Make GMO Labeling a Reality

Date:   5/11/2015 4:33:00 AM ( 9 y ago)

March 6, 2021 - Mountain Valley Spring Water's "Natural Flavors" - This writer's inquiry to Mountain Valley" What is the source of your "Natural Flavor Added" to your "White Peach" as well as to your Berry flavored water? ......... Reply (From Mountain Valley): Re: New customer message on March 5, 2021 at 9:52 am From MV (Mountain Valley) Help on 2021-03-05 11:48 Thank you for your inquiry. Per our vendor, essences/flavors may have been derived from a genetically modified source material. … As for what gives it flavor, we purchase natural flavors from a local company. As to the flavors’ contents, flavor contents are considered proprietary information and manufacturers are not obligated to inform us per federal law. We do know however, they are Kosher and vegan. The exact status of which cannot be determined due to the possible intermixing of genetically modified and non-genetically modified varieties of raw materials. The products do not contain genetically modified DNA or protein from genetically modified DNA. Additionally they have no direct involvement in the genetic modification of any of the essences/flavors.​ Thank you for your inquiry, Mountain Valley Spring From: Mountain Valley Spring Water (Shopify) Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 9:52 AM To: MV Help -- Comment: This writer called the Sprouts Farmers Market store (this past hour) from where he purchased the water and the store manager referred him to speak to the store director when she is in on Monday. Will update this report then. - *** September 16, 2017 - Glyphosate: Unsafe on Any Plate - by David Murphy and Henry Rowlands A leading FDA-registered food safety testing laboratory has found extremely high levels of the pesticide glyphosate in some of America’s most popular food products. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, is the most heavily used chemical weedkiller in food and agricultural production in human history, as a result of the widespread adoption of genetically engineered crops now grown on more than 175 million acres in the United States(U.S.) and more than 440 million acres around the globe. New scientific evidence shows that probable harm to human health could begin at ultra-low levels of glyphosate e.g. 0.1 parts per billions (ppb). Popular foods tested for glyphosate measured between 289.47 ppb and at levels as high as 1,125.3 ppb. The testing and analysis was performed by Anresco Laboratories, San Francisco, an FDA registered laboratory that has performed expert food safety testing since 1943. The laboratory found that well-known products tested for glyphosate, Original Cheerios, for example, measured levels as high as 1,125.3 ppb. Other high levels of glyphosate were found in familiar products such as Oreos, Doritos, and Ritz Crackers, among 29 foods tested. Currently, U.S. regulators allow a very high level of daily glyphosate residue in America’s food. The acceptable daily intake (ADI) limit is set at 1.75 milligrams per kilogram of bodyweight per day (written 1.75 mg/kg bw/day) in the U.S., versus a more cautious 0.3 mg/kg bw/day in the European Union. Tolerances have been set through the submission of corporate-sponsored studies and industry influence on the regulatory process. New research shows that Roundup causes liver and kidney damage in rats as reflected in changes in the functions of 4,000 genes at only 0.05 parts per billion (ppb) glyphosate equivalent indicating damage. Additional studies have found that levels as low as 10 ppb can have toxic effects on the livers of fish and cause significant damage to the livers and kidneys of rats at 700 ppb, which is the allowable level of glyphosate found in U.S. drinking water. Credible independent, peer-reviewed scientific evidence now shows that the levels of harm to human health could begin at the ultra-low levels of 0.1 parts per billion (ppb) of glyphosate. These groundbreaking new findings that one of the most iconic cereals in U.S. contains levels as high as 1,125.3 ppb should be a wake-up call for all Americans regarding unacceptable levels of pesticide residues in our nation’s food. These findings are especially troubling, considering that the latest independent scientific evidence, during which a team of international scientists re-evaluated the same data previously used by regulators, calls for a much lower ADI to be set at 0.025 mg/ kg of bodyweight per day or “12 times lower than the ADI” currently set in Europe and 70 times lower than the level currently allowed by the EPA in the United States. It’s important for individuals and parents to understand that glyphosate contamination cannot be removed by washing and is not broken down by cooking or baking. Glyphosate residues can remain stable in food for a year or more, even if the foods are frozen or processed. - This material, provided for educational and informational purposes, constitutes a "fair use" of any copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. Organic Consumers Association is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. To support our work, please send a tax-deductible donation to: OCA, 6771 South Silver Hill Dr., Finland, MN 55603 Activist or Media Inquiries (218) 226-4164. Text JoinOCA to 97779 to join our mobile network.[6]  *** May 11, 2015 - Everyone needs to know this - plus I have additional "food-for-thought" for chefs "of every stripe and color". "After reviewing 44 scientific studies, half of the IARC panel[1] thought that glyphosate should be classified as a Group 1 'known carcinogen,' with the other half opting for a Group 2 'probable carcinogen' rating. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, is sprayed heavily on 84 percent of all GMO crops, including soy, corn, canola, and sugar beets—all the key ingredients in processed foods."[2] - Every "chef" (no matter how one may define the term) has not only the right but the moral and ethical duty to know the source and substance of the foods that come into their kitchen. GMO labeling is by and large essential for this purpose. Or (possibly a better option) one could possibly eliminate all "GMO crops" from their kitchen. A chef can do this and still have a bounty of food options to work with. However- a "convenient food consumer" does not have the same options at their fast/convenient food locations. Having written this now I was inspired to research with terms chef+"gmo labeling".... and it looks like I have "About 43,700 results"! - "Pompeo Bill Is Trying to Legalize Fraud It's important to recognize that not labeling transgenic food is fraud, so the Pompeo bill is essentially just trying to legalize it. As an example, salmon spliced with eel is no longer the salmon you would expect when seeing 'salmon' written on a label. It's a cross between salmon and eel, something akin to a 'sEELmon,' and that must be disclosed. Not disclosing this fact is fraud because it is counter to a consumer's expectation. The burden should not be placed on the traditional salmon fishermen to get their nature-provided fish certified as GMO-free; the burden of truthful declaration of what the product actually is should be placed on the patent holder and producer of these transgenic organisms." ***********^*********** August 15, 2015 - "Three times as much agribusiness money, on average, for House members voting to bar GMO labeling - by Alex Lazar on July 24, 2015 Thursday’s House passage of a bill that would keep states from requiring genetically modified foods to be labeled[3] was a big — and not at all close — win for agribusiness and food and beverage interests. The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015, known to its critics as the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, sailed through by a vote of 275 to 150. While the bulk of its support came from the GOP and most of its opponents hailed from Democratic districts, the vote didn’t break cleanly along party lines. Among its 107 sponsors were 92 Republicans and 15 Democrats. But a more telling predictor of where lawmakers came down was the amount of support they’d received from interests with a stake in the legislation. For example, the campaigns of Reps. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), Rodney Davis (R-Ill.), Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.), all cosponsors of the legislation (most of whom also sit on the House Agriculture Committee), received six-figure dollar amounts from providers of agricultural services and products — one segment of the agribusiness sector — during the 2014 election cycle. That put them high among the top 20 recipients of funds from the industry. Cosponsors such as Reps. David Valadao (R-Calif.), Steve Fincher (R-Tenn.), Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) aren’t on the Agriculture Committee, but nevertheless pulled in six-figure dollar amounts from the crop production and basic processing industry (another part of agribusiness; think Cargill Inc. and the National Corn Growers Association) during the midterm cycle — landing them among the 20 members who received the most from that industry. Reps. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), two original sponsors of the legislation, were the top two current House members receiving the most money from the Grocery Manufacturers Association in 2014. The grocery manufacturers — who have spent $4.1 million lobbying on all issues so far this year, almost as much as they spent in all of 2014 — have lobbied on the bill more than any other organization, mentioning the measure on 14 lobbying reports this year. After the Grocery Manufacturers Association, PepsiCo Inc ($2.5 million in overall lobbying this year) and Monsanto Co ($2.6 million) have mentioned the bill most frequently. All told, the 230 Republicans and 45 Democrats who voted to pass the bill collectively received over $29.9 million from the agribusiness sector and food and beverage industry during the 2014 cycle, or about $108,900 per member. That’s nearly three times as much as the average $38,977 per lawmaker drawn by the 138 Democrats and 12 Republicans voting nay. Their cumulative contributions from the interests came to $5.8 million. For all the election cycles since 1990, more than $115.1 million has gone to those who voted for the legislation this week (with an average of $418,644 per member), compared to almost $25.8 million for those who voted against it ($171,785 per member). With numbers like those, anti-labeling advocates may be giving a whole new meaning to the term “cash crop.” Doug Weber contributed research to this post. Categories: Congress Influence & Lobbying Issues and Legislation Politicians & Elections Tags: agricultural services and products, alex lazar, Collin Peterson, crop production and basic processing, dark act, david valadao, Devin Nunes, Frank Lucas, G.K. Butterfield, gmo, Grocery Manufacturers Association, House Agriculture Committee, Kevin Cramer, Kurt Schrader, Mike Conaway, Mike Pompeo, monsanto, pepsico, rodney davis, safe and accurate food labeling act, Steve FIncher, Alex LazarAlex Lazar is the summer 2015 reporting intern for OpenSecrets Blog. He is a graduate of George Washington University. His previous articles have been published by various news organizations including The Hill, ABCNews.com and The Huffington Post.[4] Dr. Mercola referred to this report.[5] *** February 4th, 2016 - (NaturalNews) ... Monsanto (is) the largest producer of genetically engineered (GE) seeds in the world, accounting for over 90% of the seeds planted globally. The U.S.-based agricultural biotechnology company is also the leading producer of Roundup – a controversial herbicide that contains glyphosate. Monsanto creates GE seeds that are resistant to herbicides – in particular, Roundup – meanwhile Roundup kills everything except the GE crops that can withstand it. When these GE crops are harvested, they contain extremely high levels of glyphosate, which the WHO recently admitted is a "probable" carcinogen. ... Glyphosate is toxic to both humans and the environment, infiltrating the landscape and water systems and building up over time in the bodies of animals and humans alike. ... It is an endocrine disrupter and affects reproductive health, wreaking havoc on the human body, even in low doses. The human body is not equipped to handle GE foods, and a variety of studies in animals have revealed serious health risks associated with GE food consumption. The risks include infertility, immunity problems, changes in the liver, kidney problems, accelerated aging and dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis. ... The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has waived all levels of safety testing and claims that nothing more than voluntary research is necessary. So Monsanto and other controversial agri-giants are able to fly under the radar when it comes to the risks involved with their products. ... If you're interested in avoiding GE foods, or just want to avoid putting your hard-earned cash into Monsanto's pocket, here are some brands to boycott: Coca-Cola and all its variations (Coca-Cola Light, Cherry Coke, Minute Maid, Burn, Dr Pepper and Fanta) Cadbury Campbell, Liebig and Royco soups Capri-Sun General Mills products, including Green Giant, Haagen Daz, Yoplait yoghurt and Old El Paso fajitas Heinz Kellogg's including Cornflakes, Special K, Treso, Miel Pops, Coco Pops, Frosties, Extra and All Bran Knorr broths, soups and sauces Kraft Philipp Morris and associated brands including Maxwell Coffee, Philadelphia cream cheese, Lu cookies, Milka, Oreo and Toblerone Lipton teas Ocean Spray Pepperidge Farm cookies PepsiCo and Pepsi-Cola brands including Tropicana, Alvalle, Gatorade, Seven Up, Lipton Ice Tea, Lay's, Doritos, Ruffles, Tostitos and Quakers Pringles Schweppes Uncle Ben's By avoiding these and other Monsanto-related brands, you'll be diverting your cash away from the corporate giant and doing your bit to fight against the production of GE foods and glyphosate herbicides. Meanwhile, by sharing knowledge and information about Monsanto products, you are encouraging others to make informed decisions about what products are ethically sound. Sources include: WhoIsMonsanto.com NaturalNews.com FoodRevolution.org Comment-Economiser.fr Science.NaturalNews.com Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/052849_Monsanto_boycott_food_products.html#ixzz3zBStFxwE *** March 18th - On 03/17/2016 11:10, Weston A Price Foundation wrote: Thanks to WAPF members and the thousands of Americans who spoke up for labeling GMOs and states' rights, the Senate did not get the 60 votes needed to move Monsanto's Dream Bill forward. The bill, dubbed the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act, would have preempted the GMO labeling law in Vermont and all other state laws on the issue, taking power away from our state legislatures. In place of the state laws for mandatory, on-package labeling, the DARK Act would have continued the failed approach of voluntary labeling, together with secretive QR codes, websites, and call-in numbers, none of which serve to inform the majority of consumers about what is in their food. The defeat of the DARK Act is a major victory for the food movement and America's right to know - thank you for taking action! ... You can see how your Senators voted here: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00037 (Ignore the title about Planned Parenthood - the Senate was proposing to strip out the original text of the bill and replace it entirely with the DARK Act text) Senators Merkley (D-OR), Boxer (D-CA), Tester (D-MT), Blumenthal (D-CT), and others were true champions in speaking up for our right to know if our food contains genetically engineered ingredients. While we can celebrate for a moment, we know that Monsanto and their allies are on Capitol Hill right now trying to figure out how they will bring this back up. They are determined to block Vermont's mandatory labeling law from going into effect in July. Stay tuned for future action alerts. ***********^*********** Notes: [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Agency_for_Research_on_Cancer [2] http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/05/11/gmo-labeling-pompeo-bill.aspx?e_cid=20150511Z1_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20150511Z1&et_cid=DM74640&et_rid=948461116 [3] The Congress was never delegated this kind of power over the States. Therefore the States are not obligated to obey a law that is without delegated authority. Will any of the fifty States respond accordingly? [4] http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/07/three-times-as-much-agribusiness-money-on-average-for-house-members-voting-to-bar-gmo-labeling/ [5] "Your Rights Removed For Monsanto's Benefit": http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/08/11/labeling-gmo-foods.aspx?e_cid=20150811Z1_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20150811Z1&et_cid=DM84274&et_rid=1071453087 Your natural born, God-given, Unalienable Rights are not subject to being "removed"! I intend to comment about this at Mercola.com [6] https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/glyphosate-unsafe-any-plate?inf_contact_key=812e51cbec26f75e16793a62f09091fbf399b226da3acb5f60e79e5d6710429f ***********^*********** Keywords: Glyphosate, Monsanto, herbicide, Roundup, GMO crops, soy, corn, canola, sugar beets, processed foods, gmo labeling, carcinogen, full disclosure, cancer, food, chef, Pompeo bill, transgenic organisms, safe and accurate food labeling act, DARK Act, health risks, Food Safety, Genetic Engineering
 

Popularity:   message viewed 1613 times
URL:   http://www.curezone.org/blogs/fm.asp?i=2252676

<< Return to the standard message view