Stop Food control NOW

Why should genetically engineered ingredients be clearly labeled? We need the option not to buy  Genetically engineered food, not only is it possibly bad for you it is controled by big corprations. control the food control the world? Food items that contain GMOs are unlabeled in America. Why so sneaky? Dozen other countries that recognize that a lack of long term studies and testing may be hiding disastrous health defects.

edibleojai.com The multinational agriculture and biotechnology corporation Monsanto is a menacing presence for environmental and social justice movements across the planet. Over the past three decades, the company has spread its proprietary, genetically engineered (also known as “transgenic” and often abbreviated as “GM” or “GMO”) crops across the world on its way to becoming the largest seed and fifth largest pesticide company globally.1 With 165 million acres of GM crops grown in the United States—including 88% of corn, 90% of cotton and 94% of all soybeans—the seed lines of both conventional and organic farmers are now openly threatened by contamination. 2 This past year, members of the organic seed industry sued Monsanto to protect themselves from the increasing likelihood they will infringe upon the company’s intellectual property rights, which it has vigilantly protected during the years its patents on GM seeds have been in effect.3  

Comment Number: AGW-067 From: Leslie Glendye <lglendye4@********.com>
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 4:03 PM
To: ATR-Agricultural Workshops <agriculturalworkshops@usdoj.gov>
Subject: Comments
I am writing because I am concerned about the lack of competition in agricultural markets. 

Just one company, Monsanto, controls the majority of seeds in the US, and regularly threatens farmers who don't buy its seeds. They also sue farmers who end up unknowingly getting Monansto's "patented" genes mixed in with their own crops, through natural pollination (bees, wind, etc.). Not only is it not the farmers' fault, but they should be allowed to sue Monsanto for contaminating their non-GMO crops. Monsanto is negligent in leaving GMOs vulnerable to natural transferrence of pollen into the general ecosystem!

? What's in our food, anyway? And why aren't there decent labels telling you where it grew, what chemicals are on it, and if it's genetically modified?

? There is a "revolving door" of personnel between corporate lobbyists and government regulators. No wonder corporations aren't held to strict standards.

? Prices are rising at the supermarket, but you've heard that farmers are struggling -- and big food companies have made record profits this year. It reminds me of the big oil companies who took advantage of hurricane Katrina and the iullegal war in Iraq. They took huge subsidies from the government because of these stressors, yet still showed record-breaking profits for the year!

? Food is grown and raised in ways that are terrible for the environment, with methods that pollute the water, poison the soil, and threaten our long-term food security.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to comment.

Sincerely,

Leslie Glendye

, 02725

June 14, 2012

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=09F69ABA-A6A5-4292-9AC2-CB8AE1265EDE
WASHINGTON, June 14 - Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today proposed an amendment to the farm bill that would let states require that any food or beverage containing genetically engineered ingredients be clearly labeled.

The Vermont Legislature earlier this year considered a bill that would have required labels on foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients. The House Agriculture Committee heard testimony from 111 citizens and hundreds more crowded the Statehouse to show their support. Despite passing by a lopsided 9-1 vote in committee, the bill languished after Monsanto threatened to sue the state.

Similar strong-arm tactics by one of the world's leading producers of genetically engineered foods and herbicides have been employed elsewhere by Monsanto, the multi-national company that posted $1.6 billion in profits last year. "It's no mystery why Monsanto would fight people's right to know," Sanders said "Business is booming for the chemical company. Clearly, they have a lot to protect."

The Sanders Amendment, cosponsored by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), acknowledges that states have the authority to require the labeling of foods produced through genetic engineering or derived from organisms that have been genetically engineered.

The measure also would require the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to report to Congress within two years on the percentage of food and beverages in the United States that contain genetically engineered ingredients.

"All over this country, people are becoming more conscious about the foods they are eating and the foods they are serving to their kids, and this is certainly true for genetically engineered foods," Sanders said. "I believe that when a mother goes to the store and purchases food for her child, she has the right to know what she is feeding her child."

In the United States, Sanders said, food labels already must list more than 3,000 ingredients ranging from gluten, aspartame, high-fructose corn syrup, trans-fats or MSG, but not genetically altered ingredients. Around the world, by contrast, 49 countries require labels on foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients.

In the 1990s, there was consensus among scientists and doctors at the FDA that genetically-altered foods could have new and different risks such as hidden allergens, increased plant-toxin levels and the potential to hasten the spread of antibiotic-resistant disease. Those concerns are mounting. In just three days, the American Medical Association will consider resolutions calling for new studies on the impact of genetically-altered foods. The American Public Health Association and the American Nurses Association already passed similar resolutions.

Sanders stressed that labeling genetically-altered foods will not increase costs to shoppers. He also disputed claims that genetically engineered crops are better for the environment. Instead, he said, the use of Monsanto Roundup-ready soybeans engineered to withstand exposure to the herbicide Roundup has caused the spread of Roundup-resistant weeds, which now infest 10 million acres in 22 states with predictions of 40 million acres or more by mid-decade. Resistant weeds increase the use of herbicides and the use of older and more toxic herbicides.

The Sanders Amendment is about allowing states to honor the wishes of their residents and allowing consumers' to know what they're eating. "Monsanto and other major corporations should not get to decide this, the people and their elected representatives should," Sanders said.

LEGAL AUTHORITY

Turning now to FDA's legal authority over genetically engineered foods, FDA has authority under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C or the Act) Act to ensure the safety of all domestic and imported foods for man or other animals in the United States market, except meat, poultry and egg products which are regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Pesticides are regulated primarily by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which reviews safety and sets tolerances (or establishes exemptions from tolerance) for pesticides. FDA monitors foods to enforce the tolerances set by EPA for pesticides. Bioengineered foods and food ingredients (including food additives) must adhere to the same standards of safety under the Act that apply to their conventional counterparts. This means that these products must be as safe as the traditional foods in the market. FDA has broad authority to initiate regulatory action if a product fails to meet the safety standards of the Act.

8 Reasons GMOs are Bad for You:
http://www.organicauthority.com/foodie-buzz/eight-reasons-gmos-are-bad-for-you.html#s.abgrmdedqbiaa

GMOs are bad for your body, bad for the community, bad for farmers and bad for the environment. This is why:
 

The health consequences of eating genetically modified organisms are largely unknown. Genetically engineered foods have not been shown to be safe to eat and may have unpredictable consequences. When trans-fats were first introduced, corporations battled to get them onto your grocery shelves – and it is only decades later that this once novel food has been proven to be extremely unhealthful. Many scientists are worried that the genetically altered foods, once consumed, may pass on their mutant genes to bacterium in the digestive system, just like the canola plants on the roadsides of North Dakota. How these new strains of bacteria may affect our body systems’ balance is anybody’s guess.
 

Food items that contain GMOs are unlabeled in America. Why so sneaky? The European Union has banned GMOs, as have Australia, Japan, the UK and two dozen other countries that recognize that a lack of long term studies and testing may be hiding disastrous health defects.

Genetic engineering reduces genetic diversity. When genes are more diverse, they are more robust; this is why a pure bred dog tends to have greater health problems than the dear old mutt. Plants with reduced genetic diversity cannot handle drought, fungus invasions or insects nearly as well as natural plants, which could have dire consequences for farmers and communities dependent on GMO crops for survival.

Once the mutant genes are out of the bag, there is no going back. Genetically modified organisms contaminate existing seeds with their altered material, passing on modified traits to non-target species. This creates a new strain of plant that was never intended in the laboratory. In North Dakota, recent studies show that 80% of wild canola plants tested contained at least one transgene. In Japan, a modified bacteria created a new amino acid not found in nature; it was used in protein drinks and before it was recalled it cause severe mental and metabolic damage to hundreds as well as several deaths. Japan banned GMOs after this horrific experience.

Monarch butterflies have also died after their favorite food, milkweed, was cross-pollinated from Bt corn which rendered it toxic to the endangered species.

GMOs are not the answer for global food security. Genetically engineered crops have shown no increase in yield and no decrease in pesticide use. In many cases other farm technology has proven much more successful, and even Monsanto agrees that its genetically engineered crops yield less than conventional farming.

Genetically engineered foods have not been proven to be safe, but the few studies conducted don’t look so hot. The organs of rats who ate genetically modified potatoes showed signs of chronic wasting, and female rates fed a diet of herbicide-resistant soybeans gave birth to stunted and sterile pups.

Big biotech firms have very sketchy track records, but then again what would you expect from organizations who want to patent the world’s food supply? These massive biotech companies have a history of toxic contamination, deceiving the public and suing small farmers when their patented seeds blew across the fence. Biotech firms sell sterile seeds to African farmers- meaning the seeds are only good for one season, because the plants that grow up will not be able to reproduce. Farmers must buy new seeds every year instead of growing from the previous year’s yield. GMOs are not the farmers’ friend.

GMOs require massive amounts of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides. These things are poisons, and should not be eaten or allowed to run off into our water supply. But they are, every day, by companies who care far more about the bottom line than they do about your health, your environment or your children’s future.