A fresh study looks at what happens after people change their meat-eating habits. Those who upped their intake — about 3.5 servings more per week — saw their risk of developing Type 2 diabetes during four years of follow-up increase by almost 50 percent.
Monsanto has said that it won’t sue anyone for accidentally growing trace amounts of its patented crops. Now, that promise is legally binding, a federal appeals court says.
The high court ruled unanimously that when farmers use patented seed for more than one planting in violation of their licensing agreements, they are liable for damages.
Congress on Thursday approved stopgap funding legislation that includes language explicitly granting the USDA authority to override a judge’s ruling against genetically modified crops. Critics denounce the measure as the “Monsanto Protection Act.” But it seems to be codifying powers the USDA already has exercised in the past.
On its surface, the case is about whether farmers can use seeds derived from patented crops. But the bigger question is, how much control does a company have over its patented products once they’re in the hands of consumers?
Many farmers are worried that the biotech giant will sue them if a patented gene gets accidentally incorporated into their crops. But in a departure, one Monsanto lawyer says that only farmers that specifically take advantage of the company’s technology would face a lawsuit.
Should California require labeling of genetically modified foods? That’s the goal of Proposition 37 on the November state ballot. Supporters say GMO labeling will provide California consumers with valuable information, while detractors claim it will simply add unnecessary confusion and cost to the food system.