Pages tagged "DuPont"
For Immediate Release: October 22, 2012
Oakland -- Foreign and out of state companies are flooding California with money to oppose Proposition 37, which would require labeling of genetically engineered food. See all the corporations that are bankrolling the No on 37 campaign.
Monsanto, Pesticide Companies Spend $5.5 Million More to Defeat Right to Know GMO Labeling Measure; Opposition Funds Total $32 Million
Sacramento, Calif. -- Monsanto just gave an additional $2.89 million to defeat Proposition 37, which would require labeling of genetically engineered foods in California. Monsanto’s total contribution against Proposition 37 now stands at $7.1 million, according to campaign finance disclosure records filed with the California Secretary of State.
Other major pesticide companies also just made major additional contributions to defeat Proposition 37, including DuPont ($874,800), Dow AgroSciences ($815,200), Bayer CropScience ($381,600), BASF Plant Science ($357,700) and Syngenta ($178,700).
“Monsanto wants to buy this election so they can keep hiding what’s really in our food,” said Gary Ruskin, campaign manager of the Yes on Proposition 37 campaign. “They are on the losing side of history. Californians want the right to know what’s in our food, and we will win it.”
The “Big 6” pesticide firms (Monsanto, DuPont, Bayer, Dow, BASF and Syngenta) have contributed $19 million of the $32 million that the No on 37 campaign has raised.
Proposition 37 prohibits companies from labeling a product as “natural” if that product is, well, unnatural. Food that is genetically engineered in a lab is hardly natural, of course.
So, it was not surprising to learn that the Natural Products Association (NPA) and the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) oppose our right to know. Indeed, each of the inaptly named trade associations are composed of member companies that sell products routinely marketed as “natural” or “all natural,” even though they are produced using genetic engineering. Unlike organic standards, NPA standards do not preclude the use of GMOs.
One prominent member of NPA is DuPont, the same company that told us DDT is safe. DuPont has already contributed nearly $5 million to the No on 37 campaign.
NPA's position is in direct contrast with its mission since 1936 to protect and advance the healthiest quality products for health conscious, natural products consumers who want to know what is in their food and supplements.
NPA falsely claims that “Proposition 37 places every supplier, manufacturer, and retailer of food products at risk of unreasonable and frivolous litigation.” They also claim that Prop 37 “includes bounty hunter enforcement provisions". It does not.
SEE OUR AD HERE AND DONATE to help us keep it on the air!
The No on 37 campaign: brought to you by the same corporations that told us DDT and Agent Orange were safe, orchestrated by the same guys who helped mislead the public about the health risks of tobacco. Now they're telling us we don't have a right to know if our food is genetically engineered.
Monsanto, the largest contributor to No on 37 at $4.2 million, was the primary manufacturer of Agent Orange, the code name for herbicides used by the U.S. Military during the Vietnam War. U.S. soldiers were told that it was “perfectly safe” and often wore little protective clothing when applying it, as shown in our ad. Agent Orange is now linked with various types of cancer and other diseases.
Monsanto also manufactures most of the genetically engineered seeds and also the herbicides that are designed to go with the seeds -- a combination that has created a scourge of superweeds, and has led to a new GMO scheme involving the use of more toxic pesticides like 2,4-D (which happens to be a component of Agent Orange). Here's a brief primer on Monsanto's history of decieving the public with bad science.
DuPont, the first manufacturer of DDT and the second largest funder to No on 37 with just over $4 million in contributions, also has a history of less-than-honest dealings with science, such as the alleged 20-year cover up about the health effects of a chemical used to manufacture Teflon. Now these corporations are saying: Trust us, GMOs are perfectly safe -- even though independent reviews of industry studies point out serious problems.
In an attempt to mislead California voters about Proposition 37, the No on 37 campaign is reaching into the old bag of tricks pioneered by the tobacco industry, and using some of the very same tobacco industry operatives. Here's a look at the truth behind the lies.
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, by Stacy Finz, August 20, 2012
A lab technician screens peppers for diseases at the Monsanto pathology greenhouse in Woodland (Yolo County). Monsanto opposes a ballot measure to require labels on genetically modified food. Photo: Noah Berger, Bloomberg / SF
Not everyone agrees that consumers have the right to know what’s in our food. If you do, now is the time to get involved. New contributions freshly posted on the Secretary of State website reveal an all-star cast of big corporations opposed to honest labeling of our food – and we need your help to ensure the real story gets out to voters this fall. Here are the key players opposing Proposition 37, the California Right to Know initiative to label genetically engineered foods.
Pesticide Peddlers: The “Big Six” chemical companies have given the largest donations to date to the opposition, totaling more than $1.1 million, as explained by Tom Philpott in Mother Jones.
Monsanto, BASF, Bayer, Dow, DuPont and Syngenta: These are the guys who make the pesticides, and also make or promote the seeds that are genetically engineered to withstand the pesticides, thereby allowing them to … sell more pesticides. You get the picture. GMOs are “the growth engines of the pesticide industry,” explains Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, PhD, Senior Scientist at Pesticide Action Network.