I'm dismayed to see that there's any question whatsoever about voting YES on Proposition 37 (label GMOs). It is, to quote several members of the Los Angeles City Council when they unanimously voted to endorse it last week, "A no-brainer."
There is a massive disinformation campaign going on from every outlet—TV, radio, mass mailings—being funded by the same folks who told us DDT, PCBs and Agent Orange are safe (they're not), and none of what they're saying is true. Stanford University even forced them to take one commercial off the air because they represented the spokesperson as a Stanford professor, which he wasn't. That should tell you all you need to know about the opposition's integrity.
I've been working on Prop. 37 almost since its inception and would like to set the record straight:
Proposition 37 is a well-written, well-researched proposition, put together by a diligent group of food industry, food policy, farm, science and health experts, several of whom I know and trust implicitly.
Proposition 37 specifically only addresses genetically-engineered crops sold whole or as ingredients in other food items, to make it as easy as possible for stores and companies to comply. These crops include: corn, soybeans, canola, sugar beets, cotton, Hawaiian papaya, some zucchini, and crookneck squash. California law requires that ballot measures only address one state code at a time. Items not included in Proposition 37—alcohol and meat—are covered by different state or federal codes and therefore do not apply.
There is a strong precedent to Proposition 37 in the U.S.: The 2004 Food Allergen Labeling Act protects consumers by requiring labeling of possible allergens like peanuts, soy and dairy. When Congress approved it, the same food companies objected and made the same claims, yet, when the Act went into force, stores and companies complied, prices remained stable, there was no excessive or abusive litigation, and consumers had more information with which to protect themselves (we have all seen the labels, “This product made on equipment which may have once touched peanuts”).
Proposition 37 offers no economic incentives for lawyers to sue. The only new enforcement provision added by Prop. 37 allows a consumer to sue only for an order to force required labeling to take place—not to recover any money at all. Consumers cannot file a class action without first giving notice, and if the defendant fixes the labels, then no class action is permitted. Any penalties from a violation go only to the state, not the plaintiff or lawyer.
Proposition 37 does not include a “bounty hunter” provision like Proposition 65, which lets the plaintiff keep one-quarter of any civil penalty on top of an award of attorney’s fees. The same chemical companies making claims about lawsuits are themselves suing farmers across the country for saving their own seeds.
Food prices remained stable when the European Union required the labeling of GMOs ten years ago. Sixty-one countries across the globe either label GMOs or ban them completely, including Australia, Brazil, Japan, Peru, India, China and Russia. Why on Earth do people in Russia and China have more rights to know what’s in their food than we do? That’s not the country I grew up in.
Creates paperwork? Anyone who believes farmers who use Monsanto seeds don't already keep reams of paperwork to address the patent protection situation, aren't paying attention.
The grassroots effort that became Proposition 37 was started by a fearless, feisty grandmother from Chico, Pamm Larry, who couldn’t believe that genetically-engineered foods weren’t already being labeled. She called together some friend to help, those friends became a people’s movement which gathered nearly a million signatures to get her GMO labeling initiative on the ballot this Tuesday.
If you have other questions or concerns, I would be happy to address them. This is one of the most important issues of our time and California has the opportunity to lead the way towards greater transparency and a more level playing field (organic farmers are not federally subsidized; GMO farmers are), which is what our free market economy is supposed to be all about.
To sum up: Vote Yes on Prop. 37!
To learn more:
or
NY Times editorial: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/g-m-o-s-lets-label-em/
or
- WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT????
- While we're on the subject of things I am trying to understand, you know - just for the record - there is NO sound in a written statement. No matter how big the letters , how capitalized, how italicized, how bold...NO SOUND...SILENCE...NOTHING! - Yes, we have all entered into an unspoken agreement that capitalized letters are an attempt to represent volume in the imaginarily audible "voice" of the one who is WRITING (NOT speaking), but I really don't understand how people can actually become offended at capital letters because they REPRESENT audible sound. - I just don't get it....but, then, I don't get cheese-flavored pod-corn either, so...there you go.
There is a distinct lack of inflection on the intertubes and not having any syntax available in the Patch software is a clear disadvantage, to be sure. (italic on 'is') (see?) hehe.
http://www.carighttoknow.org/
It means that the old fashioned farmer has no option to follow their directions, or orders. they cannot save seed for the next harvest e.g and have to use Monsanto approved pesticide. This Pesticide (in theory) is designed to be sprayed on GMO corn and not be affected but at the same time killing bugs, insects and disease. So to say that humans have no hand in our farming is just plain wrong.
However Organic produce is grown without any presticides and without any gene modification whatso ever. They are more susceptible to disease but the produce is fresher and more like mother nature intended.
I want to know what's in my food. I would also add that GMO produce such as Corn has to rely on a form of Agent Orange to combat disease in crops since the pesticides that were designed to cannot dea with them anymore. So I want to know which food is GMO and which is organic so I can eat organic and avoid such terrible chemicals. Hey if you don't mind eating chemicals that's your business. I just want to know, in order to make the choice.
The truth behind this Prop 37 is that food companies that used GMO products know that their food is bad for the public and are putting off the inevitable. One day the public will see that GMO food is bad for the body and that Organic is best. Until then, the public should be allowed to decide when to eat GMO or not GMO - just like when we choose diet free soda, low sodium soup, grass fed beef, free range chicken.
In effect, 'Mother Nature/God' doesn't look over your food....a Corporation does.
Labelling doesn't stop you eating food marked GMO, just as much as a label on a pack of cigarettes doesn't stop you from smoking. But would it make you pause to think twice, as much as that label on a pack of cigarettes does warning you of cancer.
You're not a grammar natzi, eh?
"You're not a grammar natzi, eh?" natzi? No, dear. Not grammar. Weak logic, poorly informed opinions and just plain old dumbassery, yes, but not grammar. There's an ocean of bad grammar I won't even try to contend with on the net. It would be as futile as protesting grains of sand at the beach and besides, I'm guilty of dangling a participle here and there. Have you gotten a plate # from that sedan yet? I've had 3 call backs asking for it.
Label that stuff.