The company is facing consumer fraud allegations from the Attorney General of West Virginia, over false and misleading claims over the performance of the much higher-priced Roundup Ready 2 soybean seed. Monsanto advertising claims a 7% to 11% yield increase with RR 2 soybeans, a promise not substantiated by research at Iowa State and Pennsylvania State Universities. Several other states are considering comparable actions under consumer protection laws.
Despite an effort to spin the recent Supreme Court decision in the Roundup Ready alfalfa case as a major win for the biotech industry, the Center for Food Safety and many others have pushed back and explained what the court decided, and did not decide. In short, the ruling contained a minor procedural “victory” for Monsanto and the USDA, but no change in the status quo on several other issues and arguments brought before the Court.
Dr. Brian Baker, now at Alfred State College, is a member of the Center’s scientific advisory committee. He provided the Center a clear and crisp assessment of the ruling. An excerpt of Baker’s comments follows –
“As reported by biotech supporters, the Court did lift the lower court's injunction on planting, but said that USDA-APHIS still needed to approve RRA within the bounds of NEPA. The suit was premature and for the most part left the status quo in place. The Court disregarded arguments by Monsanto asking the court to rule what specifically could be considered grounds for denial, and in effect deferred to the agency.”
Media coverage of the spread of glyphosate (Roundup) resistant weeds keeps spreading. The Associated Press circulated a major piece on June 21, 2010 entitled “Roundup resistant weeds pose environment threat.” The article describes efforts by the biotech industry to create new GMO plants tolerant of herbicides in addition to Roundup, including several that are much more toxic and damaging to the environment.
