Showing posts with label prop 37. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prop 37. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
3 Reasons to Label Genetically Engineered Foods
Prop 37 is a simple label for genetically engineered foods. Also called GMOs, these are plants or animals that have had their DNA artificially altered by genes from other plants, animals, viruses or bacteria, in ways that can’t occur in nature. Here are 3 reasons why we need to label genetically engineered foods.
1. We have a right to know what we're eating and feeding our families. The right to know and the right to choose are fundamental American values; and 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. More than 50 other countries already require labels on genetially engineered food. California consumers have a right to this information too. If you think we have a right to know what's in our food, vote yes on Prop 37.
2. Gambling with our health and our children’s health. A growing body of peer-reviewed studies link genetically engineered foods to allergies and other health problems. Despite these warnings, long-term health studies have not been conducted, and the US FDA requires no health or safety testing -- even though the World Health Organization and the American Medical Association say testing should be mandatory. The companies claim their genetically engineered foods are safe, but many people are skeptical of these studies because the companies are allowed to control the science and suppress research. While we wait for independent studies, let's label genetically engineered foods so we have the right to choose for ourselves whether to take these risks.
3. Genetic engineering causes serious environmental problems. Environmental problems are well documented, including biodiversity loss, a massive increase in pesticide use, the emergence of super weeds and super bugs that are threatening millions of acres of farmland, and the unintentional contamination of organic and non-GMO crops.
The bottom line: There are many reasons why people might want to avoid genetically engineered foods, including religious reasons. One thing we all agree on is that we have a right to know what's in the food we're eating and feeding our families. Prop 37 is a chance to bring fairness to our food system and restore our basic democratic rights.
Did you know? The pesticide companies are spending A Million Dollars a Day to confuse voters about Prop 37! Please share this link: Don't Let Monsanto Buy Your Vote!
3 things you can do today to help pass Prop 37: JOIN our team, DONATE to the campaign (every dollar counts!), and TELL YOUR FRIENDS to Vote Yes on 37!
1. We have a right to know what we're eating and feeding our families. The right to know and the right to choose are fundamental American values; and 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. More than 50 other countries already require labels on genetially engineered food. California consumers have a right to this information too. If you think we have a right to know what's in our food, vote yes on Prop 37.
2. Gambling with our health and our children’s health. A growing body of peer-reviewed studies link genetically engineered foods to allergies and other health problems. Despite these warnings, long-term health studies have not been conducted, and the US FDA requires no health or safety testing -- even though the World Health Organization and the American Medical Association say testing should be mandatory. The companies claim their genetically engineered foods are safe, but many people are skeptical of these studies because the companies are allowed to control the science and suppress research. While we wait for independent studies, let's label genetically engineered foods so we have the right to choose for ourselves whether to take these risks.
3. Genetic engineering causes serious environmental problems. Environmental problems are well documented, including biodiversity loss, a massive increase in pesticide use, the emergence of super weeds and super bugs that are threatening millions of acres of farmland, and the unintentional contamination of organic and non-GMO crops.
The bottom line: There are many reasons why people might want to avoid genetically engineered foods, including religious reasons. One thing we all agree on is that we have a right to know what's in the food we're eating and feeding our families. Prop 37 is a chance to bring fairness to our food system and restore our basic democratic rights.
Did you know? The pesticide companies are spending A Million Dollars a Day to confuse voters about Prop 37! Please share this link: Don't Let Monsanto Buy Your Vote!
3 things you can do today to help pass Prop 37: JOIN our team, DONATE to the campaign (every dollar counts!), and TELL YOUR FRIENDS to Vote Yes on 37!
Why do they want to kill us en masse?
Poisoning our food, water, and air...
It's what they do. It's all they do. And for decades.
And the cancer rates keep climbing and climbing and climbing...
Why aren't these talking points with the candidates for ANY office in the land? Because they are ALL bought and paid for window dressing for the Beast System. A system of death, slavery, and darkness.
That's why.
Prop 37 in California is a step toward freedom from slavery. But who is there to help?
The media? Not a chance. They are owned by the same devils who own big agra.
The politicians? Yeah, right.
The courts? They are the worst of the bunch; soulless lawyers seeking only to gain power and money.
That leaves us. We have to find our freedom, become self-aware of the truths of this time, and do what we can to free our family, friends, and anyone who has the sense to listen.
All else is just submission to slavery. Enjoy your frankenfood, cancer, and diabetes. It's all you have to look forward to, otherwise.
It's what they do. It's all they do. And for decades.
And the cancer rates keep climbing and climbing and climbing...
Why aren't these talking points with the candidates for ANY office in the land? Because they are ALL bought and paid for window dressing for the Beast System. A system of death, slavery, and darkness.
That's why.
Prop 37 in California is a step toward freedom from slavery. But who is there to help?
The media? Not a chance. They are owned by the same devils who own big agra.
The politicians? Yeah, right.
The courts? They are the worst of the bunch; soulless lawyers seeking only to gain power and money.
That leaves us. We have to find our freedom, become self-aware of the truths of this time, and do what we can to free our family, friends, and anyone who has the sense to listen.
All else is just submission to slavery. Enjoy your frankenfood, cancer, and diabetes. It's all you have to look forward to, otherwise.
Food Companies Against Our Right to Know
The Big Processed Food companies dumped another $5-plus million into the No on 37 campaign on Friday, indicating that the campaign against our right to know what's in our food is recognizing that even a million dollars a day of advertising isn't enough to bring them to victory. Shame on these companies that are labeling their food honestly in 61 other countries but are spending millions to oppose our right to know here in California.
KRAFT FOODS GLOBAL, INC. $1,094,852
SMITHFIELD FOODS, INC. $454,908
PEPSICO, INC. $429,100
UNILEVER $372,100
KRAFT FOOD GROUP $304,500
COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA $291,100
CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY $250,000
GENERAL MILLS, INC. $227,100
BUNGE NORTH AMERICA, INC. $165,361
KELLOGG COMPANY $158,200
NESTLE USA, INC. $146,200
FLOWERS FOODS, INC. $135,415
WELCH FOODS, INC. $122,752
MONDELEZ INTERNATIONAL $107,000
HERSHEY COMPANY $98,800
THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY $97,000
HILLSHIRE BRANDS COMPANY $85,900
BIMBO BAKERIES USA $84,600
TREE TOP, INC. $81,261
MEAD JOHNSON NUTRITION COMPANY $80,000
CLEMENT PAPPAS & COMPANY, INC. $66,984
ABBOTT NUTRITION $46,900
FARIBAULT FOODS, INC. $44,838
B&G FOODS, INC. $40,000
KNOUSE FOODS COOPERATIVE, INC. $28,900
OCEAN SPRAY CRANBERRIES, INC. $25,000
GOYA DE PUERTO RICO, INC. $24,049
BRUCE FOODS CORPORATION $21,604
SUNNY DELIGHT BEVERAGES COMPANY $20,700
LAND O'LAKES, INC. $20,700
GOYA FOODS GREAT LAKES $14,470
SNACK FOOD ASSOCIATION $10,000
HIRZEL CANNING COMPANY $9,978
CLOROX COMPANY $6,900
MOODY DUNBAR, INC. $5,000
TOTAL $5,172,171
KRAFT FOODS GLOBAL, INC. $1,094,852
SMITHFIELD FOODS, INC. $454,908
PEPSICO, INC. $429,100
UNILEVER $372,100
KRAFT FOOD GROUP $304,500
COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA $291,100
CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY $250,000
GENERAL MILLS, INC. $227,100
BUNGE NORTH AMERICA, INC. $165,361
KELLOGG COMPANY $158,200
NESTLE USA, INC. $146,200
FLOWERS FOODS, INC. $135,415
WELCH FOODS, INC. $122,752
MONDELEZ INTERNATIONAL $107,000
HERSHEY COMPANY $98,800
THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY $97,000
HILLSHIRE BRANDS COMPANY $85,900
BIMBO BAKERIES USA $84,600
TREE TOP, INC. $81,261
MEAD JOHNSON NUTRITION COMPANY $80,000
CLEMENT PAPPAS & COMPANY, INC. $66,984
ABBOTT NUTRITION $46,900
FARIBAULT FOODS, INC. $44,838
B&G FOODS, INC. $40,000
KNOUSE FOODS COOPERATIVE, INC. $28,900
OCEAN SPRAY CRANBERRIES, INC. $25,000
GOYA DE PUERTO RICO, INC. $24,049
BRUCE FOODS CORPORATION $21,604
SUNNY DELIGHT BEVERAGES COMPANY $20,700
LAND O'LAKES, INC. $20,700
GOYA FOODS GREAT LAKES $14,470
SNACK FOOD ASSOCIATION $10,000
HIRZEL CANNING COMPANY $9,978
CLOROX COMPANY $6,900
MOODY DUNBAR, INC. $5,000
TOTAL $5,172,171
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Companies trying to stop GMO labeling of foods and by how much spent lobbying California
MONSANTO COMPANY $4,208,000.00
E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO. $4,025,200.00
PEPSICO, INC. $1,716,300.00
BASF PLANT SCIENCE $1,642,300.00
BAYER CROPSCIENCE $1,618,400.00
DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC $1,184,800.00
NESTLE USA, INC. $1,169,400.00
COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA $1,164,400.00
CONAGRA FOODS $1,076,700.00 These companies are making food products that are killing us all. It's slow, it's called cancer and disease, and it will get 1 in 2 in the next ten years. We HAVE TO KNOW what is in our food to make an informed choice.
E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO. $4,025,200.00
PEPSICO, INC. $1,716,300.00
BASF PLANT SCIENCE $1,642,300.00
BAYER CROPSCIENCE $1,618,400.00
DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC $1,184,800.00
NESTLE USA, INC. $1,169,400.00
COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA $1,164,400.00
CONAGRA FOODS $1,076,700.00 These companies are making food products that are killing us all. It's slow, it's called cancer and disease, and it will get 1 in 2 in the next ten years. We HAVE TO KNOW what is in our food to make an informed choice.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Facts - Yes on Prop 37
Why Labeling GMOs is Important
What is Proposition 37? Proposition 37 is a common-sense November ballot measure that will help consumers make informed choices about the food they eat. Written with broad input from food groups, industry, science, legal and health experts Prop. 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) requires clear labels letting consumers know if foods are genetically modified.
What Are Genetically Engineered Foods (GMOs)? A genetically engineered food is a plant or meat product that has had its DNA artificially altered in a laboratory by genes from other plants, animals, viruses, or bacteria in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This type of genetic alteration is not found in nature and is experimental. Many of the foods we currently eat and feed our families (including certain baby formulas and a high percentage of corn, soy, cotton and sugar beets commonly used in processed foods sold in the U.S.), but we don’t know which ones without labeling.
Example: Genetically Modified corn has been engineered in a laboratory to produce pesticides in its own tissue. GMO corn is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an Insecticide, but is sold unlabeled. [EPA Pesticides]. Walmart is now selling Monsanto's sweet corn that has been genetically engineered to contain an insecticide, but consumers don't know because it's not labeled.
Are Genetically Engineered Foods Safe? GMOs have not been proven safe, and long-term health studies have not been conducted. A growing body of peer-reviewed studies has linked these foods to allergies, organ toxicity, and other health problems. These studies must be followed up. However, unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the US Food and Drug Administration does not require safety studies for genetically engineered foods. The United Nations/World Health Organization food standards group and the American Medical Association have called for mandatory safety testing of genetically engineered foods -- a standard the U.S. fails to meet.
GMOs Linked to Environmental Problems: Various environmental problems associated with genetic engineering have been well documented, including biodiversity loss, an overall increase in pesticide use, the emergence of super weeds that are threatening millions of acres of farmland, and the unintentional contamination of non-GMO and organic crops.
We Have a Right to Know What's in Our Food: Fifty countries around the world—representing more than 40% of the world’s population---already require GMO labeling, including all of Europe, Japan, India and China. Polls show that more than 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. We are free to choose what we want to eat and feed our children. The free market is supposed to provide consumers with accurate information about products so we can make informed choices.
Who is in Favor of Proposition 37? Prop 37 was initiated by a grassroots organizing effort with the help of thousands of volunteers across the state, the Right to Know campaign gathered nearly one million signatures from California voters within a 10 week period. More than 2,000 organizations – including media outlets, food manufacturers and retailers, leading consumer, environmental, farming, health, faith-based, political and labor groups – have since endorsed Yes on 37: www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements.
Who is Opposed to Proposition 37? Not one human being has made a contribution to the campaign against Prop. 37. Instead, the campaign is funded entirely by giant pesticide and junk food companies with a track record of making false claims about the safety of their products. The “No” campaign’s two largest donors-- Monsanto and DuPont—are the same companies that told us Agent Orange and DDT were safe. Further undermining the No campaign’s credibility is the fact that its biggest funder—Monsanto—produced a series of ads supporting labeling of GMOs in Europe in the 1990s.
A Simple Proposition for California in 2012: The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act is simple: The initiative would simply require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it is produced through genetic engineering, and would not allow these products to be labeled as “natural.” Prop 37 gives companies 18 months to change their labels, and allows for the GMO disclosure to appear wherever they choose on packaging.
No Cost to Consumers or Food Producers: Companies change their labeling all the time, and research shows that Prop. 37 will have no cost impact on consumers or food producers. In a recent study on the economic impact of Proposition 37, Joanna Shepherd Bailey, Ph.D., Professor at Emory University School of Law, concluded that there would be “no increases in prices as a result of the relabeling required.” In Europe, introduction of GMO labeling produced no increase in food costs. David Byrne, former European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection of the European Parliament, stated that when Europe introduced GMO labeling in 1997, "it did not result in increased costs, despite the horrifying (double-digit) prediction of some interests.”
Prop. 37 Doesn’t Ban the Sale of Any Foods: Despite opposition claims that Prop 37 would "ban the sale of thousands of groceries," it would not ban any foods at all. It merely requires that GMO-containing foods be labeled with the phrase “partially produced with genetic engineering” anywhere on the front or back of packages.
Greater Legal Certainty For Businesses: According to an independent legal analysis by James Cooper, JD, PhD, of George Mason University School of Law, Proposition 37 has been narrowly crafted in a way that provides “greater legal certainty” for businesses than other California consumer disclosure laws. It won’t invite frivolous lawsuits. What it will do is help California consumers make more informed choices about the food they eat.
If Proposition 37 passes, it will be a huge step toward the transparency we deserve. This is about our right to know what's in our food and the right to choose for ourselves what we eat and feed our families. These are fundamental American values. Join us in helping us win back our right to know about the genetic engineering of our food system. Vote Yes on 37 in November, join our campaign, share our ad, donate if you can (every little bit helps!).
Together, we can make history this November!
Why Labeling GMOs is Important
What is Proposition 37? Proposition 37 is a common-sense November ballot measure that will help consumers make informed choices about the food they eat. Written with broad input from food groups, industry, science, legal and health experts Prop. 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) requires clear labels letting consumers know if foods are genetically modified.
What Are Genetically Engineered Foods (GMOs)? A genetically engineered food is a plant or meat product that has had its DNA artificially altered in a laboratory by genes from other plants, animals, viruses, or bacteria in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This type of genetic alteration is not found in nature and is experimental. Many of the foods we currently eat and feed our families (including certain baby formulas and a high percentage of corn, soy, cotton and sugar beets commonly used in processed foods sold in the U.S.), but we don’t know which ones without labeling.
Example: Genetically Modified corn has been engineered in a laboratory to produce pesticides in its own tissue. GMO corn is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an Insecticide, but is sold unlabeled. [EPA Pesticides]. Walmart is now selling Monsanto's sweet corn that has been genetically engineered to contain an insecticide, but consumers don't know because it's not labeled.
Are Genetically Engineered Foods Safe? GMOs have not been proven safe, and long-term health studies have not been conducted. A growing body of peer-reviewed studies has linked these foods to allergies, organ toxicity, and other health problems. These studies must be followed up. However, unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the US Food and Drug Administration does not require safety studies for genetically engineered foods. The United Nations/World Health Organization food standards group and the American Medical Association have called for mandatory safety testing of genetically engineered foods -- a standard the U.S. fails to meet.
GMOs Linked to Environmental Problems: Various environmental problems associated with genetic engineering have been well documented, including biodiversity loss, an overall increase in pesticide use, the emergence of super weeds that are threatening millions of acres of farmland, and the unintentional contamination of non-GMO and organic crops.
We Have a Right to Know What's in Our Food: Fifty countries around the world—representing more than 40% of the world’s population---already require GMO labeling, including all of Europe, Japan, India and China. Polls show that more than 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. We are free to choose what we want to eat and feed our children. The free market is supposed to provide consumers with accurate information about products so we can make informed choices.
Who is in Favor of Proposition 37? Prop 37 was initiated by a grassroots organizing effort with the help of thousands of volunteers across the state, the Right to Know campaign gathered nearly one million signatures from California voters within a 10 week period. More than 2,000 organizations – including media outlets, food manufacturers and retailers, leading consumer, environmental, farming, health, faith-based, political and labor groups – have since endorsed Yes on 37: www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements.
Who is Opposed to Proposition 37? Not one human being has made a contribution to the campaign against Prop. 37. Instead, the campaign is funded entirely by giant pesticide and junk food companies with a track record of making false claims about the safety of their products. The “No” campaign’s two largest donors-- Monsanto and DuPont—are the same companies that told us Agent Orange and DDT were safe. Further undermining the No campaign’s credibility is the fact that its biggest funder—Monsanto—produced a series of ads supporting labeling of GMOs in Europe in the 1990s.
A Simple Proposition for California in 2012: The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act is simple: The initiative would simply require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it is produced through genetic engineering, and would not allow these products to be labeled as “natural.” Prop 37 gives companies 18 months to change their labels, and allows for the GMO disclosure to appear wherever they choose on packaging.
No Cost to Consumers or Food Producers: Companies change their labeling all the time, and research shows that Prop. 37 will have no cost impact on consumers or food producers. In a recent study on the economic impact of Proposition 37, Joanna Shepherd Bailey, Ph.D., Professor at Emory University School of Law, concluded that there would be “no increases in prices as a result of the relabeling required.” In Europe, introduction of GMO labeling produced no increase in food costs. David Byrne, former European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection of the European Parliament, stated that when Europe introduced GMO labeling in 1997, "it did not result in increased costs, despite the horrifying (double-digit) prediction of some interests.”
Prop. 37 Doesn’t Ban the Sale of Any Foods: Despite opposition claims that Prop 37 would "ban the sale of thousands of groceries," it would not ban any foods at all. It merely requires that GMO-containing foods be labeled with the phrase “partially produced with genetic engineering” anywhere on the front or back of packages.
Greater Legal Certainty For Businesses: According to an independent legal analysis by James Cooper, JD, PhD, of George Mason University School of Law, Proposition 37 has been narrowly crafted in a way that provides “greater legal certainty” for businesses than other California consumer disclosure laws. It won’t invite frivolous lawsuits. What it will do is help California consumers make more informed choices about the food they eat.
If Proposition 37 passes, it will be a huge step toward the transparency we deserve. This is about our right to know what's in our food and the right to choose for ourselves what we eat and feed our families. These are fundamental American values. Join us in helping us win back our right to know about the genetic engineering of our food system. Vote Yes on 37 in November, join our campaign, share our ad, donate if you can (every little bit helps!).
Together, we can make history this November!
http://www.carighttoknow.org/facts
What is Proposition 37? Proposition 37 is a common-sense November ballot measure that will help consumers make informed choices about the food they eat. Written with broad input from food groups, industry, science, legal and health experts Prop. 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) requires clear labels letting consumers know if foods are genetically modified.
What Are Genetically Engineered Foods (GMOs)? A genetically engineered food is a plant or meat product that has had its DNA artificially altered in a laboratory by genes from other plants, animals, viruses, or bacteria in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This type of genetic alteration is not found in nature and is experimental. Many of the foods we currently eat and feed our families (including certain baby formulas and a high percentage of corn, soy, cotton and sugar beets commonly used in processed foods sold in the U.S.), but we don’t know which ones without labeling.
Example: Genetically Modified corn has been engineered in a laboratory to produce pesticides in its own tissue. GMO corn is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an Insecticide, but is sold unlabeled. [EPA Pesticides]. Walmart is now selling Monsanto's sweet corn that has been genetically engineered to contain an insecticide, but consumers don't know because it's not labeled.
Are Genetically Engineered Foods Safe? GMOs have not been proven safe, and long-term health studies have not been conducted. A growing body of peer-reviewed studies has linked these foods to allergies, organ toxicity, and other health problems. These studies must be followed up. However, unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the US Food and Drug Administration does not require safety studies for genetically engineered foods. The United Nations/World Health Organization food standards group and the American Medical Association have called for mandatory safety testing of genetically engineered foods -- a standard the U.S. fails to meet.
GMOs Linked to Environmental Problems: Various environmental problems associated with genetic engineering have been well documented, including biodiversity loss, an overall increase in pesticide use, the emergence of super weeds that are threatening millions of acres of farmland, and the unintentional contamination of non-GMO and organic crops.
We Have a Right to Know What's in Our Food: Fifty countries around the world—representing more than 40% of the world’s population---already require GMO labeling, including all of Europe, Japan, India and China. Polls show that more than 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. We are free to choose what we want to eat and feed our children. The free market is supposed to provide consumers with accurate information about products so we can make informed choices.
Who is in Favor of Proposition 37? Prop 37 was initiated by a grassroots organizing effort with the help of thousands of volunteers across the state, the Right to Know campaign gathered nearly one million signatures from California voters within a 10 week period. More than 2,000 organizations – including media outlets, food manufacturers and retailers, leading consumer, environmental, farming, health, faith-based, political and labor groups – have since endorsed Yes on 37: www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements.
Who is Opposed to Proposition 37? Not one human being has made a contribution to the campaign against Prop. 37. Instead, the campaign is funded entirely by giant pesticide and junk food companies with a track record of making false claims about the safety of their products. The “No” campaign’s two largest donors-- Monsanto and DuPont—are the same companies that told us Agent Orange and DDT were safe. Further undermining the No campaign’s credibility is the fact that its biggest funder—Monsanto—produced a series of ads supporting labeling of GMOs in Europe in the 1990s.
A Simple Proposition for California in 2012: The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act is simple: The initiative would simply require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it is produced through genetic engineering, and would not allow these products to be labeled as “natural.” Prop 37 gives companies 18 months to change their labels, and allows for the GMO disclosure to appear wherever they choose on packaging.
No Cost to Consumers or Food Producers: Companies change their labeling all the time, and research shows that Prop. 37 will have no cost impact on consumers or food producers. In a recent study on the economic impact of Proposition 37, Joanna Shepherd Bailey, Ph.D., Professor at Emory University School of Law, concluded that there would be “no increases in prices as a result of the relabeling required.” In Europe, introduction of GMO labeling produced no increase in food costs. David Byrne, former European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection of the European Parliament, stated that when Europe introduced GMO labeling in 1997, "it did not result in increased costs, despite the horrifying (double-digit) prediction of some interests.”
Prop. 37 Doesn’t Ban the Sale of Any Foods: Despite opposition claims that Prop 37 would "ban the sale of thousands of groceries," it would not ban any foods at all. It merely requires that GMO-containing foods be labeled with the phrase “partially produced with genetic engineering” anywhere on the front or back of packages.
Greater Legal Certainty For Businesses: According to an independent legal analysis by James Cooper, JD, PhD, of George Mason University School of Law, Proposition 37 has been narrowly crafted in a way that provides “greater legal certainty” for businesses than other California consumer disclosure laws. It won’t invite frivolous lawsuits. What it will do is help California consumers make more informed choices about the food they eat.
If Proposition 37 passes, it will be a huge step toward the transparency we deserve. This is about our right to know what's in our food and the right to choose for ourselves what we eat and feed our families. These are fundamental American values. Join us in helping us win back our right to know about the genetic engineering of our food system. Vote Yes on 37 in November, join our campaign, share our ad, donate if you can (every little bit helps!).
Together, we can make history this November!
Why Labeling GMOs is Important
What is Proposition 37? Proposition 37 is a common-sense November ballot measure that will help consumers make informed choices about the food they eat. Written with broad input from food groups, industry, science, legal and health experts Prop. 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) requires clear labels letting consumers know if foods are genetically modified.
What Are Genetically Engineered Foods (GMOs)? A genetically engineered food is a plant or meat product that has had its DNA artificially altered in a laboratory by genes from other plants, animals, viruses, or bacteria in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This type of genetic alteration is not found in nature and is experimental. Many of the foods we currently eat and feed our families (including certain baby formulas and a high percentage of corn, soy, cotton and sugar beets commonly used in processed foods sold in the U.S.), but we don’t know which ones without labeling.
Example: Genetically Modified corn has been engineered in a laboratory to produce pesticides in its own tissue. GMO corn is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an Insecticide, but is sold unlabeled. [EPA Pesticides]. Walmart is now selling Monsanto's sweet corn that has been genetically engineered to contain an insecticide, but consumers don't know because it's not labeled.
Are Genetically Engineered Foods Safe? GMOs have not been proven safe, and long-term health studies have not been conducted. A growing body of peer-reviewed studies has linked these foods to allergies, organ toxicity, and other health problems. These studies must be followed up. However, unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the US Food and Drug Administration does not require safety studies for genetically engineered foods. The United Nations/World Health Organization food standards group and the American Medical Association have called for mandatory safety testing of genetically engineered foods -- a standard the U.S. fails to meet.
GMOs Linked to Environmental Problems: Various environmental problems associated with genetic engineering have been well documented, including biodiversity loss, an overall increase in pesticide use, the emergence of super weeds that are threatening millions of acres of farmland, and the unintentional contamination of non-GMO and organic crops.
We Have a Right to Know What's in Our Food: Fifty countries around the world—representing more than 40% of the world’s population---already require GMO labeling, including all of Europe, Japan, India and China. Polls show that more than 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. We are free to choose what we want to eat and feed our children. The free market is supposed to provide consumers with accurate information about products so we can make informed choices.
Who is in Favor of Proposition 37? Prop 37 was initiated by a grassroots organizing effort with the help of thousands of volunteers across the state, the Right to Know campaign gathered nearly one million signatures from California voters within a 10 week period. More than 2,000 organizations – including media outlets, food manufacturers and retailers, leading consumer, environmental, farming, health, faith-based, political and labor groups – have since endorsed Yes on 37: www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements.
Who is Opposed to Proposition 37? Not one human being has made a contribution to the campaign against Prop. 37. Instead, the campaign is funded entirely by giant pesticide and junk food companies with a track record of making false claims about the safety of their products. The “No” campaign’s two largest donors-- Monsanto and DuPont—are the same companies that told us Agent Orange and DDT were safe. Further undermining the No campaign’s credibility is the fact that its biggest funder—Monsanto—produced a series of ads supporting labeling of GMOs in Europe in the 1990s.
A Simple Proposition for California in 2012: The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act is simple: The initiative would simply require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it is produced through genetic engineering, and would not allow these products to be labeled as “natural.” Prop 37 gives companies 18 months to change their labels, and allows for the GMO disclosure to appear wherever they choose on packaging.
No Cost to Consumers or Food Producers: Companies change their labeling all the time, and research shows that Prop. 37 will have no cost impact on consumers or food producers. In a recent study on the economic impact of Proposition 37, Joanna Shepherd Bailey, Ph.D., Professor at Emory University School of Law, concluded that there would be “no increases in prices as a result of the relabeling required.” In Europe, introduction of GMO labeling produced no increase in food costs. David Byrne, former European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection of the European Parliament, stated that when Europe introduced GMO labeling in 1997, "it did not result in increased costs, despite the horrifying (double-digit) prediction of some interests.”
Prop. 37 Doesn’t Ban the Sale of Any Foods: Despite opposition claims that Prop 37 would "ban the sale of thousands of groceries," it would not ban any foods at all. It merely requires that GMO-containing foods be labeled with the phrase “partially produced with genetic engineering” anywhere on the front or back of packages.
Greater Legal Certainty For Businesses: According to an independent legal analysis by James Cooper, JD, PhD, of George Mason University School of Law, Proposition 37 has been narrowly crafted in a way that provides “greater legal certainty” for businesses than other California consumer disclosure laws. It won’t invite frivolous lawsuits. What it will do is help California consumers make more informed choices about the food they eat.
If Proposition 37 passes, it will be a huge step toward the transparency we deserve. This is about our right to know what's in our food and the right to choose for ourselves what we eat and feed our families. These are fundamental American values. Join us in helping us win back our right to know about the genetic engineering of our food system. Vote Yes on 37 in November, join our campaign, share our ad, donate if you can (every little bit helps!).
Together, we can make history this November!
http://www.carighttoknow.org/facts
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Exclusive new Organic Spies video released: Is Whole Foods systematically training employees to lie about GMO?
(NaturalNews) A new video has surfaced from the Organic Spies group, and that video is being released exclusively on the Natural News video site TV.naturalnews.com. The hidden camera video shows a multitude of Whole Foods employees repeating misinformation to customers who ask whether the store sells GMOs. They appear to have rehearsed these false answers through some sort of company training.
This new video (see link below) is the second hidden camera video from Organic Spies, an anonymous group of "real food revolutionaries" who appear to be solidly organized, with spies apparently placed in cities across the country. They have successfully infiltrated multiple Whole Foods stores with covert cameras, posing as customers asking common questions about GMOs.
This new video, filmed after the video Organic Spies video was released, shows yet more Whole Foods employees repeating lies and disinformation to Whole Foods customers about GMO.
Click here to watch the new video on TV.naturalnews.com.
Each of the following statements made by Whole Foods GMOs (and captured on hidden camera) is blatantly false:
• "Pretty much everything is non-GMO."
• "GMOs? There are a few items that do have them, but they've been removed."
• "I know Whole Foods is trying to sponsor a law that's make sure everything is labeled properly... We're backing a law with other people..." (Huh? Whole Foods has so far REFUSED to donate money to Proposition 37 in California. Where is this guy getting his story?)
• "We don't sell anything with GMOs in it... we have very strict rules about certain things, we don't sell things that we know have GMOs."
• "No we don't do that. If there's... anything that has GMOs in it, we don't have them."
• "No, absolutely not. Because the bottom line for all Whole Foods is no preservatives, no additives, no added growth hormones, no GMOs. Absolutely, that's for everything."
• "No nothing we sell has GMOs in it. We don't buy any products..."
• "If it doesn't have alfalfa there'll be no GMOs in it, that's generally our policy. [Narrator asks "Whose policy?] The store. The company." ["Whole Foods?"] Yeah."
• "Whole Foods doesn't have any of the GMO products... This is our standards, yeah. Whole Foods standards. Whole Foods doesn't have any parabens, no GMOs. No GMO product and... no preservatives."
• "I don't think we're allowed to carry anything with GMOs."
• "We don't carry any GMO."
• "Uh no, that's policy we do not sell anything like that."
• "We don't sell anything with GMO."
• "Soy normally doesn't have GMO."
• "No we're not allowed to carry any GMO items. Pretty much every item we carry, they have to go through a little process."
• "We don't carry, we don't contain GMOs. Anything in here. We can't carry, that's part of our thing."
• "It's against our policy to carry anything that's grown with GMOs in it."
• "Everything in the store is [non-GMO]."
• "We have a strict guideline that we don't [carry GMO]."
• "We do carry some, but... it's extremely rare. And if we do it's because it's a different kind of GMO."
Repeated patterns of disinfo point to likelihood of deliberate training
One of the words you hear repeated in these answers is "policy." It's Whole Foods "policy" not to carry GMOs, we're told by these grossly misinformed employees.
Each of these employees seems convinced that what they are saying is true. They appear to have been informed and assured that Whole Foods sells no GMO. The most likely source of this information would obviously training materials distributed to the employees by Whole Foods Market, Inc.
This isn't just Whole Foods employees who are ignorant of GMO. They don't tend to say, "I don't know" or "I'm not sure." They insist, with certainty, that it is a Whole Foods policy to sell no GMOs whatsoever!
If Whole Foods has been training its employees with deliberate disinformation about GMOs, it would be the greatest scandal in the history of natural foods retailing.
Background on Organic Spies and the hidden camera Whole Foods videos
When the original Organic Spies video was launched on YouTube October 1st, YouTube quickly pulled the video just as it achieved 110,000 views and was on track to go super-viral. It is now clear that YouTube censored this video for political reasons as a way to suppress investigative journalism that exposed what has now become a massive Whole Foods scandal.
After being censored, that video was quickly re-posted on the Natural News video network, which has increasingly become the last refuge for free speech in a world controlled by globalist corporations that routinely conspire to censor free speech and hide dishonest business practices from their own customers. Click here to see the original Organic Spies video on TV.naturalnews.com, where it has already racked up another 70,000 views (and growing).
Fact: Whole Foods sells masses of GMOs, including Monsanto's GM corn
A few days after all this took place, the InfoWars team of Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton visited Whole Foods Market headquarters in Austin Texas, where they filmed an interview with a Whole Foods executive Libba Letton. Click here to watch that video now.
In that interview, the Whole Foods executive openly admitted that Whole Foods sells GMOs just like every other grocery store in America. She characterized GMOs as "pervasive" and expressed regret that consumers didn't know more about GMOs.
She then went on to state, "I don't think that Whole Foods does anything to try and make people think that we don't have food with GMOs in them." This claim, however, was contradicted almost immediately by video footage of a large marketing sign attached to the side of an Austin, Texas Whole Foods store which reads, "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER."
That sign is clearly visible in this photo from the Aaron Dykes InfoWars video:
I wrote extensively about this contradiction in an article released on October 8, 2012, entitled Whole Foods caught in GMO marketing deception, false advertising - here's the proof.
Are you a Whole Foods employee? Were you trained to lie to customers about GMO?
Natural News has set up a special email address where whistleblowers can contact us if they wish to reveal details about this matter.
Were you or are you a Whole Foods employee? Were you trained to tell customers that Whole Foods sells no GMO? We want Whole Foods to tell the truth! So please email us at TellTheTruth@naturalnews.com.
We strongly protect the privacy of our news sources, and we offer anonymity to any whistleblowers who wish to speak out in the public interest. However, for your own protection, do not email us from an email account that can be easily traced to you. (Protect your own privacy, in other words, if you wish to be a source for a future story about Whole Foods.)
Along with organizations like the Organic Consumers Association (www.OrganicConsumers.org), Natural News is leading the whistleblowing effort against Whole Foods on the issue of GMO, doing what the mainstream media refuses to do -- engage in actual investigative journalism.
Our goal? To convince Whole Foods to clean up their act and either label GMOs sold in their stores or stop selling them altogether. We also believe that Whole Foods should lend strong financial support to Proposition 37 in California, the GMO labeling ballot measure.
This new video (see link below) is the second hidden camera video from Organic Spies, an anonymous group of "real food revolutionaries" who appear to be solidly organized, with spies apparently placed in cities across the country. They have successfully infiltrated multiple Whole Foods stores with covert cameras, posing as customers asking common questions about GMOs.
This new video, filmed after the video Organic Spies video was released, shows yet more Whole Foods employees repeating lies and disinformation to Whole Foods customers about GMO.
Click here to watch the new video on TV.naturalnews.com.
Each of the following statements made by Whole Foods GMOs (and captured on hidden camera) is blatantly false:
• "Pretty much everything is non-GMO."
• "GMOs? There are a few items that do have them, but they've been removed."
• "I know Whole Foods is trying to sponsor a law that's make sure everything is labeled properly... We're backing a law with other people..." (Huh? Whole Foods has so far REFUSED to donate money to Proposition 37 in California. Where is this guy getting his story?)
• "We don't sell anything with GMOs in it... we have very strict rules about certain things, we don't sell things that we know have GMOs."
• "No we don't do that. If there's... anything that has GMOs in it, we don't have them."
• "No, absolutely not. Because the bottom line for all Whole Foods is no preservatives, no additives, no added growth hormones, no GMOs. Absolutely, that's for everything."
• "No nothing we sell has GMOs in it. We don't buy any products..."
• "If it doesn't have alfalfa there'll be no GMOs in it, that's generally our policy. [Narrator asks "Whose policy?] The store. The company." ["Whole Foods?"] Yeah."
• "Whole Foods doesn't have any of the GMO products... This is our standards, yeah. Whole Foods standards. Whole Foods doesn't have any parabens, no GMOs. No GMO product and... no preservatives."
• "I don't think we're allowed to carry anything with GMOs."
• "We don't carry any GMO."
• "Uh no, that's policy we do not sell anything like that."
• "We don't sell anything with GMO."
• "Soy normally doesn't have GMO."
• "No we're not allowed to carry any GMO items. Pretty much every item we carry, they have to go through a little process."
• "We don't carry, we don't contain GMOs. Anything in here. We can't carry, that's part of our thing."
• "It's against our policy to carry anything that's grown with GMOs in it."
• "Everything in the store is [non-GMO]."
• "We have a strict guideline that we don't [carry GMO]."
• "We do carry some, but... it's extremely rare. And if we do it's because it's a different kind of GMO."
Repeated patterns of disinfo point to likelihood of deliberate training
One of the words you hear repeated in these answers is "policy." It's Whole Foods "policy" not to carry GMOs, we're told by these grossly misinformed employees.
Each of these employees seems convinced that what they are saying is true. They appear to have been informed and assured that Whole Foods sells no GMO. The most likely source of this information would obviously training materials distributed to the employees by Whole Foods Market, Inc.
This isn't just Whole Foods employees who are ignorant of GMO. They don't tend to say, "I don't know" or "I'm not sure." They insist, with certainty, that it is a Whole Foods policy to sell no GMOs whatsoever!
If Whole Foods has been training its employees with deliberate disinformation about GMOs, it would be the greatest scandal in the history of natural foods retailing.
Background on Organic Spies and the hidden camera Whole Foods videos
When the original Organic Spies video was launched on YouTube October 1st, YouTube quickly pulled the video just as it achieved 110,000 views and was on track to go super-viral. It is now clear that YouTube censored this video for political reasons as a way to suppress investigative journalism that exposed what has now become a massive Whole Foods scandal.
After being censored, that video was quickly re-posted on the Natural News video network, which has increasingly become the last refuge for free speech in a world controlled by globalist corporations that routinely conspire to censor free speech and hide dishonest business practices from their own customers. Click here to see the original Organic Spies video on TV.naturalnews.com, where it has already racked up another 70,000 views (and growing).
Fact: Whole Foods sells masses of GMOs, including Monsanto's GM corn
A few days after all this took place, the InfoWars team of Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton visited Whole Foods Market headquarters in Austin Texas, where they filmed an interview with a Whole Foods executive Libba Letton. Click here to watch that video now.
In that interview, the Whole Foods executive openly admitted that Whole Foods sells GMOs just like every other grocery store in America. She characterized GMOs as "pervasive" and expressed regret that consumers didn't know more about GMOs.
She then went on to state, "I don't think that Whole Foods does anything to try and make people think that we don't have food with GMOs in them." This claim, however, was contradicted almost immediately by video footage of a large marketing sign attached to the side of an Austin, Texas Whole Foods store which reads, "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER."
That sign is clearly visible in this photo from the Aaron Dykes InfoWars video:
I wrote extensively about this contradiction in an article released on October 8, 2012, entitled Whole Foods caught in GMO marketing deception, false advertising - here's the proof.
Are you a Whole Foods employee? Were you trained to lie to customers about GMO?
Natural News has set up a special email address where whistleblowers can contact us if they wish to reveal details about this matter.
Were you or are you a Whole Foods employee? Were you trained to tell customers that Whole Foods sells no GMO? We want Whole Foods to tell the truth! So please email us at TellTheTruth@naturalnews.com.
We strongly protect the privacy of our news sources, and we offer anonymity to any whistleblowers who wish to speak out in the public interest. However, for your own protection, do not email us from an email account that can be easily traced to you. (Protect your own privacy, in other words, if you wish to be a source for a future story about Whole Foods.)
Along with organizations like the Organic Consumers Association (www.OrganicConsumers.org), Natural News is leading the whistleblowing effort against Whole Foods on the issue of GMO, doing what the mainstream media refuses to do -- engage in actual investigative journalism.
Our goal? To convince Whole Foods to clean up their act and either label GMOs sold in their stores or stop selling them altogether. We also believe that Whole Foods should lend strong financial support to Proposition 37 in California, the GMO labeling ballot measure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)