Pages tagged "Monsanto"

Yes on 37 Launches Major TV Ad Buy with Positive Message: Food is Love

After 25 days of blistering attacks, Prop 37 still leads polls

For Immediate Release: Thursday, October 26, 2012

Oakland – After withstanding 25 days of deceptive attack ads that have gone unanswered, the Yes on 37 California Right to Know Campaign today launched a seven-figure television ad buy with a positive message that tells the true story of Proposition 37, which would be the first law in the nation to require widespread labeling of genetically engineered food.

“It’s all very simple: Food is a sacred part of our lives. We absolutely have a right to know if our food comes from nature, or if it was genetically engineered in a lab by companies like Monsanto and Dow,” said Stacy Malkan, media director of Yes on Proposition 37 California Right to Know campaign.

See our new Food is Love ad here:



No on 37 Funders: $40.6 Million Against our Right to Know

Press Release:

E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO. $4,900,000
PEPSICO, INC. $2,145,400
NESTLE USA, INC. $1,315,600

Foreign, Out-of-State Companies Bankrolling Campaign Against GMO Labeling

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.

Don't Let the Pesticide Companies Buy Your Vote!

usa-best-elections-money-can-buy-button-0770.jpgThe world’s largest pesticide companies are spending One Million Dollars a Day to confuse California voters about Proposition 37 -- a simple label that will give us the right to know what's in our food.

A Million Dollars a Day in TV ads can buy lots of confusion, but it can't buy facts. Here are the facts about Prop 37:

No cost to consumers: Adding a few words to labels costs nothing. Labeling didn’t raise costs in 50 other countries and won’t raise costs here. It won’t add red tape or bureaucracy either, and the only independent study on Prop 37 confirms these facts. Read the Truth about Cost.

No incentives for lawsuits: With no incentives for lawyers to sue, the opposition's stories about "shakedown lawsuits" make no sense whatsoever. Prop 37 is straightforward and easy for businesses to follow; there will be no need for lawsuits. Companies will label for genetic engineering just like they label calories and fat. Retailers have special protections under the law. Read the Truth about Lawsuits.

Exemptions are common sense: Prop 37 exempts products that have no ingredient labels, such as restaurant food and alcohol. But it will cover meat from genetically engineered animals. The opposition is trying to confuse voters about exemptions -- and to do it, they are running ads featuring a fringe radical scientist who think nuclear radiation is good for our health -- all because they don’t want to label genetically engineered foods. Read the Truth about Exemptions.

California farmers are FOR Prop 37: Thousands of California farmers, all the leading businesses in the natural and sustainable food sector, and all the leading labor groups -- United Farm Workers, United Food and Commercial Workers, and California Labor Federation -- are saying YES ON 37.

'Trial Lawyer' Claims Are Ridiculous, Inaccurate

We have the right to know what’s in our food.  That’s the simple premise of Proposition 37, which would require labeling of food that is made with genetic engineering.  But instead of taking issue with that fundamental right, opponents of the measure – the largest chemical and processed food companies – are claiming the new law would lead to a wave of costly litigation, exposing food retailers to abusive lawsuits by rapacious trial lawyers. Nothing could be further from the truth.  

See below for the facts to counter their false claims.

New Yes on 37 Ad Highlights Monsanto's “Pesticide Corn” Hitting California Stores

Are your children eating Monsanto's GMO sweet corn? New research links GMO corn to a range of potential health risks, and a new ad released today by the Yes on 37 campaign illustrates that California children may be eating Monsanto's new GMO sweet corn product without their parents knowing it.

This summer, Monsanto began selling its first GMO sweet corn product in grocery stores such as Walmart. The sweet corn is engineered to withstand the weed-killer Roundup and also to contain an insecticide (Bt toxin) within the cells of the corn. 

"This pesticide corn looks like regular corn, but it’s not,” says Susan Lang, a Sacramento mother who organzed a protest at Walmart over the corn. “In light of recent research linking genetically modified corn to potential health risks, I believe I have a right to know if the corn I’m feeding my children has been genetically engineered to contain pesticides. That’s why I support Prop. 37." 

Help us get our ad on the air by MAKING A DONATION TODAY

Share our ad by SHARING THIS LINK

We have a right to choose for ourselves whether to eat pesticide sweet corn!

Russia Suspends Imports of Genetically Engineered Corn in Wake of Rat Study; France Orders Probe of GMOs

For Immediate Release:  September 25, 2012
Contact:  Stacy Malkan,

Russia today suspended the import and use of Monsanto’s genetically engineered corn, following a study released last week that found serious health problems in rats fed this corn, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Last week, the French government called for an investigation into GMOs and said it would seek an immediate ban on European Union imports if the findings indicate a detrimental impact on humans. The French agriculture Minister has asked European authorities to abandon the use of GMO crops.

“Across the world, there are heightening concerns about the health risks of eating genetically engineered foods,” said Proposition 37 Campaign Manager Gary Ruskin. “There is a giant question mark hanging over these foods and their health risks.  For those of us in California, the case for labeling of genetically engineered foods has never been stronger.” 

Rep. Kuicinich: Why don't we have labeling? Corruption and influence of Monsanto

Following is a one-minute speech by US Rep. Dennis Kucinich on the floor of the US House of Representatives on September 19, 2012. Thanks Rep. Kucinich for standing up for our right to know what's in our food!

dennis_kucinich2.jpg"Mr. Speaker, in 1992, the Food and Drug Administration decided that genetically modified organisms were the functional equivalent of conventional foods.

They arrived at this decision without testing GMOs for allergenicity, toxicity, antibiotic resistance, and functional characteristics. As a result, hundreds of millions of acres of GMO crops were planted in America without the knowledge or consent of the American people, no safety testing, no long-term health studies.

The FDA has received over a million comments from citizens demanding labeling of GMOs. Ninety percent of Americans agree.

Why no labeling? I'll give you one reason: the influence and the corruption of the political process by Monsanto. Monsanto has been a prime mover in GMO technology, a multimillion dollar GMO lobby here and a major political contributor.  There is a chance that Monsanto's grip will be broken in California, where a GMO labeling initiative is on the ballot. Here in Congress my legislation, H.R. 3553, will provide for a national labeling bill.

Americans have a right to know if their food is genetically engineered. It's time for labeling. It's time for people to know how their food is being produced."

HELP MAKE IT HAPPEN here in California!

Massive Tumors in Rats Fed Monsanto’s Genetically Engineered Corn in First Long Term Study

Now more than ever it's important to join this historic right to know campaign!

By Gary Ruskin -- headline.jpgThe results are in from the first-ever peer-reviewed long-term health study of the most common type of genetically engineered corn – and they are worrying. For two years, researchers fed rats a diet of genetically engineered corn that is common in the US food supply, and found massive mammary tumors, kidney and liver damage, and premature death. The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology.

Read the "Summary of Findings" from the researchers here.

This research adds to the growing body of peer-reviewed research that links genetically engineered foods to allergies, organ toxicity and other illnesses.

These findings underscore the importance of giving California families the right to know whether our food has been genetically engineered in a laboratory.

Proposition 37 – which would label genetically engineered foods in California – is the answer for everyone who wants the right to know what’s in their food.  And it is the best recourse available for those of us who do not wish to be subjects in a giant science experiment conducted by Monsanto and the other pesticide giants that are bankrolling the No on 37 campaign. (Recent contributions have topped $32 million, more than half from Monsanto and the big pesticide companies.)

This is the food fight of our lives. Prop 37 is our best chance to bring fairness and transparency to our food system. Join the Yes on 37 California Right to Know campaign.

Monsanto, Pesticide Companies Spend $5.5 Million More to Defeat Right to Know GMO Labeling Measure; Opposition Funds Total $32 Million

For Immediate Release: : Monday, Sept. 17, 2012
Contact: Gary Ruskin (415) 944-7350;

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.


1  2  3  4  Next →