There must be something in the water out there in the Pacific Ocean. During the 2012 election, California voters were asked to vote on GMO labeling — and they soundly rejected it. Now, Washington voters are being asked to do the same thing.
And the campaign is just heating up.
The pro-labelers are signing the same tune as usual. GMOs are bad. We need to know we’re eating them. Our families are in danger. There’s no scientific research. We’re just moms looking out for our kids.
Uh huh.
Too bad there is no scientific data to show biotechnology is bad for humans or the environment. And farmers feed these same crops to our kids too — and farm kids are generally healthier than non-farm kids.
You can read the text of the bill here. You know the bill is absolutely bogus based on the first few paragraphs. It states that biotechnology isn’t regulated by the federal government, which is completely false. It states that scientists have expressed concerns about the safety of biotechnology, which is completely false. It also states that biotechnology is bad for the environment, which is false.
But since when has the anti-GMO crowd ever tried telling the truth? Never. The entire campaign for labeling is based on a lie, false science, and scare tactics.
This particular bill, however, is completely arbitrary. Certain foods would have to be labeled, while others would not. Foreign companies could get away with it simply by not claiming to be exempt. Of course it would result in huge costs for farmers and, ultimately, consumers. It also makes it difficult for farmers outside of Washington to sell produce within the state, and difficult for Washington farmers to ship products out of the state.
As with all labeling initiatives, it needs to be defeated.
If you’re interested in getting involved, visit No on 522.
I wrote on this as well and it's just 1 step closer to being able to actually target the labeled GMO products to then try to ban them from the stores and eventually with the goal of halting the technology. I truly, truly don't understand why these people are so closed-minded and are not willing to learn and listen to the actual science. Science is fact – it's not made up!
Glad to see someone analyzing the bill. So many uniformed people that just believe scare campaigns not based in evidence. The organic industry has its own agenda as well. Those in that industry understand that by requiring GMO labeling (which is unnecessary because GMO foods have proven over and over again to be completely safe) will increase their profits. Forcing a label will scare customers into not buying GMO product and instead they will by organic, which isn't any safer and is more likely to give you e.coli.
Consumers should have the right to make their own decisions. But any labeling law has to be coherent. That means a national law or a model international law. Not a law written by some special interests or people with an agenda.
If you want to avoid biotechnology (and there really is no scientific reason to do so), then you can waste your money and purchase organic.
First, let me say, I love the farm and love your blog. I don't mean any disrespect, just another opinion about GMO labeling. Yes, having a ban in one state would be ridiculous. I may not go along with this particular bill, but, we do have to start somewhere. The list of gmo's is expanding faster than true science can keep up. Our children are having huge increases in gut issues, ibd, ibs, crohns etc. Along with food allergies. I don't think GMO's should be banned, but I do believe in a labeling law so people can rightly know what their food is about and make their own decisions. The science has been false before as they push things through with their own agendas. A study can be explained anyway the authors deem fit. There are always points left out. Take the trials of Pamela Ronald with her research being blasted. You see, this moves so fast without sound scientific evidence, that as parents, it would be really nice to know our children are "just eating food" not some new plant pathogen capable of living in the guts of our children thanks to a mammalian gene splicing. Or a new protein causing huge disruptions and inflammation in the stomachs of our little ones. I, for one, would like to see labeling across the board, even though, it may be too late because gmo's are rapidly corrupting the heirloom species through pollination. I have left a link to one of the latest articles about Pamela Ronald.http://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/can-the-scientific-reputation-of-pamela-ronald-public-face-of-gmos-be-salvaged/
Thank you, I'm glad you like the blog! I would just like to point out that real science is considered legitimate because it can be reproduced and it is peer reviewed. Simply because one study has a flaw doesn't negate an entire body of work. Further, you've mentioned problems that are children are having? There is nothing to link biotechnology to those problems. Absolutely nothing. In fact, there has never been a single scientific study showing that biotechnology is harmful to humans or the environment. Never. Finally, I will point out that before biotechnology is available for commercial use, it has undergone millions of dollars worth of testing, usually lasting over a decade. If its on the market, there is not doubt it's safe.
you keep saying everything is false….prove it. The biggest problem with your swiss-cheese of an argument is that: Posilac (rBGH), "Round-up Ready" crops, and BT cotton all exist and are PRIME examples of adverse human health effects…
The USDA and EPA have already reviewed the scientific materials on Round-Up Ready crops and found they are safe for human consumption. The burden is on YOU to show otherwise. Unfortunately for you, this is something you cannot do because there is NO scientific data to support your position. Also, do you realize that BT is a protein that is used as a pesticide on organic farms? I actually have done an entire article about it and showed the scientific data proving it is safe: https://www.thefarmersdaughterusa.com/2012/06/mons…