User: flenvcenter Topic: Food-National
Category: Food Safety :: GMOs
Last updated: Oct 22 2014 20:57 IST RSS 2.0
 
1 to 20 of 3,799    
How Real Change in the Food System Starts at Retail 22.10.2014 Green on HuffingtonPost.com
By guest blogger Joyce de Brevannes, market outreach manager for the Non-GMO Project It's been 20 years since the " Flavr Savr " tomato, the first commercially produced genetically modified organism (GMO), appeared on grocery store shelves. The tomato, whose genes had been spliced to include genes from an Arctic flounder to extend its shelf life, had its life cut short when consumers vocally fought back against its questionable genetics and lack of flavor and retailers rejected it for its inability to hold up during shipping. Since then, GMOs have become increasingly prevalent in the food system, and consequently more hidden from consumer view. At present, more than 80 percent of packaged foods include GMO ingredients, and many Americans have been consuming GMOs at almost every meal for years without realizing it. However, the tide is changing as consumers become increasingly aware of the unlabeled presence of GMOs in food. Today's savvy shoppers are demanding more transparency with regard to where their ...
Also found in: [+]
Battles rage in Oregon, Colorado over genetically modified foods 22.10.2014 LA Times: Nation
Voters in two Western states are caught in fierce battles over whether consumers will know what is deep inside their food.
Also found in: [+]
Food giants spend millions to take on GMO labeling 22.10.2014 Durango Herald
Colorado voters continue to be pounded by multi-million dollar political advertising campaigns, often with the two candidates or issue opponents fairly evenly matched, with no respite in sight until Election Day.But on one particular issue, the campaign ads are entirely lopsided. Labeling genetically modified food, commonly called GMOs...
Also found in: [+]
Jeremy Johnston: Support Prop. 105 22.10.2014 Steamboat Pilot
Don’t you think that you have a right to know what’s in your food? In response to your editorial, “Our View: Proposition 105 is costly and confusing,” here are a couple of facts to help clear up some misconceptions about Prop. 105 and genetically modified organisms: Colorado has what is called a single subject initiative law. That means only one statute can be amended or added per initiative. Because meat, dairy, alcohol, gum, pharmaceuticals and restaurant food are governed by different state statutes by law, they had to be exempted from this initiative but are not exempted from future regulation. This initiative applies to packaged foods and produce, which is 70 percent of what is in the grocery store. GMOs have not been proven safe for long-term human consumption. Proposition 105 opponents site the fact that no studies show GMOs to be unsafe, but it’s a two-way street. No long-term studies exist to show that they have no harmful effects, either. No plant varieties have been engineered to be drought ...
Also found in: [+]
Sowing the seeds of an illogical crop ban 22.10.2014 LA Times: Opinion
Last year's half-baked and unsuccessful proposal to ban genetically engineered crops in Los Angeles has not improved with time. Yet here it is before the City Council again, complete with wild statements about bioengineered food, chock full of inconsistent logic and, just like last year,...
Also found in: [+]
Ban on GMO plants advances at L.A. City Hall 21.10.2014 LA Times: Top News
Also found in: [+]
Appeals Court Revives Syngenta, Bunge GMO Lawsuit 21.10.2014 WCCO: Local News
(credit: CBS)A federal appeals court gave agricultural chemical-maker Syngenta Seeds hope Monday that it may be able to proceed with a lawsuit against grain storage and transportation company Bunge North America for refusing to accept one of Syngenta's genetically modified corn varieties.
Also found in: [+]
Our View: Proposition 105 is costly and confusing 19.10.2014 Steamboat Pilot
Proposition 105 would require genetically engineered food produced in Colorado to be labeled Our view The measure is unnecessary, costly and will hurt Colorado’s farmers and ranchers. Proposition 105 would require foods that are genetically modified or produced with genetic engineering to be labeled with the words “Produced with Genetic Engineering.” This ballot measure sounds good on the surface, but upon closer study, we don’t think it is as simple and low-cost as proponents claim it to be, or even necessary. The proposition would establish a separate food labeling system unique to Colorado, which we think is burdensome and confusing, and would be substantially more expensive than the $113,000 estimated by the Colorado Legislative Council in the Blue Book. We think the actual cost of the labeling would be in the millions. A study conducted on a similar measure that Washington state voters defeated last year showed that GMO labeling would cost taxpayers there $22.5 million per year. And even if the ...
Also found in: [+]
Pesticide Use Skyrocketing on GMO Crops While Pro-GMO Media Run Interference 18.10.2014 Green on HuffingtonPost.com
by David Bronner, president of Dr. Bronner's Michael Specter's recent articles in the New Yorker bashing Vandana Shiva and the labeling of genetically engineered foods (" Seeds of Doubt "and " The Problem with G.M.O. Labels ") are the latest high-profile pro-genetically modified organisms (GMO) articles that fail to engage with the fundamental critique of genetically engineered food crops in U.S. soil today: Rather than reduce pesticide inputs, GMOs are causing them to skyrocket in amount and toxicity. Setting the record straight, Ramon J. Seidler, PhD, former senior scientist for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has recently published a well-researched article documenting the devastating facts, " Pesticide Use on Genetically Engineered Crops ," in Environmental Working Group's online AgMag. Seidler's article cites and links recent scientific literature and media reports, and should be required reading for all journalists covering GMOs as well as for citizens seeking to understand why their ...
Also found in: [+]
Monsanto Spends Millions in Bid to Defeat Local GMO Labeling Initiative 17.10.2014 CommonDreams.org Headlines
Also found in: [+]
Modified: GMO Labels that Actually Work 17.10.2014 Green on HuffingtonPost.com
When the "in" crowd wrests the levers of power from the "out" crowd, be ready to duck. Trendy slogans may well become administrative fiat. Authoritarian fashion-sense often relies on poor reasoning and an even poorer respect for individual autonomy. For a case in point, look no further than the intensifying push for genetically modified labeling in Colorado (pending state motto: "We're Cooler than California"). Genetically modified foods are definitely "out" for Colorado's urban-farmer blisterati, and they want the state to help make their case. Proposition 105 , like California's failed Prop 37 , asks Colorado voters whether it ought to be mandatory to include labels on all products containing genetically modified ingredients. Coloradans might just outdo those Pacific-fronting pikers on this one, as happened with marijuana. Weed is hip, even good for you. Genetically modifying food? "That's just not cool, man . . . " Consider the contradiction: After removing overstepping authority on recreational, ...
Also found in: [+]
GMO labeling foes spend big on campaigns in Oregon, Colorado 17.10.2014 Science
By Carey Gillam (Reuters) - Opponents of GMO food labeling proposals on the ballot next month in Oregon and Colorado have contributed roughly $20 million for campaigning against the proposed laws, nearly triple the money raised by supporters of the initiatives, campaign finance reports show. Both measures would require labels on foods made with genetically engineered crops, which are common in the United States. Voters in Colorado and Oregon weigh in on the issue in mid-term election voting on Nov. 6. ...
Also found in: [+]
EPA Approval Highlights Need for GE Labeling 16.10.2014 Green on HuffingtonPost.com
On Wednesday, in a quiet but profound decision to approve a dangerous weed killer, the EPA chose the rights of Dow Chemical Co. and the biotech lobby over those of the American people, particularly our children. While the decision will now be litigated, our real hope as citizens to protect ourselves from such potentially carcinogenic herbicides is to get our government to approve mandatory federal labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods. Explaining the connection requires that I get down into the, um, weeds. The EPA approved the herbicide Enlist Duo to kill weeds in corn and soybean fields. In the months leading up to the decision, more than 500,000 citizens, 50 congress-people and dozens of eminent physicians, weed scientists and public health experts had urged the EPA not to approve Enlist. Enlist Duo is the combination of two different chemicals, glyphosate and the even more toxic 2,4-D, created by Dow AgroSciences to be used in tandem with their genetically engineered Enlist Duo seeds, which ...
Also found in: [+]
Climate sceptics exploit double standards of eco-warriors 16.10.2014 New Scientist: Sex and Cloning
Greenpeace will never defeat climate-change denial if it employs the same unscientific fear and smear tactics in its opposition to GM crops, says Fred ...
Also found in: [+]
Failing Humans and Planet, EPA Greenlights 'Agent Orange' Herbicide 16.10.2014 CommonDreams.org Headlines
Also found in: [+]
EPA Approves New 2,4-D Herbicide Blend, Paving Way for Controversial GE Crops 16.10.2014 Commondreams.org Newswire
Also found in: [+]
EPA Approves 2,4-D Weed Killer Enlist Duo For Engineered Crops 15.10.2014 Green on HuffingtonPost.com
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency has approved a new version of a popular weed killer to be used on genetically modified corn and soybeans. The EPA said Wednesday that it will allow the use of a 2,4-D weed killer called Enlist Duo, a new version of the popular herbicide used since the 1940s. It is designed to be used on corn and soybeans grown with engineered seeds approved by the Agriculture Department last month. When used together, farmers can spray the fields after the plants emerge, killing the weeds but leaving crops unharmed. The agriculture industry has anxiously awaited the approvals, as many weeds have become resistant to glyphosate, an herbicide commonly used on genetically modified corn and soybeans now. Enlist includes a combination of both 2,4-D and glyphosate. Critics say they're concerned the increased use of 2,4-D could endanger public health and more study on the chemical is needed. The USDA has said that if both the seeds and herbicide are approved, the use of 2,4-D ...
Also found in: [+]
Chipotle backs GMO-labeling proposals 15.10.2014 Durango Herald
DENVER – Burrito giant Chipotle on Tuesday endorsed ballot measures in Colorado and Oregon that would require labeling of genetically modified food, providing a morale boost for campaigns being heavily outspent by agriculture interests.The Denver-based chain said in a statement that consumers want to know whether the food...
Also found in: [+]
Chipotle backs Colorado's GMO food labeling effort 15.10.2014 Yahoo: Politics
DENVER (AP) — Burrito giant Chipotle is backing a Colorado ballot measure that would require labeling of genetically modified foods.
Also found in: [+]
Denver-based Chipotle supports Colorado ballot proposal to label genetically modified foods 15.10.2014 Star Tribune: Nation
Also found in: [+]
1 to 20 of 3,799