.

Where Do You Stand on GMO Labeling and Prop. 37?

The campaigns for and against Proposition 37 are heating up. How do you feel about genetically modified food?

Fairfax’s Good Earth Natural Foods is participating in non-GMO month when the issue could not be timelier.

The food fight over Proposition 37 should intensify over the next week as Californians prepare to vote Nov. 6 on the measure, which would require the labeling of genetically engineered food (or genetically modified organisms). The proposition would also not allow genetically engineered foods to be labeled as natural. 

The Fairfax health food store is one of more than grocery 1,500 grocery retailers in North America participating in the third annual non-GMO month this October, according to Good Earth officials. Good Earth will have specials, shelf tags, displays and educational materials to help shoppers identify Non-GMO Project verified options.

Has anyone heard of this sort of participation in Novato?

The Fairfax Town Council audience erupted into applause and cheers Aug. 1 after

GMOs are created by gene splicing techniques. Opponents argue it creates unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacterial and viral genes. GMO labeling is mandatory is almost 50 countries in the world.

“The passing of Prop 37 will go a long ways to stopping the continued dangerous proliferation of GMOs in this country; with GMOs now found in as much as 80 percent of conventional packaged foods, we are more committed than ever to helping people find safe, healthy non-GMO choices,” said Al Baylacq, a Good Earth Natural Foods partner, in a release. The store officials have formally endorsed the proposition.

While the Yes on Proposition 37 backers are polling ahead of the resistance, those behind No on 37: Coalition Against the Deceptive Food Labeling Scheme are launching a costly campaign, which a total of more than $25 million in contributions from Monsanto, DuPoint, PepsiCo, General Mills, Kellogg and other major U.S. food and beverage makers

According to the nonprofit Non GMO Project, “high-risk crops” that are .

How do you feel about GMOs? Are you going to vote for Prop 37 in November? Tell us why or why not in the comments below.

Stay Patched in! Follow Novato Patch on Twitter | Like Novato Patch on Facebook | Sign up for the daily e-mail with links to the latest news.

Michael Deutch October 26, 2012 at 06:35 PM
Part IV False Claim #3: Prop 37 is just like Prop 65, the toxics labeling law. Truth: Prop 37 is so significantly different from Prop 65 that comparing the two laws makes no sense. The opposition knows this -- but they do it anyway. According to an independent analysis by James Cooper, JD, PhD, George Mason University School of Law, Prop 37 "covers less economic activity, provides more exemptions from its provisions, and is likely to provide greater certainty for businesses" than Prop 65 -- differences which substantially reduce the potential for lawsuits. False Claim #4: Prop 37 is "a nightmare scenario for grocers” and retailers because they have to obtain and keep "reams of paperwork." Truth: This is completely false. Retailers would only have to label the few raw commodities (sweet corn, papaya, squash) that are genetically engineered. They can either stick a simple label on the bin or, if they wish, they can ask their supplier for a sworn statement that the crop is not genetically engineered. Furthermore, retailers are protected under the law in two ways. First, class action lawsuits are expressly forbidden unless the retailer is given a chance to put the labels on -- if they do, no lawsuit. Second, the law protects anyone for whom a claimed violation was not intentional or resulted from an error; since retailers have no reason to know what's inside the packages of food on their shelves, they aren't liable at all. It couldn't be clearer.
Michael Deutch October 26, 2012 at 06:36 PM
Part V: False Claim #5: Prop 37 will lead to rampant lawsuits against farmers and retailers. Truth: Under basic legal principles, legal liability for violating a rule falls on the person responsible for complying with the rule. Under our initiative, the person responsible for labeling processed foods is the person who puts the label on -- the manufacturer. The retailer would only be responsible for labeling a raw agricultural commodity that is genetically engineered. The other side is lying about farmers and retailers because they want to take the spotlight off the junk food manufacturers who are responsible for putting the labels on the food. False Claim #6: “An interconnected web of trial lawyers – with a history of working together to champion and sue under a ballot measure that has made them millions from shakedown lawsuits – is at the heart of the campaign for California’s Proposition 37” Truth: The California Right to Know campaign began with the efforts of Pamm Larry, a former midwife, farmer and longtime Chico resident. In 2011, Pamm started organizing mothers and volunteers across the state toward a 2012 ballot drive with only one goal in mind — to let California consumers know if the food they are eating is genetically engineered. With the help of thousands of volunteers, the Right to Know campaign gathered nearly one million signatures from California voters within a 10 week period.
Bill October 26, 2012 at 10:05 PM
Actually this proposal should be reversed. Label all food that is GMO free and let the rest of it go. Such a label should be optional to organic type products.
Kim Kulp, RD October 26, 2012 at 10:31 PM
I am a Registered Dietitian with a nutrition counseling practice in Novato and Mill Valley, and I strongly support Proposition 37. A simple label will allow everyone the opportunity to make choices about the food they buy and feed their families. GMO crops are created to be resistant to herbicides and pesticides, which means more and more of these chemicals will continue to be required. Increased use of chemicals in the air, water and soil, is not good for anyone's health. The same companies that own the chemicals, own the patents for GMO seed. They make money from both ends, and that's why they are spending so much money on TV ads against Prop 37. Pay attention to the end of the ads, and you will hear they are supported by Monsanto and Dow chemical. These companies are much too powerful, and they are controlling our food supply. For a clear discussion on this topic check out this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7l42cIJXvM Make sure you have the right to choose what you eat with a simple label. Please vote Yes on 37!
Concerned citizen October 29, 2012 at 05:14 PM
I just returned from France, where labeling GMO products is required by law. They are afraid that some unlabeled GMO products could clandestinely infiltrate from the US. They published and broadcast extensive research results based on mice fed with hybrid corn. A majority of these mice had some type of tumor growth by week 6 and full fledged cancer after 3 months of eating GMO corn. Our digestive systems evolved eating foods with specific cell structures, providing it with artificially altered food structures is bound to offset our immune system's equilibrium. Why open ourselves to these risks to satiate food manufacturers like Monsanto and pesticide companies who are spending millions to defeat this proposition. VOTE YES FOR YOUR HEALTH!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »