Karma for Monsanto's Fake Science Is Slow: The retraction was “a long time coming”: 25 Years

Thanks to The New Lede for this story and to the hundreds of others who ran it. The story is even in Le Monde in Paris.

Citing “serious ethical concerns,” journal retracts key Monsanto Roundup safety study

The journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology has formally retracted a sweeping scientific paper published in the year 2000 that became a key defense for Monsanto’s claim that Roundup herbicide and its active ingredient glyphosate don’t cause cancer.

Journal Editor-in-Chief Prof. Martin van den Berg, Ph.D.,  said in a note accompanying the retraction that he had taken the step because of “serious ethical concerns regarding the independence and accountability of the authors of this article and the academic integrity of the carcinogenicity studies presented.”

The paper, titled “Safety Evaluation and Risk Assessment of the Herbicide Roundup and Its Active Ingredient, Glyphosate, for Humans,” concluded that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based weed killers posed no health risks to humans – no cancer risks, no reproductive risks, no adverse effects on development of endocrine systems in people or animals. Regulators around the world have cited the paper as evidence of the safety of glyphosate herbicides, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in this assessment.  

The listed authors of the paper were three scientists who did not work for Monsanto – Gary Williams, Robert Kroes and Ian Munro – and the paper was touted by the company as a defense against conflicting scientific evidence linking Roundup to cancer. The fact that it was authored by scientists from outside the company, from seemingly independent researchers, gave it added validity.

But over the last decade, internal company documents that came to light in litigation brought by cancer victims have revealed that the paper actually was a product of three years of what one company official referred to as “hard work” by several Monsanto scientists who helped craft the paper as part of a strategy Monsanto called “Freedom to Operate” (FTO).

The corporate files show that company officials celebrated their work when the paper was published. In one such email following the April 2000 publication of the Williams paper, Monsanto government affairs official Lisa Drake described the toll the work developing “independent” research papers took on multiple Monsanto’s scientists.

“The publication by independent experts of the most exhaustive and detailed scientific assessment ever written on glyphosate … was due to the perseverance, hard work and dedication of the following group of folks,” Drake wrote. She then listed seven Monsanto employees. The group was applauded for “their hard work over three years of data collection, writing, review and relationship building with the papers’ authors.”

Drake further emphasized why the Williams paper was so significant for Monsanto’s business plans: “This human health publication on Roundup herbicide and its companion publication on ecotox and environmental fate will be undoubtedly be regarded as “the” reference on Roundup and glyphosate safety,” she wrote in the email dated May 25, 2000. “Our plan is now to utilize it both in the defense of Roundup and Roundup Ready crops worldwide and in our ability to competitively differentiate ourselves from generics.”

In a separate email, a company executive asked if Roundup logo polo shirts could be given to eight people who worked on the research papers as a “token of appreciation for a job well done.”

Monsanto’s Hugh Grant, who at that time was a senior executive on his way toward being named CEO and chairman, added his own praise, writing in an email “This is very good work, well done to the team, please keep me in the loop as you build the PR info to go with it.”

In 2015, Monsanto scientist William Heydens suggested that he and colleagues “ghost-write” another scientific paper. Monsanto could pay outside scientists to “edit & sign their names” to the work that he and others would do, Heydens wrote in an email. “Recall that is how we handled Williams Kroes and Munro 2000.”

The emails were spotlighted in jury trials in which cancer victims won billions of dollars in damages from Monsanto, which was bought by Bayer AG in 2018.

In explaining the decision to retract, van den Berg wrote:

“Concerns were raised regarding the authorship of this paper, validity of the research findings in the context of misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors and the study sponsor and potential conflicts of interest of the authors.” He noted that the paper’s conclusions regarding the carcinogenicity of glyphosate were solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto, ignoring other outside, published research.

Van den Berg did not respond to a request for comment.

When asked about the retraction, Bayer said in a statement that Monsanto’s involvement was adequately noted in the acknowledgements section of the paper in question, including a statement that referred to “key personnel at Monsanto who provided scientific support.” The company said the vast majority of thousands of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement. 

“The consensus among regulatory bodies worldwide that have conducted their own independent assessments based on the weight of evidence is that glyphosate can be used safely as directed and is not carcinogenic,” the company said.

An EPA spokesman said that the agency is aware of the retraction but “has never relied on this specific article in developing any of its regulatory conclusions on glyphosate.” The spokesman said the EPA has “extensively studied glyphosate, reviewing more than 6,000 studies across all disciplines, including human and environmental health, in developing its regulatory conclusions.” The updated human health risk assessment the agency is currently conducting for glyphosate is “using gold standard science,” the spokesman said. That assessment should be released for public comment in 2026 and will not be relying on the retracted article.

Brent Wisner, one of the lead lawyers in the Roundup litigation and a key player in getting the internal documents revealed to the public, said the retraction was “a long time coming.”

Wisner said the Williams, Kroes and Munro study was the “quintessential example of how companies like Monsanto could fundamentally undermine the peer-review process through ghostwriting, cherry-picking unpublished studies, and biased interpretations.”

“Faced with undisputed evidence concerning how this study was manufactured and then used, for over two decades, to protect glyphosate sales, the Editor-in-Chief … did the right thing,” Wisner said. “While the damage done to the scientific discourse—and the people who were harmed by glyphosate—cannot be undone, it helps rejuvenate some confidence in the otherwise broken peer-review process that corporations have taken advantage of for decades. This garbage ghostwritten study finally got the fate it deserved. Hopefully, journals will now be more vigilant in protecting the impartiality of science on which so many people depend.”

----

MY NOTE: 2017 coverage of the New York Medical College defending Gary Williams (the only one of the three scientists who signed the paper) is unsettling and deserves a followup.

Don't Just Ring in the New Year with Any Old Bubbles: Ring in the New Year with Biodynamic Cava Bubbly - FREE SHIPPING, TOO

I recently traveled to Spain on a sponsored trip to attend the incredible educational 2025 Cava Meeting, a momentous event in which the Cava D.O. announced the 2025 vintage of Cava Superior wines is required to be organic. 

It is a landmark achievement, but caution is advised–these are the elite Cava wines that are rarely imported in the USA, not the mass market Cavas from Friexenet and Codorniu that you find on supermarket shelves and in big box wine stores. 

With a small group of American wine writers, I traveled to visit 12 producers after the meeting and was impressed by their wines. In terms of quality and price, these were amazing. 

On the first night dinner, I was fortunate enough to sit next to the biodynamic pioneer in the region, Vins el Cep, which I have since discovered, makes a beautiful, biodynamically farmed (Demeter certified grapes) Cava you can buy now on wine.com with FREE SHIPPING (now through Dec. 9).  

Get the free shipping with this code: ELF.

This 2019 Clos Gelida Gran Reserva (aged a minimum of 30 months in bottle) is all estate grown, estate vinified and aged and is $22.

NOTE

I have wonderful photos to share here on this wine and visit but Google's blog software is fussy about which account I am logged in on and won't let me post photos here. Instead, visited my substack to see the photos here. 

In the meantime, here's a link to the Instagram photo with Maive Esteve, general manager at Vins el Cep. LINK

Saying Goodbye to Roundup Herbicide: Napa's Progress

I never thought I would see the day when the SF Chronicle's wine department would take up the topic of Roundup herbicide again. 

But that day came today! 

Have a look (gift link).

And kudos to Napa Green for its work on this effort. 

Unmentioned in this article is the Napa Valley Grapegrowers own work on this topic. See the story of growers spontaneously cutting back due to public inquiries in the wake of the three Bay Area court cases awarding a school landscaper and home users millions in awards for Roundup's role in contracting Non Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) which attacks the lymphatic system. 

Unfortunately, Napa and other growers throughout the wine growing world continue to use this soil killing herbicide widely.

That's why you should buy organically grown food and wine.

In wine, the risks of residues in the wine on humans' microbiome is not well understood but there are many significant studies on its soil killing properties. Wine testing studies showed that organically grown wines had far fewer residues than conventional or sustainable wines.  

(Most people absorb glyphosate in the body from eating non-organic grains, non-organic grain products [bread, cookies, cereals, etc.] and non-organic potatoes.)

For the latest exciting new science looking at glyphosate (the active ingredient in the commercially available Roundup these days–Bayer stopped selling home owners the glyphosate version after the spate of lawsuits halved its stock price due to the court case payouts) and human health, see the international collaboration of leading scientists at the Global Glyphosate Study. 

The latest discovery in the science community? Glyphosate (both alone and in commercial formulas) causes more kinds of cancer than were previously known-and at lower doses than previously thought. The researchers have shared their findings with regulators in the hopes of impacting policies.

It should be noted that none of the lawsuits involved in vineyard workers (so far). Most were of landscapers and residential users who used the herbicide frequently.

Vineyard workers are often exposed to far more dangerous vineyard chemicals with higher toxicity, but few studies have looked at this. One study showed that Parkinson's is related to one of those chemicals (paraquat), but its use has now been curtailed in the state of California. 

According to the National Institute of Health (pre-Trump) "Parkinson's disease is the world's fastest growing brain disorder, and exposure to environmental toxicants is the principal reason." Paraquat is one. 

If you want to support human health and soil health, vote with your dollars.

------

A reminder: Slow Wine USA's guide to wine lists only wines farmed without herbicide. Get your guide here (amazon) or here (bookshop.org).

Gift idea: pair the book with a bottle of wine from one of the producers in the guide!

Hint: there are hundreds of wines, both in Napa and the rest of the US, grown without herbicides. 

And a final note: ALL the ORGANIC grower are always glyphosate free.

Gratitude Day

I am grateful to all the growers who care enough to farm organically. We salute you and thank you for all that you do.

What you do matters!

A Love of Old Vine Zin: Wine Icons Jancis Robinson, Wine Writer, and Paul Draper, of Ridge Vineyards, at the Old Vine Conference in Napa

So much was said at the beautiful opening session of the Old Vine Conference held Oct. 31 in Napa. Enjoy it for yourself here.

Or click on the transcript on YouTube for text version.

(I've also written about it for a forthcoming issue of a wine publication and will post that story link when it is released. Sign up at pamstrayer.substack.com [FREE] to be notified when it launches.)

(That newsletter is for only the articles I write for various publications [i.e. not my blog, or organic news which are released on my other substacks.])

Ridge has converted every old vine vineyard it owns to organic certification, thanks to the amazing efforts of its vineyard director David Gates, who was also a founder of the Historic Vineyard Society in California. (It does not own Pagani Ranch which is not organic in practice or certification). 

I have been going on the Historic Vineyard Society's annual trips (region based) for years and recommend supporting them. 

The Jancis-Paul conversation is, no pun intended, one for the ages. Enjoy. And tune in to forthcoming videos from the Old Vine Conference that will soon be posted on their YouTube channel.

You can view long form videos from panels now posted (from the conference livestreams). Shorter, segment videos will be posted soon.

Many of the participants including Turley, Ridge, Sandlands, Bedrock and others have certified organic vineyards and top quality wines perfect for your holiday table.

Ram's Gate Winery Now Regenerative Organic Certified

Congrats to Ram's Gate on this worthy achievement

Press Release

SONOMA, Calif., (Oct.20, 2025) — Jeff O’Neill, Proprietor of Ram’s Gate Winery in Sonoma’s Carneros AVA, announces today that the winery’s 28 acres of estate vineyards have earned Regenerative Organic Certified® (ROC™) distinction, one of only 25 wineries in the world to achieve this rigorous certification. This milestone builds on the momentum of Ram’s Gate’s California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF) certification in 2024 and underscores the company’s deep-rooted commitment to environmentally responsible practices, further demonstrated by O’Neill Vintners & Distillers’ Green Medal Leader Award in 2021 and Certified B Corporation status in 2022.

“Ram’s Gate Winery’s Regenerative Organic Certification is an incredible achievement and testament to the passion and dedication of our entire team,” says O’Neill. “This recognition reflects our deep belief that exceptional wine begins with healthy soil, balanced ecosystems, and a collective commitment to land stewardship.”

The ROC™ program, overseen by the nonprofit Regenerative Organic Alliance (ROA), sets one of the highest standards in agriculture today. Building on the foundation of USDA organic certification, the principles of ROC™ prioritize soil health by fostering organic matter, increasing diversity, sequestering carbon, integrating animals, and providing social fairness for farm workers. This holistic approach ensures that agriculture benefits both the environment and people, promoting more sustainable ecosystems and communities.

At Ram’s Gate, regenerative organic farming is designed not just to preserve the land, but to restore and enhance it with every vintage. The winery’s approach prioritizes building healthier soils and more climate resilient vineyards, leading to fruit that transparently expresses site, soil, and season. In tandem with the winery’s ROC™ recognition, O’Neill Head of Sustainability Caine Thompson and Winemaker Joe Nielsen launched an ambitious agroforestry initiative in March 2025; an approach practiced by a small set of wineries across France, including Château Cheval Blanc in Bordeaux and Champagne Ruinart. As a part of this initiative, the team planted 40 fruit trees per acre directly within the vineyard rows, which will continue to improve soil health, increase biodiversity, and create a resilient ecosystem built to thrive amid the challenges of a changing climate. 

Over the last several years, Ram’s Gate has also eliminated all synthetic inputs and introduced cover crops to improve soil structure and biodiversity. Natural pest control is maintained through falconry and owl boxes, while an annual sheep grazing program assists with weed management and nutrient cycling. Together, these practices reinforce Ram’s Gate’s commitment to environmental stewardship and cultivating a thriving, resilient vineyard ecosystem. Ram’s Gate’s 28-acre estate vineyard has been Certified Sustainable since 2015 and additionally holds the Certified Fish Friendly Farming® designation.

“From the beginning, our philosophy at Ram’s Gate has been rooted in the idea that the best wines come from vineyards in balance with nature,” says O’Neill. “Regenerative farming allows us to go beyond organic practices—to not only protect the land but actively improve it for generations to come.”

Gotta Laugh | New Michelin Wine's Organic Explainer Shows Heavily Herbicided Sonoma Wine from Pagani Ranch

Here is Vanessa Conlin, Master of Wine, in a Wine Access video for consumers to buy wines featured at the prestigious Per Se restaurant in New York. (Per Se's wine list used to include Ridge's Pagani Zin.) It's a vineyard that is heavily farmed with synthetic herbicide and has been for years. 

I just can't help myself sometimes. I have to laugh. But it's not funny.

Michelin Guide announced today that it's now going to cover wine. It could be great news.

BUT...Its first organic explainer includes a bottle shot of one of Sonoma's oldest synthetic herbicide users, Pagani Ranch, allegedly picked by elite wine directors at WineAceess. That's not funny.

-------------------------------------------

Wine Access is a company that sells wine–i.e. a merchant, not an organic expert. It's recently been bought by a startup–Full Glass Wine–in 2024. Full Glass appears to be on a bit of a shopping spree. 

(As a former startup C-suite executive in several multimillion dollar companies fueled by big dotcom cash, I remember the days. "Get Big Fast," they said. We can see where that landed.) 

Wine Access is banking on its star somm line up and buying power to seize the day. To be fair, these wine experts from prestigious restaurants are not paid to assess how green the farming is in the wines they select and sell. (That's sad but...) 

They are taste experts and they work for the most elite institutions–where selling expensive wine is a big economic factor in the restaurant's business success. (Wine accounts for a bigger percentage of high end restaurant profits than food in many establishments). 

Although it's not said so, I am beginning to wonder if Full Glass or Wine Access is greasing the slides and is forging a paid partnership with Wine Access and Michelin's new wine division. (Obviously companies like JancisRobinson.com and the Wine Advocate have been under pressure for years to do deals like this but have so far seemed to have maintained editorial integrity.)

(In my years in startup land, we used to pay for amazingly high priced partnerships because it made business sense when you're trying to get market share and brand recognition. But I digress from the topic–which is organic and truthful, accurate content.)

Wine Access previously signed, in 2023, a deal with Sunset magazine to run a Sunset magazine wine club. Its press release then said, "In 2021, Wine Access was named the official wine provider of the MICHELIN Guide." So this relationship has a history. 

In addition to its coveted quality stars, Michelin also said it would give new green stars to wine producers. 

Here's an excerpt from Michelin Guide's organic explainer, from Wine Access provided content.

REALITY: ORGANIC GRAPES - OFTEN "WINE BY WINE" NOT BY WINE BRAND

Are these new "green wine" star givers going to understand that most small (and not so small) wineries in the USA are not all estate, and that many organic estate producers ALSO buy grapes from other producers who do not farm under the same green practices that the estate does? 

I call them hybrid producers and their numbers are huge. 

Many, many, many estate wineries also buy grapes from others. They may make any kind of wine they want to from them. Many make single vineyard designates–95% of the grapes in such a wine must be from the named vineyard. That's what this Ridge's Pagani wine is. 

PAGANI NEVER CLAIMED TO BE ORGANIC. IT USES A LOT OF HERBICIDE. THAT IS LEGAL. CALLING IT ORGANIC IS NOT.

Here is an excerpt from Pagani's pesticide use report, which is its official report to the state of California on its 2025 sprays in Sonoma County vines. 

As you can see, Pagani sprayed Lifeline herbicide on all of its 77 acres. Organic regulations prohibit the use of synthetic herbicide, which is what Lifeline (glufonisate ammonium) is. Many experts say it is worse than Roundup (glyphosate plus other ingredients which scientists say are more toxic than glyphosate alone). Until recently it used plenty of Roundup Powermax Herbicide, a commercial, extra strength version of the product only professionals can purchase. (Geeky? View three years of PUR data from Pagani here, showing earlier herbicide use.)

Another spray listed here, Alion, is a pre-emergent herbicide, which many experts say is worse than Roundup or Lifeline.

RIDGE DOES NOT SAY PAGANI IS ORGANIC

It is true that Ridge Vineyards has made all of its estates organic and certified them, but that is only its own estate wines. 

Here is its description of the Pagani wine. It does not say it's an estate wine or farmed organically.

I first watched this unfold when Robert Parker's Wine Advocate called out Ridge as a Green Star. Its own estate is and is to be commended for this. I worship the ground Ridge's vineyard manager David Gates walks on and call him (as a journalist) from time to time for expert opinions. 

But Pagani is not organic. Who says so? 

WHO SAYS PAGANI FROM RIDGE IS ORGANIC?

Apparently, it's Wine Access.com "experts" (which has a content relationship with Michelin) or Robert Parker's Wine Advocate (owned by Michelin) who have not done their homework.

Too many wine experts with incredible sensory skills are credentialed by organizations that do not take the chemicals used in wine grape farming seriously enough to teach them. (And yet we know they can affect and improve flavor. One study by wine economists looked at 128,000 French wines scores from more than 30 French wine experts from 1995 to 2015 and found that overall, organically certified vines accounted for an average 6 point bump in scores and biodynamic farming an average 12 point bump.) 

Is it possible this misunderstanding about Ridge's Pagani came from Robert Parker muddying the waters with its green stars program? That program gave a green star by brand (not wine by wine) to Ridge. 

It you ask me, the MWs and MSs and WSET diploma experts should all be required to take at least one semester of training that covers both conventional and organic vineyard management. Then they might not make these kinds of rookie mistakes. 

Slow Wine USA at the Inaugural Terra Madre of the Americas: A Talk, A Meet the Maker Area, An Enoteca and An Agroforestry Talk (Plus U.C. Davis Panel)

Caine Thompson, head of sustainability for O'Neill Vintners and Distillers giving a presentation on agroforestry
in France and U.S. He has led tree planting in vineyards at Ram's Gate in Sonoma and Robert Hall in Paso
Robles to increase biodiversity. 

It was a first. 

A first for Slow Wine USA. A first for Slow Wine USA wineries. A first for Terra Madre of the Americas.

Visit Sacramento brokered a deal with Slow Food International to bring an Americas only version of the grand, global food fair in Italy, Terra Madre, to California. The international organization has begun to feature regional versions of the event in Japan, Belgium, the Nordic countries and elsewhere. 

ATTENDANCE: 140,000+

Estimates from Visit Sacramento and the "Farm to Fork Capital of America" Facebook page say 140,000 to 165,000 attended over three days.



 (The event piggybacked on Sacramento's annual Farm to Fork event which typically draws 100,000 over two days.) 

MORE THAN 50 U.S.WINERIES POURED

Despite the fact that the event took place during harvest, more than 50 U.S. wineries participated.

Here are a few scenes from the three day event:

• A panel with North American and South American winemakers including Steve Matthiasson (from Napa) and Paul Bush from Madrona Vineyard in Casino (in the Sierra Foothills). 

• A Sip and Savor event providing an overview of Slow Wine USA, led by national editor Deborah Parker Wong, managing editor Pam Strayer (me) and former Sacramento Bee wine journalist), wine judge and author Mike Dunne, now a Slow Wine USA field contributor for the Sierra Foothills.

• A talk on agroforestry in vineyards with Caine Thompson, head of sustainability for O'Neill Vintners and Distillers which has planted fruit trees in its vineyards at Ram's Gate in Sonoma's Carneros and at Robert Hall in Paso Robles

SLOW WINE USA EVENT PHOTOS

Enjoy these photos below.

SATURDAY WINEMAKER PANEL

 (Left and center left-unnamed South American winemakers). Center right, Steve Matthiasson (from Napa) and right, Paul Bush from Madrona Vineyard in Casino (in the Sierra Foothills).

EVENT POSTER

Event poster showing featured headliner speakers

SUNDAY PANEL ON SLOW WINE USA GUIDE

Author Mike Dunne speaks with a Slow Wine USA fan

Wine educator Deborah Parker Wong with wines tasted
for Slow Wine USA Guide Overview panel,
a sip and savor event.

MEET THE MAKER WALK AROUND TASTING 

Jambe des Bois winegrower Dan (married to 

JDB winemaker Danielle Langlois) from Sonoma poured for 

a fan at the Meet the Maker area. Consumers paid $50

to meet more than 50 winemakers in hosted tastings.

Andis Wines GM Lorenzo Muslia (a former Florentine
restauranteur) pours for an attendee. And is seeking 
organic certification, a three year process. 

ENOTECA (WINE PURCHASE BY THE GLASS)

                        

Wines by the glass were available for purchase from dozens of Slow Wine 
USA wineries. (Visit Sacramento booked the sponsors.)

U. C. DAVIS TERRA MADRE PARTICIPATION

"The Americas: Wine and Science" panel of scientists from U.C. Davis Vit and Enology faculty
and a South American vintner discussed the state of climate impacts on winegrowing and research on mitigations.
At right, newly appointed department chair Ben Monpetit.
  (He has been in the dept. since 2016 and was promoted to
department chair in 2025). 

The next Terra Madre USA, sponsored by Visit Sacramento, is scheduled to take place in Sacramento in 2027. 

130+ ORGANIC ESTATE WINERIES IN SLOW WINE USA 

NOTE: Terra Madre and Slow Wine USA do not require organic certification or a ban on synthetics in farming–a fact I am mentioning to eliminate any reader confusion because this blog only features wines from certified organic vines. 

What the guide does do: it does not review individual wines farmed with synthetic herbicides. 

Yet, Slow Wine USA is the only eco friendly wine guide in the USA and is the most transparent about the winegrowing and winemaking processes for each wine reviewed. Writers include 16 field contributors located in wine growing regions who annually visit and taste at the wineries. 

Slow Wine USA is the best the US gets to featuring wineries with certified organic vines, with more than 135 (out of 380) included in the guide. The guide is $25 and available for purchase online at slow foods website or on Amazon.com. 

Visit Sacramento's Partnership with Slow Food Brings First (FREE) Terra Madre to California: Authentic Foodie Culture or Corporate Promotion? A Bit of Both

Visit Sacramento's multimillion dollar investment in bringing Slow Food International's Terra Madre to the Americas brought food–healthy or not–to the fore to the Italian based, international "good, clean, fair" new event in California's Sacramento convention center for a three day fair. 

While the Turin based event is five days, much of it staged out doors, the California event, spanning both North and South America, was geographcally close to California's specialty crops epicenter and was staged indoors.  

California's ag sector grows a quarter of the country's food, making it a prime target for making U.S. ag healthier.

Panel | Challenges and Opportunities Facing California Agriculture | Learn about the challenges that face agriculture in California and hear the opportunities to overcome them.

Hosts: Ashley Stokes, Ph.D., Dean, UC Davis College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences | Anne Todgham, Ph.D., Associate Professor, UC Davis Department of Animal Science | Colin Dixon, Director, Student Farm, UC Davis Agricultural Sustainability Institute | Majdi Abou Najm, Ph.D., Lead Faculty Advisor for the Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems, UC Davis Department of Land, Air and Water Resources | Neal M. Williams, Ph.D., Professor of Entomology, UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology 

And while health and coping with climate change in ag were on display–thanks to U.C. Davis' Health Sciences many panels–climate friendly eating was not really a central focus. 

Good meat and healthy ranching was, but not beans or poultry–much better options on the climate friendly eating scale. Embarrassingly enough, while Slow Wine USA put on a no-herbicided wine enoteca (selling wine by the glass $14 from wine donated by local wineries) and meet the maker area ($50 admission to taste at 50 some stands, again from winery donated time and money), two headliners had a different playbook.

Darrell Corti and Jeremiah Towers on stage

Sacramento grocer Darrell Corti, a specialist in Italian food, and former chef Jeremiah Tower (Chez Panisse, Stars, Santa Fe Bar and Grill), toasted to the event on stage as they drank Moet et Chandon champagne (definitely grown with herbicide and fungicide) and ate caviar. Caviar.

(We could have had organically grown sparkling wine from Gloria Ferrer in Sonoma on display or organic grower Champagne or Oregon biodynamic sparkling wine.) 

Is Moet really the message Slow Food International wants to convey and that Visit Sacramento spent millions to promote?

California's agricultural economy is so large that it ranks as the world's fifth-largest supplier of food so it's a good place to have discussions about healthier food, as the U.C. Davis team showed in a series of panels, including one on anti-inflammatory foods. 

Alice Waters (a video) and Chef Ann both see direct organic
farmer to school sales as an economic and health engine

The biggest star was Alice Waters, who started Chez Panisse in 1971. Now in her early 80s, the crowd cheered for her on a panel on school lunches as if she were Taylor Swift. 

Also on her panel was Chef Ann, who has a foundation devoted to helping improve school lunches with direct to farmer purchasing.

I happened to sit next to a second grade school teacher who teaches in a bilingual school in Davis. She said her students loved to read the Chez Panisse menu each week out loud in the classroom. Surprisingly,that would be the downstairs (the very expensive) menu. "They like to learn about new foods," she said, adding that their parents reported to her that the kids were eating better and even asking for apples and other healthy fare.

A panel entitled Every Bite Matters: How Eating Shapes Agriculture:
Mas Masumoto,  food tour operator Dawnie Andrak, 

farmer Tom Willey, and coop GM Brian Munn

Another panel with our most famous California organic farmers-Masumoto Family Farm and TD Wiley Farms–spoke out about how to get their organic messaging out to consumers and wholesale buyers. Wiley is on a weekly podcast. And in every box of produce the farm ships they include a story about the farm. A different story every week. "Some of our wholesalers have papered the walls with them over the years," Wiley said. 

Masumoto has written close to 15+ books, including some for children. 

Anonymous farming is not for them. They said storytelling is the way to people's purchasing power. 

Brian Munn, president of the Sacramento Natural Foods Coop, shared a feel good story about the coop, founded in 1972. When egg prices soared this year, the coop voted to keep them from spiraling out of control, deciding instead to absorb those extra costs elsewhere.

WERE HOTEL ROOM OCCUPANCY RATES A VALID MEASURE OF SUCCESS?

The downtown Hyatt Regency and Sheraton Grand hotels were at 100% and 95% capacity throughout the weekend, Testa said. ($300,000 in advertising throughout the Bay Area may have helped but I met only locals at the event, plus those who came to exhibit and stayed in a hotel room). So at what cost and to benefit who on might ask about the millions of dollars spent on the event? 

Of course, hotel room occupancy benefits the city. The occupancy tax is 15% to 16.45%. But the event will be taking place only every other year. 

Testa's salary is $425,775, according to Pro Publica. 

In Oregon, the Travel Oregon CEO Todd Davidson's resigned this summer (after 30 years) amidst a sea of complaints about his $477,000 in compensation for running a 73 person agency. And occupancy rates are declining as international visitors and Canadians visit less. 

Authorities said corporation sponsorships from one tribe ($500,000), Bank of America and U.C. Health Sciences (more public money) offset the Terra Madre expenses. 

That might explain how Negronis become a Slow Drinks beverage? A very large donation, insiders said, enabling scholarships–and a whole booth and large signage for Negronis, courtesy of Campari. 

So Slow Food has plenty of paradox to juggle. 

Already organizers were talking about what to change next time around, as they plan to stage the festival every two years. 

One takeaway–more food to actually eat in the conference hall. There was very little of that inside the conference center (and a lot outside from local food trucks, mostly with unhealthy food). Change is on the horizon.

Organic Event SELLS OUT at Fort Mason | S.O.R.B.E.Tasting Hopes to Bring Future Tastings to Los Angeles

Morgan Twain Peterson (Bedrock) and MJ (aka Black Wine Guy) podcasting from the inaugural vintage
 of the S.O.R.B.E.Tasting

Zin pioneer and Ravenwood founder Joel Peterson has a new groove–promoting organically farmed wines in his Once and Future brand at festival organized in part by his son Morgan.
He was one of several O. G.s pouring at the 30 winery event at Fort Mason.

And they're just getting going.

More than 30 Sonoma Valley wineries poured an incredible variety of top tier wines Sunday August 17 at Fort Mason in San Francisco. 

It was the "inaugural vintage" of what organizers hope will become an annual event as well as one that travels to other cities. Organizers were overjoyed to see the event, a sort of proof of concept, sold out its maximum number of tickets (230 at roughly $75 a pop). 

It was the first wine tasting I've seen that was both regional and about organic farming. Yet another first for Sonoma Valley.

S.O.R.B.E.T. stands for Sonoma Organic Regenerative Biodynamic Educational Tasting. (See previous blog post here for a list of wineries who participated). Since its first event was successful, organizers now say they'd like to bring it to Los Angeles.

Event organizers say the valley has 2,500 acres of organically grown vines out of 25,000 planted acres. Overall the county has roughly 60,000 acres planted. 

Sonoma Valley is the area in the county with the longest history of wine grape growing and a culture of organic that far outpaces the rest of the county which has poured millions over the years into marketing "sustainable" wine growing that uses synthetic fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides and fungicides.

While most of the wine industry is experiencing harsh downturns in sales, organic is up 2 percent.  

Scenes from S.O.R.B.E.Tasting

A rare appearance by another O. G.–Will Bucklin of Old Hill Ranch, one of Sonoma. Valley's great old vine treasures (first planted in 1852).

Enterprise Vineyards' head of viticulture, Spanish born Mireia Domènech Lopéz, at a table for wines from Rossi Ranch grapes made by a variety of producers. 

Katie Bundschu (left) of Gundlach Bundschu winery at the Gun Bun table. 

The winery has now certified its winery as well so it's just started making wines labeled "Made with Organic Grapes." Huzzah.

A table displayed educational materials about the various "shades of green" in wine farming systems as well as the history of chemicals in grape growing in the region.

Southern Sonoma has four wineries certified Regenerative Organic. 

Silver Level

• Donum Estate (Carneros and other sites, too)

Bronze Level

• Bedrock Estate vineyard (Sonoma Valley, 111 acres)

• Gundlach Bundschu Estate + Abott's Passage Estate (Sonoma Valley, 164 acres)

• Ram's Gate (Carneros, 28 acres)

MJ, aka The Black Wine Guy, recording his Beats podcast live from the tasting with guest and organizer Morgan Twain-Peterson of Bedrock.

The event also had a commemorative teeshirt created by Living Roots, friends of Raj Parr who run a wineshop in North Carolina. They attended Raj's wedding in India, where they connected with an organic regenerative cotton company who makes the shirts. 

Teeshirt gets the award for Best Tasting teeshirt for putting farming first.

Podcast Highlights: 

• Chris Cottrell on how markets (like back East) are starting to ask not just what kind of oak, yeast, etc. etc. but NEW - how the grapes were grown.

• Morgan on how he and Sam Coturri noticed "sustainable" vintners in Sonoma posting pictures of sheep eating herbicided weeds in the vines. (Major ick.)

• Jason Jardine of Hanzell on how he got his start with Tony Soter (one of Napa's organic pioneers who went on to found his winery in Oregon) and how today he and others need to be role models for the next generation of wine growers and vintners. 

Here's the PODCAST LINK.

PS Yours truly makes a brief appearance at about 3/4 of the way in. 

MJ and Winery Sixteen 600's Sam Coturri

After $11 Billion in Cancer Payouts Linked to Herbicide Use, Pesticide Industry Lobbies for a Free Pass | Health Experts Push Back

While California farmworkers and home owners using residential approved products are exposed to toxic chemicals used in farms, school grounds, parks and homes, the industry that profits from these sales is moving to declare itself immune from liability. Health professionals are concerned. 

Recent glyphosate court cases have now forced Bayer/Monsanto to pay out $11 billion so far. Most were over the failure to warn (and to accurately represent) the dangers to residential users.

Thanks to Wine Business for alerting the ag community about the issues in the legislation mentioned below. (Proposed Federal Legislation Alarms Vineyard Owners, Bars States from Regulating Pesticides and Insecticides).

The health community is weighing in in the Beyond Pesticides press release reprinted below. 

This prequel with stats and recap comes courtesy of https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/roundup-lawsuit.html.

• 61,000 Roundup Cases Left… and Counting

• As of May 2025, settled 100,000 Roundup lawsuits, paying approximately $11 billion. "Bayer achieved this through large-scale block settlements with law firms handling high volumes of claims, along with pre-trial resolutions in individual cases," 

The majority of these cases are now in state courts across the country, though more than 4,000 remain consolidated in the federal MDL in California.

In case you would like more info (including the precious videos of IARC scientists in court to talk about glyphosate's history of toxicity, click here. (It's a lot to wade through but completely damning evidence, study by study, from the beginning. 

In addition...

June 30, 2025 – Supreme Court Wants Trump Administration Opinion

The U.S. Supreme Court requested the views of the Department of Justice regarding Bayer’s latest attempt to curb thousands of lawsuits alleging its Roundup weedkiller causes cancer. Bayer is appealing a Missouri court decision that upheld a $1.25 million jury verdict awarded to a man who claimed his non-Hodgkin lymphoma was caused by long-term exposure to Roundup. Bayer’s dream is that the Supreme Court find that federal law, specifically the EPA’s approval of Roundup without a cancer warning, should preempt state-law failure-to-warn claims.

Bayer’s CEO put out a statement of optimism.  The stock market seems to disagree.  Bayer stock is down 4.5% today.

----------------

PRS: I'll be updating some stats on California wine grape growers glyphosate use soon.

----------------

BEYOND PESTICIDES PRESS RELEASE

Broad Coalition Calls on Congress To Reject Fast-Moving Legislation 
To Shield Chemical Companies from Liability 

(Boldings mine)

WASHINGTON, DC, August 22, 2025—Legislative language moving through Congress, intended to prevent farmers, consumers, and workers from holding pesticide manufacturers accountable for the harm caused by their toxic products, is being opposed by a broad coalition of farmers, beekeepers, consumers, environmentalists, and workers, with the release of a joint statement opposing a dramatic change in a fundamental legal right.  

The document, Protect the Right of Farmers, Consumers, and Workers to Hold Pesticide Companies Accountable for Their Harmful Products, is joined by 51 organizations, coalitions, businesses, and leaders representing tens of thousands of members and communities. The legislation is hidden in a provision of the Appropriations bill (Section 453) that has passed through the Appropriations Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, which is headed for a vote in the full House, followed by the U.S. Senate. 

The Appropriations provision is being pushed by chemical companies in the wake of extraordinary jury verdicts against Bayer/Monsanto, amounting to billions of dollars of compensatory and punitive damages, for “failure-to-warn” liability claims involving glyphosate (Roundupᵀᴹ) weed killer products. The pesticide has been classified as cancer causing by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a part of the World Health Organization (WHO). 

As outlined in the joint statement, the coalition is calling on Congress to: 

• REJECT the provision, section 453, adopted in the House Interior-EPA Appropriations and full Appropriations Committee, in the final House bill; 

• REJECT the language of section 453 being attached to the Senate Appropriations bill; and 

• REJECT section 453 language from being incorporated in the final Appropriations bill. 

The joint document focuses on five elements critical to the protection of public health and safety in a climate of deregulation and reductions in federal funding for environmental and related programs: 

• Legacy. The courts have long served as a venue for farmers, consumers, and workers to hold chemical manufacturers accountable for their failure to warn about the hazards of their products, including potential chronic adverse health outcomes, on the product label.

• Label. EPA pesticide product labels are not required to display long-term effects like cancer and reproductive problems that are linked to exposure.

• Legal. Section 453 in the House Appropriations bill would, in the future, prohibit cases like those filed by those harmed by glyphosate (Roundup™), who have won jury verdicts and compensation. 

• Lasting. The House bill language removes the incentive for chemical manufacturers, under threat of compensatory and punitive damages, to develop safer products or remove products altogether—slowing the critically necessary shift to effective, less- and non-toxic land and building management practices and products to protect health and the environment. 

• Law. Legislative history added to the bill in the committee will do little to ensure a fully functioning EPA and court redress. 

Implications If Section 453 Passes 
Bayer/Monsanto and the chemical and agribusiness group Modern Ag Alliance are leading the charge on efforts in Congress and state legislatures across the country to create immunity from failure to warn litigation. In this context, the chemical industry has successfully lobbied for what environmentalists and legal experts have called a weak federal pesticide law (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act—FIFRA), and then argue in court when sued for damages that their products are in compliance with pesticide registration standards and therefore they are protected from litigation. Juries have ruled that chemical manufacturers failed to provide adequate warning through their product labeling, given the independent peer-reviewed science, including what the company knew or should have known, and a clinical assessment of the harm caused to the plaintiff. 

Under the Appropriations language moving through Congress, the only permitted EPA-approved label language must be consistent with a human health assessment or carcinogenicity classification previously approved by EPA—freezing in place EPA's position on a pesticide for possibly decades, and eliminating the ability to hold chemical manufacturers accountable for damages. The bill language states: “None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to issue or adopt any guidance or any policy, take any regulatory action…” without conducting an entirely new assessment—which takes “no less than four years, and sometimes over 12,” according to EPA. [The bill language is found here. Search on Section 453.]  Under this provision, industry will argue that they, as registrants of pesticide ingredients, are unable to disclose potential harms that are different from the EPA-approved label. The industry is also pushing to amend the Farm Bill with similar language that shields chemical manufacturers from lawsuits on the harm caused by their products. 

Pushback In The Senate


With pesticide manufacturers pushing to stop cancer victims (and others suffering adverse effects) from suing them under longstanding ”failure to warn law,“ U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) is proposing to uphold this unequivocal right to protection via the Pesticide Injury Accountability Act (S. 2324). The legislation would amend FIFRA to create a federal right of action for anyone who is harmed by a toxic pesticide.

Groundswell of Public Opposition To Section 453 
The groundswell of support in opposition to this legislation emerges from a diverse range of voices, including environmental, conservation, climate, public health, and biodiversity organizations, alongside farmers, beekeepers, businesses, medical professionals, farmworkers, farmers, and the grassroots. 

“With the massive dismantling of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) programs by the current administration, Congress has been seeking, through Appropriations bill provisions, to limit court oversight, which in many cases serves as the only backstop for public health and environmental protections,” says Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. 

“The challenges facing farmworkers are profound; from exposure to limited protections, our communities are already at the margins, with women and children shouldering the most severe impacts of forced pesticide contact,” adds Mily Trevino-Sauceda, executive director of Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, “This legislation would reduce their access to justice with this inhumane introduction of pesticide immunity shield language. There is no victory in harming the very workforce that feeds this nation.” 

In the words of Diane Rosenberg, president of Iowa Alliance for Responsible Agriculture and Jefferson County Farmers and Neighbors, “EPA pesticide product labels are often inadequate or inaccurate. Yet this dangerous legislation would shield pesticide companies from accountability for any harm their chemicals may inflict. This is flat out wrong. Congress should protect vulnerable farmers, not multibillion-dollar chemical companies.” 

“Farmers and consumers have long had venues, like courts, to hold chemical manufacturers accountable for their failure to warn about the health harms of their products. State laws have also historically been able to help protect the health of farmers, farmworkers, and consumers from health-harming pesticides,” notes Katie Huffling, Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environment’s (ANHE) executive director [DNP, RN, CNM, FAAN]. “We urge Congress to both develop and maintain a system that truly protects farmers, farmworkers, and consumers; a system that holds pesticide manufacturers responsible for their failure to warn about the harm caused by their products and a system that supports the development of safe and effective, less- and non-toxic products to protect health and the environment.” 

“We also know that there are significant disproportionate impacts that women and children face, not to mention farmworkers, agricultural, rural, working-class, and majority Black Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) communities, as documented in the scientific literature,” shares Max Sano, Beyond Pesticides’ senior policy and coalitions associate. 

Signatories [Representing 50 States and The District of Columbia]:  
Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments (ANHE), Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, American Bird Conservancy (ABC), American Sustainable Business Network (ASBN), Bee Squared Apiaries, Beyond Pesticides, Beyond Toxics, Californians for Pesticide Reform, Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Center for Environmental Health (CEH), Center for Farmworker Families (CFF), Center for Food Safety (CFS), Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), Center for Progressive Reform (CPR), Children’s Environmental Health Network (CEHN), Clean Air Action Network of Glens Falls (CAAN), Clean Water Action, Coming Clean Network, Coy’s Honey Farm Inc., CT Pesticide Reform, Farmworker Association of Florida (FWAF), Farmworker Self-Help, Friends of the Earth (FOE), Green America, Iowa Alliance for Responsible Agriculture (IARA), Jefferson County Farmers and Neighbors, Inc. (JFAN), Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA), Maryland Ornithological Society, Maryland Pesticide Education Network (MPEN), Maryland Votes for Animals, Missouri Coalition for the Environment (MCE), Missouri River Bird Observatory (MBRO), Montana Environmental Information Center (MEIC), Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Association (NODPA), Northeast Organic Farming Association of Massachusetts (NOFA-Mass), NOFA-NJ, NOFA-NY, NOFA-VT, Norwalk River Watershed Association (NRWA), Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP), Organic Consumers Association (OCA), People & Pollinators Action Network (P&PAN), Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network (PANNA), People Organized in Defense of Earth and Her Resources (PODER), Pollinate Minnesota, Pollinator Pathway, Pollinator Stewardship Council (PSC), Rachel Carson Council (RCC), Re:Wild Your Campus, Toxic Free North Carolina (TFNC), Valley Improvement Projects (VIP). 

For a copy of the joint statement, please click here or see the attached PDF file. 
For an updated version of this press release as signatories are added, please click here.  

### 

Additional Quotes: 
“Once you understand the pesticide registration process, the need to hold registrants accountable becomes very apparent,” says Richard Coy, third-generation commercial beekeeper and vice president of Coy’s Honey Farm, Inc. “In my opinion, legislation that impedes accountability is bad policy.” 

“As Missourians, we see industry’s influence everywhere—on our highways, in our mailboxes, and on our screens—reminders of how aggressively they shape public opinion and policy,” reveals Ethan Duke, co-founder and co-director of Missouri River Bird Observatory. “At the Observatory, we’ve seen efforts like Section 453 have consequences for the welfare of our fields, waterways, and bird populations. Section 453 would silence communities and strip away one of the few tools people have to hold industry accountable for the harm they cause to both human health and the natural world.” 

“Farmworkers are on the front line of pesticide exposure,” Jeannie Economos, coordinator of the Pesticide Safety and Environmental Health Project at Farmworker Association of Florida, highlights. “In my 30 years of working with farmworkers, I have heard heartbreaking stories of health effects that farmworkers, their children, and/or their families have experienced. Farmworkers deserve fair treatment and justice!”

Jay Feldman, Executive Director, Jfeldman@beyondpesticides.org, 202-543-5450 
Max Sano, Senior Policy and Coalitions Associate, msano@beyondpesticides.org, 415-297-8779   

Mark Neal's Eloquent Take Down of Greenwashing and Denial AND The Invention of a New Word "Syntheticides"

I am republishing this insightful post from Mark Neal which he originally shared on Linkedin. He has graciously permitted me to post it here. 

To connect with him, please visit him on Linkedin.com or at nealvineyards.com. (Better yet, go taste there! Howell Mountain is beautiful.) He is the only northern California vintner I know of who is certified organic, ROC and biodynamic. 

Language matters, and right now our language is in a heap of trouble, as Mark so clearly lays out.

Transparency: The Synthetic Illusion of Sustainability

By Mark J Neal

Owner at Neal Family Vineyards, Owner at Jack Neal & Son, Regenerative Organic Consultant

August 19, 2025

The California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance defines “sustainable winegrowing and winemaking” as a holistic approach that conserves natural resources, protects the environment, enhances wine quality, enriches lives, and safeguards family farms. But if synthetic materials are part of that equation, it’s not holistic. Knowing what synthetic materials do to our air quality, soils, water, in our foods, how can this enrich life on earth and safeguards the family farm for generations?

Over fifty years ago, my father taught me a lesson I’ve never forgotten: “Sht in, sht out.” That principle still holds. He wasn’t talking about our compost pile either. You can’t build life on a foundation of chemicals. And yet that’s what’s happening across modern agriculture—and not just on the farm. Now we see the same misinformation being repeated by AI systems, websites, and news outlets. Why? Because the greenwashing has gone digital.

Try searching “sustainable farming” online and see what you get. It sounds great: healthy food, healthy planet, happy families. But much of that language is filtered through a lens shaped by agribusiness lobbying, PR firms, and marketing budgets. In 2023 alone, Big Ag spent $178 million lobbying for favorable policy—pushing “sustainable” initiatives while continuing to apply synthetic fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, and growth regulators. This is not saving the planet. This is saving the bottom line.

And it’s working. Most consumers are misled into thinking that the word “sustainable” guarantees something chemical-free, safe and farming correctly when it rarely does. The result? Confusion, manipulation, and more poison in our soil, water, and food. It’s the same story Monsanto and others have told for decades—now it just has better packaging.

Let’s break this down. The word “holistic” comes from the Greek word “holos,” meaning all, whole, entire. A holistic farming system must look at everything: the soil, the crops, the animals, the people who farm, the environment, and the long-term impact of every decision that is made on every square inch of the farm. You don’t get to call something holistic when you're pouring synthetic nitrogen into the ground, spraying glyphosate and other herbicides under the vines, or applying insecticides & fungicides that leave harmful residues in the fruit. That is not holistic. That is toxic.

The truth is simple. There are only three farming methods that fully protect the soil, support biodiversity, and prohibit synthetic materials and Genetically Modified Organism (GMO):

 Certified Organic

 Biodynamic®

 Regenerative Organic®

Each of these methods requires third-party inspections, audits, and full accountability. No shortcuts. No self-scoring. No marketing spin. If you want to build soil health, protect water quality, and create wines or foods that support life, these are the only paths. Everything else is a version of chemical farming wrapped in green buzzwords.

I consider myself once a regenerative farmer, now a regenerative organic farmer. Only because the word regenerative was greenwashed back in January 2025. [I think he's talking about the state of California declaring that it could include the use of synthetics.} That means everything we done for the last 60 years is about renewal—restoring what has been damaged, rebuilding what’s been lost, and regenerating health from the soil up. Healthy soil isn’t just about better grapes. It means better water retention, more carbon sequestration, more microbial activity, more biodiversity. It means your farm is alive. When you apply herbicides, synthetic fertilizers, or growth regulators, you are not building life. You are destroying it. There is no way around that fact.

Most so-called “sustainable” farming associations and their systems still allow these synthetic materials. They say they’re improving. But how can you improve something when the starting point is not factual? If you say you’re protecting the environment, but you’re still applying glyphosate or synthetic fungicides, what exactly are you protecting?

Just one example: glyphosate, the most commonly used herbicide in the world, was classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2015 as “probably carcinogenic to humans.” The U.S. EPA, in contrast, concluded in 2017 that it is “not likely to be carcinogenic.” That’s too close for comfort. Glyphosate alters gut bacteria, disrupts the microbiome, and may interfere with the endocrine system. And that’s just one of hundreds of synthetic materials currently in use.

This is why I created the word “syntheticides” to refer to all of them—herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, insecticides, miticides, bactericides, avicides, and more. These syntheticides are allowed under so-called “sustainable” programs like Napa Green, Lodi Rules, or even self-proclaimed regenerative farms that never went through organic certification. No matter how pretty the label, if it allows syntheticides, it’s not sustainable.

Certified Organic is the only standard that prohibits these materials. It is the only one that guarantees no GMOs, no chemical fertilizers, no synthetic weedkillers or growth regulators. That’s why we’ve farmed that way since 1984—and why we became certified wine producers in 2007. That’s why we don’t use GMO, Mega Purple, grape concentrate, or synthetic additives in our winemaking. We don’t add sugar during processing. (BTW it’s against the law in CA). We don’t rely on artificial yeast strains unless they meet strict organic standards. Our wines are fermented dry, wild when possible, and with nothing added that compromises the integrity of the vineyard or your health.

Why does it matter? Adding any synthetic materials, mean synthetic residues in your food, in your wine, and eventually in your body. They leach into the water supply, poison microbes, destroy biodiversity, and leave soil compacted, lifeless, and restricts full  carbon storage. And once the soil dies, the farm dies. Scientists say that we have only 50 more harvest left on those chemical farms which is about 97% of all world farming. Life depends on you to help change this. How? Read up on this! purchase a few items that are textiles or food that have an organic certification on the label.

We are losing species, losing pollinators, losing microbial diversity at alarming rates. Even on a larger scale destroying our ocean life because of ag and residential run off. Synthetic farming methods have contributed directly to these losses. And yet, marketing tells us everything is improving. They call it “climate-smart,” “eco-friendly,” “natural,” or “sustainable.” But it’s the same chemical playbook—just dressed up for social media.

Real sustainability means taking responsibility. It means telling the truth. It means understanding that if your wine label says “made with organic grapes,” it is not an organic wine unless the entire winemaking process is also certified. It means rejecting greenwashing terms and looking for real certifications such as: Regenerative Organic Certified®, or Demeter Biodynamic®.

It means not settling for halfway.

At Neal Family Vineyards, we’ve never taken the shortcut. We farmorganically because we believe the land deserves better—and so do you. We believe that future generations should inherit vineyards and soils that are richer, more alive, and more abundant than the ones we started with. That doesn’t happen by accident. It happens through intention, through responsibility, and through action not fake words.

This isn’t just about wine it’s all agriculture worldwide. It’s truly nurturing our soils for generations to come vs greedy big AG drug pushers that destroying our soils.  Then we talk about how we grow food, textiles, raise animals, and live on this earth. It’s about redefining what sustainability really means and holding that word accountable because it’s not ‘Holistic farming’. Because if you still allow synthetic materials, your farm isn’t sustainable. And neither is the future.

Let’s stop pretending that the illusion is enough.

Let’s farm—and live—with real transparency.