In November, Californians will be the first to vote on a landmark proposition (Proposition 37)to decide if food using ingredients that have been genetically modified should be labeled as such. Here is the precise wording:
Genetically Engineered Foods. Labeling. Initiative Statute.
- Requires labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways.
- Prohibits labeling or advertising such food, or other processed food, as “natural.”
- Exempts foods that are: certified organic; unintentionally produced with genetically engineered material; made from animals fed or injected with genetically engineered material but not genetically engineered themselves; processed with or containing only small amounts of genetically engineered ingredients; administered for treatment of medical conditions; sold for immediate consumption such as in a restaurant; or alcoholic beverages.
As expected, the big food companies are not interested in such disclosures, while the smaller companies using non-GMO ingredients are in favor. The former have spent over $25 million in their efforts to kill proposition 37.
Here are 37 reasons why Proposition 37 MUST pass
- GMO crops’ environmental benefits are questionable; GMO crops require pesticides too.
- Genetic modification is NOT the same as selective breeding. Side effects are unknown.
- There have been NO long term studies on GMO safety.
- We don’t need more superweeds.
- Anything brought to you by the makers of Agent Orange does not inspire trust.
- GMO labeling will not make food more expensive. If labeling GMOs was cost prohibitive, European manufacturers would go bankrupt (they DO label GMO’s).
- In an animal study, GMOs caused sterility within 3 generations. Wouldn’t that be a nice surprise for your great grandkids?
- The long term environmental impact of GMO crops is unclear.
- GMO crops are sterile, keeping farmers at the mercy of biotech firms each growing season. (ie price hikes…)
- GMO corn is used as livestock feed. Harms the animal, then harms the human?
- Honest labeling does not mean the US will become a “nanny state”.
- 90% of Americans support GMO labeling.
- GMO crops have NOT SHOWN any increase in crop yields on average.
- GMO crops have huge R&D costs. Manufacturers must sell, sell, sell to recoup costs, safe or not.
- If Prop 37 passes, it will increase sales of smaller food manufacturers and add diversity, helping rebuild local communities.
- You can wash off pesticides, but GMO, whose genes serves as inborn pesticides, can never be washed off.
- GMO crops poison insects, which then die from infections from bacteria like E.Coli.
- Superbugs are evolving to circumvent GMO protection.
- Cross pollination contaminates non-GMO crops, without the consent of their growers. There is no turning back after that.
- GMO ruins generations of farming traditions, most notably saving and reuse of seeds.
- GMOs are forever – the BT toxin from GMO corn has been found in the blood of pregnant women and their fetuses.
- Food allergies have skyrocketed since GMO introduction into the food system. Coincidence?
- The studies that claim GMO foods are safe, have been funded by GMO manufacturers.
- Big food corporations oppose GMO lableing, why are they afraid to let consumers know what’s in their food?
- Scientists can’t agree on whether GMOs are safe or not. Shouldn’t we have the right to sit on the sidelines, at least for now?
- Nutrition surprise! GMO and conventional crops aren’t the same, but you could never know since they’re not labeled. One study showed that compared to conventional soy, GMO soy has less protein, less phenylalanine, less choline and less of the B-complex vitamins. It has more trypsin inhibitor and its lecithin levels were double regular soy.
- Whether we want to eat GMO products or not should be a consumer choice – when items are not labeled consumers no longer have that choice.
- Studies on GMO with negative results can and are being blocked from publication by the seed and biotech companies.
- GMO puts Biodiversity at risk. One study showed BT crops were lethal to protected insect species in Europe.
- Allergy transfer. When the Brazil Nut was genetically engineered into a soybean, the GMO soybean caused an allergic reaction in those allergic to nuts. While this specific GMO was not approved, the fact that allergens can be transferred is quite concerning. People with allergies deserve to know.
- Passage of proposition 37 will stimulate a wave of new product reformulations that will ultimately benefit consumers.
- Many big food companies claim that eating healthfully is a matter of personal choice. How can one exercise personal responsibility when huge economic conglomerates are fighting to keep us ignorant?
- If proposition 37 passes in a large state like California, it will have a ripple effect to the rest of the country.
- Proposition 37 is not a Democrat / Republican issue. We should all demand the freedom to know what we feed our families.
- Because this is the opponents’ lame excuse for not doing it – “It’s a deceptive, deeply flawed food labeling scheme that would add more government bureaucracy and taxpayer costs, create new frivolous lawsuits, and increase food costs by billions–without providing any health or safety benefits.”
- Revolving doors between the FDA / USDA /other government offices and biotech companies such as Monsanto have delayed GMO labeling since the early 90′s when the first crops were introduced. In Europe, GMO labeling from day one made sure that a GMO market would not develop at all. Mandatory labeling going forward will make sure no new GMO crops are added to the market before their safety has fully been assured.
- Transparency airs out all corruption.
Vote YES on Prop 37!