a crop has been approved for market, with current emphasis placed almost entirely on pre-market testing. Given the inadequacy of a traditional epidemiological approach to monitoring GMOs in the marketplace, the consortium proposes a “clustering and neural network”-type machine-learning framework to identify potential biomarkers capable of detecting unforeseen health risks. Such biomarkers could also be useful in predicting immune responses of multiple species to future genetically modified organisms. This methodology, coupled with meta-analysis of data within a prospective public repository, would significantly complement current pre-market testing procedures.
Other findings to be presented at the conference include those of a three year study conducted by the Irish Agriculture and Food Development Association in which pigs were fed genetically modified corn. The corn, modified to produce the insect-resistant Bt toxin, was grown in Spain.
These and other findings from GMSAFOOD research teams will be presented at the GMSAFOOD conference at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria 6-8 March 2012, including:
- Salmon feeding trials (Norway)
- Investigation of human immune response to potential allergens in GM peas using human-SCID mice (Austria)
- Food chain studies where rats were fed pork and fish which had been raised on Bt-corn (Norway)
- Epitope mapping and antibody determinations (Hungary)
Page 2 of 2
Media are invited to attend the press conference on 8th March (9:30am-11am) as well as any of the other GMSAFOOD conference sessions.
Internationally recognized researchers to present keynote addresses will include:
- Gerhard Flachowsky, EFSA GMO safety committee member, will present a talk on GMOs in animal nutrition
- Richard Goodman, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, will present his work on the potential allergenicity of GMOs intended for human consumption
- Gerard Barry, International Rice Research Institute, will review the experience and future of products from GM Crops
- Anne Constable from the Nestle Research Centre and Alan Kristal, University of Washington, will discuss epidemiological issues surrounding post market surveillance for novel foods
- Helmut Gaugitsch from the Environment Agency Austria, Sandy Lawrie from the Food Standards Agency in the UK, and Yves Bertheau from INRA France will join in a panel discussion on the 8th to discuss risk assessment and policy issues.
Thursday 8 March, 9:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
Medical University of Vienna
Rectorate Sitzungssaal,
First floor, Room 514
Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Vienna
For more information:
Szilvia Steiner
Medical University Vienna
Department of Dermatology
Experimental Allergy Laboratory Rm.4P90.02
Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna
Tel.: +43 1 40160 63009
GMSAFOOD Consortium: Medical University of Vienna, Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority, Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Central Food Research Institute, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, and Troyka, Techno-Park of the Middle East Technical University.
Further details on the project and conference registration can be found here:

Debunker, What pesticide

What pesticide residues are you referring to?

exactly what residues is he

exactly what residues is he talking about _ i assume he thinks a chemical liek dihygrogen monoxid is carcinogenic- I know its in all GM crops and it kills people but that can't be what he is talking about --can it?

There are in fact studies

There are in fact studies that show fairly high levels of pesticide residue in GMO foods. These pesticides are known to be carcinogenic. Thus GMO foods are bad for you. No matter how many uninformed people (or liars) say differently. Labeling is being fought because Monsanto doesn't want people to know where their poisonous products are, because they know if people were able to easily identify, which products have GMO foods, they wouldn't buy those products.

what residues are

what residues are carcinogens?

Hooray to getthefacts4change

Hooray to getthefacts4change for expressing a reasoned and informed opinion rather than unfounded hysteria. I thought I was the only one. There are so many conspiracy theories surrounding GMO foods that are so entrenched that the nay-sayers will not entertain the slightest bit of reason and their first response is to accuse you of being in bed with Monsanto. So keep it up. Perhaps others will join us to shine some light on the subject.

There is a simple fact that we must all understand and it does not require any scientific or technical knowledge: over a 10 year period, three trillion doses of GM foods were comsumed by humans without a single adverse event. Not one. The food is safe, so get over it. This report was several years back, so we have likely doubled the number of doses. Do you or anyone you know have liver or kidney disease, cancer or are infertile from eating GMO foods?

Please do not confuse my defense of GMO technology with the business practices of Monsanto. If you don't like Monsanto, then sue the bastards or send money to to those who will.

And I agree about Gucciardi. He is not a reporter. His articles are so opinionated and contain so many errors that he has no business writing for Nation of Change.

You might as well face it,

You might as well face it, Monsanto! You're on your way out! Along with the other 'persons' who are doing evil things to our Mother! You are MF's in the true sense of the word, or more accurately, mother rapists! And for what? The Bottom Line? HA! The Bottom Line is that we need our Mother, the Earth, to survive! And so you, and all those others MUST STOP KILLING HER! You think you're so clever! Yes, clever you are but you have not the faintest idea of wisdom, of justice, of peace. And frankly, I don't think you even care. Money is all you care about.You must go and hang your heads in shame for all the damage and wounding you have done. Remember, your children and grandchildren too will have to make do with what's left after you have poisoned everything that grows. Including humans. I send blessings and heartfelt gratitude to those who stand up to your evil ways. You cannot hide from us anymore, the game's up!

you have been saying Monsanto

you have been saying Monsanto is on its way out for 16 years and it only gets bigger . I dont have any problem eating Gm crops directly let alone eating meat fed Gm grain. It has been used fro 16 years and has been the most tested food. How come Monsanto does loss law suits about its business practices? Because they have high ethics standards. They had a manager bribe a government official in Asia a number of years ago. They reported it to the US government - who ever hears of companies self reporting these types of things> everyone goes goes through rigorous ethics training - do academics or activities do that - hell you really thing they are perfect? Hell no. The fact is people are alive today becuase of GM foods not the other way around and I can guaranteed you have no idea what a farm is really like. Thank god we dont have to depend on people like you for our food

there is a simple reason why

there is a simple reason why GM derived food is not labeled. The reason for labeling would be religion based. Since there is no difference in nutritional quality before long all food would have masses of labels that mean nothing for safety. If you want GM free try certified organic. Ordinary organic is a fraud and can be GM and not even organic. Once the label Gm free is there, it would be free range or "place your sloganhere" label next and the FDA knows this. You can label milk as BGH hormone free but you have to say that there is no difference in milk from BGH treated or not treated milk becuase based on what FDA has reviewed as valid there is no lab in the world that can tell you which cow was treated with BGH. hence the rest is almost a religious belief based on belief and not science but I know none reading this will believe it - they have already been converted

I doubt you are an

I doubt you are an accomplished reporter when you get the facts wrong. G,m crops don't cause disease or cancer and there is no basis to say they are harmful. The EU eats the grain but doesn't allow cultivation because of political not health or environmental reasons. Their scientist approve the products. The FDA which Taylor works is not the main aganecy that regulates its the USDA and sometimes the EPA and Taylor excuses himself from the discussions and if anything doesn't support Monsanto. The only facts you got right was the Monsanto got to take a Friday off. From what I heard from people I know there they would love another day off. Also the Davis site works a lot on non-GM products including seed for organic farmers (another fact you didn't know).

Three cheers to the 'dozens'

Three cheers to the 'dozens' of protesters who prove that grass roots people power is the one way to bring about positive change in greedy, careless corporations and begin to make the rich and powerful feel the squeeze as we, the 99% have been feeling for years! It's about time and the inspiration for more of us to get out there and do our part to let those in power hear our voices.

Whether GMO foods are harmful

Whether GMO foods are harmful is an open question, but we certainly need clear labeling so each of us can make their own decisions.

So happy to see this action!

So happy to see this action! We have a right to know what we are eating and right now, monsanto is feeding us GMO foods filled with pesticides and cancer causing ingredients. Many European nations have rejected the seeds but in the USA, since Taylor once was a lawyer for Monsanto, the burden of proof rests on us. Little to no testing and what was done was destroyed. I want to have the option of knowing what I am feeding my family and if this company continues to pervail; then their poisonous food needs to be labeled as containing GMO's

Comment with your Facebook account

Comment with your Disqus account

Top Stories

comments powered by Disqus

NationofChange works to educate, inform, and fight power with people, corruption with community.

If you would like to stay up to date with the best in independent, filter-free journalism, updates on upcoming events to attend, and more, enter your email below:

7 Compelling Reasons Why You Should Support NationofChange

Our readers often tell us why they’ve decided to step up and become supporters. Here are some of the top reasons people are giving.

1. You’re keeping independent journalism alive
The corporate owned media has proven that it can’t be trusted. In a media landscape wrought with spin and corruption, NationofChange stands in very scarce company.

2. You’re sticking it to the rich, powerful, and corrupt
When you have money in this country you can get away with damn near anything, and they do. NationofChange isn’t afraid to expose these criminals no matter how powerful they are.

3. Your donation is 100% tax-deductible
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 charity. People tend to assume that many other organizations are (most nonprofits are NOT) but it’s that 501(c)3 status is a bit more rare than you think.

Read the rest...