Why I'm Voting "NO" on Prop 37

[Peace Voyager]

I appreciate your investigation; but I'd hope you'd vote yes and then work for better laws to rid, or restrict, and label all GMO use.

Why I'm voting "NO" on Prop 37

by Laurel Blair, NTP

To those who are familiar with my nutritional philosophy, it may come as a surprise to hear that I plan to vote against California Prop 37, an upcoming ballot initiative to label genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the food supply.

Before I get accused of being a shill for Monsanto,

[rossmen]

this is important information. cost benefit agricultural policy turns the world into a large lab experiment. bad primates will be punished. if the smart primates organize resistance by demanding information then the experiments are simply changed. human evolution is actually quite rapid.

GMO Film Series Presents Scientist Under Attack

Wednesday, October 10 6:30 PM
$5.00 USD
Humanist Hall in Oakland

Potluck begins at 6:30pm and the film begins at 7:30pm.

Árpád Pusztai and Ignacio Chapela have two things in common. They are distinguished scientists and their careers are in ruins. Both scientists choose to look at the phenomenon of genetic engineering. Both made important discoveries. Both of them are suffereing the fate of those who criticise the powerful vested interests that now dominate big business and scientifuic research. Statements made by scientist themselves prove that 95% of the research in the area of genetic engineering is paid by the industry. Only 5% of the research is independent. The big danger for engineering is paid by the industry. Only 5% of the research is independent. The big danger for freedom of scince and our democracy is evident.
Can the public/we all still trust in our scientists?

Humanist Hall
390 27th St
Oakland, CA 94612
(Between Telegraph and Broadway)

Host: Carter Allen
Email: [email protected]

[datars]

New Prop 37 ad
Right to Know: Vote Yes on Prop 37
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB1xHFwSYIg

Click here to help us get this ad on the air: https://fwwat.ch/Right2KnowTVAD

To learn more about Prop 37 and Food & Water Watch's campaign to make GE Labeling the Law, visit www.foodandwaterwatch.org/yeson37.

"What makes you think you have the right to know?" asks Danny DeVito in a witty, ironic public service announcement by the political action committee sponsored by consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch in support of Proposition 37. California's ballot initiative to label genetically engineered foods. A diverse, all-star cast joins DeVito in the "Right to Know" PSA, including Bill Maher, Dave Matthews, Jillian Michaels, Emily Deschanel, John Cho, Glenn Howerton, Kaitlin Olson, KaDee Strickland and Kristin Bauer van Straten.

[Peace Voyager]

this is important information. cost benefit agricultural policy turns the world into a large lab experiment. bad primates will be punished. if the smart primates organize resistance by demanding information then the experiments are simply changed. human evolution is actually quite rapid.

U R a funny advanced primate Rossman.

We are the paradigm shifters we've been waiting for.
Get set for Warp Speed Evolving. All hope is not lost - hurray!

[datars]

Just Label It - the GMO labeling song by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEVw5Jl4c2g

HealthRanger YouTube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/thehealthranger

[ruthnew]

Love that commercial & this one too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB1xHFwSYIg

No on 37 ad pulled: https://www.carighttoknow.org/no_on_..._source=prop37

Just Label It - the GMO labeling song by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEVw5Jl4c2g

HealthRanger YouTube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/thehealthranger

[guy]

thank you for your thoughtful and eloquent post, rosa.

guy

Laurel, I read your opinion piece on Prop 37 as well as your subsequent responses to people who challenged you. While it is apparent your heart is in the right place, I was disappointed to see you using your position as an NTP to add weight to your unfounded accusations about the nature of Prop 37 and its proponents. It is always disappointing to me when I encounter otherwise intelligent and articulate people within the natural health community who can't see the forest for the trees. The big picture has obviously been lost, and you are using your articulate intelligence to try to sway others towards your hairsplitting, negative point of view.

You may not think you are giving your vote away to Monsanto et al, but that is what a No vote from you and every voter swayed by your attacks on Prop 37 means. Have you examined the funding for and against Prop 37? Last time I looked, the Biotech/ Industrial Food crowd had raised $34 million to try to deny Californians the right to know whether they are eating GMOs. The Yes on 37 crowd has raised $4 million.

This is not some corporate front making a sham of labeling. Prop 37 is a true grassroots effort. Volunteers gathered 250,000 of the nearly one million signatures submitted to get the initiative on the ballot. OCA, IRT and the Right to Know committee are not and have never been corporate-sponsored. Look at the funding, look at the endorsers. https://www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements Do you really think that Jeffrey Smith, the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, Robyn O'Brien and all the rest of our food heroes are either too stupid to know they are being deceived or are in on this alleged deceit themselves? Do you really think that the volunteers who have committed thousands of hours to this campaign are likewise stupid or deceptive? I'm here to tell you, you don't hold the patent on intelligence and discernment. We knew about the exemptions, and many of us, myself included, did tell people about them.

You claim repeatedly that the Yes on 37 crowd is deceptive because the exemptions were not laid out for you to examine before you donated. In fact, the initiative has been available in full online for nearly a year now. At any time since November 2011, it could be read on labelgmos.org, and now it is on the carighttoknow website https://www.carighttoknow.org/read_the_initiative

Yes, there are exemptions. As GardenQueen stated, California Constitution Article 2, section 8 (d) explicitly says: An initiative measure embracing more than one subject may not be submitted to the electors or have any effect. In plain English this means that for an initiative to be legal, it can only be about one issue. That is why the focus is on food sold in grocery stores, the foods people most often eat. Alcohol is not considered to be in the same legal category as food, nor are vitamins. That is why they are exempt. Meat and from animals fed or injected with GMOs is considered a second-generation product as they are not themselves directly genetically engineered. The same goes for milk. That is why they are exempt. However, if GMO salmon (or any other animal) is for sale, it would be labeled as such.

Now Laurel, I have to quote you here "I understand where the Prop 37 writers were coming from on this issue, but personally I would have handled it a LOT differently if it was up to me. By far, my biggest beef with Prop 37 is the way the campaign was conducted."Where have you been? We could have used your considerable energy and commitment to spread the word. You could have shared the exemptions with everyone you spoke with. Remember, most on the ground communication has been by volunteers. You could have been part of the process, part of the solution, instead of pointing fingers and throwing stones and trying to tear down all that we have poured our hearts and souls into.


It seems to me that with your angry diatribe you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. Prop 37 doesn't ban GMOs and there are loopholes that you actually had to look up yourself, so you choose to vote NO? What is the alternative? Do you really think that not having GMOs labeled will make people more invested in self-education to avoid GMOs? Without labels, most people don't even know that GMOs exist. I spent time canvassing in a WinCo parking lot, talking to people with carts full of GMOs. Most of them had never heard of a GMO, and once they understood that they were lab-made they wanted labels.

I find it interesting that you advocate voting against Prop 37 and instead tell people that avoiding GMOs is a matter of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Can you really stand by that statement when you think of the millions of people who have never heard of GMOs? In contrast, I believe the responsibility for identifying GMO products rests with the corporations that produce them, the farmers who grow them, and the companies that manufacture food with them, NOT with the people who unwittingly eat them. That said, I am a label reader and I always tell people to read the fine print. But of course, most people don't.

You claim that it is easy for the informed consumer to avoid GMOs, but that entails eating a whole foods diet devoid of processed foods, or eating 100% organic. As a fellow traditional nutritionist ala Weston A Price, I agree that would be ideal for people's health. However, as a realist I understand that we have to meet people where they are for information to be accessible to them. For the millions of people shopping at WinCo and Safeway, eating this way is at present an unachievable goal. A big part of my personal motivation for being a volunteer with Label GMOs is to democratize access to non-GMO foods, to make them accessible to those who simply can't buy organic foods and who don't know what the 8 commercial GM crops are. Is 5% GMO better than 100% GMO? In my book, yes.

Is it perfect? No. Is it everything I would like to see? Not by a long shot. Is it a good first step? Absolutely. Will it need strengthening in the future? Yes! We are so far behind the rest of the world on this issue, and the Agrichemical companies are so entrenched here, that compromises had to be made in order for this to stand up in court. Eighteen state-level legislative attempts have been made to label GMOs, and they all failed. To date, this is our best chance to pass a GMO labeling law in the US. In a perfect world, Prop 37 would label GMOs everywhere they show up, from animal feed to restaurants. However, writing such a broad initiative would doom it to failure, and allow the silent corruption of the food supply to continue beneath the level of most people's awareness. This is not about the ideal, it is about the real.

I encourage all who are reading this to VOTE YES ON 37 and then continue to educate others about GMOs. This is just the first step.

Some examples of next steps: Are you a parent? Work to get GMOs out of your children's school cafeteria. Do you eat out a lot? Ask restaurant owners to source non-GMO products. Are you a teacher? Show your students Genetic Roulette. Pass out non-GMO shopping guides. Teach people to read labels. Are you a farmer? Commit to growing non-GMO crops, talk to your neighboring farmers, form a no GMO coalition, educate your customers.

Laurel, for you I have a special challenge: Instead of using your intellect to try to tear down and discredit Prop 37, get involved. Once it passes, work to strengthen it. Perhaps you could start a campaign to ban the planting of GMOs in your county. Contact the organizers of the successful ban on GMO planting in Mendocino County. Network. Write your own county measure. Awareness about GMOs is higher now than it has ever been, due in large part to Prop 37 campaigners. Ride the wave and join the fight. If this just isn't your cup of tea, please, stop complaining about how the work of others doesn't match up to how you imagine you would do it.

Very Sincerely,
Rosa Rashall, Certified Nutrition Educator

[ruthnew]

Traindays - I think that meat is not included because the animals are not genetically modified. They eat GMOs and we are getting the GMOs second hand. That is another issue. I think you may find this article by Michael Pollan informative. https://www.organicconsumers.org/art...icle_26403.cfm Ruth

Well, I asked what I thought were good questions in a previous post, however there are no answers...yet.

I get there are loopholes in the prop 37. While that is unfortunate, I do not see the disclosures that WILL get labeled, if prop 37 passes, as a failure. I see them as a start. It is too bad it takes such huge effort to even get this much labeled...but that is a fact...that is our legal process...and that is the best we have to work with now. And a big thank you to those posters who put so much effort, time and energy into making disclosure possible - I really appreciate your work greatly.

I look at it like this. Our legal process is slow. I have seen that firsthand, and it is a fact of our times. We cannot change that...at least not anytime soon. And, I get the piece where the whole ballot would not succeed if there was insistence on meat being included...some legal situations...you have to stick to one issue (I also don't get why meat has to be separated out, but its some legal thing)

I do not see in our future a better start for disclosure of gmo's in our food. If anyone can convince me that a better measure can feasibly get passed in the next two years, then I might change my mind.

Obviously there are people willing to take the time, money and energy to campaign for these things. I am going to vote yes, and appreciate that there will be people in the future who will take the next step to get even fuller disclosure on our ballot. It is a gift.

[pnicholson]

hi rosa. sorry for the time lag. i am not able to come here every day. i am also sorry if i offended you, or others. it was not intentional.

i have some links for you here. sometimes the connections are easy to untangle and sometimes not. by design. i can demonstrate big corp funding for some orgs and the orgs for whom i finally gave up, fooddemocracynow! and carighttoknow (slowfood & slowmoney) are splinter groups from the larger orgs, though there is some info on 'slow' orgs. they are funded by the larger groups. given enough time i could do it. but i do not care to. i am tired of coming up with links and connections. if you are not content with what i offer, do it yourself.

you say you know what agenda 21 is. it is this but not that. but to most people it is about really good and important issues like climate change control and sustainable development and saving the earth, being green. who could argue with that? it can't possibly be deceptive about something like labeling gmos. well, how could it possibly be deceptive about something as important as living sustainably and saving the earth? i do not think we have the time to pick and choose. as i stated - if it is un it is bad. i have been researching the un and ngos, climate change, rockefeller and other tax-free foundations and their connections to population reduction through, for one, gmos, for about seven years now. i know what the un is about. i know who the founders and funders are, because it is easy enough to determine. but that is what i say. i am willing to agree to disagree.

since you are up on agenda 21 nomenclature some of the wording on the websites might be more meaningful to you than, perhaps, it would be to others. the first link is the most important. i believe it supercedes all the others in significance and importance. at any rate, i hope you find them interesting and informative. thanks again for your patience. and just fyi and re gmos: i spend a great deal of time researching possible cures for type 1 diabetes. my little dog is diabetic - i suspect from vaccines. a month or so ago i discovered that the life-saving human insulin, the only kind available in this country since the natural insulins have been discontinued, i am giving him twice a day is gmo. though it states it right on the bottle, i somehow missed it for two years. his body is rejecting it - no surprise there. i am fighting to save his life. while i believe anything can be cured naturally, type 1 diabetics at this time rely on insulin to keep them alive (thought i fully intend to find alternatives). that the insulin they are offered is gmo is beyond evil. clever if you are a sociopath, but....

here we go.

much love,
p

https://www.globalresearch.ca/doomsday-seed-vault-in-the-arctic/

don't be culled by the UN's green agenda

https://ymlp.com/zYKsgk

every 'endorser' here is connectable to the united nations except for the democratic party (?), mercola, though i am working on that, and whole foods which i have connected to the un but not as an outright ngo. under "consumer" every org is un.

https://www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements

food day: sponsored by monsanto
https://www.organicconsumers.org/art...icle_24507.cfm

food freedom betrayal
https://farmwars.info/?p=5032

founding members of slowmoney(un). organic valley's george siemon was mentioned in the link above. please check out
the credentials and associations (un) of these entrepeneurs etc.
https://slowmoney.org/founding-members

tulsans for sustainable freedom: the ngo scam
(lots of interesting info here)
https://tulsansforsustainablefreedom.com/L12.html

socialism, taxes & castro: mission rio+day 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9iZ...eature=related

US Agents of Subversion Deride Russian NGO Bill
https://globalpoliticalawakening.blo...e-russian.html

gives an idea of the scope of power/enforcement that un has usurped. never before has it been laid out so openly, here & elsewhere, the intention of a group of sociopaths who wish to rule the world and more shocking - the fact that they intend to absolutely control every facet of our lives and the lives of animals and plants.
https://www.un-documents.net/csdngo/es2ngo.htm

just for fun
https://www.blacklistednews.com/UN_Sustainability_Summit_Exposed%3A_Big_Business,_Dictators,_and_NGOs/20467/0/38/38/Y/M.html


linking endorsers to united nations:

california nurses association
https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/ref...best-local-ngo

california labor federation
https://productstewardship.us/displa...articlenbr=235

united farm workers of america
https://www.bamco.com/sustainable-fo...rker-inventory
https://fairtradeusa.org/fair_trade_for_all

california council of churches
https://www.unodc.org/ngo/list.jsp#C

consumer federation of america
https://stopgamblingonhunger.com/endorsements/

public citizen
https://www.iisd.org/tkn/about/resources.asp

food democracy now!
https://action.fooddemocracynow.org/...stamping_GMOs/


american public health association
https://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy...lt.htm?id=1375

i hope i did not leave anything out.

it is my understanding that agenda 21 is all inclusive.

Yes Agenda 21 is real. I am a fan of Rosa Koire's, and have noticed the insidious jargon and policies that are indicators of Agenda 21 being implemented in my home county as well as nationally. I do not intend to vote for either of the corporate puppets being held up for us to choose from. Long before I ever knew about Agenda 21 I attended a meeting where the Delphi technique was used. I was the only one in the room who walked out at the end of the day angry, knowing we had been scammed. When I encountered Rosa's work years later, I finally knew exactly HOW we had been scammed.

That said, Label GMOs, IRT and OCA are most emphatically NOT an Agenda 21 scam. Are you kidding PNicholson? Your lack of critical thinking and your broad sweeping statements lumping everyone who is trying to make a difference in with the UN NGO's working to bring on the New World Order is simplistic, inaccurate and defeatist. Beware of believing everything that goes through your head!

Agenda 21 is all about "smart development" and getting people into the cities and out of the country. It is about putting corporate overlords in charge of everything needed for survival. It is about getting small farmers off the farm, and forbidding front yard veggie gardens. It is about letting Monsanto pollute all the seed so we don't have a choice. It is about poisoning the air and water so we need expensive interventions to conceive, to be healthy, to grow our own healthy food.

HOW COULD A LABELING LAW THAT PUTS KNOWLEDGE IN THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE BE A UN AGENDA 21 SCHEME? If people avoid GMOs because of the label, this will benefit their health. If they are healthier, they are less vulnerable to Agenda 21 strategies. If people's avoidance of GMOs shifts the market away from GMOs in any measurable way, it will represent a stumbling block in the Agenda 21 program. A massively shrinking market share for GM products has been the result of labeling everywhere it has been implemented. Why would it be any different here in CA?

I have no objection to going down the rabbit hole and looking with open eyes at what is actually happening. However, you seem to have mixed up a potent brew of a little information plus a load of assumptions that has you dizzy with your own sense of "superior knowledge". Have you bothered to actually confirm any of your accusations about Label GMOs and the other food safety groups you demonize as being UN funded, or do you just "know" them to be true? I challenge you to back up your claims with actual data.

Traindays, to answer your question: Prop 37 is the only chance we are likely to have to get GMOs labeled in California. If it succeeds here, other states will follow. The naysayers on this thread are not offering another initiative to label GMOs, they are simply stating that Prop 37 isn't good enough. As I said before, this is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. If we want transparency in labeling, this is where it starts. Vote YES ON 37!

["Mad" Miles]

`
Just want to emphasize that Post #52 in this thread is the best explanation for why Prop 37 is written the way it is. Rosa R. gives the exact reasons why, legally and procedurally. That's the post I refer others to when sharing this discussion outside of Waccovia.

I do not agree with Rosa about the dangers of "Agenda 21" but I'm in synch with her explanation for why there are "loopholes" in this proposed legislation. Please read or reread it carefully. She covers a lot of ground with her economical use of words.


`

[Mudwoman]

I agree, Handy ~ Steer clear of Canola. If one thoroughly researches the ill-health effects of cooking with / eating canola, it's darn scary.

Canola is genetically engineered, grown with organic practices or not. I'm voting YES! on Prop 37 labeling of GMO / GE ingredients in our foods.

Haven't yet decided how I'll vote on this one.
Regarding Canola, be aware that it is made from Rapeseed oil. The name Canola comes from the chemist who discovered the way to use petrochemical solvents to reduce the toxic erucic acid content. Whether it is GE or not, I steer clear of it.

[ferngirl]

Kudos Mad Miles.

Ditto here. I agree that Prop 37 is not perfect legislation. But considering that if Prop 37 looses it is a defeat for labeling of our foods and a win for Mighty Monsanto. Therefore, I must, in my best conscience, cast my vote for prop 37. Though a nice explanation Laurel, I am going to side with Europe's need to know and my need to know. And well even if not perfect, it is a start. And at least it will get some people thinking about this subject who were oblivious before. And they are out there. Not everyone is from west county. Ferngirl

So the Proposition isn't perfect. What is? It's a start.

If passed, we'll know more than we did before. And the gaps provide new opportunities for public education by informed activists.

If it fails, it will be seen as a defeat for the anti-GMO movement. Weighing the pros and cons, I'm voting for it. And I encourage others to do so as well.

I knew about the problems in it before today, by the way.

This set of concerns reminds me of the Prop. 19 debate two years ago. Similar instance of the, "The Perfect, being The Enemy of The Good."

Pick your fights. Know which side you're on.

Who benefits? Who suffers? Why?

Then decide.

[Mudwoman]

Hey! Everyone,

Laurel isn't the only person dismayed with Prop 37's exceptions. Spoke with at least 3 farmers at the Original Santa Rosa Farmers Market last Saturday, plus a good friend, who also are considering OR have decided on a NO vote. (Though I'm still talking with them, hoping to influence their understanding and support...think I've won one person over.)

Prop37 was written with GREAT CARE and CONSIDERATION to make its passage likely. Here is an excellent info graphic that explains the LabelGMOs exceptions. Take a look. Please share it with anyone else who may be undecided or hesitant or confused by the TV barrage of misinformation by LabelGMOs opponents.

[ruthnew]

IMO this isn't just a Political issue. This is a matter of survival. Please look at this 1 minute video and if you want more detail, the second one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDdn...Y&feature=plcp (Which generation? my children or my grandchildren?) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nHCw36wIhs And I like this one by a GMO farmer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WOB...layer_embedded They say it better than I can. With this pre-prop 37 info and the recent research from France on the long term effects of GMOs, they should be banned.

[lamorr]

message from a friend ...

Aloha Waccovians,

In answer to your question Laurel, re: the trans fat (trick)...yes, I am definitely aware and only because I took a medical nutrition class at the JC, years ago. I appreciate your time-spent writing about this, as you are moving. Mahalo for your dedication toward food safety & nutrition and for sparking more needed discussions on Wacco, both pro & con.

Thank you gardenqueen for working overtime with your volunteer efforts to bring more awareness to our still slumbering public, many of whom still know nothing much about what we are all exposed to and eating. I'm happy to know our once-trusted Whole (Deception) Foods and other brand name food companies are being flushed out as Prop 37 brings more deception to light, demanding more truth. Thank you for the links & important facts.

Prop 37 is not an exercise in honesty, Laurel. It's a hard fought necessarily strategic campaign to create public awareness and help ensure that our political process in these concerns is still intact; we're in for the long haul whether this wins 'or not'. It will only take much longer for the groups who write the ballot measures opposing GMO's, to complete all the subsequent work that needs to be done. If it doesn't win, then the road we'll need to travel to help salvage what's left of our environment & children's health won't be the scenic route. I don't want to think about what the 'or not' could possibly spawn.

Personally, it would be a great relief to know that talking about GMO foods in the ways we have on Wacco, is only the beginning of many more thought-provoking talks that move us toward generating more focused political activism to eventually address the larger danger at the roots.

Yes, Paul I agree whole-heartedly; we need to ban GMO's altogether. The public should not be forced to eat disgusting scientific experiments passed off as 'edibles' or 'foods'. But how are we to rise to the occasion of banning GMO's when the majority of our populace has no idea what GMO is, nor what it implies in terms of health when, especially our children eat this biotoxic mess? In fact, the "M" in GMO standing for "modified", helps to conceal from public knowledge--that the science of Genetic Engineering includes the crossing of the species barrier. It's NOT a simple modification; it has never been what anyone considers to be food. I find that eating human and animal DNA in engineered plants is disgusting, as most of us probably do.

And...I've inadvertently eaten a lot of it, without buying GMO products. By living in GMO contaminated environments, I became extremely ill. I had to learn very quickly how to make myself well. It took 3 frightening years to reclaim my health, and from what knowledge I gained, I now am able to help others in identifying illnesses related to "GMO saturation" (a term I've coined). Living in such GMO polluted environments takes its toll before one really knows what's happening.

I appreciate the voices of those who've volunteered hours of their time and energy to help us understand all the more complex details involved in the authoring of Prop 37. Thank you for saving us the hours of research, and thank you for your passionate work.

If any of us lack a spirit of determination to help pass 37, it will be to the greater detriment of the whole. The sad and shocking truth of the matter is that there are still far too many people who are not aware of GMO products, what they are, and the threat they pose to our collective health. If Prop 37 were only to serve in making the greater American public more aware, then that is where we need to begin. We will still need to create more ballot measures that address individual laws to govern more particular food safety needs, i.e., all the issues that Prop 37 does not and can not cover. There is an urgent need to keep GMO/GE practices and toxins out of our foods, food mills, backyards, supermarkets, restaurants, school lunch programs, federal food programs, etc., etc., etc. But we can't even get close to addressing where this all stems from if people don't know it exists or worse yet, that we've been eating science experiments for quite some time now!

If Sonoma County is legally allowed to engage in GMO agriculture, then we may be left scrambling to help protect ourselves after too much damage has been done to our natural environment. Life in GMO environments leaves one with no options to protect from exposure and inadvertently "eating it" by way of the pollen, no matter how much organic food we grow, purchase or eat. Locally grown "organic" crops and carefully made organic food "choices" by reading labels will simply not be a luxury afforded to those of us living in Sonoma County.

This may come as a surprise for most of us who have never lived in the vicinity of GMO open-air field test plots, but the growers are not legally obligated to inform the public about what types of GMO test plots are being grown, nor where they are planted. When people and animals are exposed to the pollens of such crops, there are very different physiological/biological reactions in the body, than those that occur with more well-known allergies.

Labeling GMO foods is a major attempt in only Raising Awareness of the General Public. Labeling is not a "simple first step". It is our very First Opportunity to Collectively Speak Up and A CRITICAL FIRST STEP in standing up for the quality of life we want to protect locally in Sonoma County, California, nationally and globally; it's about protecting the quality of our children's lives by letting the GMO industry LIE out of the bag. This action could possibly lead to more activism brought about by many more concerned U.S. citizens; we need the collective power of vast numbers of people to stop the growing of GMO crops in the first place!

Without our critical first step in actually being able to open our mouths via Prop 37, in a belated yet roaring refusal to Monsanto, et al., we are pretty well screwed. I feel outraged by the fact that Monsanto wants all of us to REMAIN SILENT. They cannot be challenged in the media. They persecute and then prosecute the small farmer and ethical scientists who've spoken up--to the ruination of their lives. They take our power from us while demanding our silence, insisting we continue to pay with everything precious we've got--quality of life in the health of humans, soil, air, lands, water, medicinal plants, food crops, animals, insects...the foundation of our remaining freedoms--choices.

I had the experience of attending a Monsanto sponsored conference at the U. of Hawaii. Before we were seated, I was informed we would not be allowed to ask questions or to make comments as members of the audience. It felt like a gag-order that Monsanto had put on us, and sent a creepy feeling through me, and the more I thought about it, my anger started to grow. At that point, I raised my voice to object in conversation with my friend. The louder I became, the more nervous Monsanto's moderator became, to the chagrin of my friends. As I continued objecting loudly to their message of "sit down, and remain silent" before it began, my outrage mounted. It was unthinkable that none of us would be able to ask questions of the panelists who represented Monsanto, the genetic engineers and organic growers. Because my loud mouth persisted, Monsanto Woman grabbed a handful of small note cards, quickly stepped up to the mic and explained that they thought it might be better if each of us could be given a card; we would be allowed to write a maximum of 3 questions each on the card. In order to qualify for an answer, we had to write the name of the panelist to whom we wanted to field our question, before the talks began. Not all questions would be read out loud--they would be randomly picked (and obviously not chosen if too controversial, I might add).

My questions of course, were not chosen; they were to Monsanto: "Do you think it's important to shelter the food corn from the pollen of pharmaceutical corn, as pharmaceutical corn contains STD's, part of the AIDS virus & blood thinners?" To The GMO Engineer: As it refers to human DNA in food crops: "What part of whose ancestor are we EATING and WHY? Does the crossing of the species barrier imply that humans may begin contracting diseases that were only known to occur in animals, and vice-versa?"

I discovered AFTER I settled on the Big Island, that Hawaii had the largest number of GMO open-air field test plots in the U.S. Until then, I had no idea what GMO fields were about, nor had it ever occurred to me that I would live in a GMO contaminated environment and that I would be sacrificing the gift I was born with--unusually strong health.

I had run away from Alexander Valley, Healdsburg where I lived for over 20 years, partly to escape the more invasive vineyard practices there--the threat of applying a nerve gas to our private lands without our knowledge and without our consent if an outbreak of the Glassy-winged sharpshooter insect was found in our surrounding vineyards. I was told by the So. Co. Board of Supervisors that I could vacate my property if I found out my organic garden, well water, children and self had been affected by the nerve gas. They told us that "the little person is in the way" of the vineyard industry--meaning the property owner.

I hadn't any idea what it would cost to live in such a toxic GMO environment in Hawaii. Who knew? It was news to me; no one I knew had any knowledge about it. Even now, not nearly enough people are speaking up about the perils of living in locally contaminated GMO ag environments. How will we manage as a community if we want to ban GMO crops locally? What will happen if 37 doesn't pass, and people still aren't aware of GMO foods, because they never read it on a "food" label, like so many other people are able to do in other countries? How do we gain support to rally against Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Syngenta, et al.? These corporations were my neighbors in Hawaii. They are the employers of the many Hawaiian locals who prefer working in agriculture to slaving in the hotel industry on the other tourist-centered islands. There is little tourism on Molokai, where I lived.

On Molokai, the wind carries the pollen (and there is considerable pollen in corn). The pollen contains and carries all the genetic markers, herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, bacterium, including E. coli, viruses, mycotoxins, blood thinners, STD's, and part of the AIDS virus, etc., on the wind. All of this biotoxin lodges into the mucus membranes of eyes, nose & mouth in humans and animals. It very quickly enters the bloodstream and settles in the intestinal tract. One does not have to buy GMO foods and eat them in order to be poisoned! When the body absorbs invisible GMO pollens on the air through eyes, nose & mouth, serving portions aren't possible to calculate. One does not chew, intentionally swallow or drink it--except maybe in the water. Many of us in the small community who attended a permaculture weekend workshop at an organic farm, began comparing health stories to find that we had been feeling like we had been eating loads of poison and were sharing the same symptom pictures and were sick for the first time in really odd ways. I had lost my ability to eat and do anything productive. Even though I could feel hunger and wanted to eat, I also felt sick to my stomach. It would occur in waves and I couldn't keep food down; so I lived for months on fermented poi until I finally left the island of Molokai where I lived for 9 months.

I now have a little knowledge helpful to others who suffer from digestive tract disorders, former medical patients who have been through the "medical mill" and can't be helped. Some symptoms are inclusive of dehydration from bowel incontinence, vitamin/mineral deficiencies, bone loss, weight loss, and Morgellons Syndrome. Most of my clients are facing financial ruin from doctor visits, lab tests and loss of employment--all stemming from what I recognize as GMO saturation. The thing is, my work with clients begins by teaching people to reclaim their health by informing them of the existence of GMO products first. Because of Prop 37, there is a plethora of scientifically backed information from leading experts in the field that has recently made it easier for me to educate my clients. I highly recommend seeing the interview of Dr. Don M. Huber, by Food Democracy Now! I consider it to be the very best information for understanding what we may be facing in terms of diseases and deficiencies that could soon affect larger numbers of animals and humans and cause more devastating environmental degradation, especially if Obama turns a deaf ear on Dr. Huber's plea to withhold planting more GMO crops & alfalfa.

At the University of Hawaii Monsanto conference I spoke of previously, we met the scientist who inserted E. coli into papaya DNA. His explanation for using it as a marker was because "E. coli is a naturally occurring substance; why not?" The room went silent for a moment, as we held our breath waiting for a panel member to respond. (Are you remembering here that we were told not to speak?) Well........these were some very tense, long moments until the organic farmer who had enough courage to finally speak was able to respond. He began in a guarded tone, by agreeing that E. coli is in fact a "naturally occurring substance" and that it is "naturally" found in only one place in the body. His body lurched forward a little towards the table after he spoke. There was nothing left to say. The energy in the room said it all. No other panelist dared speak to that.

Mr. brilliant GMO scientist had gone through all the trouble of preparing a huge bowl of chunky E. coli papaya for us to eat as a tasty mid-morning snack. Yum! It looked plenty juicy to me, but I don't recall anyone rushing over to serve up a big plate of E. coli with papaya. At least one other person from our Wacco community was in attendance that day! Do you remember?

I learned that what had once been organic papaya seed on the Big Island tested positive for GMO contamination. So much for going "local" and organic farming. How many of us take papaya enzymes for digestive purposes? Have you read your labels today? I won't eat papaya from anywhere in the world.

Thanks to research done by Food Democracy Now!, I have updated my knowledge of facts that are important to me: The American public is eating GMO foods, which are grown on 165 million acres across our nation. Worldwide, at last count, there were 365 million acres of GMO seed crops (Roundup Ready). We are a world-class leader. Does anyone know how many GMO acres are planted in Sonoma County?

This may sound trivial here, but where else can we find cross contamination of nasty GMO corn pollen? Well, having lived inside this hot mess of intensely toxic ecosystem, I can be absolutely positive that there is pollen residue on the outside of GMO packaging, especially on GMO corn products and corn starch, which sits right up against organic corn products and corn starch on the shelves at Whole Foods in Coddingtown. I brought this to the attention of an employee, who was not a cashier. I was asked to help support the community and employees of Whole Foods, by writing to upper management and corporate offices about my concerns. So there are at least 2 Whole (Deception) Foods employees who felt concerned enough to ask me to please support them in their positions. Whole Foods employees also struggle personally to inform the public more honestly about Whole Foods policies & practices, in regard to our 'right to know' as consumers and supporters of this food chain. You can pitch in too to help support the employees, if you shop there.

This is a first time wake-up call--TO VOTE, and I hope it won't be our last. If we think we may always have a right to vote about anything in regard to Monsanto/GMO/Genetic Engineering--I would think again.
California needs to voice some solidarity on this one. Labeling has been taken to the Supreme Court and failed miserably; I know better than to take an opportunity to vote for GMO labeling for granted.

Perhaps because GMO industry is generated from within our own country, on a global note, we are unfortunately and very sadly lagging behind the progress of other nations! Fewer people around the world eat the frightening stuff we eat. Many governments and their populations aren't remaining silent and stuffing this revolting, invisible filth down their gullets. To vote NO on Prop 37 is a vote that keeps us all "Eating in the Dark" (you can read the book by Kathleen Hart). We continue paying the very high price of our own loss of health and life within our devastated ecosystems--not because WE don't know in our Wacco community--but because so many others simply do not yet know or don't know enough to take it seriously. Can we please take a little time to help put other folks on the same page?

As the whole world looks to America to see what's really happened to our health, our children and environment, the way we vote is sending a big message about, at least, our dignity! Are we going to take what looks like a small step now, however incomplete or inadequate that may seem to some, or...can we see the bigger picture and prepare to take more meaningful steps forward as a nation, beginning in our own community? Are we to sit by becoming more cynical and complaining about the few organizations, which work so hard on behalf of the People, and not do our small part to say Yes? Can we bring the invisible, which can easily be denied--into print? Can we use Prop 37 as a stepping-stone to get to the root of our GMO travesty? I know we're capable of thinking beyond the illusion of "safety" we believe we have by simply "reading labels".

There are those who will think: If GMO foods are so harmful, why don't they put a label on it? I want to ask you how you would feel if your children ate the GMO plants growing in the fields, not knowing they're eating a mouthful of biotoxins. Kids in Hawaii do run through the fields, grabbing corn off the stalks which unknown to them may be Pharmaceutical corn. It's outright dangerous. Corn and other agricultural crops have always been edible, not drugs, chemicals and sources of human and animal diseases.

A Yes Vote on 37 that forces the GE industry and Monsanto to become visible is not an every day opportunity. It all depends where you happen to live, who you are, and what you're doing...that we are allowed to speak up to Monsanto and be heard--unless you're buying into their products.

Prop 37 is an intense, short match of 'hardball' that, at least, challenges Monsanto and former government officials within their "revolving door" Corporate Poison Foods Industry to square off with the presence of a greater number of us now, to see whose information will ultimately stand as the more publicly credible--us, or the big "M"?

Any little thing GMO industry is required to do on our behalf because we signed it into law, means we are still able to exercise some small amount of political power that our government has outright stolen from us. This is a test.

In closing, I also want to express my deepest appreciation and regard for the integrity and ethics of Dr. Don M. Huber. I hope that his life work in plant pathology is not destroyed by our government, along with his reputation and livelihood, as has been the case for so many others before him. I pray the Obama Administration will find the dignity to respect and value his dedicated work; his warnings and his respect-worthy care for the well being of human, animal and environmental health.

Mahalo,
phyllis bala
doctor of indigenous medicine

[datars]

Scientist that discovered GMO health hazards immediately fired, team dismantled
https://www.naturalnews.com/037665_G...an_damage.html

[datars]

Free 'Seeds of Freedom' Screening and Prop 37 Discussion (Richmond 10/24, Menlo Park 10/27 & Berkeley 11/2)

Nutiva Presents... SEEDS OF FREEDOM Free Screenings and Yes on Prop 37 CA Right To Know Discussion Wednesday, October 24 - Richmond Saturday, October 27 - Menlo Park Friday, November 2 - Berkeley In the spirit of the health and well-being of all Americans, Nutiva is presenting free public screenings of the film “Seeds of Freedom,” a 30-minute film, produced by the Gaia Foundation and African Biodiversity Network, about the affect of GMO seeds on global farming in support of the November 6, 2012 PROP 37 RIGHT TO KNOW. Following each screening are panel discussions about the integrity of our food system, featuring speakers supporting the Campaign to Support ‘THE RIGHT TO KNOW’ and YES on CA PROP 37. Seeds of Freedom, narrated by Jeremy Irons, charts the story of seed from its place at the heart of traditional, diversity-rich farming systems across the world, to its transformation into a powerful commodity, used to monopolize the global food system. Community and sponsoring partners include LabelGMO.org, Institute for Responsible Technology, Bioneers, Earth Island Institute, Food Shift, The Gaia Foundation, African Biodiversity Network, Richmond Grows, Women’s Earth Alliance and Wiser Earth. Admission is FREE (Space is limited. Registration in advance suggested.) For more information & free registration, please visit www.Nutiva.com/films. Screening Dates, Venues and Speakers: Date: Wednesday, October 24 Time: 6:00pm Location: East Bay Center for the Performing Arts Address: 339 11th Street, Richmond Free Registration: www.Nutiva.com/films Discussion with: - John Roulac, CEO, Nutiva, Inc. - Pamm Larry, Initial Instigator and Northern California Director, LabelGMOs.org - Claire Cummings, Environmental Lawyer, Author Date: Saturday, October 27 Time: 7:00pm Location: Trinity Church Address: 330 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park Free Registration: www.Nutiva.com/films Discussion with: - John Roulac, CEO, Nutiva, Inc. - Pamm Larry, Initial Instigator and Northern California Director, LabelGMOs.org Date: Friday, November 2 Time: 7:00pm Location: The David Brower Center Address: 2150 Allston Way, Berkeley Free Registration: www.Nutiva.com/films Discussion with: - John Roulac, CEO, Nutiva, Inc. - Gary Ruskin, Campaign Director, Prop 37 - Grant Lundberg, CEO, Lundberg Foods

[Peace Voyager]

I am not sure why or how this happened, but more than one of my friends heard I was against proposition 37.

Let me be very clear; I am strongly against all genetically modified foods. Even if Prop. 37 has some flaws in it; I stand in complete support of the labeling of all GMO products.

In fact, I worked for GE Free Sonoma County to get a 10 year moratorium against GE crops grown here on the ballot; which was sadly defeated. Due in part to false advertising by the opposition in misquoting a public official.

If I could find the funding, I'd lead the way for a GE Free California!

If only the public officials here supported our organic agriculture, with the same vigor and funding they do for the wine grape growers; we'd be a lot healthier and better prepared for transition towards self reliance.

A Sante!,
(To health)

Colleen Fernald

Sebastopol's Constitutional Candidate
For Peace Through Justice
Organic + Bio Dynamic Food & Water Security

www.campaignforpeace.org

[Butterfly]

Vote "YES" on 37... Puts us on the right livelihood road. Corollary: The SF Giants won the National League Pennant. Now, in the World Series to win that too. Without a Pennant, no Series...

[BreathOfFreshAir]

Laurel,
I just read the first few paragraphs of your blog here - due to time factor - but what you say about prop 37:

does not apply to restaurants and food bars, or that meat, milk, and eggs from animals fed or injected with GMOs will not be labeled. And do we really trust the processed food industry to tell us the truth about their products? These kinds of exemptions are in direct ethical conflict with the points outlined in Prop 37’s own Findings and Declarations. If the dangers of GMOs are so great that the people have a right to know which foods contain them, they should have a right to know in ALL cases, not just a select few.


backers KNOW all this - the reason being, if you know any of the history of the issue is that the big ag. companies already take issue with it but it is a START in the right direction. If we tried to ban GMOs like in the past, it would never fly - this is STEP 1. We are in a process. It is an education of the public and it is calling great attention to the issue. While it is not perfect, it is a start.

I urge you to do more research and talk to people at carighttoknow.org before you cast your vote! or check out democracynow.org October 24 - go 9 minutes into the show.

Why I'm voting "NO" on Prop 37

by Laurel Blair, NTP

To those who are familiar with my nutritional philosophy, it may come as a surprise to hear that I plan to vote against California Prop 37, an upcoming ballot initiative to label genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the food supply.

Before I get accused of being a shill for Monsanto, let me assure you that I am about as anti-GMO as they come. I am generally not in favor of banning things that I personally disagree with (like trans fats, for example), but when it comes to GMOs, I make an exception. I would support an outright ban on GMOs because they represent such an overwhelming threat to the environment and human health, not to mention the contamination of non-GMO and organic crops.

Proponents of Prop 37 call it “Right to Know”, and the focus of their campaign is that consumers should have the right to know if their food contains ingredients produced through genetic engineering. They point to the fact that 50 other countries have GMO labeling laws in place. Prop 37 would require that products with genetically modified (GM) ingredients be conspicuously labeled “Genetically Engineered” on the front of the package or, in the case of products that are not packaged, on a label on the shelf or bin where the product is sold. It would further declare products to be misbranded if they are labeled “natural” yet contain GM ingredients.

In the past few months I have heard a lot about Prop 37, how great it is, and how everyone should vote for it, but not one word about the exemptions it contains. I have to assume that most of its supporters simply have not read the text of the measure. Under Prop 37, animal products from animals fed diets containing GMOs or injected with GM drugs would be exempt from the labeling requirement. GM enzymes or processing aids would also be exempt, as would all alcoholic beverages. Incredibly, all restaurant food, medical food, and other food intended for immediate human consumption would be exempt from the labeling requirement. And all food would be exempt if a sworn statement is provided stating that the food has not been intentionally or knowingly contaminated with GMOs.

I highly doubt that many who plan to vote in favor of Prop 37 are aware that their "right to know" does not apply to restaurants and food bars, or that meat, milk, and eggs from animals fed or injected with GMOs will not be labeled. And do we really trust the processed food industry to tell us the truth about their products? These kinds of exemptions are in direct ethical conflict with the points outlined in Prop 37’s own Findings and Declarations. If the dangers of GMOs are so great that the people have a right to know which foods contain them, they should have a right to know in ALL cases, not just a select few.

I first began researching Prop 37 after my husband expressed his concern that GMO labeling would end up just like trans fat labeling. Man made trans fats are supposed to be labeled in the Nutrition Facts panel on a food label, but a loophole allows food processors to list the amount as zero grams if it contains less than .5 grams of trans fat per serving. They simply make the serving sizes smaller, and suddenly they are allowed to slap a label of “Trans Fat Free” on the front of their package! Additionally, another loophole makes mono- and di-glycerides exempt from the labeling requirement, even though they contain varying amounts of trans fatty acids. Often they are listed several times on an ingredient list, so the true amount of trans fat present in a product labeled "Trans Fat Free" could be significantly more than .5 grams.

Seeing as there is no safe level of artificial trans fat in the diet, it is difficult to see how such a rule could be justifiable, except perhaps to those who have a vested interest in continuing to put these unsafe fats in our food. This kind of government mandated deception is reprehensible and will undoubtedly harm the health of millions of people, who are being led to believe that the foods they buy are free of trans fats. Today, even with the labeling law in place, the only way to know for sure if your food contains trans fats is to read the ingredient list.

My husband worried that eventually some loophole would be found or legislated that would render GMO labeling similarly deceptive. He felt that whenever we create new regulations, there is a high likelihood that those regulations will be corrupted and used against us. The first thing I did after he mentioned his concern was to read the text of the proposition. And, lo and behold, the loophole was already there! One of the exemptions states:

“Until July 1, 2019, any processed food that would be subject to section 110809 solely because it includes one or more genetically engineered ingredients, provided that: (i) no single such ingredient accounts for more than one-half of one percent of the total weight of such processed food; and (ii) the processed food does not contain more than ten such ingredients. ”

Essentially, Prop 37 allows foods to be exempt from the so-called mandatory labeling and still contain up to 5% GMO ingredients by total weight! A product could have 10 different GM ingredients and still not require a label! This absurd loophole would be in place for five years, giving Monsanto & Friends plenty of time to quietly make it permanent or find another way to deceive consumers into buying their products.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing is that the Organic Consumer's Association and other organizations that collected money and signatures to get Prop 37 on the ballot did not inform anyone of the true nature of the measure. People were told they were donating to "label GMOs" because "it's our right to know!" To then write tons of loopholes and allow 5% GMO content in unlabeled products is nothing short of a betrayal of consumer trust. The whole thing was a deception from the get go. And when questioned about the deceptiveness of their campaign, the OCA and CARightToKnow have replied that labeling all GMOs is too extreme and would never pass! Seeing as the vast majority of Prop 37 supporters believe that is precisely what the measure would do, the doublespeak coming from the Prop 37 campaign is unbelievable.

Some people might feel that Prop 37 is “a step in the right direction.” But when are we going to stop using that phrase to justify all kinds of terrible policies? How could a measure that would give consumers a false belief that they are avoiding GMOs possibly be construed as being a step in the right direction? The deception inherent in Prop 37 makes it totally unethical in my book. Two wrongs NEVER make a right. As bad as GMOs are, we are never going to get out of this mess with legislation that deceives and confuses consumers.

I feel that this is not an issue of “right to know“ but rather one of personal responsibility. No one but yourself is stopping you from knowing what is in your food. Right now if a person is concerned about GMOs, they do a little research to find out what ingredients contain them, then they read labels to avoid those ingredients. But if Prop 37 passes, it is doubtless that many people will think, “Oh, the government labels GMOs, so I am safe because I don’t buy the things with that label. I am keeping myself and the environment healthy and keeping my hard-earned dollars out of Monsanto’s pockets.” Those same people could be eating restaurant or food bar food that's loaded with GMOs, as well as buying chicken that was fed almost entirely on GM grains, milk from cows injected with GM growth hormones (and also fed GM grains), breakfast cereal that contains up to 10 different GM ingredients, and vitamins produced with GMOs!

How many times are we going to let politicians and corporations corrupt and distort well intended regulations to use them against us before we get wise to their game? We need to realize we cannot and should not rely on the government to tell us the truth about anything, especially when the government and big business are BFFs. We need to stop giving our power away and decide that we‘re going to own it ourselves! If the 90%+ of people who support GMO labeling were to educate themselves and completely boycott all GM products and ingredients, that would represent a major financial blow to Monsanto, as well as huge wins for human and animal health, the environment, and personal responsibility.


How to Avoid GMOs in the Food Supply

1. There areeight GM foods available in the United States: corn, soybean, canola, cottonseed, sugar beets, Hawaiian papaya, zucchini, and yellow squash. Always choose organic versions of these foods.

2. GM Alfalfa is also grown and fed to livestock, along with GM corn and soybeans. GM drugs and growth hormones may be given to non-organic livestock. Always choose organic animal products, or buy from local farmers and verify that they do not give their animals any GM feed or injections.

3. If “sugar” is listed as an ingredient, it is very likely that some of that sugar is from GM sugar beets. Choose “pure cane sugar“ instead. Or better yet, use unrefined sweeteners that are rich in minerals like Sucanat, Rapadura, or palm sugar.

4. Check out this list of additives and ingredients that could potentially be GM:

https://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/...gredients.html

Most of these ingredients are harmful for reasons other than their potential GMO content and should be avoided anyway.

5. Vitamins and supplements are often produced either from GMO ingredients or with the use of GMO organisms. Some of the most common are on the ingredient list under point 4 above. This is a huge part of the reason why I recommend getting nutrients from foods, or from supplements that are really foods, like fermented cod liver oil.

6. While not technically part of the food supply, body care products are another hidden source of GM ingredients. Many substances pass through the skin easily, so it’s probably wise to avoid putting GMOs on your scalp or skin Many shampoos and conditioners contain plant proteins, so check to make sure these are organic.

[datars]

TRANSGENTIC ENGINEERING

Modifying organisms is a way of modifying the world. The scientific, business andpolitical communities are organized to cross engineer that which is natural also knownas genetically modify. There are six companies on the planet involved in geneticengineering and 90% are controlled by Monsanto. Currently all soy is GM and isincluded in almost all processed foods including baby and dog food. The gamble is ifnatural creation such as humans, animals, insects, soil and plants will be able to adaptor simply perish? The news has recently reported the latest victims of the GM squad;coffee and cow’s milk. Instead of processing coffee beans after harvesting todecaffeinate them, they are genetically modifying the beans to be decaffeinated from thestart. Children allergic to cow’s milk have been growing in numbers they have cloned acow (without a tail) to make GM milk without the allergens in it. Why the push to produceGM foods? We are told the GM crops with built-in pesticides will obliterate starvationfrom the planet. Scientists have exposed that to be false.

CAN DNA CHANGE YOUR MOOD?

Research from Canada published in the journal of Biological Psychiatry found thatproteins can modify DNA and affect your mood. The Canadian study wanted to find outwhy depressed individuals commit suicide and found that protein chemicals in the braincan modify mood called epigenomic regulation.

https://psychcentral.com/news/2008/0...-dna/2678.html

What do you suppose will happen to humans who consume lettuce spiced with spiderDNA? We are told the lettuce will provide more vitamin C with spider DNA in it. Tomatois spliced with fish genes to make them more resistant to cold and won’t freeze. Withfood modification changing nutrition and protein we have to ask what kind of impact willthat have on the 40,0000 genes in each human cell? Chemical modification in the brainor other areas of the body may be difficult or impossible to reverse. The Alliance forNatural Health reports that genetically engineered food becomes part of the bacteria inthe human digestive tract. So, if Monsanto is altering seeds for crops to grow producingtheir own insecticides and pesticides; then these organisms will become part of thehuman gut and produce these chemicals continuously. Even after stopping theconsumption of GM foods, these proteins are already deposited. This was based on alimited human study using GM soy

https://www.anh-usa.org/genetically-engineered-foodalters-our-digestive-systems/

OUR POOR PLANTS

The Institute for Responsible Technology reports that the genetic engineering processcauses “massive collateral damage” throughout the plant’s DNA. Think about what thescientists are doing. They are taking God’s copyright and modifying it to take possession.Not a good idea to steel from God. The process of modifying genes will delete orpermanently turn off or on proteins creating hundreds of changes. Inserting a foreigngene can damage or rearrange proteins and trigger allergies or promote diseases suchas cancer. Remember the recent two-year French study feeding rats Monsanto’s cornand they grew massive cancerous tumors and died young

https://truthout.org/news/item/11639-french-study-finds-tumors-and-organ-damage-in-rats-fedmonsanto-corn . The problem having GM genes living and reproducing inside our gut isit can create more antibiotic-resistant diseases. The Bt toxins in GM foods making thempesticide factories can make us pesticide factories as well and penetrate ourbloodstream (93%) and also the unborn babies (80%). Don’t forget the Canadian study Ijust mentioned because there is great concern in the scientific community that GM foodswill alter our human DNA and brain chemicals causing more people to become

34

schizophrenic or have various mood disorders. There is also the concern that the GMfoods will exacerbate this problem in people already diagnosed with emotional disorders.There is also the concern that GM foods will promote leaky gut syndrome making ussusceptible to various diseases.

MORE ALLERGIES

Allergies are on the rise in the US and spiked by 50% with the introduction of GM soy inthe UK. Nothing was done. In 1989 Japan had an outbreak of eosinophilia-myalgiasyndrome which was traced to a Japanese company which produced a tryptophansupplement using their genetically engineered bacteria. You need to steer clear of GMbacteria, especially in the new generation of yogurt. Your herbal products have stricterpurity standards than the genetically engineered products. One of the first scientists tospeak out against genetic engineering is the late George Wald.

“Recombinant DNA technology (genetic engineering) faces our society withproblems unprecedented, not only in the history of science, but of life on theEarth. Now whole new proteins will be transposed overnight into wholly newassociations, with consequences no one can foretell, either for the host organismor their neighbors. For going ahead in this direction may not only be unwise butdangerous. Potentially, it could breed new animal and plant diseases, newsources of cancer and novel epidemics.” George Wald, Nobel Laureate inMedicine or Physiology 1967SCIENTISTS SPEAK OUT

Some scientists have been sounding the alarm and paying the price. Biochemist ArpadPusztai worked in the field of genetic engineering at Scotland’s Rowett ResearchInstitute. He worked on the GM potato pumped full of Bt toxin. He and his teamdiscovered that what they were told about the expected outcome was in direct conflict totheir results. The GM potato caused severe health damage in lab rats. They released theinformation to the news networks and paid the unemployment price for betraying theirindustry and government-backed sponsors. Some of the changes Pusztai noted in thelab animals were; shrinking kidneys, changes in liver, spleen and malignant tissues,hemorrhages in kidneys and intestine. Brain function was also altered affecting memoryand learning. Researchers in Egypt also corroborated Pusztai’s findings involving GMsoy, corn, wheat and canola

https://www.naturalnews.com/037665_G...an_damage.html

.

WHERE THIS LEADS

The GM food industry is designed solely to establish a new food source in order tocontrol the masses through food. The intent is to phase out the organic food sourcemaking it as illegal as marijuana. You see precursors of this with certain townshipsacross American implementing laws outlawing organic gardening. These laws arecommunicated as to protect the public from salmonella. The Chemtrail phenomenon hasbeen said to control the weather. If that can be accomplished; control the rain to fall onlyon areas with compliant with GM crops or make the rain suitable only for GM crops andtoxic to organic, then you could control masses of people through food and water. I willbe interviewing environmental safety and health expert Therese Aigner on Herb TalkSaturday 10/27/12 at 7 am on GCN about this topic. If you miss the live broadcast,

check the archives later for this show.

[datars]

Dear Friends and waccobb members, Many of you know that I have been a big supporter of Yes on Proposition 37 – the effort to require the labeling of genetically engineered food. Right now the No on 37 Campaign is blanketing the airwaves with lies and distortions. These ads are designed to confuse you and steer you away from the fact that you have the right to know what’s in your food. It’s important that you understand who the “No on 37” actually is. The two largest contributors to the No on 37 Campaign – multinational agrichemical corporations Monsanto ($8.1 million) and Dupont ($4.9 million) – are the same corporations that told us Agent Orange and DDT were safe. You can find out more about Monsanto by watching this. Then there are the junk food companies helping to bankroll the opposition such as Cocoa Cola, Pepsi, Nestle and Kellogs. There are in fact zero donations from actual people to the No side– they are all contributions coming from multi-billion dollar corporations. Proposition 37 was co-written by manufacturers, distributors, food safety lawyers, consumer groups, and farmers. It was put before grocers and independent certifying groups before filing. It is written to protect businesses and to pass legal scrutiny. The Proposition covers food on supermarket shelves. No cost to consumers: Adding a few words to labels costs nothing. Labeling didn’t raise costs in 61 other countries and won’t raise costs here. Read the Truth about Cost. Exemptions are common sense: Prop 37 exempts products that have no ingredient labels, such as restaurant food and alcohol. But it will cover meat from genetically engineered animals. The opposition is trying to confuse voters about exemptions. Read the Truth about Exemptions We have thousands of endorsers such as the California Nurses Association, United Farm Workers, California Council of Churches, the Sierra Club and thousands of other endorsers you can see here. Sixty-one countries around the world - representing more than 40% of the planet's population - already require GMO labeling, including all of Europe, Japan, India and China. The right to know what is in my food and your food is not just important enough for me to vote for Prop 37 but it's why I've dedicated my time to this campaign. Voting YES on Prop 37 will help ensure that Californians can make informed decisions about the foods we eat and feed our children. Please vote YES and encourage others to do the same. For more information, please visit carighttoknow.org If you would like to sign up for a phone banking shift, please visit carighttoknow.org/phone_bank

Visit LabelGMOs at: https://labelgmos.ning.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network