It's hard to fight $43,000,000!

It's hard to fight $43.000,000! Chemical companies and international corporations have raised more than this to oppose proposition 37 which would require that you be told if your food contains genetically  modified ingredients (GMO's-Genetically Modified    Organisms). With that much money you can spread a lot of misinformation.  In the lead up to the election, the foes of proposition 37 are spending over a million dollars per day to try to defeat it.  Why? To protect a multi-billion dollar empire.  Those glossy fliers you have received in the mail cost a lot of money. Have you looked to see who is sending them to you?  Look near the bottom. It will say something like ”Coalition Against the Deceptive Food Labeling Scheme, sponsored by Farmers, Food Producers, and  Grocers”  This is deceptive labeling. Who are these people?  Read more.  Who pays their bills?  Monsanto, DuPont, Pepsi-Co, Syngentia, Dow Chemical, and a host of other Giant Corporations.  Many donating over a million dollars each to defeat this measure.  Monsanto alone has donated over seven million!  To oppose this Goliath, the  right to know Davids have raised a little over five million to date.

The glossy mailings I have received are full of misleading and deceptive material.  One contained a statement by someone identified as associated with the University of California Davis that no labeling like this is required anywhere else in the world.

In fact, more than 40 nations, including most of Europe, Australia, Russia, India, Brazil and  Japan require labeling of GMO's    Their laws may not be exactly “like” the propose CA law, but labeling is required. In Ireland, Algeria, and Saudi Arabia GMO's are banned altogethe. Zambia has refused US food aid because of GMO's.  When the proponents first introduced GMO's in the UK, The UK paid a top researcher three million dollars for his lab to conduct a study of the safety GMO's, hoping thereby to reassure the public. When the results were not to the governments liking, Dr. Arpad Puzstai was fired after 30 years on the job. His lab was closed and his results were seized.  Only a huge public outcry led to their release and the labeling requirements in Europe.  His study had shown changes in the normal stomach lining of lab rats after only two weeks on GMO food.

The mailings say the measure will be costly to enforce.  The Independent Legislative Analyst says it could cost from a few hundred thousand to over one million dollars anually plus possible increased court costs.  Huh?  Over forty million to fight this?   

Opponents say that the measure will be costly to farmers and grocers.   Certainly not directly. The measure only requires labeling and allows a timed phase-in. Direct costs would be minimal. By “Farmers and Grocers” do they mean International Agri-Business?

Opponents say the measure is confusing.  Why is dog food labeling required, but not beef labeling?   There are no Genetically modified Cows!  (yet) Cows are fed GMO's, probably to their detriment, but to require labeling of GMO fed organisms would be over-reach.  Dog food, however, contains lots of GMO's  The main genetically modified crops are corn, soy beans, canola, cotton, sugar beets (but not sugar cane), plus some zucchini and crook neck squash,  and papayas.  Genetically Modified Alfalfa and Kentucky Blue Grass have also recently appeared.  Read the Dog Food Bag. It is often full of GMO ingredients. People love their animals, and independent studies show a lot of harmful side effects on animals that are fed GMO's.  Animals often die that graze on the stubble of GMO cotton plants, but  not when eating natural cotton stubble.

Opponents say proponents are interested in money.  Well, that's too silly to refute, given their own position.

The opponents say GMO's are safe.  But, the rise of many of the modern diseases closely follow the introduction of GMO's in the mid- 90's.  Graphs of the incidence of Allergies, Autism, Cancer, Chron's Disease, Leaky Gut Syndrome and many others show a rise corresponding to the introduction of GMO's.  Many Doctors and Scientists are concerned, and many private studies implicate GMO's in the rise of sickness and disease in America.  Genetic Engineering is far from an exact science, contrary to what you may have heard, and many unintended changes may incurr in the new product. We are told these are harmless, but long term studies would be needed to prove this. None have been done. Plants and their seeds developed slowly over millions of years is conjunction with the rest of the environment. Even small sudden changes could lead to disastrous unpredicted consequences.  This brings us back to money.  Medical savings by avoiding GMO's may well far exceed any costs associated with labeling them.  

The Opponents say they are saving the world from hunger.  On the conrtary!  Agri-Business monoculture is displacing and destroying small farmers around the globe! Native seed, the heritage of millions of years, is being replaced by patented seed from Monsanto and other Genetic Engineering firms.  Farmers  can no longer save their own seed.  They become dependent on international corporations for both seed and the chemicals needed with them. This is the multi-billion dollar business they are defending.   The world grows plenty of food, people just can't afford it!

The FDA has tested this stuff and it is safe you say.  No. No testing has been required since 1992. Manufactures only have to assert to the FDA that they say it is safe. No independent studies have been Required!  However, when a lawsuit in 1998 disclosed internal FDA documents prior to that time, it became clear that many of the FDA's scientists considered these products very dangerous.  Warnings from the FDA scientists to their superiors were ignored and suppressed. 

Who is the FDA's man in charge of food safety? Michael Taylor.  Prior Jobs?  Monsanto Attorney, and Monsanto Vice President.  In fact, in the Clinton, Bush, Obama years former Monsanto employees have held prominent government positions in the USDA, the EPA, the US Senate, the White House, and other offices.  Hillary Clinton  once represented Monsanto in her position with the Rose law firm. Politicians from both sides of the aisle get all excited by the prospects for economic  growth and world dominance that genetic engineering seems to promise, but their glassy eyes overlook the huge potential dangers. This is not a political issue though, this is an issue about health, honesty,  and the fundamental rights of citizens. Why don't the opponents want genetically modified foods labeled? Could they be afraid that if you knew you wouldn't want to eat them?  The bottom line is that in spite of the political or economic interests, You Have A Right To Know What You Are Eating!