I-522: Next step for GMO labeling in Washington State, USA

As part of an ongoing movement to make labeling of GMO products mandatory, a group in Washington State is now working on Initiative 522, "The People's Right To Know Genetically Engineered Food Act." 

Digital Journal reported recently on the set-back with GMO labeling in California, as Big Pesticide and the No on 37 campaign won by a small margin, after spending $46 million to fight mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food.

Shortly after this, happier news was reported in regard to San Juan County, Washington, a county which is now GMO-free after residents voted yes on Initiative Measure 2012-4, which puts a ban on genetically modified organisms in the county. 

Continuing with Washington State, another initiative, I-522, is in the works, and is looking for at least 320,000 signatures, as recommended by the Secretary of State. Deadline for the signatures is December 31, 2012.

In the video above, Beverly Goldie, the Facilitator of the GMO Awareness Group (GAG) of the North Olympic Peninsula, explains the drive and how people are getting together for the cause.

Basically I-522 is an initiative to the Washington State legislature to establish mandatory labeling of foods produced through genetic engineering. I-522 is filed and individuals and organizations are gathering signatures across the state. Numbers are growing every day and people from all walks of life are working together to advance food labeling. There are many ways others can support I-522. As they say, "Every little tweet and every dollar helps."

Anyone interested in getting involved can visit the Facebook, Google+, Twitter and Pinterest pages and also GAG's YouTube channel. Anyone wishing to volunteer, can do so here and the location map for signing petitions is here.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336518#ixzz2BlG6cYE0

Video: California kids say 'Yes on 37' to label GMOs

 

A bunch of youngsters in California are concerned about the food that they are eating. While they can't personally vote on Prop 37, they are urging others to say yes to the ballot initiative to label GMOs.

You have to be 18-years-old to vote, but not to make a video. A group of kids got together and made the above video, which is doing the rounds on YouTube. 

 

The kids urge Californians to vote yes on Proposition 37, the ballot initiative to label genetically modified food products and products that contain genetically engineered ingredients.

 

 

All they, and other proponents of Proposition 37, are asking, is for a simple label, telling them what is in their food. No extra cost to the consumer, just transparency. 

 

As they say in the video, the opposition to Proposition 37 does not consist of one single human being, just a bunch of the biggest pesticide and junk food companies. For more information, visit www.carighttoknow.org/

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335667#ixzz2AaPjuhTg

Kids are not Lab Rats: Vote Yes on Prop 37

In a really cute video, kids tell us why it is important to vote Yes on Proposition 37, the initiative requiring genetically modified food to be labeled in California, USA.

Coming up in November this year, Californians will be voting on Proposition 37, which would require that all genetically engineered food be labeled. 

 

The opposition (Big Pesticide and major junk food companies) are pumping millions of dollars into a misleading and often fraudulent advertising campaign to debunk labeling and to confuse voters. 

 

35 million dollars goes a long way to protecting their bottom line. While the Yes on 37 campaign cannot match them in dollars, the grassroots organization can fight back with a big heart and a genuine need to know what we are eating. In case you don't know what genetically engineered or genetically modified (GE or GMO) foods are, the majority of processed foods in the supermarket contain these. The food has been genetically modified with DNA from other plants or animals, and also to produce its own built-in pesticides. 

 

The foods are untested, unlabeled and potentially unsafe for both your health and the environment.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), does no independent safety testing on GMOs and only relies on information supplied by the biotechnology companies, who in turn, are merely thinking of their bottom line. 

 

A recent study in France showed that genetically modified corn caused tumors and organ failure in rats over a lifetime period. And yet, we have no idea of the long-term effects of the same GMOs on humans. 

 

 If you live in California, give yourself the chance to choose what you are eating and feeding to your children by taking the pledge to vote Yes on 37 or, if you live elsewhere, to support the initiative. 

 

 As the kids in the video say, they can't vote, but you are an adult, so please vote "Yes." 

 

 

For more information visit www.carighttoknow.org where they say, "Prop 37 gives us the right to know if our food has been genetically engineered. It helps us make the right food choices for our families by putting a simple label on the groceries we buy and telling us if our food has been genetically engineered. Simple and clear labels. No cost to consumers. No loopholes - that's why a broad and diverse Coalition from the Sierra Club, to farmers, nurses, doctors and the Consumer Federation of America say YES to 37."

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335221

Yes on 37: Don't let the pesticide companies buy your vote

Big Pesticide is currently spending $1 million per day on TV and radio advertising to confuse California voters about Proposition 37, which simply requires clear labeling to tell us what is in our food.

Despite it being evident that labeling of GMO products is essential, and the fact that the large majority of Californians are demanding this labeling, the world's largest pesticide companies are currently spending $1 million per day to confuse voters.

The truth is that all that money can buy plenty of confusion among listeners and viewers, but it cannot buy the actual facts about Proposition 37, which are as follows: 

1. "No on 37" is trying to tell you that labeling is going to raise the cost of foods, i.e. the cost of the labeling will be passed on to consumers. They reckon that your grocery costs will increase by $400 a year.

This is untrue. Labeling did not raise costs in 50 other countries worldwide who have implemented GMO labeling. It won't raise costs in the US either. Just adding a few words to the labels actually costs you nothing. Read about the only independent study on Proposition 37 to find out the Truth about Cost. 

2. "No on 37" is saying Proposition 37 is “a measure for trial lawyers written by trial lawyers.” 

Proposition 37 was not written by trial lawyers. It was written by a group of food industry, farm, science and health experts, including representatives from Lundberg Family Farms, the Organic Consumers Association, Food Democracy Now!, Nature’s Path and the Center for Food Safety. 

3. "No on 37" says Proposition 37 will provide “countless new opportunities for shakedown lawsuits.” 

The truth is that there are no incentives for lawsuits. The opposition's stories about "shakedown lawsuits" make absolutely no sense. Proposition 37 is extremely straightforward and is easy for businesses to follow. Companies will label their products for genetically engineered ingredients, just like they label calories and fat. Retailers are protected under the law. Read the Truth about Lawsuits.

4. "No on 37" says that exemptions offered by Proposition 37 make no sense. However, exemptions under Proposition 37 make absolute common sense: Prop 37 exempts products that have no ingredient labels, such as restaurant food and alcohol. You can't exactly expect a restaurant to stick a label on every dish or drink they serve? Proposition 37 will cover meat from genetically engineered animals. 

The opposition is merely trying to confuse voters about exemptions - and to do this they are running TV ads featuring a fringe radical scientist (one who thinks nuclear radiation is good for our health and who suggested that nicotine is not addictive) - because they don’t want to label genetically engineered foods. Read the Truth about Exemptions.

Thousands of farmers in California are for Proposition 37. All the leading businesses in the natural and sustainable food sector are voting Yes on 37. All leading labor groups in the industry, including United Farm Workers, United Food and Commercial Workers, and California Labor Federation are saying Yes on 37. 

Stand with those leading the health, faith, labor and consumer groups and vote Yes on Proposition 37. Don't let the pesticide companies and purveyors of junk food try and buy your vote.

Read more and listen to a broadcast by Dr Robert Gould, MD, San Francisco Bay Chapter President of Physicians for Social Responsibility, who speaks on the health implications of GMOs and explains why labeling of products containing GMOs is essential.  http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/334890

For more information also visit http://www.carighttoknow.org

South African consumers win GM labelling victory

The African Centre for Biosafety reports that South African consumers have just won a hard-earned victory, regarding the labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods.

 

GM crops have been grown in South Africa since 1999. However most consumers are largely unaware that their staple food, maize (or corn), has been genetically modified. GM soya and cotton are also grown in South Africa, and a significant amount of foodstuffs on the supermarket shelves now contain GM components or ingredients.

 

Up until now, the food industry in South Africa has taken the view that current GM labelling laws are ambiguous and do not apply to processed foods.On Wednesday, the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) published draft amendments to regulations governing the labeling of genetically modified food in South Africa. According to these draft amendments, all imported or locally produced food which contains 5% or more genetically modified components or ingredients, must now be labelled as "contains genetically modified ingredients or components".

 

Director of the African Centre for Biosafety (ACB), Mariam Mayet, congratulated the DTI and also praised the role played by consumers in demanding their right to know. Mayet says "the proposed amendments convey the clear intention of government that the food industry must now step up to the plate and label their products."

 

Mayet did, however, express disappointment that labelling will only apply if there is 5% or more GM content. This threshold is reportedly based purely on commercial considerations and not on any scientific measure. 

 

SAFeAGE is an organisation that has fought for mandatory labelling of GM food to be included in the Consumer Protection Act. Fahri Hassan of the organisation said that he was "delighted that finally, the best interests of the public have been considered and that consumers have won the right to know what they are eating".

 

Currently the draft amendments are open for public comment up to November 9, 2012. Expectations are that the GM industry will continue to lobby for weaker regulations and give excuses as to why their products should not be labelled.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/334690