Sunday, April 26, 2009

MSG being sprayed on ALL vegetable crops


Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2009, 12:35 AM

"Approval for use on organic crops--in all states--has been requested. "
MSG Is Being Sprayed On Fruits, Veggies,
Nuts,Grains And SeedsAs They Are Growing...Even
Those Used In Baby FoodTruth In Labeling.org4- 20-9
In the 1970s, reluctant food processors
"voluntarily" took processed free glutamic acid
(MSG) out of baby food. Today it's back, in
fertilizers called "Omega Protein
Refined/Hydrolyzed Fish Emulsion" and "Steam
Hydrolyzed Feather Meal," both of which contain
hydrolyzed proteins; and in a product called
AuxiGro WP Plant Metabolic Primer (AuxiGro)
produced by Emerald BioAgriculture (formerly
Auxein Corporation) , which contains both
hydrolyzed protein(s) and "monosodium glutamate."
AuxiGro is being sprayed on some of the
vegetables we and our children will eat, into the
air we and our children must breath, and onto the
ground from which it can move into drinking
water. Head lettuce, leaf lettuce, tomatoes,
potatoes, and peanuts were among the first crops
targeted. On September 12, 2000, the Auxein
Corporation Web site gave the following information:
Crops registered include: Celery; Fresh Market
Cucumbers; Edible Navy and Pinto Beans; Grapes;
Bulb Onions; Bell, Green and Jalapeno Peppers;
Iceberg Head Lettuce; Romaine and Butter Leaf
Lettuce; Peanuts; Potatoes; Snap Beans;
Strawberries; Processing Tomatoes; Fresh Tomatoes; and Watermelons.
Today, there is no crop that we know of that has
not been approved for treatment with MSG by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Even in California -- the only state where there
are any restrictions on the use of AuxiGro --
AuxiGro has been approved for use on a number of
crops, and Emerald BioAgriculture continues to
push for more. Field tests in California have
been -- and may continue to be -- conducted on a
variety of crops, and those AuxiGro treated crops
may be sold in the open market without revealing
that they have been treated. We can't tell you
which crops those are because the CDPR has
refused to send records of test trials (which are
public information) to the Truth in Labeling Campaign.
As of June 13, 2002, AuxiGro was registered for
use in California on tomatoes, almonds, apricots,
cherries, plums, nectarines, peaches, prunes,
grapes (including grapes to be used in wine), and
onions. At that time, the California Department
of Pesticide Regulation said they were not aware
of any testing of AuxiGro for use on other crops.
They also said that they did not have any
proposals presently in house to register
additional crops for AuxiGro. It would appear,
however, that what the CDPR said was not true,
for the CDPR subsequently announced that Emerald
BioAgriculture had applied for permission to use
AuxiGro on tomatoes (new use), and on melons (new
crop) -- and, to the best of our knowledge,
approval is always preceded by field testing.
On July 7, 2004, Emerald BioAgriculture requested
approval of use of AuxiGro as a desiccant,
disinfectant, fertilizer, fungicide, growth
regulator - for increased yield and prevention of
powdery mildew in various crops such as almonds,
grapes, and melons. They also asked to add cole
crops (including broccoli, brussels sprouts,
cabbage, cauliflower, kale, collards, turnips,
rutabaga, mustard, watercress, and kohlrabi) to
the list of crops approved for AuxiGro use.
Approval for use on organic crops--in all states--has been requested.
What's wrong with using glutamic acid, an amino
acid found in protein, as a spray on crops?
- In protein, amino acids are found in balanced
combinations. Use of free glutamic acid as a
spray on crops throws the amino acid balance out of kilter.
- It's not the glutamic acid found in protein
that is being sprayed on crops, it's a synthetic
product. The spray being used most widely is
called AuxiGro. The "free glutamic acid" or so
called "L-glutamic acid" component being used by
its manufacturer, Emerald BioAgriculture,
contains L-glutamic acid, an amino acid found in
protein; but it also contains D-glutamic acid,
pyroglutamic acid, and other chemicals referred
to in the industry as "contaminants. " The free
glutamic acid used in AuxiGro is processed free
glutamic acid. It is manufactured -- in chemical
plants -- where certain selected genetically
engineered bacteria -- feeding on a liquid
nutrient medium -- excrete the free glutamic acid
they synthesize outside of their cell membrane
into the liquid medium in which they are grown.
In contrast, the free glutamic acid found in
protein, and the free glutamic acid involved in
normal human body function, are unprocessed. free
glutamic acid, and contain no contaminants.
- No one knows what the long term effects of
spraying processed free glutamic acid on crops will be.
- That the processed free glutamic acid (MSG)
will be absorbed into the body of the plant and
into the fruit, nuts, seeds, or vegetable it
produces seems undeniable. If it were not, the
plant would not be stimulated to grow. Neither
Emerald BioAgriculture or the EPA will address this issue.
- That there will be residue left on crops has
not been disputed by Emerald BioAgriculture. But
no study of either the amount of that residue, or
the least amount of processed free glutamic acid
needed to cause a reaction in an MSG-sensitive
person, has ever been done. "It should wash off"
doesn't mean it will wash off. "It seems unlikely
that such a small amount would cause a reactions"
doesn't mean that a small amount will not cause a
reaction or have long term health effects.
- Free glutamic acid is known to be toxic to the
nervous system. But the neurotoxic effects that
processed free glutamic acid will have on animals
that consume the plants on which it is sprayed -
effects over and above any effects caused by
external glutamic acid residue - have never been
evaluated. Neither are there data on the effects
that spraying processed free glutamic acid will have on drinking water.
- Consider, also, that children are most at risk
from the effects of processed free glutamic acid.
Their undeveloped blood-brain barriers leave them
most at risk from exposure to processed free
glutamic acid. It has been repeatedly
demonstrated that infant animals fed processed
free glutamic acid when young develop
neuroendocrine problems such as gross obesity,
stunted growth, and reproductive disorders later
in life, and that they also develop learning
disabilities. Emerald BioAgriculture did not
address that particular safety issue in its application to the EPA.
- No one knows how little glutamic acid is needed
to kill a single brain cell or to trigger an adverse reaction.
- Free glutamic acid is a neurotransmitter. It
causes nerves to fire, carrying nerve impulses throughout the nervous system.
- Free glutamic acid is a neurotoxin. Under
certain circumstances, free glutamic acid will
cause nerves to fire repeatedly, until they die.
- Processed free glutamic acid kills brain cells.
The free glutamic acid ingested by laboratory
animals that caused brain lesions and
neuroendocrine disorders was very often given in
the form of the food ingredient "monosodium
glutamate." "Monosodium glutamate" is the name of
a particular food additive. Processed free
glutamic acid is the reactive component in
"monosodium glutamate," just as processed free
glutamic acid is a reactive component in AuxiGro.
The glutamate industry research done in the 1970s
that was submitted to the EPA by the Auxein
Corporation, that pretended to find that
processed free glutamic acid is "safe," has been
long refuted by independent scientists. Indeed,
at the present time, neuroscientists attempting
to develop drugs to block the toxic effects of
free glutamic acid are using processed free
glutamic acid to selectively kill certain kinds of brain cells.
- Processed free glutamic acid causes
neuroendocrine disorders in maturing animals that
ingest processed free glutamic acid early in life.
- Processed free glutamic acid causes learning
disorders in maturing animals that ingest
processed free glutamic acid early in life.
- Processed free glutamic acid crosses the
placental barrier and causes learning
disabilities in animal offspring of dams that ingest it.
- Processed free glutamic acid has access to the
brain through the blood-brain barrier, which is
not impervious to the unregulated flow of
processed free glutamic acid. The blood-brain
barrier is immature at birth and may continue to
develop up to puberty. In certain areas called
the circumventricular organs, the blood barrier
is never impervious to the unregulated flow of
free glutamic acid. In addition, the blood-brain
barrier is easily damaged by such events as high
fever, a blow to the head, drug use, stroke,
ingestion of processed free glutamic acid, and the normal process of aging.
- The National Institutes of Health recognize
glutamic acid as being associated with addiction,
stroke, epilepsy, degenerative disorders such as
Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and
ALS, brain trauma, neuropathic pain, schizophrenia, anxiety, and depression.
- For years, free glutamic acid has been produced
and used in food additives with names such as
monosodium glutamate, sodium caseinate, and
hydrolyzed soy protein. In some people, the
processed free glutamic acid in food additives
causes adverse reactions that include migraine
headache, asthma, arrhythmia, tachycardia, nausea
and vomiting, depression, and disorientation. The
processed free glutamic acid in prescription and
non-prescription drugs, food supplements, and
cosmetics can also cause adverse reactions.
There are badly flawed industry-sponsored studies
that have pretended to find that processed free
glutamic acid does not cause adverse reactions.
Inappropriate procedures used by the glutamate
industry have included limiting subjects to
people virtually guaranteed not to be sensitive
to processed free glutamic acid, and/or using
processed free glutamic acid or other similarly
reactive substances in placebos as well as in
test material. The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) has based its claim that processed free
glutamic acid causes only mild and transitory
reactions on those badly flawed industry-sponsored studies.
- Even the EPA admits that the food additive
called "monosodium glutamate" causes adverse reactions.
- Even the FDA admits that the food additive
"monosodium glutamate" contains processed free glutamic acid.
- Even the FDA admits that many consumers refer
to all free glutamic acid as "MSG."
The EPA's approvals of use of MSG in agriculture
are simple, straightforward, and in violation of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
In reviewing the application of Auxein
Corporation (now Emerald BioAgriculture) for use
of processed free glutamic acid in a spray to be
applied to crops as they grow, the EPA failed to
conform to the requirements of the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act, which require, in part,
that the EPA review any proposed action for
validity, completeness, reliability, and
relationship to human risk. The EPA also ignored
Executive Order 13045 which requires government
agencies to consider available information
concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers,
including infants and children. For example,
Auxein Corporation sent the EPA 14
industry-sponsored toxicological studies from the
literature, all done in the 1970's, but failed to
mention hundreds of studies in the literature
that refuted those 14 studies. Auxein Corporation
even failed to send the EPA independent studies
that appeared in the same book(s) as the
industry-sponsored studies sent to the EPA. For
example, although processed free glutamic acid
causes brain lesions and neuroendocrine disorders
in infant animals, this special hazard faced by
infants was ignored by Auxein Corporation. It
would appear that Auxein Corporation restricted
its consideration of "available information" to
information made available by the glutamate
industry; and the EPA, even after having been
sent abstracts from other "available
information, " has not challenged the Auxein
Corporation applications. A more complete
discussion of the shortcomings of the EPA
approvals granted to Auxein Corporation has been submitted to the EPA.
Questions about the safety of spraying processed
free glutamic acid on plants and into the
environment have been raised by the Truth in
Labeling Campaign and by individual consumers.
The EPA has refused to address those concerns.
The EPA, and, in particular, EPA spokesperson Dr.
Janet Andersen, has failed to respond to
allegations that in approving the spraying of
processed free glutamic acid, the EPA failed to
consider the reliability, validity, and
completeness of the Auxein Corporation
application or comply with Executive Order 13045
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks,
except to say that the EPA had complied with
executive order 13045. Moreover, while responding
to letters that asked direct questions of the
EPA, Andersen failed to respond to most, if not
all, of the direct questions contained in those letters.
AuxiGro, the first MSG-laced plant "growth
enhancer" to hit the market, has been approved
for spraying on every crop we know of, with no
restrictions on the amount of processed free
glutamic acid (MSG) that may remain in and/or on
crops when brought to market. Even before
consumers had an inkling that crops were being
sprayed, the Truth in Labeling Campaign received
reports that MSG-sensitive consumers had gotten
sick from head lettuce and potatoes.
Federal Register notices chronicling the
application and approval of processed free
glutamic acid are available on the Web via GPO
Access, the Federal Register, through: <
http://www.gpoacces index.html>http://www.gpoacces index.html
. Application for approval of use of AuxiGro was
made to the EPA in 1997. Testing of the product
was also approved in that year, and many of the
test crops sprayed with AuxiGro were brought to
market without notifying consumers. Glutamic acid
was granted an exemption from establishment of a
tolerance limit in January, 1998. AuxiGro was
also approved for use on a number of crops in
January, 1998, and approved for use on other
crops later. No announcement of these approvals
was made in the Federal Register.
Due to a technical glitch in the system, the
glutes came to need one more approval to make
their California registrations work. The glutes
were asking for AuxiGro to be approved for use as
a fungicide in California, but the EPA had only
approved AuxiGro for use as a pesticide produce
or plant growth enhancer. And when application
was made for this addition to their approvals,
the application was brought to our attention; and
the Truth in Labeling Campaign filed a formal
protest to this approval of AuxiGro. <
http://truthinlabel objection- s1.html>The
Formal Objection of the Truth in Labeling
Campaign was filed on August 16, 2001 with the EPA.
By law, formal objections filed in a timely
manner must be responded to within six months.
Also, by law (we were told) even though the Final
Rule had not been promulgated, this additional
use of AuxiGro would be considered approved
unless and until the EPA determined that it
should be otherwise. In July, 2004, we received a
conference call from Dr. Andersen and a number of
other EPA players, including an EPA lawyer -- a
"courtesy call" telling us that our objections
had been discounted and that the Final Rule
allowing use of AuxiGro as a fungicide would be
published shortly in the Federal Register.
What's wrong at the EPA?
Neither the EPA nor Janet Andersen, Ph.D.,
director of the Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division (BPPD), are stupid. Rather,
all evidence would appear to suggest that the
EPA, which is charged with protecting the health
of Americans, says it is protecting the health of
Americans, when in fact the EPA acts to protect
the bottom line of big business. Don't think for
a moment that MSG is the only toxin unleashed on
the American public by the EPA. Let the words
"methyl parathion" and "DDT" jog your memory.
The EPA, in granting the chemical referred to as
"L-glutamic acid" an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of
"L-glutamic acid" on all food commodities when
applied/used in accordance with good agricultural
practices (thereby allowing unrestricted amounts
of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) residue to
remain in and on any and all food crops that come
under the EPA's jurisdiction) violated Section
408(c)(2)(A) (i), Section 408(c)(2)(ii) , Section
408(c)(2)(B) , and Section 408(b)(2)(D) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Neither "L-Glutamic Acid and Gamma Aminobutyric
Acid; Exemptions from the Requirement of a
Tolerance; Final Rule" (Federal Register June 21,
2001) nor "Glutamic Acid; Pesticide Tolerance
Exemption; Final Rule" (Federal Register January
7, 1998), which preceded it, met the criteria
established by law for granting exemptions from
the restriction of a tolerance.
How did spokesperson Andersen excuse the fact
that the EPA approved processed free glutamic
acid for use in an EPA approved spray? First,
said Andersen, the free glutamic acid used in the
spray is naturally occurring, and it's 99.3 per
cent pure pharmaceutical grade L-glutamic acid.
Yet, in admitting that the free glutamic acid in
AuxiGro is not 100 per cent pure L-glutamic acid,
and that it is pharmaceutical grade, Andersen
contradicted herself, and actually made the point
that 1) if the free glutamic acid used in AuxiGro
were truly natural, it wouldn't be
"pharmaceutical grade;" and 2) if the free
glutamic acid used in AuxiGro were truly natural
it would be 100 per cent, not 99.3 per cent pure L-glutamic acid.
Andersen said something else very interesting.
She said that the EPA is well aware of the fact
that MSG causes adverse reactions. However, when
Andersen used the term "MSG" she was referring to
the one food ingredient called "monosodium
glutamate," and not to the free glutamic acid in
"monosodium glutamate" that causes adverse
reactions. Failure to define terms, asAnderson
did (and does) so handily, is both deceptive and misleading.
What Andersen did is very clever. What she said
makes no sense at all. No one has ever claimed
that the processed free glutamic acid in AuxiGro
comes out of a box labeled "monosodium
glutamate." So for her to say it doesn't, is
meaningless. On the other hand, the claim has
been made that the free glutamic acid in AuxiGro
will cause the same brain lesions, neuroendocrine
disorders, adverse reactions and other diverse
disease conditions that are caused by the free
glutamic acid in "monosodium glutamate" and the
other food additives that contain processed free
glutamic acid. That claim is true, but Andersen
does not address it. How do you refute someone
who ignores legitimate questions and spews out
irrelevant statements as though they pertained to
your legitimate questions? You don't. The EPA
defense of its approval of use of processed free
glutamic acid in plant "growth enhancers" and its
registration of AuxiGro has two parts to it: 1)
ignoring those who question EPA actions, and 2)
making the irrelevant statement that AuxiGro does
not contain MSG (monosodium glutamate).
Neither Andersen nor anyone else at the EPA ever
addressed the criticism that approvals given by
the EPA to allow the use of free glutamic acid
and the product AuxiGro were inappropriate.
The EPA, which approved the used of processed
free glutamic acid in plant "growth enhancers,"
made a grievous error. But instead of recognizing
and remedying that error once it was pointed out
to them, the EPA began a cover-up. That cover-up
included use of ambiguous words and phrases,
half-truths, and downright lies told to
consumers. The cover-up continued (and continues
still) with a variation of those ambiguous words
and phrases, half-truths, and downright lies told
to legislators who inquire about spraying MSG into the environment.
You might find the Emerald BioAgriculture sales literature interesting
Sales literature promoting AuxiGro was once found
on their Web site, but is now long gone. While
Federal Register notices included the fact that
there is processed free glutamic acid (MSG) in
AuxiGro, the sales literature from Auxein
Corporation did not mention the fact that their
product contains free glutamic acid until the
Truth in Labeling Campaign began to broadcast
that information. In November, 1999, Auxein added
deceptive, misleading, and untrue statements in
an elaboration of its Product Page, wherein they
essentially make the untrue assertion that the
glutamic acid used in AuxiGro is chemically and
biologically identical to that found in plants and animals.
Sales literature did (on September 12, 2000), however, contain the following:
If you think you might be reacting to AuxiGro
sprayed on crops, you might want to try to
(contact Emerald BioAgriculture (formerly Auxein
Corporation) at the addresses that follow. (A
friend recently told us that he tried to contact
them by e-mail, but his e-mail was returned
unopened.) By law, the company is required to
forward reports of adverse reactions to the EPA.
You might want to ask the EPA if Emerald BioAgriculture did so.
John L. Mclntyre, Ph.D.
President & CEO
Emerald BioAgriculture (formerly Auxein Corporation)
3125 Sovereign Drive, Ste. B
Lansing, MI 48911-4240
Phone (888) 828-9346
Fax (517) 882-7521
mailto:%20sales@auxein. com
(From time to time, their web page,
http://www.auxein. com , can be accessed by password only.)
Please feel free to copy and distribute this
material, including our Web address, for those who might be interested.
http://truthinlabel ed.html
http://www.rense. com




No comments:

Post a Comment