

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Expert contact: Dana Perls, (510) 978-4425, dperls@foe.org
Communications contact: Kate Colwell, (202) 222-0744, kcolwell@foe.org
Scientists, environmental and consumer groups denounced the U.S. Department of Agriculture's deregulation of the Arctic(r) apple, the first genetically engineered apple, produced by a Canadian corporation, Okanagan Specialty Fruits. The USDA's deregulation technically allows the Arctic(r) apple to be planted and sold without specific oversight, although the FDA may engage Okanagan in a voluntary safety consultation process prior to the GMO apple being available on the U.S. market. According to Okanagan, the apples will be labeled as Arctic(r), but will not be labeled as genetically engineered.
Despite this approval, major food companies including McDonald's (NYSE: MCD) and Gerber (OTCMKTS: NSRGY) have already stated that they have no plans to source or sell this genetically engineered apple. These companies join major apple growing associations, including USApple and the Northwest Horticultural Council (representing Washington apple growers who grow more than 60 percent of U.S. apples), that have stated opposition to this GMO apple.
"Despite the USDA's flawed approval of the GMO apple, there is no place in the U.S. or global market for genetically engineered apples." said Lisa Archer, Food and Technology program director at Friends of the Earth. "Farmers don't want to grow it, food companies don't want to sell it and consumers don't want to eat it."
The GMO Arctic Apple(r) is genetically engineered via a new, virtually untested experimental technique called RNA interference -- or RNAi -- that many scientists are concerned may have negative, unintended impacts on human health and the environment. This technique was used in the Arctic(r) Apple to silence genes related to the production of enzymes which cause apples to brown when cut. Without natural browning, apples may look fresh when they are actually decaying.
Scientists believe that the natural browning enzyme in apples may help to fight diseases and pests, meaning that famers may have to increase their pesticide use on these new GMO apples. Conventional, non-GMO apples already carry some of the highest levels of toxic pesticide residues, many of them linked to hormone disruption, reproductive harm and ADHD.
"We are concerned that USDA's safety evaluation of this apple was inadequate, particularly with regard to the health and environmental implications of this particular RNAi technology," said Dr. Michael Hansen, senior scientist at Consumers Union.
Scientists also worry that while Okanagan's RNAi process aims to silence four of the apple's genes, the process may be dangerously imprecise: targeted gene sequences are similar to other closely related genes, so the silencing process could unintentionally impact genes that affect other functions in the plant. Okanagan's petition for deregulation also does not adequately analyze the other potential functions that the targeted gene sequence could have, other than browning in apples, nor does it address the risk of unintentionally silencing the non-targeted genes. It is unclear how the USDA evaluates the risks from gene silencing and other powerful new biotechnologies.
If grown commercially, organic and conventional farms also face risks of contamination from neighboring GMO apple groves. Apple industry officials have voiced concerns that potential cross-contamination may cause important export markets such as Europe and China to reject U.S. grown apples or require costly testing and certifications from farmers and exporter companies.
Like other GMOs, this genetically engineered apple won't be labeled and won't have undergone independent safety assessment; regulators will rely on the company's own assessment that the apple is safe for human consumption.
Apples are just the beginning: Okanagan Specialty Fruits has also announced plans to introduce genetically engineered peaches, cherries and pears in the near future.
"It's interesting that USDA chose to approve this GMO apple on Friday the 13th -- it's certainly an unlucky day for the apple growers, consumers and food companies that don't want this unnecessary new GMO," Archer said. We will keep working to ensure that the market -- from grocery retailers to baby food companies -- continues to listen to the majority of consumers who don't want to eat this and other new, genetically engineered foods that are inadequately studied and unlabeled. And we will continue the fight to ensure all GMOs are labeled to protect consumers' right to know what they are feeding their families."
Note to editors: Letters to McDonald's and Gerber signed by of environmental, consumer, parent's and food safety groups and letters from McDonald's and Gerber here: www.nogmoapples.org
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400Alphabet, Google's parent company, is contributing $22 million to the president's ballroom project.
The US Justice Department has reportedly given the tech behemoth Alphabet a green light to acquire the cybersecurity firm Wiz after it was revealed that the Google parent company donated to President Donald Trump's $300 million ballroom project.
The merger deal is valued at over $30 billion and would mark Alphabet's largest acquisition to date, even as the company faces antitrust cases at the state and federal level. Wiz CEO Assaf Rappaport announced the Justice Department's decision on Wednesday at an event hosted by the Wall Street Journal.
The DOJ approval came after Bloomberg reported in June that the Justice Department's antitrust arm was reviewing whether Alphabet's acquisition of Wiz would illegally undermine competition. The following month, the Justice Department ousted two of its top antitrust officials amid internal conflict over shady corporate settlement deals.
Lee Hepner, an antitrust attorney and senior legal counsel for the American Economic Liberties Project, called the DOJ's clearing of Alphabet's Wiz acquisition "the kind of blunt corruption that most won't notice."
Hepner observed that news of the approval came shortly after the White House released a list of individuals and corporations that have pumped money into Trump's gaudy ballroom project. Google—which also donated to Trump's inauguration—was one of the prominent names on the list, alongside Amazon, Apple, and other major corporations.
Google is reportedly funneling $22 million to the ballroom project.
"These giant corporations aren't funding the Trump ballroom debacle out of a sense of civic pride," Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said earlier this week. "They have massive interests before the federal government and they undoubtedly hope to curry favor with, and receive favorable treatment from, the Trump administration."
"Millions to fund Trump's architectural whims are nothing compared to the billions at stake in procurement, regulatory, and enforcement decisions," he added.
According to a Public Citizen report published Monday, two-thirds of the 24 known corporate donors to Trump's ballroom project—including Google—are beneficiaries of recent government contracts.
The group's leader called for rejecting "attempts to curtail funding for renewable energy projects" along with "the bullying efforts by the USA and others to weaken policies and regulations to combat climate change."
Nearly 10 months after President Donald Trump ditched the Paris Agreement for a second time, a leading human rights organization on Wednesday urged the remaining parties to the landmark treaty to defy his dangerous example when they come together next week for the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Belém, Brazil.
"Amnesty International is urging governments to resist aligning with the Trump administration's denial of the accelerating climate crisis and instead demonstrate true climate leadership," said the group's secretary general, Agnès Callamard, in a statement. "In the face of President Trump's rejection of science coupled with the intensified lobbying for fossil fuels, global leaders must redouble their efforts to take urgent climate action—with or without the US."
Callamard, who plans to attend COP30, stressed that "the global climate crisis is the single biggest threat to our planet and demands a befitting response. The effects of climate change are becoming more pronounced across the whole world. We confront increasingly frequent and severe storms, wildfires, droughts, and flooding, as well as sea-level rise that will destroy some small island states."
"COP30 in Brazil presents an opportunity for collective resistance against those trying to reverse years of commitments and efforts to keep global warming below 1.5°C," she continued, referring to a primary goal of the Paris Agreement. "The fact that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere soared by a record amount last year should ring alarm bells for world leaders at COP30."
Further elevating fears for the future, the UN Environment Programme warned Tuesday that Paris Agreement parties' latest pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions—officially called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—could push global temperatures to 2.3-2.5°C above preindustrial levels, up to a full degree beyond the treaty's key target for this century.
Greenpeace demands world leaders agree on a global response plan at #COP30 as a new major UN report warned the global temperature is projected to rise to 2.3-2.5°C above pre-industrial era global temperatures, putting the Paris Agreement limit of 1.5°C at risk in the short-term.
[image or embed]
— Greenpeace International 🌍 (@greenpeace.org) November 4, 2025 at 11:20 AM
Oil Change International highlighted in a report released last week that the United States—which is responsible for the biggest share of planet-heating pollution since the Industrial Revolution—plus Australia, Canada, and Norway are now "overwhelmingly responsible for blocking global progress on phasing out oil and gas production."
The group's global policy lead, Romain Ioualalen, said that "10 years ago in Paris, countries promised to limit warming to 1.5°C, which is impossible without putting an end to fossil fuel expansion and production. The rich countries most responsible for the climate crisis have not kept that promise. Instead, they've poured more fuel on the fire and withheld the funds needed to put it out."
"The fact that a handful of rich Global North countries, led by the United States, have massively driven up their oil and gas production while people around the world suffer the consequences is a blatant mockery of justice and equity," Ioualalen added. He called on governments attending COP30 "to deliver a collective roadmap for equitable, differentiated fossil fuel phaseout dates, and address the systemic barriers preventing Global South countries from transitioning to renewable energy, including finance."
Some experts are concerned that Trump—who's pursuing a pro-fossil fuel agenda that includes but is far from limited to exiting the Paris Agreement—may interfere with the talks, even though a White House official confirmed to Reuters last week that he doesn't plan to send a delegation to Belém.
The official said that Trump made his administration's views on global climate action clear in his September speech at the UN General Assembly—during which the president said the fossil fuel-driven crisis was "the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world," and the scientific community's predictions about the global emergency "were wrong" and "were made by stupid people."
Pointing to Trump's global tariff war that was debated before the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, the official added that "the president is directly engaging with leaders around the world on energy issues, which you can see from the historic trade deals and peace deals that all have a significant focus on energy partnerships."
As CNN reported Tuesday:
This practice of linking trade and climate so closely is an innovation of the Trump administration, said Kelly Sims Gallagher, dean of the Fletcher School at Tufts University who worked on US climate negotiations with China for the Obama administration.
In the absence of US leadership, she said that China, which is the world's top emitter, may seek to assume more of a prominent, steering role at the talks. The European Union is also likely to take a strong role, though internal rifts have emerged within the EU regarding how aggressively to cut its own emissions.
While Gallagher and other experts who spoke with CNN don't necessarily expect that COP30 will feature the same kind of disruptive behavior that Trump engaged in during last month's International Maritime Organization meeting to delay a new set of global regulations to slash shipping industry emissions, they acknowledged that it is possible. Already, the Tufts professor suggested, Trump's abandonment of the Paris treaty appears to be having an impact.
"I think there's an undeniable fact, which is that with the US withdrawal for a second time, it's definitely seeming to undermine ambition," Gallagher said. "I think it's just getting harder to make the case that global ambition is going to rise without pretty substantial engagement from the United States."
Despite not sending a high-level delegation to the COP30 Climate Summit in Brazil, the presence of the US will still be felt by negotiators there. The US will be the elephant in the room, and could seek to disrupt the talks from afar, depending on how they're trending... www.cnn.com/2025/11/04/c...
[image or embed]
— Andrew Freedman (@afreedma.bsky.social) November 4, 2025 at 9:42 AM
Callamard argued Wednesday that those attending COP30 "must push back against attempts to curtail funding for renewable energy projects and resist the bullying efforts by the USA and others to weaken policies and regulations to combat climate change."
"Humanity can win if states commit at COP30 to a full, fast, fair, and funded fossil-fuel phase-out and just transition to sustainable energy for all, in all sectors, as recently confirmed by the International Court of Justice's recent advisory opinion," she said. "These commitments must go hand-in-hand with a significant injection of climate finance, in the form of grants, not loans, from states that are the worst culprits for greenhouse gas emissions."
"Crucially, states must take steps to protect climate activists and environmental defenders," the Amnesty leader added. "This is the only way to secure climate justice and protect the human rights of billions of people."
According to an annual Global Witness report published in September, at least 142 people were killed and four were confirmed missing last year for "bravely speaking out or taking action to defend their rights to land and a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment," bringing the total to at least 2,253 land defenders slaughtered or disappeared since the group started tracking such cases in 2012.
“To limit new weapons development in China or Russia, one of the best things the US can do is maintain the taboo on testing and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," said one expert.
More than a dozen US senators on Wednesday urged President Donald Trump to abort plans for a resumption of nuclear weapons testing, a call that came as Russian President Vladimir Putin directed his senior officials to draft proposals for possible new nuke tests in response.
“We write to you today to express grave reservation about any action to resume nuclear weapons testing," 14 Democratic senators led by Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and Martin Heinrich (D-NM), ranking member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in a letter to Trump.
"We request that you personally provide clarification," the lawmakers added. "The decision to resume nuclear weapons testing would be geopolitically dangerous, fiscally irresponsible, and simply unnecessary to ensure the ability of the United States to defend itself."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)—who signed the letter—also introduced emergency legislation last week aimed at preventing Trump from resuming nuclear weapons tests.
Although no country is known to have tested a nuclear weapon since North Korea last did so in 2017, Trump last month ordered the Pentagon to prepare for a resumption of reciprocal testing.
“The United States has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country,” Trump falsely wrote on social media. “Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”
TASS reported Wednesday that Putin instructed the Russian Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, intelligence agencies, and civilian bureaus to submit proposals "on the possibility of preparing for nuclear weapons tests" in the event that other countries resume testing.
Russia has not tested a nuclear weapon in its modern history. The former Soviet Union's final nuclear test took place in 1990 and the successor Russian state has adhered to a moratorium ever since.
Last week, Congresswoman Dina Titus (D-Nev.) introduced a bill to prohibit new US nuclear weapons testing. Titus accused Trump of putting "his own ego and authoritarian ambitions above the health and safety of Nevadans."
Supporting Titus' bill, Tara Drozdenko, director of the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement Wednesday that “there is no good reason for the United States to resume explosive nuclear testing and it would actually make everyone in this country less safe."
"We have so much to lose and so little to gain from resuming testing," she continued. "New explosive testing by the United States would be to make a political statement, with major consequences: It would shatter the global freeze on nuclear testing observed by all but North Korea and give Russia, China, and other nuclear powers the green light to restart their own nuclear testing programs."
“The United States has not conducted a nuclear detonation test since 1992," Drozdenko noted. "Even those advocating for testing acknowledge there is no scientific need to test to maintain the US nuclear arsenal. In fact, Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently said that the updated systems can be tested without conducting full nuclear detonations."
“To limit new weapons development in China or Russia, one of the best things the US can do is maintain the taboo on testing and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," she added. "This treaty with on-site verification measures would be the best way to ensure that countries are not clandestinely testing nuclear weapons.”
The United States and Soviet Union came dangerously close to nuclear war on multiple occasions during the Cold War, most notably amid the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and, later, during then-President Ronald Reagan's first administration in the early 1980s.
Weeks after becoming the first country to develop nuclear weapons in 1945, the United States waged the world's only nuclear war, dropping atomic bombs on the defenseless Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and killing hundreds of thousands of people, mostly civilians.
According to the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, Russia leads the world with 5,449 nuclear warheads in its arsenal, followed by the US with 5,277 warheads, China with around 600, France with 290, and the United Kingdom with 225. Four other nations—India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea—also have nuclear arsenals of between 50-180 warheads each.