Pages tagged "Proposition 37"
- Just a simple label—like in 61 other countries, indicating if our food has been genetically engineered
- Put on the ballot by a million Californians just like you
- Enables us to make an informed choice about what foods are right for our families
- Supported by consumers, farmers, nurses, doctors and a broad coalition
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, by Tom Fendley, August 29, 2012
The fight for our right to know what's in our food is heating up.
Proposition 37, which will be on the California ballot this November, has blossomed from a grass-roots movement into an epic David vs. Goliath battle -- pitting out-of-state corporations against millions of moms, dads and consumers in California who want to know if their food has been genetically engineered in a lab.
Proposition 37 will provide a simple label that will give consumers this information.
Right now, many items on the supermarket shelves -- from kids' breakfast cereal, to baby formula, to soy milk -- contain genetically engineered ingredients that are hidden from consumers.
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 Grant Lundberg and Kathryn Phillips, August 22, 2012
Voters will decide on an issue this November that affects us all: our right to know what's in our food. Many food products on market shelves in California - from baby formula, to corn flakes, to soy milk - contain genetically engineered ingredients that are hidden from consumers. Millions of Californians are saying: We want to know, and we have the right to know, if our food has been genetically engineered.
Parents, farmers, health care professionals, environmentalists, politicians and labor groups want to know, too.
ASSOCIATED PRESS, by Garance Burke, August 15, 2012
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The nation's largest agribusiness and biotech companies are pouring millions of dollars into California to stop the first-ever initiative to require special labels on foods made with genetically modified ingredients, a sign of their determination to keep the measure from sparking a nationwide movement.
So far, farming giants such as Monsanto, Dupont Pioneer and Cargill have contributed nearly $25 million to defeat the proposal, with much of that cash coming in the past few days. It's nearly 10 times the amount raised by backers of the ballot measure who say California's health-conscious shoppers want more information about the food they eat.
GROCERY HEADQUARTERS, by Carole Radice, August 2, 2012
Retailers play an important role in educating consumers.
GMOs are at the top of the list of what people want to know about.
Some joke that the acronym GMO, short for genetically modified ingredients, actually stands for God Move Over. The topic is anything but a laughing matter to the growing number of people who believe products containing GMO ingredients should be labeled as such.
Genetically modified foods have been on the scene for more than a quarter of a century.
Why the push for labeling now? While there are a number of reasons, the simple one-word answer offered by industry observers is—consumers. Today’s shoppers are holding suppliers to the highest standards possible and are insisting on transparency, truth and trust in their food system.
LOS ANGELES TIMES, by Marc Lifsher, July 19, 2012
Sacramento — A fight over genetically engineered foods has been heating up in the nation's grocery aisles. Now it's headed for the ballot box.
Voters will soon decide whether to make California the first state in the country to require labels on products, such as sweet corn, whose genes have been altered to make them resistant to pests.