Vandana Shiva at Hawaii State Capitol GMO Labeling Rally (video)

Edited from the livestream of the event held at the Hawaii State Capitol on January 16, the video contains Dr Vandana's Shiva's speech on GMOs and the future of farming.

On the opening day of the 2013 Hawaii State Legislature, Dr. Shiva, the renowned anti-GMO activist from India visited Hawaii.

Dr. Shiva addressed the GMO labeling rally, which was the end point of a march which started three miles away at the University of Hawaii. The march drew hundreds of demonstrators from Oahu and the neighboring islands.

Her rousing speech refers to Monsanto and Big Pesticide, basically five big corporations trying to take over the food supply of the world and attempting to patent life itself. She points out that there are thousands of species of each type of crop in the seed banks, which Monsanto wants to destroy, for sheer greed and profit.

Dr. Shiva's speech includes a reference to Europe and the awful economic situation in Greece, Spain and Italy. But she brings note to the fact that when she was in Italy recently, she noticed that as people became unemployed, so the gardens sprung up everywhere and young people started growing their own food. She says growing this food is the future, not GMOs.

To quote Dr. Shiva, "The only thing that Monsanto can bring us is a suicide economy. For the farmers who have committed suicide, for our children whose future is being robbed, for the planet where we commit a planetary collective suicide, in terms of wiping out our future."

"We will create Earth democracy. Our legislators will have to take instructions from the Earth, from the children, from the future."

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/341554

New Mexico next in line to try for GMO labeling

While California's Proposition 37 ballot initiative to label GMO products seems to have failed, a State Senator in New Mexico is next to take the baton in the fight for labeling of genetically modified food products.

As was seen with Proposition 37, with Monsanto and Big Pesticide's excessively deep pockets used to fight the ballot initiative, New Mexico might have a fight on their hands too. 

 

However, State Senator Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe) has proposed an amendment that, while it won’t be brought into debate until next year, he hopes will be approved and will ensure that NM consumers know exactly what is in their food. If Sen. Wirth’s amendment is approved, it will make it mandatory for genetically engineered food and items containing genetically modified, or genetically engineered (GE), products to be adequately and clearly labeled. 

 

 Sen. Wirth said, “The premise of this amendment is simple – New Mexicans deserve the right to know what’s in the food they are eating and feeding to their families.” “Labeling GE foods and feed will empower consumers with basic information to help them decide for themselves the types of food they want to buy.” Sen. Wirth is already making headway in terms of getting people to talk about his plan. 

 

 Food & Water Watch's New Mexico Organizer, Eleanor Bravo says of his amendment, “Giving foods with GE ingredients a label will only improve and expand independent health and scientific knowledge about genetic engineering.” 

 

“We need the research of genetic engineering to be expanded beyond the companies who own the seeds and stand to profit and labeling will allow this to happen,” she added. 

 

Sen. Wirth's proposal would state that companies that do not properly label GMO items will be subject to penalties under current rules pertaining to “mis-branding.”  

 

It will be a hard fight, as just a few weeks ago, Proposition 37 lost by a margin of 53 to 47 in favor of the No on Prop 37 campaign. People involved in the Yes on Prop 37 campaign feel that the last-minute defeat was caused by the multi-million dollar campaign launched by Monsanto, other pesticide companies, and junk food companies against labeling of GMOs. 

 

There is still a certain amount of concern over the results of the election, due to discrepancies in tallies shown on the California Secretary of State's website, but no real outcome has come of this.

 

Mark Kastel of The Cornucopia Institute said in a statement last month that “Genetically engineered foods found on market shelves have most commonly been altered in a lab to either be resistant to being sprayed by large amounts of toxic herbicides, or to produce, internally, their own insecticide.” 

 

“Corporations that produce both the genetically engineered crops and their designer pesticides, in concert with the multi-billion-dollar food manufacturers that use these ingredients, fought this measure tooth and nail, throwing $46 million at the effort that would have required food manufacturers to include informational labeling on GMO content on their packaging.”  

 

Related articles:

Proposition 37 — possible that election fraud made it fail  

Cheerios' Facebook page hijacked by anti-GMO protesters 

Pepsico's 'Naked Juice' to feel the pain after boycotting Prop 37 

Vandana Shiva interviewed on HARDtalk by the BBC about GMOs (video)

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/339653

Mexico's decision on GM maize postponed until next year

A decision as to a widespread planting of genetically modified (GM) corn or transgenic maize in Mexico will not be made under the outgoing government of President Felipe Calderón. It will now await until sometime next spring.

 

Digital Journal recently reported that Monsanto Co. and DuPont are planning to take over Mexico's corn-growing heartland with GM corn, or maize, with the proposed planting of 2,500,000 hectares (more than 6 million acres), including the controversial strain of corn that has been linked to cancer in rats in a recently published peer-reviewed study.

 

Concern has been voiced that the planting of GMO's would be devastating for the heart of the center of origin and diversity for maize, where scientists have identified thousands of peasant varieties of maize.

 

According to a top Mexican government official speaking on Thursday, the highly controversial approval for planting of GM corn fields on a commercial scale will be delayed until next year.

 

A deputy agriculture secretary, Mariano Ruiz, said that the regulatory approval process will not be finalized under the current government and will, instead, fall to Calderón's successor, President-elect Enrique Peña Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, who is set to take office on December 1.

 

According to Ruiz, permits are not likely to be approved for four to five months, but he did state that the new government, under Peña Nieto, is like-minded in its support for the introduction of large-scale GMO corn cultivation in Mexico.He told reporters, "I think we are in agreement generally over the importance of having this instrument, and that farmers have the tool of genetically modified organisms."

 

However he did add, "But like they say, the devil is in the details." 

 

While scientists have acknowledged that Mexico is the birthplace of corn, and opponents argue that these genetically modified varieties would contaminate native strains and irrevocably damage the grain's biodiversity, Ruiz said that the government still had to designate so-called "centers of origin" where GM corn cultivation will be banned, as well as set other safety regulations.

 

Mexico currently plants around 7.2 million hectares (17.8 million acres) of corn each year, consisting mainly of white corn for human consumption. According to agriculture ministry data, domestic corn production this year will total almost 22 million tonnes.

 

However, the country relies on imports of yellow corn for animal feed, which includes around 9 million tonnes in 2012. Promoters of GM corn say it would produce yields between 10 and 15% larger than conventional strains. They say this could both boost production, and also curb Mexico's dependence on imports.

 

There are currently five applications for commercial-scale GM corn fields, totally around 2.5 million hectares, including Monsanto, with two applications of 700,000 each in Mexico's western Sinaloa state, the country's largest corn producer.

 

Pioneer Hi-Bred International, which is part of DuPont has three applications outstanding, each of which would cover around 350,000 hectares, in northeastern Tamaulipas state.  One other application is outstanding by Dow Agrosciences de Mexico, part of Dow Chemical, for 40,000 hectares also in Tamaulipas state.

Verónica Villa from ETC’s Mexico office was quoted recently as saying, “If Mexico’s government allows this crime of historic significance to happen, GMOs will soon be in the food of the entire Mexican population, and genetic contamination of Mexican peasant varieties will be inevitable. We are talking about damaging more than 7,000 years of indigenous and peasant work that created maize – one of the world’s three most widely eaten crops.”

 

Silvia Ribeiro, ETC Group’s Latin America Director, was quoted as saying: “It would be a monumental injustice for the creators of maize – who have so benefited humankind – to be obliged to pay royalties to a transnational corporation that exploited their knowledge in the first place.”

 

Another concern is that farmers will no longer be able to save their own seed from each harvest and will always have to buy more seeds for each planting, along with the necessary herbicides, causing more expense. Should harvests not go well, farmers will then struggle to survive.

 

A petition is being run by Avaaz addressed to the President of Mexico, to "Stop GMO Corn from Contaminating Mexico's Heartland."

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/337603#ixzz2DEQMQ7X7

Monsanto Co. seeks to take over Mexico's heartland with GM maize

If their requests are approved by outgoing president Felipe Calderón, Monsanto Co. and DuPont will be planting 2,500,000 hectares (more than 6 million acres) of transgenic or GM maize in the heartland of Mexico.

According to ETC Group, the consequences will be devastating for the heart of the center of origin and diversity for maize, and also globally. 

Mexico is considered to be the global repository of maize genetic diversity, as scientists have identified thousands of peasant varieties of maize.

Should Monsanto's applications be approved, this would mark the world's first commercial-scale planting of GM varieties of a major food group, in it's center of origin.Basically this would wipe out all biodiversity, and all the various local varieties of maize, developed over around 7,000 years... read more and find out how you can help/sign petition.

If their requests are approved by outgoing president Felipe Calderón, Monsanto Co. and DuPont will be planting 2,500,000 hectares (more than 6 million acres) of transgenic or GM maize in the heartland of Mexico.

According to ETC Group, the consequences will be devastating for the heart of the center of origin and diversity for maize, and also globally. Mexico is considered to be the global repository of maize genetic diversity, as scientists have identified thousands of peasant varieties of maize. Should Monsanto's applications be approved, this would mark the world's first commercial-scale planting of GM varieties of a major food group, in it's center of origin.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/337459#ixzz2CxYEVCur

Uncounted votes on California Proposition 37

The Yes on Proposition 37 campaign to label GMOs failed on November 6. But did it? An investigation has uncovered at least 1.6 million uncounted votes in various counties of California. 

Jon Rappoport is the author of an explosive new collection, 'The Matrix Revealed', and a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Rappoport has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic and creative power to audiences around the world.

Rappoport has recently published an article in Natural News, as he has been doing a bit of investigation into why Proposition 37, the ballot initiative to require mandatory labeling of GMO products, failed.

On November 8, two days after the election, he found that many votes in California remain uncounted. He decided to try and find out just how many, and contacted the Secretary of State of CA, responsible for elections in the state, who apparently doesn't know. He was informed that all counties in California have been asked, but not ordered, to report in those figures, but it is apparently voluntary. 

So Rappoport decided to pick the largest counties and called their voter registrar offices and these are the results he obtained:

• Santa Clara County: 180,000 votes remain uncounted

• Orange County: 241,336 votes remain uncounted

• San Diego County: 475,000 votes remain uncounted

• LA County: 782,658 votes remain uncounted

In other words, in just those four counties, 1.6 million votes remain uncounted. It is still unknown how many other votes are uncounted in other Californian counties. 

Yes on 37 failed by just 559,776 votes. With the possibility of many more "yes" votes just sitting out there uncounted, is this a fair election result? What is the point of having an election, and people casting their votes, if they are not counted?

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336548#ixzz2Boe1mk00

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

San Juan County, Washington, USA now GMO-free

Local voters in San Juan county voted yes for Initiative Measure 2012-4 by a wide margin in the November 6 election. This essentially puts a ban on genetically modified organisms in the county.

The declaration made on the Initiative Measure read as follows: 

"The people of San Juan County, desiring to protect our agricultural industry, our natural environment, the private property rights of our citizens, and the health, safety and welfare of our People, deem it advisable and appropriate to restrict the cultivation of genetically modified crops, livestock and other organisms in San Juan County." 

With 8,877 votes counted, "Yes" votes outnumbered "No" votes by 5,183 to 3,329, for Initiative Measure 2012-4.

GMO-ban supporter, Marta Nielsen of Orcas Island is an organic farmer who raises chickens. She announced, "I'm proud to live in a county that could see the immense benefit of passing this forward-thinking initiative."

The GMO ban was proposed by organic farmers and other interested party in the county. The ban makes it unlawful to propagate or grow plants or animals in San Juan County, Washington, that have been genetically modified. It further provides for penalties and the destruction of such organisms. 

A recent opinion piece on GMO's by Ken & Kathryn Akopiantz, primary sponsors of the initiative can be read here.

The video above features Ken Akopiantz, a farmer and owner of Horse Drawn Farm and the Seed Librarian of Lopez Community Land Trust. He speaks on the dangers of genetic engineering (GE) and genetically modified organism (GMO) and explains why it is important to support the Initiative Measure No. 2012-4 to ban raising GMOs in the San Juan county. This speech was delivered during the Food Charrette on Lopez Island, Feb 25, 2012.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336431#ixzz2Be90I1ED

'Yes on Proposition 37': Narrow loss, movement victory

Yesterday it was a close call in voting on Proposition 37, the ballot initiative for mandatory labeling of GMO products. While the Ca Right to Know campaign lost the battle for now, it is not conceding the war.

With 4,277,985 people voting "yes" (47.9%) and 4,835,045 people voting "no" (53.1%), it was very close. 

Bearing in mind that the opposition pushed a massive $45 million dollars to quash the bill, Yes on 37 did amazingly well with smaller, but far more honest, donations and endorsements.  

The following is the Right to Know Election Statement:

Yesterday, we showed that there is a food movement in the United States, and it is strong, vibrant and too powerful to stop. We always knew we were the underdogs, and the underdogs nearly took the day. Dirty money and dirty tactics may have won this skirmish, but they will not win the war.

Today, we are more than 4 million votes closer to knowing what’s in our food than when we started. This is a victory and a giant step forward. We are proud of our broad coalition of moms and dads, farmers, nurses, environmentalists, faith and labor leaders who did so much with so few resources to bring us to this point, and we will carry forward.

These results are also a reminder of the corrupting influence of huge multinational corporations on our electoral process. The world’s leading pesticide and junk food companies outspent Yes on 37 by more than 5 to 1, and beginning on October 1, spent about a million dollars a day on a hailstorm of false claims, misrepresentations and fear mongering over five simple words on a label. In the end, they spent enough money to hide the truth from the majority of voters. The food manufacturers are on the wrong side of history; they should not fight their customers, but join them.

Today is not the end of our campaign to secure our fundamental right to know what’s in our food. It is a strong beginning, and we thank the millions of Californians who stood with us. We are proud of our grassroots movement, our 10,000 hardworking volunteers, and the diverse coalition of health, faith, labor and consumer groups that stood with us. We will keep fighting for consumer choice, fairness and transparency in our food system. And we will prevail. 

To Victory! 

The California Right to Know Campaign 

Anyone wishing to learn more and join the fight, visit www.carighttoknow.org.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336401#ixzz2BZh5671P

LA City Council on Election Day 2012

Four simple questions before you cast your vote for Prop 37

Zack Kaldveer, Assistant Media Director of the Yes on 37 Ca Right to Know campaign, had a 45 minute interview the other day about GMOs and labeling. The director immediately cut a 2 minute segment and put it up on YouTube, as it asks the right questions.

 

On Tuesday, November 6, Californians can make the decision to vote yes or no on Proposition 37 - the initiative to make labeling of GMO products mandatory. Here are four questions that Kaldveer asks you, before you cast your vote: 

1. Since when have the pesticide and junk food corporations ever spent $45 million to save you money, improve your health or protect the environment?
   
2. When it comes to your health and the health of your family, who do you trust? The pesticide and junk food corporations, bank-rolling the No on 37 campaign? Or groups like the California Nurses Association, The Breast Cancer Action Fund and the American Public Health Association?
3. Who do you trust to protect the environment? Companies like Monsanto and Dupont, who brought us DDT and Agent Orange? Or do you trust Prop 37 supporters, like the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the California League of Conservation Voters.
4. Who do you trust when it comes to whether you have the right to know what's in the food that you eat? Companies like Monsanto and Dupont and the pesticide and junk food corporations, bank-rolling the No on 37 campaign? Or Prop 37 supporters, like Consumers Union, the Consumer Federation of America and Public Citizen. 

"What we are being asked is to trust, in all of these areas, corporations that have a long history of deceiving the public, polluting the environment, and endangering public health, and disregarding the support that the Prop 37 has from organizations that have dedicated their lives and decades to improving our health and fighting for peoples' rights over corporate profit."

All Proposition 37 is asking for is a simple label, as is currently required for 3,000 other ingredients. This would come at no cost to the consumer, but would inform the purchaser of the content of the food, so that they can make an informed choice of what to feed their families. 

Prop 37 was put on the ballot by a million Californians, just like you.

No on 37, embodied by Big Pesticide and the junk food companies, has spent a whopping $45 million to try to prevent you knowing what is in your food. 

On the other hand, the California Nurses Association says: "Nurses see people suffering from serious diet-related diseases every day. The potential danger of genetically modified foods is why CNA supports Prop 37." 

The Los Angeles Times says: "Such labeling wouldn’t result in significant increases in food costs, no matter what the industry tries to tell you. After all, food companies regularly change their labels in one way or another." 

Ken Cook, president of Environmental Working Group and a Californian resident said, “Makers of sugar-laden cereal and soda companies once tried to label their products as beneficial to children’s well-being." 

"Federal regulators forced them to drop their bogus health claims. Now these same companies are pouring millions into defeating Prop 37, even though the label would actually be true and useful to consumers who want more information about their food. If their products were made with genetically engineered ingredients, then they’d be labeled as such. No more, no less.” 

For more information visit: www.carighttoknow.org/ and read more by Zack Kaldveer here.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336206#ixzz2BLJY8yZy

Halloween: GMOs are a Trick and not a Treat

We could all become Genetically Modified Zombies and Halloween would be 365 days a year. Vote Yes on Proposition 37.

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

Despite latest poll 'Yes on 37' is in it to win labeling of GMOs

While the latest Pepperdine poll taken between October 21 and 28 shows the opposition at 50.5% and support for Prop 37 at 39.1%, the new round of positive advertising will make the change. 

Stacy Malkan, spokesperson for the Yes on 37 campaign said, “The Pepperdine poll was taken after three weeks of deceptive opposition ads that went unanswered and before the Yes on 37 message got on the air. The world’s largest pesticide and junk food companies have been spending a million dollars a day carpet bombing California with lies to confuse voters about a simple labeling law."

"Now our ads are up and many voters are hearing our message for the first time – that Prop 37 is a simple labeling law that gives us the right to know what’s in our food, at no cost to consumers.” 

“On the Yes side, support is rushing in from all sides. We have a strong ground game with 10,000 volunteers out on the streets, we have a powerful ad, money is coming in the door and we have one of the most successful online organizing campaigns ever seen. We expect these will have a big effect during the last week in the campaign,” she continued. 

“We are in this to win, and the pesticide and junk food companies opposing this measure are worried we will win, as evidenced by their recent infusion of $8 million more into the opposition campaign in the last 10 days," Malkan said.

 

Total contributions to the "No on 37" campaign are now at $44.2 after Dupont contributed another $500,000 on October 29. On the "Yes" side of the scale, the supporting campaign has raised $7.4 million. 

 

 Malkan said, “We have always been the underdog in this story, but we believe that when voters go to the polls next week they will value their right to know what’s in their food and vote Yes on Proposition 37.” For more information visit: www.carighttoknow.org.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335833#ixzz2Ap02cSHe

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

Yes on Proposition 37 to Label Genetically Engineered Food. We Have the Right to Know.

Big agrochemical corporations have produced genetically engineered corn that includes insecticides.

Not on the corn. But in the corn.

A new study links genetically engineered corn to tumors and organ damage.

And the big agrochemical corporations also say Bt-toxins are safe for us to eat.

We shouldn't be forced to gamble with the health of our families.

We have the right to know what's in our food. Vote Yes on Proposition 37.

Join us at www.CArighttoknow.org - and please remember to vote on November 6!

Video: 'Trust us' — Vote yes on Proposition 37 to label GMOs

Some of your favorite stars have got together again, impersonating scientists at leading biotech firms and ironically telling you to trust them. But really, they want you to vote "Yes on 37" to label GMO foods.

"Trust Us" is an ironic public service announcement by Consumer Advocates for Safe Food and Water, sponsored by Food and Water Watch, in support of Proposition 37, California's ballot initiative to label genetically engineered foods.

With a very diverse, all-star cast, including Danny DeVito, Emily Deschanel, Glenn Howerton, Kaitlin Olson, KaDee Strickland and Kristin Bauer van Straten, impersonating scientists at leading biotech firms speaking their "subconscious minds" about why the general public should just trust them and not fight for mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods (GMOs).

To learn more about Proposition 37 and Food & Water Watch's campaign to make labeling of GMOs the law, and to help raise money to broadcast this public service announcement and others like it far and wide, visit www.voteyes37.org and www.carighttoknow.org/

Original source: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335476#ixzz2AIrofZuC

California Farmers Ask: "Why Hide What's In Our Food?"

California farmers John Richardson, Amanda Gray, and Gowan Lester agree that we have a right to know what's in the food we eat. Vote YES on Prop 37!

Click here for more information about Proposition 37 and GMO labeling.

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

Everything you need to know about Prop 37 and labeling GMOs

Vote Yes on Proposition 37 for labeling of GMOs

Here are two of the latest videos telling you why you must vote YES to Prop 37!

Kids are not Lab Rats: Vote Yes on Prop 37 

 Yes on 37 - California Right To Know 

For more info visit http://www.carighttoknow.org

Vote Yes on 37 - We Have The Right To Know

Read more about Proposition 37 and the right to know what you are eating.

Ca Right to Know calls for criminal investigation of 'No on 37'

In the latest in a line of misrepresentations and possible fraud, California Right to Know is calling for a criminal investigation of "No on 37" for misuse of the FDA Seal and a fabricated FDA quote, all in opposition to the labeling of GMOs.

Proposition 37 would require labeling of genetically engineered food in California. The opposition to Prop 37 is spending a whopping $35 million to discredit it. And they are doing this using misrepresentations and possibly even fraud. 

Letters were sent to the US Department of Justice on Thursday by the California Right to Know "Yes on 37" campaign, requesting a criminal investigation into the "No on 37" campaign. The reason for this? "No on 37" affixed the FDA's seal to one of the campaign's mailers. 

Screen capture

Misrepresentation of FDA on mailer.

 Section 506 of the US Criminal Code states: “Whoever… knowingly uses, affixes, or impresses any such fraudulently made, forged, counterfeited, mutilated, or altered seal or facsimile thereof to or upon any certificate, instrument, commission, document, or paper of any description… shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”

Gary Ruskin, campaign manager of California Right to Know Yes on 37, said, “The Justice Department should investigate this fraudulent dirty trick perpetrated by the No on 37 campaign.”

“They are running a campaign of lies, deceit and trickery, and some of it may be criminal.”

The letter sent to the US Department of Justice also gives evidence that the "No on 37" campaign falsely attributed a direct quote by the FDA in the campaign mailer. Alongside the FDA seal, text in quotes says "The US Food and Drug Administration says a labeling policy like Prop 37 would be 'inherently misleading.' This quote is completely false and fabricated. The FDA has never made such a statement and does not take a position on Proposition 37 - in fact, it would be unlawful for the agency to do so, in the general election. 

The letter, quoted below, was sent by California Right to Know to the following: - Lanny Breuer, Assistant Attorney General of the USDOJ Criminal Division; - Laurel Rimon, Chief of the Special Prosecutions Unit of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California; - Vincent Tolino, Director of the Ethics and Integrity staff at the FDA.

Dear Mr. Breuer, Ms. Rimon, and Mr. Tolino:

I am writing on behalf of our client, Yes on 37 for the Right to Know If Your Food Has Been Genetically Engineered (“Yes on 37 Committee”), a California ballot committee advocating for passage of Proposition 37 in the upcoming general election. Proposition 37 would require labeling of certain foods made with genetic engineering.

It has come to the attention of the Yes on 37 Committee, first, that the California political committee formed to oppose Proposition 37, the No On 37 Committee, has paid for and disseminated a direct mail piece stating that the Food and Drug Administration “says a labeling policy like Prop. 37 would be ‘inherently misleading,’” with the name and official seal of FDA appearing under that statement.

A copy of that mailing is attached. Of course, the FDA has never taken a position on Proposition 37; it would be unlawful for the agency to do so, in the general election; and the quoted statement from FDA was made in an unrelated context more than twenty years ago. In these circumstances, it appears that use of the agency’s seal on this mail piece is clearly fraudulent and the misuse of the seal in this way is a violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 506 and 1017 as well as applicable agency regulations.

Second, under California law, the California Secretary of State prepares an official guide for voters, including certain materials on ballot propositions. Those materials include arguments submitted by proponents of each proposition and arguments opposed, and rebuttals to each.

These arguments must be submitted by registered California voters, who submit a form certifying that they are the authors of the argument or rebuttal. The three identified authors of the “Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 37” include a Dr. Henry I. Miller, who is identified solely as “Founding Director, Office of Biotechnology of the Food & Drug Administration.”

The Rebuttal appears on page 56 of the official Voter Information Guide, a copy of which is attached. Dr. Miller in fact, does not currently work for the FDA in any capacity. The use of a false official federal title to make it appear that a high-ranking FDA official opposes the ballot proposition would seem to be a blatant violation of 18 U.S.C. §912, making it a federal offense to “assume or pretend to be an office or employee acting under the authority

We urge you to take steps immediately to put a stop to the misuse of the agency’s seal and official authority for these improper political purposes. If you have any questions or need further information concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter.

Sincerely yours, Joseph E. Sandler

--- 

The misrepresentation is just the latest in a stream of deceptions by the "No on 37" campaign, the top six funders of which are the world's six largest pesticide companies.

"No on 37" has repeatedly misrepresented the university affiliation of their lead scientific spokesperson, Dr. Henry I. Miller, in campaign ads, both in mailer form and on TV, totally violating the policy of Stanford University.

 "No on 37" has been accused of making false statements in the official California Voter's Guide, misrepresenting the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the nation's largest professional association for nutritionists and dieticians, on the subject of GMO labeling.

 Academy President Ethan Bergman said in a press release, “We are concerned that California voters are being misled." "Voters need accurate information in order to make an informed choice." 

Ca Right to Know

On top of all this, the "No on 37" campaign ads which are blanketing California have been described as misleading by the San Jose Mercury News, Sacramento Bee, and San Francisco Chronicle. 

For more information about the California Right to Know campaign, visit www.carighttoknow.org.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335080