AquaBounty’s genetically modified (GMO) salmon facing further backlash from national grocery stores and restaurant chains : Costco and Red Lobster Say No to GMO Salmon

Costco and Red Lobster Say No to GMO Salmon

Lorraine Chow | November 25, 2015 9:21 am |

 

 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) controversial approval of AquaBounty’s genetically modified (GMO) salmon has garnered further backlash from national grocery stores and restaurant chains.

Costco, the second largest retailer in the world with 487 stores and one of the largest retailers of salmon and seafood in the U.S., has made a firm commitment not to sell GMO salmon.





“Although the FDA has approved the sale of GM salmon, Costco has not sold and does not intend to sell GM salmon at this time,” the company said in a statement.

Costco’s move to reject GMO salmon comes after vehement opposition from anti-GMO activists.
According to a statement from Friends of the Earth, Walmart and Publix are among the last remaining large retail grocers in the U.S. that have not yet rejected GMO salmon.

“The market is rejecting GMO salmon. Stores won’t sell it and people don’t want to eat it,” said Friends of the Earth Campaigner Dana Perls. “Now other retailers like Walmart and restaurants need to follow suit, and we need mandatory GMO labeling so that consumers know how to avoid GMO salmon.”

More than 60 grocery store chains representing more than 9,000 stores across the U.S. have made commitments to not sell GMO salmon, including Safeway, Kroger, Target, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, Aldi and many others.

The nation’s largest seafood restaurant is also denying GMO salmon. Red Lobster, with 705 North American locations and more than 40 internationally, told the Dallas Morning News that it would not sell GMO salmon last Friday.

Incidentally, consumers might not even know they’re eating GMO salmon. AquaBounty’s salmon, which is genetically altered to grow to market size in half the time of conventional salmon, will not require a GMO label under FDA guidelines.

It’s unclear if we’ll  ever see labels for genetically altered food, period—not just salmon. Currently, the hotly contested Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act—dubbed by opponents as the Denying Americans the Right to Know Act or DARK Act—languishes in the Senate.

The act, H.R. 1599, which passed the House of Representatives in July, bans states from issuing mandatory labeling laws for foods containing GMOs. The bill gives the FDA the authority to establish national standards and regulations for GMO food. The Department of Agriculture would be granted full discretion over the law’s implementation.

Read More Here

AquaBounty genetically-modified salmon approved by FDA

 

Prince Edward Island

AquaBounty has been working on approval for the genetically-modified fish for 20 years

CBC News Posted: Nov 19, 2015 11:27 AM ATLast Updated: Nov 20, 2015 3:25 PM AT

 

 AquaBounty's salmon are genetically modified to grow twice as fast as regular salmon. (AquaBounty Technologies)

 

 

Genetically-modified salmon approved by FDA 2:25

A genetically modified salmon that grows at twice the rate of regular salmon has been approved as food by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The eggs for the salmon are raised in a facility in the eastern P.E.I. community of Bay Fortune and exported to Panama, where they're grown in above-ground tanks.

 

This is the first genetically modified food animal approved for sale in the world.
"The FDA has thoroughly analyzed and evaluated the data and information submitted by AquaBounty Technologies regarding AquAdvantage Salmon and determined that they have met the regulatory requirements for approval, including that food from the fish is safe to eat," said Bernadette Dunham, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine, in a news release.

• Read about reaction from environmental groups here

The Massachusetts-based company AquaBounty Technologies first sought approval for its salmon 20 years ago.

In a news release, the company's CEO Ron Stotish called the product, AquAdvantage Salmon a "game-changer."




Read More Here

GMO Chickens Coming Home to Roost

 

The seven hundred years-old expression, “curses are like chickens; they always come home to roost,” rarely has been more appropriate than to describe what is happening to the world’s largest purveyor of gene-manipulated or GMO seeds and paired chemical toxins. It couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of genocidal eugenicists. Monsanto Corporation of St Louis is apparently in a deep decline.

Ever since 1992 when that nasty US President George H. W. Bush conspired–yes, Virginia, conspiracies exist– with the leadership of Monsanto to unleash GMOs on an unwitting American population, Monsanto seemed unstoppable.

With the help of Bush, who made a decree that no US Government agency be allowed to independently test GMO seeds or their chemicals for health and safety–the fraudulent and totally unscientific Doctrine of Substantial Equivalence–Monsanto could make its own fraudulent doctored tests and give them to US or EU agencies as valid. As a result, GMO seeds took over American agriculture, based on a pack of lies to farmers that they would raise yields and decrease chemical use. Monsanto spread its GMO far around the world, through bribery as in Indonesia, and through the unusual machinations of the Government of the United States. Monsanto paid scientists to lie about its products safety.

It used the corrupt Brussels European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to back its position, even when alarming studies such as the famous September 2012 Food and Chemical Toxicology peer-reviewed study by Prof. Gilles-Eric Seralini created shock waves around the world. The Seralini study, the first ever long term, two year study of GMO diet with a group of 200 rats found shocking effects. Among them that,”female rats fed Monsanto GMO maize died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly… Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than, and before, controls; the pituitary was the second most disabled organ; the sex hormonal balance was modified by GMO and Roundup treatments.”

Monsanto then set about to kill the messenger by pressuring the Food & Chemical Toxicology journal to hire a former Monsanto employee, Richard E. Goodman, who promptly declared Seralini’s study “unscientific” and deleted it, an act almost without precedent in science journals. A year later both Goodman and the journal’s editor-in-chief were forced to step down and Seralini’s article was republished in another scientific journal. But the scientific character assassination against Seralini had a chilling effect as Monsanto wanted.

Read More Here

First Senate Agricultural Committee Meeting in 10 Years Cheers GMOs, Ignores Dangers

...

 

Is there a conflict of interest?

 

 

by Christina Sarich
Posted on October 27, 2015

 

 

The U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry held a biotechnology hearing for the first time in 10 years last week to discuss the future of food technology as the industry responds to increased demand, production challenges, and consumers’ calls for a safe and transparent food supply. But the meeting came up short on transparency and carried on more like a Monsanto share-holders meeting than an unbiased inquiry into the pros and cons of biotechnology where it concerns the food supply.

Senator after senator praised biotechnology and genetically modified foods, claiming they had ‘come a long way’ in ten years. Pamela Bailey, president and CEO of the Grocery Manufacturers Association said:

“The Senate Agriculture hearing reaffirmed the broad consensus among scientists and regulators that GMOs are safe and highlighted the real world negative impacts a patchwork of state labeling mandates will have on farmers, businesses and consumers. Action by Congress is urgently needed this year to pass a national, uniform labeling standard.”

The senate hearing was scheduled shortly after the US House of Representatives passed the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015,” otherwise known as the DARK Act (Deny Americans the Right to Know) by a vote of 275-150.

Read More Here

‘TTIP is death:’ Over 100 arrested in Brussels at US-EU trade deal protest (VIDEO)

Published time: 16 Oct, 2015 01:26Edited time: 16 Oct, 2015 01:41

© / Ruptly

At least 100 people have been arrested in Brussels, where hundreds more protested against TTIP, an impending free trade deal between the US and the EU, as the next round of TTIP talks approaches.

Roads were paralyzed in the Belgian capital as a force of more than 600 activists descended on EU headquarters, blocking traffic and the venue of the EU leaders summit in protest against the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).


People carried signs and chanted slogans such as “Stop TTIP, stop austerity” and "Sorry for the inconvenience. We're trying to save the world," at the march in Brussels on Thursday. "TTIP is death" another sign read. One group of protesters displayed a balloon ‘Trojan Horse’ as an allegory for the deal.




.....

View image on Twitter

Follow

felipe vankeirsbilck @FelipeVK_CNE

#OX15 successful blockades today in Brussels. However around 20 arrests confirmed. #ChangeEurope #EuroMarchas2015 pic.twitter.com/UP9MdVnfU2"

2:20 PM - 15 Oct 2015

 Read More Here

Italy and Austria join growing list of countries banning GMO agriculture. EU Committee Wants to Demolish their right to do so.

 

NaturalNews

Italy and Austria join growing list of countries banning GMO agriculture

Thursday, October 15, 2015 by: J. D. Heyes

(NaturalNews) European nations are leading the world in rejecting genetically modified organisms in food and crops, with two more countries recently joining the list: Italy and Austria.

As reported by Nation of Change, Italian ministries have opted to utilize the newly created European Union rules that permit member countries to opt out of growing GM crops. Austrian officials joined in as well, with both nations making the decision to stop growing eight varieties of GM maize, which essentially amounted to a complete ban on GM crops.

The EU's opt-out regulations were implemented earlier this year. They allow member states to decide on their own if they want to continue using GM crops or ban them altogether.

As reported by Sustainable Pulse, a number of other countries in the EU have also opted out of GM crops:

Wales: "These new rules proposed by the European Commission provide Wales with the necessary tools to maintain our cautionary approach by allowing us to control the future cultivation of GM crops in Wales," said Welsh Deputy Minister for Farming and Food, Rebecca Evans. "It will allow us to protect the significant investment we have made in our organic sector and safeguard the agricultural land in Wales that is managed under voluntary agri-environment schemes."

She added: "Farming and food processing businesses remain the driving force of our rural economy. Our emphasis is on competing on quality, strong branding and adding value through local processing. We, therefore, need to preserve consumer confidence and maintain our focus on a clean, green, natural environment. "

Poland: In 2013, the Polish government actually adopted a regulation that banned GMO farming in the country, well ahead of the EU action. But once the EU approved its regulation giving member nations the right to ban if they chose, that was more than enough authority for the Polish government to act.

"Now we no longer have to explain the scientific aspects and we can already relate to social issues," Polish Agriculture Minister Marek Sawicki said at the time of the country's ban.

Germany: German government officials announced in late September that the country would no longer permit the cultivation of GM crops, as stated by German Agriculture Minister Christian Schmidt.

Slovenia: Slovenian Agriculture Minister Dejan Zidan said in announcing the country's ban that "the government adopted the decision for a request for the exclusion of the entire geographical territory of Slovenia for GM maize to the EU, including the already registered variety MON 810 and seven other varieties which are in the process of registration with the European Commission. This allows me to formally send the request as the Ministry of Agriculture in accordance with the law for the exclusion of Slovenia with the regards to the cultivation of GM maize."

Serbia: State Secretary in the Serbian Ministry of Agriculture and Environmental Protection Danilo Golubovic recently announced the country's GMO ban. In making the announcement, Golubovic said the decision was based on a desire to improve public health and safety.

Bulgaria: This government has decided to burnish its clean and green image by banning GM crops. As noted by Sustainable Pulse's director, Henry Rowlands, "Bulgaria is home to a wide variety of unique flora and fauna and is also the base of many ancient civilizations, it is with this background that Bulgarians know what is at risk when it comes to using an untested and unnecessary technology."

European nations that have opted out of growing GM crops thus far are Latvia, France, Austria, Cyprus, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Poland, Germany, Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Slovenia and Italy, Sustainable Pulse reported.

Sources:

BullHorn.NationOfChange.org

SustainablePulse.com

Reuters.com
EcoWatch.com

Reuters.com

About NaturalNews

The NaturalNews Network is a non-profit collection of public education websites covering topics that empower individuals to make positive changes in their health, environmental sensitivity, consumer choices and informed skepticism. The NaturalNews Network is owned and operated by Truth Publishing International, Ltd., a Taiwan corporation. It is not recognized as a 501(c)3 non-profit in the United States, but it operates without a profit incentive, and its key writer, Mike Adams, receives absolutely no payment for his time, articles or books other than reimbursement for items purchased in order to conduct product reviews.

The vast majority of our content is freely given away at no charge. We offer thousands of articles and dozens of downloadable reports and guides (like the Honest Food Guide) that are designed to educate and empower individuals, families and communities so that they may experience improved health, awareness and life fulfillment.

Learn More About Natural News Here

 

...................................................................................................

by Christina Sarich
Posted on October 15, 2015

 

EU Committee Wants to Demolish Existing Law Allowing Member States to Ban GMOs

As 19 EU nations plan GMO bans

Stating a concern that the proposed law would lead to the reintroduction of border controls between GM and non-GMO-growing countries, the European Parliament news service reported that Members of the Environment Committee shot down a draft EU law that would allow member states to restrict or prohibit sales of genetically modified crops.

This vote goes against numerous EU states that have made it clear in recent months that they plan to instate total bans on GM crops. A total of 19 EU countries have sent letters to the EP saying that they plan GM bans, citing concern over spoiling agricultural markets, and also the desire to provide their citizens with organic food.

Read More Here

Monsanto and its Promoters vs. Freedom of Information

 

October 2, 2015

Ralph Nader  

Consumer advocate, lawyer and author

Next year, the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) will celebrate its 50th anniversary as one of the finest laws our Congress has ever passed. It is a vital investigative tool for exposing government and corporate wrongdoing.

The FOIA was championed by Congressman John E. Moss (D-CA), who strove to "guarantee the right of every citizen to know the facts of his Government." Moss, with whom I worked closely as an outside citizen advocate, said that "without the fullest possible access to Government information, it is impossible to gain the knowledge necessary to discharge the responsibilities of citizenship."
All fifty states have adopted FOIA statutes.

As the FOIA approaches its 50th year, it faces a disturbing backlash from scientists tied to the agrichemical company Monsanto and its allies. Here are some examples.

On March 9th, three former presidents of the American Association for the Advancement of Science - all with ties to Monsanto or the biotech industry - wrote in the pages of the Guardian to criticize the use of the state FOIA laws to investigate taxpayer-funded scientists who vocally defend Monsanto, the agrichemical industry, their pesticides, and genetically engineered food. They called the FOIAs an "organized attack on science."

The super-secretive Monsanto has stated, regarding the FOIAs, that "agenda-driven groups often take individual documents or quotes out of context in an attempt to distort the facts, advance their agenda, and stop legitimate research."

Advocates with the venerable Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) do worry that the FOIA can be abused to harass scientists for ideological reasons. This is true; for example, human-caused global warming deniers have abused the FOIA against climate scientists working at state universities like Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University.



Read More Here

Landslide victory against Biotech crops : Despite hundreds of thousands of dollars spent by companies like Monsanto. Jackson County, Oregon are now enjoying a landslide victory against GMO crops being grown within it's borders.

Genetically engineered crops banned in Jackson County, Oregon in landslide victory against GMOs

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) A ban on the growing of all genetically engineered plants appears to be a landslide victory in Jackson County, Oregon. With 100 percent of the precincts reporting and a huge voter turnout of over 50 percent, nearly 66% of voters elected to ban all genetically engineered crops from being grown in the county.

The vote ran 39,489 to 20,432 in favor of the ban, and it sends a clear signal that the People of Jackson County, Oregon -- a largely agricultural area of the country -- absolutely do not want genetically engineered crops to be growing anywhere near them. (Click here to see county election results.)

This is on top of the recent victory in Vermont where lawmakers passed a mandatory GMO labeling law that requires foods to be honestly labeled with their GMO content. (The evil biotech industry and its Grocery Manufacturers of America front group plant to sue Vermont to keep consumers in the dark.)

"Destroy all genetically engineered plants"

This ordinance in Oregon requires everyone to "destroy" all genetically engineered plants except those grown under indoor laboratory conditions (i.e. those which are safely isolated from the wild). This will allow scientists to continue to study GMOs without risking the lives of everyone else in the process.

Click here to read the full text of the ordinance (PDF).

Read More Here

.....

Oregon counties ban cultivation of GMO crops

Published time: May 21, 2014 16:37
Edited time: May 22, 2014 11:18

Reuters/Ints Kalnins

Despite the flood of corporate money poured into two small Oregon counties, local residents voted on Tuesday to ban genetically engineered crops from being planted within their borders.
Although Jackson County itself is home to less than 120,000 registered voters, the measure to ban genetically modified crops (GMOs) made headlines around the nation when it was revealed that large biotech companies like Monsanto were pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into the area in order to affect the vote’s outcome.
As RT reported previously, Monsanto and five other corporations spent at least $455,000 in an attempt to defeat the initiative, and opponents of the GMO ban had gained an eight-to-one spending advantage as of April. According to the Associated Press, nearly $1 million of the $1.3 million spent during the campaign was used by opponents.
When the results were tallied, however, 66 percent of Jackson County residents voted in favor of the ban.
"We fought the most powerful and influential chemical companies in the world and we won," local farmer and anti-GMO advocate Elise Higley told the Oregonian.
"It's a great day for the people of Oregon who care about sustainability and healthy ecosystems," added the group GMO Free Oregon on its Facebook page.

Read More Here

.....

Related articles

• Rural Oregon voters back ban on GMO crops amid U.S. labeling uproar
• Oregon counties ban genetically modified crops
• Battle Over Genetically Modified Foods in Oregon
• Jackson County, Oregon, approves GMO ban
• Oregon counties ban genetically modified crops
• Oregon counties ban genetically modified crops
• Oregon counties ban cultivation of GMO crops
• Rural Oregon county votes to ban GMOs, despite $1 million opposition effort

GMO Update—Vermont Passes GMO Labeling Bill and Stands Up to Industry Bullying as New Research Confirms Safety Concerns

Playing Keep Away From GMOs

SuperMarket News

.....

By Dr. Mercola

In a recent article titled "Monsanto GM Soy is Scarier than You Think," Mother Jones¹ went into some of the details surrounding our genetically engineered (GE) food supply.
Soybeans are the second-largest food crop grown in the US, and more than 90 percent of it is genetically engineered. Some have been modified to withstand the herbicide Roundup (i.e. Roundup-Ready soy), while other varieties have been designed to produce its own pesticide, courtesy of the Bt gene (so-called Bt soy).
As noted in the featured article, organic soy production is miniscule, accounting for less than one percent of the total acreage devoted to soy in the US. The rest is conventionally grown non-GE soy.
Even if you don't buy soy products such as tofu or soy milk, you're undoubtedly consuming plenty of soy if you're eating any processed foods and/or meats from animals raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs). A large portion of the GE soy grown actually ends up in your meat, as soy is a staple of conventional livestock feed. Much of the rest ends up as vegetable oil.
According to the US Soy Board, soybean oil accounts for more than 60 percent of all the vegetable oil consumed in the US—most of which is used in processed foods and fast food preparation. As noted in the featured article:²

"Given soy's centrality to our food and agriculture systems, the findings of a new study published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Chemistry³ are worth pondering.
The authors found that Monsanto's ubiquitous Roundup Ready soybeans... contain more herbicide residues than their non-GMO counterparts. The team also found that the GM beans are nutritionally inferior."

New Research Questions Quality and Safety of GE Soybeans

Three varieties of Iowa-grown soybeans were investigated in this study:⁴

1. Roundup Ready soybeans
2. Non-GE, conventional soybeans grown using Roundup herbicide
3. Organic soybeans, grown without agricultural chemicals

All of the Roundup Ready soybean samples were found to contain residues of glyphosate, which is the active ingredient in Roundup, along with its amino acid metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA).
On average, GE soy contained 11.9 parts per million (ppm) of glyphosate. The highest residue level found was 20.1 ppm. Meanwhile, no residues of either kind were found in the conventional non-GE and organic varieties.
In terms of nutrition, organic soybeans contained slightly higher levels of protein and lower levels of omega-6, compared to both conventionally-grown non-GE and GE soy. Similar results were found in a 2012 nutritional analysis of GE corn, which was found to contain 13 ppm of glyphosate, compared to zero in non-GMO corn.
It may be worth noting that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) actually raised the allowable levels of glyphosate^{5, 6} in oilseed crops such as soy, from 20 ppm to 40 ppm just last summer. It also raised the levels of permissible glyphosate contamination in other foods—many of which were raised to 15-25 times previous levels!

Why Glyphosate Contamination Matters

Nearly one BILLION pounds of Roundup are used each year for conventional crop production around the globe, but genetically engineered (GE) crops see some of the heaviest use. This is especially true for Roundup Ready crops, which are designed to withstand otherwise lethal doses of this chemical.
The issue of glyphosate contamination is well worth considering if you value your health. Recent research suggests glyphosate may in fact be an instrumental driver of many chronic diseases, and in my view, avoiding glyphosate is a major reason for buying organic, in and of itself.
Labeling GMOs could help you select products that are less likely to have heavy contamination, although you'd also avoid many other hazardous chemicals used in conventional farming by opting for products labeled 100% organic.
It's important to understand that these glyphosate residues CANNOT be washed off, as the chemical is actively integrated into every cell in the plant. Dr. Don Huber, who is one of the most prominent scientific experts in plant toxicology, firmly believes glyphosate is FAR more toxic and dangerous than DDT. A number of other studies have raised serious questions about the safety of glyphosate, including but not limited to the following:

• Research published in the International Journal of Toxicology⁷ in January revealed that glyphosate-based formulations like Roundup pose a threat to human health through cytotoxicity and oxidative effects. Such formulations were also found to be lethal to human liver cells
• A 2012 study⁸ found that 3 ppm of Roundup in water induced morphological changes in frogs
• A German study⁹ on poultry, published in 2013, showed that glyphosate tends to be more harmful to beneficial gut bacteria like Lactobacillus, while pathogenic bacteria like Salmonella entritidi tend to be largely resistant to the chemical. Subsequently, the microbial balance tends to shift toward pathogenic overgrowth when exposed to glyphosate, and can predispose the animal to botulism

Victory! Vermont Passes First Effective GMO-Labeling Bill

On April 16, 2014, the Vermont Senate passed the first no-strings-attached GMO labeling bill (H.112) by an overwhelming margin—28-2. The bill sailed through a House/Senate conference committee and was approved by the House of Representatives on April 23.
Governor Shumlin has already indicated he will be signing the bill into law—which will require any genetically engineered food sold in Vermont to be labeled by July 1, 2016.¹⁰ Food served in restaurants, alcohol, meat, and dairy products would be exempt from labeling however. Foods containing GMO ingredients would also not be allowed to be labeled "natural."

"I am proud of Vermont for being the first state in the nation to ensure that Vermonters will know what is in their food," Governor Shumlin said in a statement. "The Legislature has spoken loud and clear through its passage of this bill. I wholeheartedly agree with them and look forward to signing this bill into law."

This is truly an historical moment that will likely reverberate across the US in coming years. As noted by Ronnie Cummins in a recent Huffington Post article:¹¹

"Strictly speaking, Vermont's H.112 applies only to Vermont. But it will have the same impact on the marketplace as a federal law. Because national food and beverage companies and supermarkets will not likely risk the ire of their customers by admitting that many of the foods and brands they are selling in Vermont are genetically engineered, and deceptively labeled as 'natural' or 'all natural' while simultaneously trying to conceal this fact in the other 49 states and North American markets. As a seed executive for Monsanto admitted 20 years ago, 'If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it.'"

The Burlington Free Press¹² recently ran an excellent article on how the Vermont GMO labeling bill was won. I would highly encourage you to read it in its entirety, to get a real-world view of just how effective a grassroots campaign can be. It really boils down to letting your representatives know what you want. Despite the threat of a lawsuit from food manufacturers, Vermont legislators realized that their constituents were serious about wanting GMOs labeled. And they voted accordingly. Indeed, the chemical technology and food industry knows this, which is why they've fought tooth and nail to stop any and all GMO labeling efforts in the US. They've even threatened to sue any state that passes a labeling law—a threat taken seriously by Vermont.

Vermont Braces for Legal Challenge

Vermont Senate agreed to establish a state defense fund to pay for legal costs associated with defending the law against any legal challenge by the food industry, which will undoubtedly be spearheaded by the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA). It's unlikely that the industry would win such a legal challenge, however. As reported by the Burlington Free Press:¹³

"Rep. Teo Zagar, D-Barnard, told House members that... changes the Senate made will help the state prevail in court. 'This bill has been re-engineered to be more resistant to legal challenge,' he said."

As you may recall, after getting caught laundering money and narrowly defeating the Washington labeling campaign, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) sued the state of Washington, arguing they should be allowed to hide their donors—which is a direct violation of state campaign disclosure laws—in order to "speak with one voice" for the interests of the food industry.¹⁴ I subsequently named the GMA "the most evil corporation on the planet," considering the fact that it consists primarily of pesticide producers and junk food manufacturers who are hell-bent on violating some of your most basic rights, just to protect their own profits.
The GMA was initially forced to reveal their donors, but has since removed their online membership list—again hiding their members to prevent consumer awareness of who is behind this radical front group. You can find the cached members list on web.archive.org¹⁵ however. Not surprisingly, Pepsi, Coke, and Nestle—top purveyors of chronic ill health—were the top funders trying to hide their identity during the Washington State GMO labeling campaign.

Read More Here

Related articles

• GMO Soy Is Scarier Than You Think
• How "Extreme Levels" of Roundup in Food Became the Industry Norm
• 'Extreme levels' of Roundup are the norm in GMO soya
• GMO Update - Vermont Passes GMO Labeling Bill and Stands Up to Industry Bullying as New Research Confirms Safety Concerns
• "Extreme Levels" Of Herbicide Roundup Found In Food

Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act : A proposed new federal law would outlaw state-enacted GMO labeling laws.

 

Consumer alert: GMO labeling to be outlawed by 'Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act' introduced today in Congress

Thursday, April 10, 2014
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

(NaturalNews) A proposed new federal law just introduced by Rep. G.K. Butterfield (a Democrat) and Rep. Mike Pompeo (a Republican) would outlaw state-enacted GMO labeling laws. The new law, ridiculously called the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, is actually an last-ditch, desperate effort by the biotech industry and the GMA to forever bury the truth about GMOs so that consumers don't know they're eating poison.
According to mainstream media reports (1), the bill would require the FDA to mandate GMO labeling only if those foods "are found to be unsafe or materially different from foods produced without biotech ingredients."
Because the FDA and USDA have already decided, against all scientific evidence, that GMOs are "safe" and "not materially different" from other foods, this requirement is nothing but sheer sleight of hand and a pandering to idiocy. In truth, this new bill, if passed into law, would allow food companies to permanently and insidiously hide GMOs in all their products forever, nullifying the numerous state-based GMO labeling laws which are on the verge of passing.
The Environmental Working Group calls this proposed new law the "DARK Act" (Denying Americans the Right to Know), saying:
After two states have passed GE labeling bills and more than 30 others are poised to consider similar labeling bills and ballot initiatives, the food and biotech industry have goat-roped some members of Congress into introducing legislation to block state GE labeling laws.

Push for GMOs run by criminally-minded organizations

GMOs have already been restricted or banned in over 60 countries (2), and Americans are very close to achieving victory in state-based GMO labeling campaigns. The very idea that American consumers might find out they've been eating GMO poisons in most of their favorite foods is so horrifying to the biotech industry (and the processed food front groups) that its enforcers are now seeking this "nuclear option" to legally deceive consumers about GMOs with the complicity of the FDA.

Read More Here

.....

U.S. bill seeks to block mandatory GMO food labeling by states

By Carey Gillam

April 9 Wed Apr 9, 2014 12:46pm EDT

(Reuters) - A Republican congressman from Kansas introduced legislation on Wednesday that would nullify efforts in multiple states to require labeling of genetically modified foods
The bill, dubbed the "Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act" was drafted by U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo from Kansas, and is aimed at overriding bills in roughly two dozen states that would require foods made with genetically engineered crops to be labeled as such.
The bill specifically prohibits any mandatory labeling of foods developed using bioengineering.
"We've got a number of states that are attempting to put together a patchwork quilt of food labeling requirements with respect to genetic modification of foods," said Pompeo. "That makes it enormously difficult to operate a food system. Some of the campaigns in some of these states aren't really to inform consumers but rather aimed at scaring them. What this bill attempts to do is set a standard."
Consumer groups have been arguing for labeling because of questions they have both about the safety for human health and the environmental impacts of genetically modified foods, also called GMOs.
Ballot measures in California in 2012 and last year in Washington state narrowly lost after GMO crop developers, including Monsanto Co., and members of the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) poured millions into campaigns to defeat the measures.
The companies say the crops are safe and cite many scientific studies back those claims. Pompeo on Wednesday reiterated those claims, stating GMOS are safe and "equally healthy" and no labeling is needed.
"It has to date made food safer and more abundant," said Pompeo. "It has been an enormous boon to all of humanity."
But there are also many scientific studies showing links to human and animal health problems, and many indicating environmental damage related to GMO crops.

Read More Here


.....

Congress considers blocking GMO food labeling

Published time: April 09, 2014 20:10
Edited time: April 10, 2014 11:01

AFP Photo / Robyn Beck

A new bill introduced in Congress looks to ban states from implementing their own labeling laws when it comes to food containing genetically engineered ingredients.
According to Reuters, US Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) introduced the legislation on Wednesday, which is intended to head off bills in about 24 states that would require companies to inform customers when their food is produced using genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Titled the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act,” the proposal would forbid states from enacting such proposals.
"We've got a number of states that are attempting to put together a patchwork quilt of food labeling requirements with respect to genetic modification of foods," Pompeo told Reuters. "That makes it enormously difficult to operate a food system. Some of the campaigns in some of these states aren't really to inform consumers but rather aimed at scaring them. What this bill attempts to do is set a standard."
Supporters of GMO labeling argue that modified ingredients pose a threat to human health, and that as a result they should be clearly labeled in the marketplace so that consumers can make informed decisions. In addition to health concerns, they also point to the negative environmental consequences that could arise from widespread GMO use, since millions of acres of farmland and weeds are developing resistances to the pesticides used.
Opponents, however, point to their own studies, showing that GMO crops are safe and therefore do not need to be labeled differently than other products.

Read More Here
.....

Related articles

• Congress considers blocking GMO food labeling
• U.S. bill seeks to block mandatory GMO food labeling by states
• U.S. bill seeks to block mandatory GMO food labeling by states
• Monsanto: Preventing GMO Labeling At Any Cost