Climate change & agriculture

Climate change & agriculture

A new report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change underscores the need for global sustainable agriculture. Learn more »

Beyond autism awareness

Beyond autism awareness

1 in 68 U.S. children is now on the autism spectrum. This Autism Awareness Month, let's talk prevention. Learn more »

Stand with farmworkers!

Stand with farmworkers!

Across the country, communities are finding creative ways to honor and support U.S. farmworkers. Join us »

Change is afoot

Change is afoot

From coast to coast, people are standing up to Monsanto and the rest of the “Big 6.” Your support keeps this important work going. Donate today »

Label GE food

Label GE food

Californians overwhelmingly support labeling genetically engineered food. Let’s make it happen! Urge your State Senator to support SB 1381. Take action »

Not lovin’ pesticide drift

Not lovin’ pesticide drift

Join rural Minnesotans in urging McDonald's to keep its promise to grow safe potatoes that don't put their families in harm's way. Take Action »

Pesticide Action Network's picture

Whether they are sprayed from planes or injected into the soil, pesticides don’t recognize fences or property lines. But pesticide users are, again, being forced to pay property owners for damage caused by airborne drift when they cross those lines.

According to a decision handed down July 26 by a Minnesota court, organic farmers who are victims of this “trespass” are entitled to compensation for pesticide contamination.

Pesticide Action Network's picture

Monsanto has announced it will start selling a new genetically engineered sweet corn directly to U.S. farmers this fall, the Los Angeles Times reports. In doing so, the biotech heavyweight will be directly challenging Syngenta, which has until now been the sole producer of the genetically engineered (GE) sweet corn sold at your grocery store since the late 1990s.

Pesticide Action Network's picture

As the federal scientific review of the safety of atrazine wraps up, PAN continues to push for common-sense process: keep it transparent, and don't let industry influence undermine the fair use of science in government decisions. Are we worried? Unfortunately, yes. A recent look at the docket reveals a controversial, Syngenta-funded study.

Heather Pilatic's picture

It’s the only explanation. Historically, Scientific American has been unafraid to confront right-wing attacks on science of the climate change denier and creationist sort. So when a blog appears under the SciAm masthead claiming to “bust" various myths of organics, citing industry-funded studies and commentary from fringe right-wingers like Alex Avery of the Hudson Institute, one wonders what happened.

Kristin Schafer's picture

Seventy-six million. U.S. farms are doused with that many pounds of the herbicide atrazine every year. That's a lot of any chemical — and scientists link this one to birth defects, infertility and the "chemical castration" of frogs.

Next week, EPA's science advisors will wrap up a 2-year process of rethinking atrazine, based on the latest studies of its health and environmental harms. People across the country will be watching closely to see just what happens next. So, without a doubt, will the Syngenta corporation.