Why everyone who eats should vote YES on 37

Follow the money:

The No on 37 campaign is outspending the Yes on 37 campaign by 7 to 1. What this means is that the corporations who brought us DDT and Agent Orange have poured 34 million dollars into denying Californians the right to know if they are eating GMOs. Based on the Pepperdine poll that came out October 11th, the group's massively funded propaganda campaign seems to be working to sway voters towards voting no on 37. At our highest point, Prop 37 had a 69% approval rating. Since the negative TV ads and the paid Op-Eds have come into play, the percentage of voters planning to vote yes on Prop 37 has plummeted to only 48%, with 40% now saying they intend to vote against Prop 37!


The California Right to Know committee is in a tight spot. They have to rely on smaller ethical companies and citizens like you and me for donations. They have only raised 4 million dollars, which is not nearly enough to fund TV commercials, online banner ads, or mass mailings. Our strength and hope for success rests on our volunteers and the outreach done at the grass roots level to communities across the state. Please, don't believe the lies!


Prop 37 will not increase food costs. The exemptions are not arbitrary or confusing; they were necessary to make Prop 37 legal. Most importantly, Prop 37 will ensure Californians the right to choose to opt out of the open-ended, untracked human feeding experiment that is now being conducted on all of us without our informed consent.


No increase in food costs: The claims about increased food costs seem to be pulled out of thin air and are only debatable if you ignore the fact that when labeling was instituted in Europe, the same claims were made. No such price increases were seen, however.


I think the real argument being made here is in the subtext. What Monsanto and Industrial Farmers and Food Producers are worried about is that people tend to choose non-GMO products when they are given the choice.


Labeling will actually allow the free market to work as it is supposed to, for it will allow people to vote with their dollars. Demand will then dictate supply.


As it is now, the sheer volume of GMOs being grown in this country makes consuming them unavoidable unless one can afford to eat EXCLUSIVELY 100% organic foods. The intent behind Prop 37 is to democratize access to non-GMO foods, and to make non-GMO foods as available to WinCo shoppers as they are to organic consumers.


The exemptions in Prop 37 aren't arbitrary. It was intentionally written to be a narrow, single-issue initiative which will be legally defensible. Initiatives are only allowed to be about ONE issue.


-Alcohol was not included because it is not in the same legal category as food.
-Meat that is itself Genetically Engineered (for example the GMO salmon that is close to approval) will be labeled. Meat from animals consuming GMO feed, or injected with GMOs, are exempt because "second generation GMOs" are considered a separate issue.
-Food prepared for immediate consumption was not included because it could be interpreted as making Prop 37 about more than one issue (restaurants and school cafeterias are different than grocery stores). I am sad about this, but Prop 37 is simply a first step. It can be strengthened later.


Safety concerns about GMOs:
While farmer reports and independent scientific studies about the dangers of GMOs are ignored or discredited by industry scientists, and while citizens wait for conclusive information to settle the matter once and for all, Prop 37 will ensure Californians the right to choose to opt out of the feeding experiment that is now being conducted on all of us without our informed consent.


When it is claimed that the jury is still out on whether GMOs are safe, it really depends on whether we are talking about "corporate consensus science" or studies done by independent researchers. Corporate consensus claims GMOs are safe because they have never been proven dangerous by the companies' own biased studies.


In contrast, independent studies such as the recent French study that fed rats the same strain of GMO maize that Americans are eating, found a huge incidence of mammary, kidney and liver tumors, and premature deaths compared to rats in the control group. https://sustainablepulse.com/2012/09...-death-cancer/


Based on these findings, Russia and Poland have banned the importing of the strain of GM Maize used in the study; South Africa is also considering a ban; and France is calling for an EU-wide ban.


In addition, the book Genetic Roulette details 300 short term animal feeding studies showing unhealthy changes in almost every organ studied--often in as short a time as 10 days. In the movie of the same name, which was released last month and can be viewed online for free, there are farmer testimonials about the negative effects of GMOs, and the astonishing positive changes that happen when they switch to non GMO feed. There are also multiple doctor testimonials detailing the same things with their human patients.


While the official stance of the Prop 37 campaign is emphatically not focused on GMO dangers but rather on the simple inarguable Right to Know, there are a lot of other groups out there educating on the GMO safety issue. As a nutritionist, I find it nearly impossible to talk about GMOs without talking about health risks, but I always point out that this is my personal perspective based on my nutrition training.


In closing, it really does come down to whether you believe that the right to know what is in your food should be in your hands, or whether corporations have the right to deny you access to information that may be vital to the health of your family.


In deciding how to vote on Prop 37, please remember: all that corporations care about is their bottom line, profits at any cost. They do not care about the health of your family; they do not care about your children. The responsibility to ensure that Monsanto and Co. don't buy this election rests with each and every one of us. Which side are you on?


Please, ask your friends and neighbors to vote YES ON 37 for all of us, and most especially for the children. All we want is a simple label for the food that's on our table.


Here's to truth and transparency in labeling!
Rosa Rashall
Certified Nutrition Educator