10 Scientific Reasons Why YES on Prop 37 is Non-Negotiable

by Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist October 29, 2012

There’s a lot of California style mud slinging going on right now regarding the highly controversial Prop 37 and the desperate fight to require the labeling of GM Foods.  With only a week to go before what promises to be an historic and incredibly divisive election, the fate of Prop 37 will, for better or for worse, impact the health of ourselves and that of our children for generations to come – whether or not you happen to live in California.

Monsanto and other large corporations opposed to Prop 37 have pulled out all the stops to defeat the measure and have, not surprisingly, stooped to blows below the belt with downright false and fabricated statements from the FDA regarding GM Foods.

While opponents of Prop 37 argue that the measure doesn’t go far enough and will harm small farmers and businesses, these notions serve only as background noise to the larger and most important issue:  GM Foods are taking over the marketplace.

We simply do not have the luxury of waiting another 2 let alone 4 years for another ballot initiative to require the labeling of GM Foods.  Requiring labeling in California will by default benefit the rest of the United States as California’s large population precludes having a separate label for that state alone.  Getting a similar proposition passed in another state would not have the same nationwide impact.

The proliferation of frankenfoods is gaining momentum with each passing day and the accelerating speed with which GM Foods are being introduced to the marketplace must be halted NOW.

YES on Prop 37 represents our best hope to significantly stop and reverse this alarming and fast moving trend toward the adoption of GM Foods in every processed food product imaginable even those labeled as “natural”.

If you live in California and are still undecided about Prop 37, please consider the 10 science based reasons below as reason enough to vote YES on November 6, 2012.   This list is based on an email Sally Fallon Morell, President of the Weston A. Price Foundation, sent to her relatives in California who remain on the fence about Prop 37.

The truth is that there is only upside and absolutely no downside to the consumer for voting YES on Prop 37.  Any argument to the contrary is motivated solely by the profit and control of the marketplace that unlabeled GM Foods represent to corporations like Monsanto who are developing these frankenfoods in the lab and other Big Food companies like Kelloggs which utilize them as cheap ingredients in their processed foods to boost the bottom line.

10 Irrefutable Scientific Reasons Why GM Foods MUST be Labeled

1) Scientists at the Russian Academy of Sciences reported between 2005 and 2006 that female rats fed Roundup Ready-tolerant GM soy produced excessive numbers of severely stunted pups with more than half of the litter dying within three weeks, and the surviving pups completely sterile.  (Source)

2) In 2005, scientists at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization in Canberra, Australia reported that a harmless protein in beans (alpha-amylase inhibitor 1) transferred to peas caused inflammation in the lungs of mice and provoked sensitivities to other proteins in the diet (Ho MW. Transgenic pea that made mice ill. Science in Society 29, 28-29, 2006).

3) From 2002 to 2005, scientists at the Universities of Urbino, Perugia and Pavia in Italy published reports indicating that GM soy affected cells in the pancreas, liver and testes of young mice (Science in Society 29, 26-27, 2006).

4) In 2004, Monsanto’s secret research dossier showed that rats fed MON863 GM corn developed serious kidney and blood abnormalities (GMWatch, 23 April 2004.)

5) In 1998, Dr. Arpad Pusztai and colleagues formerly of the Rowett Institute in Scotland reported damage in every organ system of young rats fed GM potatoes containing snowdrop lectin, including a stomach lining twice as thick as controls (Contaminants and Toxins, (J P F D’Mello ed.), Scottish Agricultural College, Edinburgh, CAB International, 2003).

6) Also in 1998, scientists in Egypt found similar effects in the guts of mice fed Bt potato (Fares NH and El-Sayed AK. Fine structural changes in the ileum of mice fed on dendotoxin-treated potatotes and transgenic potatoes. Natural Toxins, 1998, 6, 219-33; also “Bt is toxic” by Joe Cummins and Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS News 7/8, February 2001, ISSN: 1474-1547 (print), ISSN: 1474-1814 (online) http://www.i-sis.org.uk/isisnews.php Agricultural Biotechnology 2006, www.ISAAA.org).

7) The U.S. Food and Drug Administration had data dating back to early 1990s showing that rats fed GM tomatoes with antisense gene to delay ripening had developed small holes in their stomachs (Pusztai A, Bardocz S and Ewen SWB. Genetically modified foods: Potential human health effects. In Food Safety: Contaminants and Toxins, (J P F D’Mello ed.), Scottish Agricultural College, Edinburgh, CAB International, 2003).

8) In 2002, Aventis company (later Bayer Cropscience) submitted data to UK regulators showing that chickens fed glufosinate-tolerant GM corn Chardon LL were twice as likely to die compared with controls (Food Safety: Contaminants and Toxins (CABI Publishing 2003 also Novotny E. Animals avoid GM food, for good reasons. Science in Society 21, 9-11, 2004).

9) In 2012, researchers found that female rats fed Roundup Ready-tolerant GM corn developed large tumors and dysfunction of the pituitary gland; males also developed tumors and exhibited pathologies of the liver and kidney (Séralini, GE and others. Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maiz. Food and Chemical Toxicology 2012).

10) Testing by Monsanto itself has found that rats eating GM maize (MON863) develop smaller kidneys and show startling changes in blood chemistry.   One blood change included an increase in white blood cell count  which demonstrates that the GM food elicited an immune reaction by the body.

Stop this unprecedented  and grievous assault on the health of our children!   Vote YES on Prop 37 and if you have friends and relatives in California, please share the scientific data above with them.

* Consider donating to the California Right to Know Campaign to help counter the misleading ads of the Biotech and Agribusiness giants.  You can donate at the following website:  https://prop37.nationbuilder.com/donate_to_know

 

Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

Picture Credit

 

Comments (61)

  1. The bill will pass, but if it doesn’t there is still hope. 29 states have already signed up to be part of our coalition to label GMOS on a state-wide basis. More states are waiting to get on board. Also, CALIFORNIA’S BALLOT INITIATIVE HAS AWAKENED THE COUNTRY FROM A SECRET GMO-INDUCED COMA – we will not sleep again until they are labeled and then eliminated!

    Reply
  2. GM Foods are taking over the marketplace. If this bill is not passed, we are in a world of trouble. It is simply a crime against humanity to not have Prop 37 passed. The fact that Big Food is working so hard to have it defeated should tell detractors in neon blinking lights that voting YES is the right vote.

    Reply
  3. Jarred Lewser via Facebook November 2, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    thank you amber. that is where i am at. when i first heard of the bill i thought i would be voting yes for sure but then i read the bill and i do not feel that it was written correctly. Sooo im voting no because if it gets voted in there will be no way to rewrite the bill and im convinced we will all be disappointed in the fact that not enough will have changed. i think we need to do something a little more extreme to tackle this issue and im afraid that after this gets passed everyone(not everyone) will think everything involving the food were given is okay

    Reply
  4. Karen Lossing via Facebook November 2, 2012 at 2:48 pm

    AMEN!!!! Let’s get this done CA, it is imperative to vote for TRUTH in labeling!!! Americans want to know what’s in their food!!!

    Reply
  5. Denise Gallie Rollick via Facebook November 2, 2012 at 2:47 pm

    Spoke on GMOs last night and will be on the radio in the next week or two for an interview. Wish it could be before Tuesday. It is really close now!

    Reply
  6. “Michelle Obama feeds her kids organic food as much as she can”

    The US government does not allow manufacturers to label something 100% organic if that food has been genetically modified or been fed genetically modified feed.

    So the Obamas eat organic (NON GMO) foods as much as they can. Obviously it’s important to them but not important enought to get them labeled.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLE2_n9BW5E

    Reply
  7. The genetic roulette documentary is a great watch if you havent seen it :) My sister is now feeding her kiddos more organic due to this documentary. My autisctic niece has suddenly improved socially and academically as a result!

    Reply
  8. Now I know I’ve seen a video of Obama PROMISING to get GMO foods labeled. That was going to be one of the first things he did as president. I wonder whatever happened with that??? Money probably. It’s too bad profits have priority over the health of one’s own country.

    Reply
  9. Did you post your comment on the wrong blog post Sarah? lol But if anyone wants to help with the voting in Cali and you dont live there, you can go to http://www.carighttoknow.org and volunteer to call people and explain what this all means. Im doing it tonight. I live in MD so this is my way of pitching in.

    Reply
  10. Pingback: GMO Free Tennessee! | Life at the Pig

  11. @Emily most days I don’t wear any makeup at all. A tiny (and I mean tiny) bit of VCO on the skin dusted with a mineral based makeup is all that I would use when I am going out with some mascara. I do wear a base (all natural ingredients) when I am going to dinner or somewhere more dressy. I personally hate makup anyway.. I never wore even lipstick until I got married. I would rather go barefaced and let my skin breathe. But, we do need some good quality facepaint on occasion don’t we, so look around — there really are some very good options out there.

    Reply
  12. I am sharing this article with all my Facebook friends & directly with my friends in California.
    Please EVERYONE share this article we need to make sure Prop 37 gets passed into law.
    Thank you for posting this article Sarah!

    Reply
  13. The comment I am about make is in complete goodwill, and is not meant to refute any of your well substantiated and accurately reported scientific facts. I agree with all of them. I however will be voting no on Prop 37, not because I love my two young boys or any child less than anyone else, but because I believe this should continue to be handled through private business.

    One can already shop with ease for GMO free foods at a number of different grocery stores with quick and simple stop at their customer service counter. I offer up one socio-economic reason to vote no: the financial impact of this proposition to all consumers. The impact will be a drop in the ocean to those of you that already shop and buy at these establishments. However, for those families that are unable to shop at these establishments their costs on fresh produce, fruits, prepared deli salads and sandwiches will rise. The overall health benefits of a diet rich in fresh fruit and vegetables in my humble opinion far outweigh the potential risk of consuming GMO foods.

    Labeling all GMO foods is a ‘problem’ of privilege. We can all grow non-GMO fruits and vegetables for a fraction of the price that we would pay for them at a store, we just need to do it on an individual basis, not a regulatory one.

    Just my thought on the matter,

    -Alvarado

    Reply
    • I am sorry to hear that you have bought into the lies of Monsanto that it will increase the cost of groceries. Countries that already have labeling saw no noticeable increase in cost of those products. Companies change their labels quite frequently as they change art work and ingredients without it causing an increase in cost. Companies will be given a time period to change their labels. You can read more on the cost at http://www.lavidalocavore.org/showDiary.do?diaryId=5217

      You state, “We can all grow non-GMO fruits and vegetables for a fraction of the price that we would pay for them at a store,” if so, why the concern about rising cost? You seem to be under the impression that this would ban GMOs so they would no longer be available to those who choose to buy them because of their lower cost. It doesn’t. It only requires companies to label items that contain them so those who are concerned about GMOs can make a choice.

      I strongly disagree with you that a shopper can easily shop for GMO free foods by asking at the service counter. If it is that easy then it should be no problem at all to have that info clearly stated on labels. The only real way to know that you are not buying GMO is to buy organic. That puts a far greater financial strain on consumers than labeling. Having worked on the signature gathering and passing out information on the proposition, I have found that most people are not even aware that the food they are buying contains GMO. When they find out they are horrified. You want this to be handled through private business? Would this be these same businesses that take advantage of the ignorance of these people and make them unknowing participants in their experiment?

      Reply
      • Nope, not a shill.

        SoCalGT, just making a point that if we are concerned about GMOs, we can grow our own produce at home, shop organic, or shop at Whole Foods *(which by the way, is actually championing your cause: http://wholefoods.com/about-our-products/product-faq/gmos ). I am also not talking about a $.035 sticker, I am talking about the opportunity it presents for companies to add on extra costs–the additional labor that will be required for paperwork, testing, maintenance. Suppliers that already work on small margins will not dip into ‘rainy day funds’ to offset these expenses, they will be passed along to the consumer.

        Again, I just think that this is a classist proposition that will not adversely affect those of us already concerned and educated about the issue, but will raise costs to those families that struggle to make ends meet on a daily/weekly basis. We need smarter regulations not broader ones. If we are truly concerned as a state/nation about GMOs as a public health issue, then we should address it as one through early education and intervention, not through a sticker.

        Reply
        • Alvarado, you still contradict yourself. You claim you are concerned that it will cause an increase in cost for those who can least afford it but you turn around and tell them to shop at Whole Foods if they don’t want to consume GMOs? I really don’t believe you are concerned about the cost at all. Add to that your suggestion that it will cause added cost due to paper work. Do you know that manufactures already have paperwork from their sources? Do you also know that since GMOs are patented seeds that the farmers have to have documentation of their purchases of those seeds or they can be sued for patent infringement? Farmers know what they are growing and suppliers can easily find out from them what type of seed was used. I think it is you who is classist. According to you if you cannot grow your own food or purchase organic then you don’t deserve to know what you are eating and can be used as an unknowing participant in the chemical companies’ experiments.

          Reply
    • Thanks, Alvarado for your comment. And, to those who would have California “go first” and carry the expense of this new regulation, I would suggest that you start the process in your own state and take on the expense first – and California will follow. We are paying over $4.25 a gallon for gas (10-30-12) and our food prices are already much higher than neighboring states. I just returned from Arizona and couldn’t believe gas was $3.57 a gallon and the food prices in even small town IGA grocery stores were far less than those in our major cities. So, please, get this measure on your own ballots – and in due time we will follow!

      Reply
      • Dagny, I am in California. I am appalled at the cost of living here in this state (I am a midwest native so I am very in touch with the difference). It is precisely because of the corruption in government and it’s being out of control that this state is in the condition it is in. Fortunately the people of California have some power through the ballot initiative to make some changes. To continue to harp on the “added cost” is to ignore the facts presented to you. Read http://www.lavidalocavore.org/showDiary.do?diaryId=5217 and go to http://www.carighttoknow.org/ if you really are interested in the impact on cost.

        Reply
      • Give me a break!! You’re falling for all the b.s. We’re paying $4 and change here in MD for gas too in some spots.I would GLADLY vote for this in my state! I wish all people who were ignorant enough to ignore the facts just wouldnt vote at all…just please dont vote no and ruin it for us all. Theres a reason this crap is banned in 50 OTHER COUNTRIES!!!!!!! They’re using scare tactics and you’re falling for it.

        Reply
      • Danny, there have been many attempts in different states all over the nation to get a GMO labeling law on the ballot, and the only place it has succeeded is in California. Historically, California takes the lead on many of these majors issues and the rest of the nation follows. Typically most of us are vehemently opposed to the types of things that come from California, but in this one case, we are anxiously watching and hoping that FINALLY Californians will pass something of real value to the rest of the nation. So just know that yes, we have tried, all over America, to get a labeling law passed and it has been defeated early on by Big Ag and Monsanto, etc. Now it’s California’s turn. Please don’t buy into the lie that this is going to raise prices. That’s absurd. They change labels all the time. The bottom line is they don’t want us to know what’s in their food because they know we won’t buy it.

        Reply
    • All of your money bla, bla, bla talk really just meant nothing. You said the real reason you’re voting no, you dont believe in the “potential risks” of the GMO’s. Hope your ignorance doesnt screw us all. Thanks.

      Reply
  14. Sad to say the forces against Prop 37 have a LOT of money to spend and they are using it to run constant ads. The pro-37 campaign is outgunned, and I fear that the proposition will fail.

    Reply
  15. Pingback: 10 Scientific Reasons Why YES on Prop 37 is Non-Negotiable | CookingPlanet

  16. I heard that litigation would go through the roof if this bill passes because it would be hard to trace every source of food. I’m definitely for the bill, but I can see the concerns about it, too. Can anyone address this?
    Thanks,
    Denise

    Reply
    • According to the state website, “Increase in State Administrative Costs. This measure would result in additional state costs for DPH to regulate the labeling of GE foods, such as reviewing documents and performing periodic inspections to determine whether foods are actually being sold with the correct labels. Depending on how and the extent to which the department chooses to implement these regulations (such as how often it chose to inspect grocery stores), these costs could range from a few hundred thousand dollars to over $1 million annually.”

      The important part to note is the, “Depending on how and the extent to which the department CHOOSES to implement these regulations.” It does not specify what the government has to do or spend money on. What this bill would do is give independent groups a legal leg to stand on to file suit against companies not in compliance. While it would be wonderful if the government would actually do their job and protect the people, it’s precisely because they are not that we are asking people to take matters into their own hands and demand labeling. I suspect that the government wouldn’t do any better of a job enforcing that labeling than they have with keeping harmful products out of our food. People are going to have to be willing to do it themselves.

      Reply
  17. Kari Carlin Aist via Facebook October 30, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    California-style mud-slinging–huh? What I have seen is purely Monsanto-style mud-slinging. I don’t appreciate their dirty tactics one bit, and I am a lifelong Californian–the kind with integrity.

    Reply
  18. We have tried hard to spread the word on our Well Fed Family page on Facebook.
    Where can I get one of those t-shirts they are wearing in the picture?? Would LOVE one of those!!!!!!

    Reply
  19. I wished I lived in California so I could vote. I actually signed up to call someone today for an online phone bank shift. You can find out more at carighttoknow.org. I do have a question for everyone and you Sarah…what do you’ll think of the website U.S Wellness Meats? They say their meat is grass fed and finished and the “Bulletproof Diet” guy recommends them. Have you’ll heard of that too? It was created by Dave Asprey. Runs pretty much like the Weston A Price guidlines and along with traditional cultures except he doesnt mention the importance of fermented foods and he actually said making homemade broth to get collagen was too much work and to just get grassfed collagen seperately which I dont agree with but thats another day. So either way, the U.S Wellness website has great prices on meats and if they’re that good I think we’ll start buying them. This Bulletproof guy also seems to know a thing or two and seems very passionate about helping ppl and being healthy so he seems like a reliable source. Just wondering if anyone on here had any comments on it. Thanks guys!

    Reply
    • I have veen purchasing from U S Wellness Meats (www.grasslandbeef.com) for about 3 years. I have been happy with everything I have gotten and it always arrives well packed and frozen solid. I have never ordered their chilled beef but they have it on sale now so I think I will try it. Be careful when you order the chicken though because not all of their chicken is soy free…the soyfree chicken is sent from a farm in South Carolina. Wonder flavor and you can also order chicken feet to use to make your chicken bone broth. I buy the ground beef when it’s on sale in 15 or 25 packages. The best hamburger I have ever eaten.

      Reply
  20. We’ve contacted our relatives in California and have asked them to vote in favor of Prop 37. They were already planning on doing so. However, check out the article (online) at the Wall Street Journal published 4 days ago, “Dough Rolls Out to Fight ‘Engineered’ Label on Food”. Two weeks ago, before a massive advertising blitz, voters were in favor of food labeling by 67 percent. That number has now dropped to 48 percent. As California goes, so will the rest of the country. Much rests on this vote. We’ve already felt the sacrifices we have had to make in order to buy local, organic food. But our family, teenagers included, realize if we want a healthy future it has to be paid for. We do so gladly and willingly. Thanks Sara!

    Reply
  21. Kimberly Roeh via Facebook October 30, 2012 at 11:23 am

    I’m voting yes!!! Ads against it out here are so bad I am worried it won’t pass. They just keep going on about how it will raise the cost of groceries… Hope it goes through!!

    Reply
  22. Is anyone surprised at these lies and manipulation. They have been doing this ever since they got congress and the senate to pass a law allowing for the patenting of life and the president signed it into law. They use lies, fear and statistics to confuse and intimidate the voting public, because fear works. If you try to share this story with the average person on the street or even the farmers and ranchers, they look at you like you are from another planet. They have been lied to so long by the Monsantos of the world and the government, they don’t handle the truth very well. I don’t live in California, but I hope to exercise my right to grow more of my food for myself and support the local farmers and ranchers by buying their products from them and use my dollar as a vote for local and wholesome food.

    Reply
    • Well said! The government & the corporations benefit from Monsanto & the public being misinformed! And it will continue as long as long as the American public stays asleep…

      Reply
  23. Terrific article. I wish every voter in California would read this. The campaign of lies, misinformation, and propaganda has succeeded in reducing support for Prop 37 from 65% to 40%. If you watch television for even one hour on any major network at night, you will see two or three adds attacking Prop 37.

    Every ad is full of misrepresentations, yet they are very effective. An article like this is a flash of truth. I understand that the forces supporting Prop 37 will start advertising on tv soon. I hope it is not too late for the truth to prevail.
    Stanley Fishman\’s last post: Traditional Sea Salt Is a Vital Nutrient

    Reply

Leave a Comment

CommentLuv badge

Login to your account

Can't remember your Password ?

Register for this site!