More on FDA's Decision on Genetically Engineered Salmon

According to the Center for Food Safety, “The FDA decision ignores calls from more than forty members of the U.S. Congress who have repeatedly urged FDA to conduct more rigorous review of environmental and health safety, and halt any approval process until concerns over risks, transparency and oversight have been fully satisfied.  The public filed nearly 400,000 comments demanding FDA reject this application.  Additionally, more than 300 environmental, consumer, health and animal welfare organizations, salmon and fishing groups and associations, food companies, chefs and restaurants filed joint statements with FDA opposing approval.”

Photo: AquaBounty

According to Fishermen’s News Online, “Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, said the notion that Frankenfish is safe for the public and the oceans is a joke. “I will fight tooth and nail with my Alaska colleagues to make sure consumers have a clear choice when it comes to wild and sustainable versus lab-grown science projects,” the senator said. “People want to know they are eating natural, healthy, wild salmon,” Begich said. The FDA’s assessment imperils both families and fishermen, he said.”

The FDA has announced the availability for public comment of the Agency’s draft environmental assessment for genetically engineered salmon developed by AquaBounty Technologies.  The Agency has a finding of no significant impact.  

While it might seem like the FDA doesn't pay any attention to public opinion, it's important to tell them, with an even louder collective voice, that GE Salmon at best requires much more research before it is approved for human consumption, unregulated production, and to be farmed in delicately balanced water systems.  

To make a public comment, you must go to: www.regulations.gov

In the search field, copy and paste the Docket Number: FDA-2011-N-0899

Three results will come up, comment on the document titled “Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Genetically Engineered Salmon"

You can also mail your comments to Division of Dockets Management (HFA-

305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, 

Rockville, MD 20852

Oppositiion to California's GMO Labeling Initiative

Yesterday's blog post about the California GMO Labeling Ballot Initiative showcases a very important potential step toward eventual GMO labeling across the country.  California has the highest GDP of any state in the nation, a GDP higher than many countries, so passing a labeling initiative there is likely to cause a domino effect culminating in mandatory labeling across the US.  Because of this, one of the nation's largest food lobbies, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association, has made defeating the initiative - called Prop 37 - their "single-highest priority".

According to an editorial on Food Safety News,

In a recent speech to the American Soybean Association (most soy grown in the U.S. is genetically modified), Grocery Manufacturers Association President Pamela Bailey said that defeating the initiative "is the single-highest priority for GMA this year."

You may not know the Grocery Manufacturers Association, but its members represent the nation's largest food makers -- those with the most at stake in the battle over GMO labeling; for example, soft drink and snack giant PepsiCo, cereal makers Kellogg and General Mills, and of course, biotech behemoth Monsanto.

According to state filing reports, so far GMA has spent $375,000 on its efforts to oppose the labeling measure, with its members adding additional out-of-state lobbying power in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Since Prop 37 poses a significant threat to many of the nation's largest food makers, corporations that make a lot of money from the production and sale of Genetically Modified foods, it makes sense that the lobbying group that represents those interests would be fiercely fighting back.  This backlash, however, is promising because it shows just how powerful Prop 37 really is. Lobbying groups might have a lot of money on their side, but no amount of money can compete with a large group of voices speaking out in unison.

Here in Connecticut we might not be able to vote on Prop 37, but that doesn't mean that we can't speak out in support of it.  The more people nationwide who show their support of mandatory GMO labeling, both publicly and to their friends and neighbors, the more likely those in California who can vote on it are to hear us.  After all, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association is a giant national lobbying firm that is currently influencing the outcome of the vote, regardless of whether or not it's employees can actually vote on the ballot itself.  So talk to those around you and be outspoken, because your voice makes a difference.  Let's show California that we support their right to know what's in their food!

Have an outspoken day!
-Melissa

California is continuing to demand its Right to Know.

The Right to Know is building momentum in California leading up to the November ballot on the issue.  Known as the "Yes on 37" campaign and the "Right to Know Campaign", the movement has received endorsement from the California Labor Legislation and Senator Barbara Boxer and State Senator Mark Leno.  

According to the Digital Journal article 'Yes on 37' Right to Know - organizing one million more voters, Senator Boxer said yesterday, “California consumers have the right to know if their food has been genetically engineered. This basic information should be available for consumers on the label the way it is in nearly 50 other countries around the world.”

The bill has also been endorsed by the Consumer Federation of America, the United Farm Workers, California Certified Organic Farmers, Public Citizen, Organic Consumers Association, the California League of Conservation Voters, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Center for Food Safety, and the Sierra Club.  This coalition of farmers, agricultural non-profits, consumer advocacy groups and environmental groups demonstrates the broad spectrum of interests in GMO-labeling.  The only opponents seem to be food companies that use GMOs and the corporations that develop genetically modified crops, seeds and foods.  GMO-labeling is also supported by about 90% of California's voters based on voter polls. 

The California ballot initiative might lead the way for GMO-labeling in the rest of the country! We are so excited for this progress, you can learn more about the California Right to Know Campaign at their website, and cheer them on while we keep generating support for the Right to Know here in Connecticut.  

Happy August!
Kristiane

Upcoming GMO Activism Events

Jeffrey Smith and Tara Cook-Littman from Right to Know CT

On August 8, 2012 save the date for a day packed with GMO activism and some of the most renowned people in the non-GMO movement!

 

The day starts out with a Legislative Meeting in Hartford where Jeffrey Smith will be speaking, and continues with a Right to Know Coalition meeting:
GMO Public Meeting
August 8, 2012
10am: public meeting at the Capitol with Jeffrey Smith
12pm: Right to Know Coalition meeting
Hartford, CT

Later on, the Institute for Responsible Technology will be holding a benefit celebrating non-GMO food from around Connecticut:
an Evening Benefiting The Institute for Responsible Technology
Wednesday August 8, 2012
7:30PM
Greenwich Audubon
613 Riversville Road
Greenwich, CT
Celebrate the Non-GMO food offerings available in CT from organic chefs and restaurants from around the state such as Catch A Healthy Habit, Health in A Hurry, Bakery on Main, Du Soleil, Just Food, Green & Tonic, Double L Market, and Natures Temptations!

Still can't get enough Jeffrey Smith?  You're in luck!  He is also one of the keynote speakers at the NOFA Summer Conference on August 10-12.  Jeffrey will also be holding a pre-conference training on fighing GMOs on Thursday, August 9, 1pm-5pm and Friday 8am-12 noon. You can learn more about the fantastic speakers and workshops at the Summer Conference and register for the event here.

Have a great Wednesday!
-Melissa

The Right To Know Ballot in California

The GMO-Labeling issue is going to ballot in California! Almost one million Californians signed a petition in favor of adding the provision to the California ballot.

Get ready for the biotech and big ag industry to push back against this legislation, with "grassroots" organizations, a large media campaign and unbelievable amounts of money.  In his Mother Jones article "How California Could Force the Rest of the US to Label GMO Foods", Tom Philpott writes that "A move to labeling would likely create a robust market in non-GMO, conventional versions of those crops, giving large-scale farmers incentive to transition away from GMOs and cutting into the profits of giants like Monsanto, Syngenta, and DuPont. If a substantial percentage of them did, that would be a hard blow to the profit plans of the big agrichemical companies, whose business models are based on constant growth, not shrinkage." 


An article by Organic Consumers Associations' Alexis Baden-Mayer and Ronnie Cummins reposted from the Organic Consumers Association (read original article here):What do a former mouthpiece for tobacco and big oil, a corporate-interest PR flack, and the regional director of a Monsanto-funded tort reform group have in common? They're all part of the anti-labeling PR team that will soon unleash a massive advertising and PR campaign in California, designed to scare voters into rejecting the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.

In November, California voters will vote 'yes' or 'no' on a law to require mandatory labeling of all genetically engineered ingredients in processed foods, and ban the routine industry practice of mislabeling foods containing genetically engineered ingredients as 'natural.' Polls show that nearly 90 percent of the state's voters plan to vote 'yes.' But when November rolls around, will voter support still be strong? Not if the biotech, agribusiness, and food manufacturers industries can help it.

It's estimated that the opposition will spend $60 - $100 million to convince voters that genetically engineered foods are perfectly safe. They'll try to scare voters into believing that labeling will make food more expensive, that it will spark hundreds of lawsuits against small farmers and small businesses, and that it will contribute to world hunger. . . .

Alexis Baden-Mayer is Political Director of the Organic Consumers Association.
Ronnie Cummins is founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association. Cummins is author of numerous articles and books, including "Genetically Engineered Food: A Self-Defense Guide for Consumers" (Second Revised Edition Marlowe & Company 2004).
© Copyright 1997-2012 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved.