US Food Safety: A Remarkable Triumph of Democracy Over Corporate Power, GMO Labeling Has Finally Arrived in the U.S. -- by Andrew Kimbre

GMO' Labeling: Corporate Hypocrisy On Steroids

For the last 15 years, numerous organizations and legislators have been battling to require the labeling of genetically engineered foods. During that time 64 other countries have mandated this labeling, but not the U.S. Many of us in the food movement have said that it was not a matter of if we would join with these countries and have GE labeling, but when. Well, it looks like when may have finally arrived.

Over the course of just a few days, several major companies have announced they will label GE products, including Kellogg’s, ConAgra, Mars and General Mills. Earlier this year, Campbell’s announced it would label. What caused this wave of GE labeling? It certainly hasn’t been a sudden realization that more than 90 percent of Americans want labeling, which polls have shown for many years. And these companies have never been pro-labeling. Just the opposite. Each has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund massive PR campaigns opposing various state GE labeling initiatives.

This sudden turnaround was actually triggered by a remarkable triumph of democracy over corporate power that took place last week in the U.S. Senate. That vote involved an attempt to pass what many call The Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act. This bill introduced by Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) was specifically designed to rescind all state laws requiring labeling of GE foods. Of special concern was Vermont’s labeling law, which is scheduled to go into effect July 1, 2016.

Feeling the pressure of the Vermont deadline, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, Monsanto and other large chemical and industrial ag companies put enormous pressure on the Senate to pass the DARK Act. Against this array of powerful companies were tens of millions of Americans involved in the food movement.

Most mainstream media outlets predicted an easy victory for corporate power. But the companies soon realized they were in a serious battle. Their primary argument that labeling was going to raise the cost of food got shot down when the study they relied on turned out to be bogus, and food companies such as Campbell’s said the costs would be minimal. Their other argument was that without the DARK Act they would be confronted with a “patchwork” of different GE labeling laws. That argument also failed when it was demonstrated that Vermont’s requirements were the same as those in Connecticut and Maine, the only other states having voted for labeling.

Then they introduced a supposed “compromise” version of the DARK Act that would allow them to voluntarily indicate whether a product contained GE ingredients via QR codes, websites and call-in numbers. This proposal quickly ran into trouble when research showed millions of Americans could not even read QR codes. Half of low income and rural Americans do not own smart phones, nor do two-thirds of the elderly. This grossly discriminatory scheme would also force shoppers to triple or quadruple their shopping time to find out about GE ingredients. They would have to call in to inquire about a product, or take a picture of each product with their phones and upload them, assuming they were able to get on line.

The DARK Act was an obvious attempt to hide non-labeling under the guise of labeling. Senator Barbara Boxer correctly called the bill a “sham and an embarrassment.” Then it came down to the vote. By Senate rules, Monsanto and the big food companies needed 60 votes in the Senate to get the DARK Act to a final vote. Despite predictions, they didn’t even come close: the final vote was 49-48 against the bill. Democracy defeated corporate power. The right to know of Americans won. At that point several major food corporations saw that they were not going to be able to bully the Senate into erasing the Vermont law or those of other states. Within hours the dominoes began to fall as one corporation after the other announced they would comply with the Vermont labeling mandate.

Is the battle over? Hardly. Chemical companies, including Monsanto, and some major food companies will no doubt fight on, and try to find some other way to convince the Senate to circumvent Vermont and other state labeling requirements. It will be a hard sell. Will the Republicans in the Senate really allow a second vote on GE food labeling when they won’t even allow one vote on a Supreme Court nominee? Will they continue to listen to Monsanto when the company has already announced its plans to attempt to merge with a foreign company to avoid paying taxes in the U.S.? Whatever the corporate powers decide they can be sure of one thing: they will once again come up against a strong food movement. We must remain vigilant in defending our right to know. 

Read more: In a Remarkable Triumph of Democracy Over Corporate Power, GMO Labeling Has Finally Arrived in the U.S. | Alternet

USA: Poison on your dinner table?: Strawberries, tomatoes, peppers, grapes, nuts and vine crops could be contaminated with methyl bromide

They look good, but are they poisoned with methyl bromide

The pesticide that sickened a Delaware family in the Virgin Islands is banned for indoor fumigation but U.S. growers will still legally use more than 375 metric tons of the chemical on fields this year through special waivers, federal regulators said.
 

Methyl bromide is blamed in the accidental poisonings of a mom, dad and their two teen sons at a Caribbean resort. The boys remained critically ill Monday at a Philadelphia hospital. Criminal investigators are examining how and why the bug killer got sprayed in a room beneath the family's rented villa two days before they arrived in mid-March.

U.S. law forbids exterminators from using methyl bromide but the Environmental Protection Agency grants a "critical use exemption" to certain farmers — primarily strawberry growers — letting them inject the chemical directly into their soil, the EPA said.

And some organic advocates are worried about the pesticide perhaps reaching grocery-store fruit.

"You have nurseries producing strawberry transplants — the nurseries are the main users of methyl bromide in the U.S. today. The plants in the fields are all started in nurseries.

That ground at the nursery is all fumigated," said Jonathan Winslow, field services manager at Farm Fuel, Inc., a farmer-started, organic distribution and research company on the central California coast.

"So that strawberry transplant can get pulled out of the ground at the nursery and moved to an organic field and be produced under an 'organic' certification," Winslow said. "The use of methyl bromide has diminished, yes. But I am concerned about it. That's why I work for an organic company."

The pesticide is so nasty that, in 1987, the United States and 26 other nations signed a treaty called the Montreal Protocol, vowing to phase out methyl bromide mainly because it depletes the ozone layer. Today, nearly 200 countries have signed that agreement.

But the use of the neurotoxin goes on in farming.

"In the United States, strawberries and tomatoes are the crops which use the most methyl bromide," the EPA says on its website. "Other crops which use this pesticide as a soil fumigant include peppers, grapes, and nut and vine crops."

Read more: Methyl Bromide Pesticide in Paradise Poisoning Case Still Used in U.S. Crops - MyArkLaMiss.com - KTVE NBC 10 - KARD FOX 14 - Your homepage for the latest News, Weather and Sports in the ArkLaMiss!

Genetically Modified Foods could kill you but the culprits have "friends" in high places

There appears to be no question about the fact that the modified crops are designed to “handle” large doses of herbicide.

 Therefore it would only follow the GMO farmers are spraying their crops with more poison to fight off bugs, and the residue of these poisons can follow the food to the market and to your table.

 It’s possible we are all being slowly poisoned by crops that absorb sprayed poisons and may be eaten raw as a vegetable or even survive some cooking methods. One person, a laymen who has studied genetically modified foods a great deal says genetically modified corn causes colon and gastrointestinal problems because the corn sticks to the inside of the body.

One of the major concerns with genetically modified food is the eventual control of the food chain by a company such as Monsanto, who patents every seed modification they make. The implications of this are complex but sobering.

If Monsanto owns the rights to all seeds being planted, then no one can buy, use or plant any seeds without Monsanto’s express consent. The future failure of an entire seed chain could drastically reduce the availability of food and cause even more starvation in underdeveloped countries. There are even a group of conspiracy theorists who think a company like Monsanto could be used to severely limit food supply, resulting in the “culling” of millions of people worldwide.

I am not sure I buy in to this theory but with all that is going on in the world today, my mind is not closed to the “unbelievable” any more. It could even become illegal to use, plant, germinate, grow any seed that is not patented by a company such as Monsanto.

Their lawyer czars may have fashioned legislation that argues any seed not theirs could harm the seed or food chain, could contaminate it and therefore it should be illegal. Now, that may sound a little paranoid but you should pay attention to developments.

Washington and EU  lobbyists have huge capabilities. Regardless of whether modified food is harmful or could turn out to be harmful,  People have a right to know which foods are modified. Is that asking to much? We are supposed to be able to make free choices in this world, and the selection of which foods we eat is one of the most important.

Genetically modified foods are still to new for scientists to provide conclusive evidence of harm to humans. However, there are strong indications and factors that cause many scientists to believe some genetically modified food causes health problems in humans, including cancer.

Genetically modified food leaves a larger footprint in it’s aftermath, meaning the residue, the traces of it stay around in the body long after non-modified food is completely left the body. While genetically modified food must be labelled as such in Europe,

The US Food and Drug Administration in the United States not only does not require labeling, it does not require companies to even provide a list of their modified food, or to announce or send out notice there is a new modified food on the market. The Deputy Commissioner for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is Michael Taylor.

In the 1980’s Taylor was a lawyer for Monsanto and developed their food and drug defense against the government and any others who would question their practices.

 Click here for more on GMO altered foods