Mexicans saved by US from eating cat food!

Mexicans “would be eating cat food” if it weren’t for the US and US trade, says US Senator from Louisiana.

This comment came at a great time. Lately, my English classes with Liz have been devoted to junk food vocabulary.  Liz just moved from Morelia, Mexico to Arkansas to marry her childhood sweetheart. He legally emigrated from Mexico decades ago, and is now divorced, with an 11 year old daughter. Mealtimes are tense.

Back in Morelia, Liz naturally ate well, without following fads or strictures: lots of fruit and vegetables and home-blended juice, some, but not much, meat and fish, fresh corn tortillas more than white bread, snacks of chili-lime drenched jicama sticks or spicy nuts. Six weeks in, she’s deep in food-system culture shock:  cheese-gooey pizza, greasy burgers and fries, squishy white bread, chips, energy drinks, more chips, ice cream, more soda, not a fruit or vegetable in sight.  I told her about the “cat food” comment. 

“Even coming from Mexico,” she said, “where we have way too much of your food, and kids are getting fat and unhealthy (1), still, at home I can buy fruit everywhere. At least I have the choice.  Every market, every day, mango, papaya, strawberries, pineapple, avocados, claro, we’re in Michoacán. Tomatoes, jicama, carrots, squash. Here, I can’t find anything. And what I finally find, it is so expensive. And it’s not habit to eat it. I see kids only with big bags of potato chips and enormous bottles of soda.”

I was reminded of the cerrada San Augustin, a pedestrianized block just below the Morelia Cathedral, lined with snack sellers. On one side, gazpacho stands, colorful heaps of cubed papaya, pineapple, watermelon, mango, ready to fill plastic cups and top with orange juice, lime, chili, cheese, crema — your choice. On the other side, ice cream stands with all the usual plus fabulous flavors like avocado and mamey. A little further down, esquites, roasted corn kernels spiced and sauced 10 different ways, served in a cup, or, at fancier places, in a little clay bowl. A vendor sells elote, roasted corn on the cob (with or without crema, chili, lime, grated cheese). Another offers jicama pops the size of ping pong paddles, ready to coat, or not,  in sugar or chili or both. A guy hawks the ever-popular Dorilocos, a bag of Doritos zipped open on the side, for stuffing with, you guessed it, salsa, cheese, lime. Then there are snack bags of garbanzos, beans in skins or not, roasted or steamed. Another corner, sugar- or Hershey chocolate-dipped fried churros. 

Yes, plenty of unhealthy stuff, plenty of junk food. But healthier options, too, Snacks based in corn, vegetables, and fruit, still holding on.(2) Snacks you won’t find in the US at the mall or school football game.

This is the painful irony of applying to Mexico the ‘they’d be eating cat food’ metaphor for poverty. The fact is, with US trade, Mexicans are eating worse than ever. Much worse. And getting sicker, accordingly. The American diet that Mexico increasingly imports from the US – both the food itself and the patterns of producing and eating it  – is literally killing them with diabetes, heart disease, chronic illnesses, and reduced quality of life.(3)

Nutritional poverty is not the only impoverishment fed by the American diet taking over. As Mexico’s food system entwines with that of the US, cheaper imports from the US drive small producers out of business. Tastes change.(4) Smaller diversified farms get bought up, consolidated, or fall out of production.(5) High value export crops – avocados, berries – replace local or regionally marketed food, which, in turn, couldn’t get prices that would make production viable.  Bigger, agribusiness export systems drive illegal clearing of forests, heavier chemical use, contamination of surface water and heavier water extraction. Biodiversity declines, niche and specialized traditional crops suffer.

Food self-sufficiency and resilience at the household, community, regional, and ultimately national levels weaken. Small shops sell more chips, soda, and candy than local fruit and vegetables. Ex-campesinos and their families leave the pueblos for the cities, where jobs– and healthy food – are scarce. People who are able migrate north, legally and otherwise, to pick strawberries, harvest apples, work vineyards, cook, clean, build, and landscape.

There are parts of Mexico where it is now really difficult to find fruits and vegetablesInstead of the tianguis markets where local fruits and vegetables were historically inexpensive and plentiful, the food needs of Mexicans are increasingly met by chains like Walmart, Coca Cola-owned OXXO, and Circle K.” (6)

Food traditions in Mexico run deep and delectable, a source of pride and globally recognized. In 2010, UNESCO declared traditional Mexican food part of the  intangible cultural heritage of humanity, reflecting integration across community-rooted practices of planting, harvesting, cooking, and eating. Corn is at the heart, with at least 60 heirloom varieties, plus beans typical to each region, and more than 150 different chilis across Mexico. Food-farming systems unique to Mexico persist from pre-Hispanic times. Pre-US trade times.

Mexican cuisine has moved its traditions into the fine dining realm, now, as well. Mexican restaurants in Mexico and in the US gather awards and regularly hit “top” lists with star chefs. Star chefs who seek out the heirloom corn, chilis, and greens that agribusiness is driving out. The food that if it weren’t for the power of the US agri-food system might not be so hard to find that it is turned into expensive, specialty signature dishes.

Fortunately, Mexican agriculture and traditions also go north. More than 10 million tons of fruits and vegetables, and over 1 million metric tons of avocados from Mexico save at least some Americans eating only chips, burgers and fries.

NOTES

(1) One in three Mexican schoolchildren overweight or obese – a 27 percent rise in 12 years…Mexico’s biggest killers are now cardiovascular diseases and diabetes. ..only 40 years ago, the main causes of death here were malnutrition and infectious diseases. The speed at which Mexicans have made the change from a diet dominated by maize and beans to one that bursts at the seams with processed fats and sugars poses one of the greatest challenges to public health officials. Mexico is the largest consumer of ultra-processed products, including sugary drinks, in Latin America. 

(2) Healthy, fruit- and veg-centric options are readily turned into high-calorie zappers, but still much healthier than ultra-processed, zero-nutritional value junk food.

(3) “The country’s food environment has been transformed as a result of economic growth and free trade agreements. In the past 40 years, the Mexican diet has shifted from mainly fresh and unprocessed foods to ultra-processed products high in sugar, salt, and fat. This transformation, along with aggressive marketing techniques by the food industry, has also led Mexico to become one of the countries with the lowest breastfeeding rates in the world. Today, 23·1% of the Mexican population’s total dietary energy comes from ultra-processed food products. WHO recommends a maximum of 5–10% of total energy per day from free sugars—in Mexico, over two thirds of the population exceed this. The country is also among the highest consumers of sugary beverages globally; they represent approximately 10% of total daily energy intake in adults and children and make up 70% of total added sugar in the diet.”

…attempts to develop prevention policies faced immediate opposition from multinational food companies. Even basic efforts, such as healthy hydration recommendations were never fully implemented due to strong pressure from the beverage industry. Junk food and sugary drinks were banned from schools, albeit the guidelines did not include penalties for non-compliance, which has led to lax implementation.”  The Lancet. September 2020. Obesity in Mexico: rapid epidemiological transition and food industry interference in health politics.

(4) It is increasingly difficult to find, or afford, healthier food options, especially in smaller towns and rural areas, as fast, cheap junk food and soda replace fruit and vegetables in supermarkets and shops all over Mexico. “..over the last two decades, the Mexican diet has been transformed. Consumption of beans dropped by half. In the last 14 years, consumption of fruit and vegetables dropped by 30% – largely replaced by processed food and sugar-sweetened beverages…. In part due to the North American Free Trade Agreement, which took effect in 1994, the availability of processed food has soared. Even in the most remote villages, little stores sell packaged biscuits, pastries, doughnuts and cakes, and sodas and non-carbonated sweetened drinks.” The Guardian, 2013.

(5) “NAFTA put almost two million small-scale Mexican farmers out of work, in turn driving illegal migration to the United States….When NAFTA removed trade tariffs, companies exported corn and other grains to Mexico below cost. Rural Mexican farmers could not compete…..At the same time, Mexico reduced its subsidies to farmers from 33.2% of total farm income in 1990 to 13.2% in 2001. Most of those subsidies went to Mexico’s large farms. These changes meant many small Mexican farmers were put out of business by highly subsidized American farmers……In response to NAFTA’s competitive pressure, Mexican agribusiness used more fertilizers and other chemicals, costing $36 billion per year in pollution. Rural farmers expanded into marginal land, resulting in deforestation at a rate of 630,000 hectares per year.” Reference: Council on Foreign Relations, July 2020. NAFTA and the USMCA: Weighing the Impact of North American Trade. Andrew Chatzky, James McBride, and Mohammed Aly Sergie

(6) “Since NAFTA, subsidized corn, soy, and meat products in the U.S. have altered a food landscape that now includes people outside its borders. This has included the cheap, corn-syrup-heavy products that have saturated the North American market with very little regulation, pushing aside more traditional, local foods.” … “There are parts of Mexico where it is now really difficult to find fruits and vegetables…One kilo of fruit costs the same as a 600-milliliter Coca-Cola.” …. “Instead of the tianguis markets where local fruits and vegetables were historically inexpensive and plentiful, the food needs of Mexicans are increasingly met by chains like Walmart, Coca Cola-owned OXXO, and Circle K.” References: How NAFTA Destroyed the Mexican Diet, Behind the trade agreement that changed eating in North America forever. Lisa Martine Jenkins  Sep 19, 2018. Eating NAFTA: Trade, Food Policies, and the Destruction of Mexico. Alyshia Galvez, University Press, 2018

GMO corn ban next step? Science goes to mediation.

Mexico answered the US call to show the science behind the limited GMO corn ban. The US didn’t like the response. Now both may be putting their science on the table for third party consideration.

Though Mexico radically slimmed its GMO corn ban to now apply only to white corn used for tortillas and masa, the US remains “distressed1” and driven to call for trade dispute settlement under USMCA2 (formerly NAFTA). The distress is not over the few percent of US corn exports that would be affected — which could largely be filled by US growers of non-GMO white corn. No, it’s the science.

USMCA does not require Mexico to accept GMO corn. It does, however, stipulate that any blockage of trade must have a scientific justification. And both sides have science on their side. But the US is playing one science hand, Mexico, another.

“Unless Mexico knows something that isn’t known by scientific experts the world over, the authors of more than 1,700 studies – many of them independently funded — on the safety of ag biotechnology … then there is no scientific basis for the ban,” said Lynne Finnerty, director of ag & environment communications for the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO).

Not so fast. “…Mexico has the right to its own science, and the country will use it to defend its actions,” says Tim Wise, a senior research fellow at Tufts University and a senior adviser for the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, a Minnesota-based research and advocacy group.

“There’s plenty of science to justify precaution … on GM corn consumption… It’s not up to [US Secretary of Agriculture] Vilsack to determine what level of tolerance Mexico needs to accept or what constitutes sound science. USMCA doesn’t give the U.S. the right to make those determinations … It mandates that there’s transparency in decision-making and that it’s science-based – not which science.”

As I’ve written about before, an underlying tension is: which science, addressing what issues? The US focuses on the safety of human consumption of GMOs. Mexico raises other areas of scientific inquiry, beyond immediate health concerns, including potential contamination of heritage corn varieties; the global importance of preserving corn biodiversity; cultural heritage and preservation; food sovereignty and security; sustainability, economics, and support for Mexican small and mid-sized producers.

The problem for the US around ‘which science, addressing what?’ goes well beyond corn kernels. If Mexico’s science prevails, with its scientific rationale for the GMO corn ban validated, it undermines the long-standing claims of US ag that GMOs and biotechnology are entirely benign.

BIO’s press release of March 7 (3) is clear. “…the importance of beginning the legal process (is) to not only resolve the dispute with Mexico but also prevent other countries from following suit. The United States must use the dispute mechanisms ..to ensure…domestic policies do not limit the tools U.S. farmers have to sustainably produce food for our ever-growing world population … Sending a strong signal on enforcement will serve as a critical precedent for other trading partners.”

US Republicans continue to sabre-rattle4, calling for declarations of trade violations and dispute resolution. Mexico appears to continue with appeasement. I see little news about it here in the Mexican press, and little on the US side — the US Farm Bill takes news precedence. It’s in simmer-mode. But it needs to be watched. US corporate industrial ag has a way of boiling over, scalding whatever is in its path.

(1) “…science, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack says, is the foundation of his distress over Mexico’s second presidential decree that seeks to block the U.S. GM white corn from making its way into Mexican food.” Agri-Pulse 02/22/23 ” US counting on science to win GM corn fight, but so is Mexico.”

(2) ..Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., called Mexico’s action on GM corn “a flagrant violation of USMCA” and stressed that the U.S. “should be prepared to pursue a full dispute settlement.” Agri-Pulse 02/22/23 ” US counting on science to win GM corn fight, but so is Mexico.”

(3) BIO (Biotechnology Innovation Organization) Ag & Bioscience Groups: It’s Time for Action on Mexico’s Biotech Corn Ban. March 9, 2023.

(4) Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, the top Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, said Mexico’s actions are a “clear-cut example of a partner going back on its word” and stressed that the U.S. has “an obligation to ensure American producers are given the fair access to markets they were promised.”

Mexico yields on GMO ban; not enough for US ag

Environmental, food sovereignty, small producer, and indigenous groups are dismayed by Mexico softening its GMO/glyphosate ban of 2020. But the USDA and US corporate agriculture say Mexico’s position is still unacceptable. All I can say is, can’t these guys read? The modified “ban” is as soft and narrow as corn silk.

In response to the imperious US demand to “show us the science by February 14,” Mexico issued a new decree on February 13, parsing and slicing the ban to slivers.

In a huge concession, the ban will not apply to yellow corn — by far the biggest Mexico import/US export — used largely to feed Mexico’s appetite for chicken, beef, pork, fish, goats, and sheep.1 So that exempts 95% of US corn exports from the “ban.” And while there had been a target date for applying the ban to yellow corn for animals and industry, that deadline was dropped. Instead, decisions about GMO yellow corn imports and phase-outs will “…depend on supply and working with domestic and foreign businesses for an orderly transition.” Hmm. Wonder when that will happen, and how far ‘foreign’ businesses will go.

At issue, then, is white corn used for direct human consumption, and for some processed food and industrial products. Mexico is largely, though not entirely, self-sufficient in white corn. Of the approximately 17 million tons of corn Mexico imports each year, white corn makes up only about 3.4 million tons. But despite reducing the ban to this small segment of imports, the new decree goes even slimmer. Earlier iterations of the ban applied to white corn for human consumption. The new decree slices it down to corn destined to be used for masa and tortillas. And not all masa and tortillas, but masa and tortillas in government programs.2 So, public purchases for government use, no GMO corn, but everything else seems to get a GMO ok pass. That elote corn griller on the plaza is free to slather chili-lime-mayo on nice and cheap imported GMO cobs.

Cutting off even more from the scope of the ban, the new decree allows GMO white corn to be imported for manufactured human food — chips and snacks, cereals, sauces, ice cream, cakes. And it is the responsibility of the importer, of whoever buys it and brings it in, to make sure that it’s only going to the allowed uses, and not for masa or tortillas in government programs.3 Uh huh, right.

So exempted from the ban is all the yellow corn — most of the pie — and of the remaining slice that’s white corn, white corn for manufactured food products is exempted, along with any other food that is not ‘masa and tortillas destined for government use’. The ban looks like it applies a pile of crumbs.

As far as glyphosate and seed corn, which apply to corn planting, not to immediate consumption, the news is mixed. Mexico’s science around this — which the US seems to categorize as not-acceptable science — has to do with contamination of local varieties, eventual dilution or elimination of Mexico’s diverse corn heritage4, the environmental damage of glyphosate, and the human health impacts of glyphosate use.5 Mexico has long restricted commercial planting of GMO corn, but seed and chemical companies continue to challenge the regulation. It is reiterated in the new decree: no GMO seed corn, no GMO seed corn for human consumption.6

Glyphosate, the weed killer that allows GMO corn to grow when all else around it dies, is to be phased out, and gradually replaced by safer, less environmentally damaging substitutes and practices. The transitional phase of substitution is to begin immediately, to be completed by March 31, 2024.7 That is, the glyphosate ban won’t start for another year.

So what’s the problem? Despite recognizing that, “Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador’s government softened its stance on a planned ban on genetically-modified US corn after pressure from the Biden administration,” the response is that the new decree “landed with a thud.” It is “disappointing,” and “will not avoid a trade dispute.” 8

What does US corporate agriculture want? The now-mushy ban would impact a fraction of the US market — a fraction, by the way, that could potentially be filled by US farmers growing non-GMO corn. It is not enough, then, for Mexico to cave on trade and big-ag economics, and allow the vast majority of its imports to remain GMOs.

The US also seems to need Mexico to bow at the altar of the science the US prioritizes, abandon environmental and social sciences, turn a blind eye to cultural, economic, and environmental concerns, and bid adios to notions of self-determination, self-sufficiency, and food sovereignty. Allowing Mexico to use and act on these arguments would give them legitimacy. If Mexico then wrests some degree of independence, some shred of autonomy, from global seed and chemical conglomerates, and from US corporate agriculture, well, what’s next?

Decree full text

Decree summary

Mexico news: https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/cartera/decreto-del-maiz-transgenico-no-evitara-disputas?utm_source=web&utm_medium=social_buttons&utm_campaign=social_sharing&utm_content=copy_link

https://aristeguinoticias.com/1302/mexico/prohibe-amlo-uso-de-maiz-transgenico-para-alimentacion-humana/

1 Cutting meat consumption — especially of corn-finished beef and industrial pork — would help reduce Mexico’s reliance on imported GMO corn, and also reduce negative environmental impacts of the livestock industries. Mexico could ramp up support for mixed production methods, environmentally sound pasturing practices, agro-forestry, non-GMO feeds, and transitioning to more eco-friendly meat production and consumption.

2 From the decree: Maíz para alimentación humana, el que se destina a la alimentación humana mediante nixtamalización o elaboración de harina, que es la que se realiza en el sector conocido como de la masa y la tortilla. That is: Maize for human consumption, which is intended for human consumption through nixtamalization or flour processing, which is carried out in the sector known as masa and tortilla;

..se abstengan de adquirir, utilizar, distribuir, promover e importar maíz genéticamente modificado, así como glifosato o agroquímicos que lo contengan como ingrediente activo, para cualquier uso, en el marco de programas públicos o de cualquier otra actividad del gobierno. …refrain from acquiring, using, distributing, promoting and importing genetically modified corn, as well as glyphosate or agrochemicals containing it as an active ingredient, for any use, within the framework of public programs or any other government activity.

3 From the decree: …. la Comisión Federal para la Protección contra Riesgos Sanitarios podrá otorgar autorizaciones de maíz genéticamente modificado para alimentación animal y de uso industrial para alimentación humana, siendo responsabilidad de quien lo utilice en México que no tenga el destino previsto en la fracción III del artículo segundo de este ordenamiento. … the Federal Commission for the Protection against Sanitary Risks may grant authorizations for genetically modified maize for animal feed and for industrial use for human feed, it being the responsibility of those who use it in Mexico who do not have the intended purpose provided for in fraction III of Article II of this order (masa and tortilla).

4 http://Navarro, Carlos. “Study Finds High Levels of Genetically Altered Organisms in Mexican Tortillas.” (2017). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/sourcemex/6384

5 The World Health Organization has characterized glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has concluded the opposite. Nonetheless, Roundup maker Bayer-Monsanto has paid out billions to settle numerous lawsuits from plaintiffs who maintain the herbicide contributed to their cancer. https://thefern.org/2022/12/the-deep-roots-of-mexicos-trade-dispute-with-u-s-over-gmo-corn

6 From the decree: Las autoridades en materia de bioseguridad, en el ámbito de su competencia, con el propósito de contribuir a la seguridad y a la soberanía alimentarias y como medida especial de protección al maíz nativo, la milpa, la riqueza biocultural, las comunidades campesinas, el patrimonio gastronómico y la salud humana, de conformidad con la normativa aplicable: I.     Revocarán y se abstendrán de otorgar permisos de liberación al ambiente en México de semillas de maíz genéticamente modificado; II.     Revocarán y se abstendrán de otorgar autorizaciones para el uso de grano de maíz genéticamente modificado para alimentación humana,

The authorities in matters of biosecurity, within the scope of their competence, with the purpose of contributing to food security and sovereignty and as a special measure to protect native corn, milpa, biocultural wealth, peasant communities, gastronomic heritage and human health, in accordance with the applicable regulations: Revoke and refrain from granting permits for the release into the environment of Mexico of genetically modified corn seeds; II. Revoke and refrain from granting authorizations for the use of genetically modified corn seed for human consumption.

7 From the decree: …revocarán y se abstendrán de otorgar autorizaciones y permisos para la importación, producción, distribución y uso de glifosato y realizarán las acciones conducentes para el establecimiento y generación de alternativas y prácticas sostenibles y culturalmente adecuadas, que permitan mantener la producción agrícola y resulten seguras para la salud humana, la diversidad biocultural del país y el medio ambiente, libres de sustancias tóxicas que representen peligros agudos, crónicos o subcrónicos. Se establece como periodo de transición para el desarrollo y escalamiento de las acciones previstas en este artículo, el comprendido de la fecha de entrada en vigor de este decreto y hasta el 31 de marzo de 2024.

In accordance with the applicable regulations, revoke and refrain from granting authorizations and permits for the import, production, distribution and use of glyphosate and will carry out actions conducive to the establishment and generation of sustainable and culturally appropriate alternatives and practices which allow maintenance of agricultural production and are safe for human health, the biocultural diversity of the country and the environment.

8 https://www.agriculture.com/markets/newswire/update-1-us-disappointed-in-mexicos-new-gmo-corn-decree-ag-secretary

https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/cartera/decreto-del-maiz-transgenico-no-evitara-disputas?utm_source=web&utm_medium=social_buttons&utm_campaign=social_sharing&utm_content=copy_link

https://farmpolicynews.illinois.edu/2023/02/mexico-softens-stance-on-gmo-import-ban/