Over the past few months, I’ve been writing about Proposition 37, the California initiative that would require foods made through genetic engineering to be labeled, a policy that is common sense in 61 other countries, but has been denied to Americans thanks to lobbying by Big Biotech. One of the most prominent food myths perpetuated by the likes of Monsanto is that we need genetic engineering “to feed the world.”
Posts Tagged ‘Monsanto’
California Newspaper Editorial Boards Spread False Claims and Faulty Logic on Proposition 37
Each election season, proponents and opponents of the various initiatives on the California ballot hope for the state’s major newspaper endorsements. While you can’t expect every paper to endorse your side, Proposition 37, which would require labeling of foods produced using genetic engineering, seems to have had a string of incredibly bad luck. So incredible, in fact, that the reasoning behind several California newspaper endorsements of a No vote has me scratching my head.
Did Monsanto Write This Op-Ed Signed by a UC Davis Professor?
As I recently explained, University of California at Davis agriculture researchers are heavily influenced by the funding they receive from Monsanto and other big biotech players. This conflict of interest explains in part why we are seeing several UC Davis professors author reports and op-eds opposing California’s Proposition 37, which would require labeling of foods containing GMOs.
University of California at Davis Reports Make Dubious Claims on Prop 37
Last week I wrote about how the No on 37 campaign – the California ballot initiative that would require labeling of GMOs foods – is relying on experts with questionable credentials to do its bidding. Over the past few weeks, two expert reports have emerged from the No campaign that also warrant closer scrutiny.
Top 10 Lies Told by Monsanto on GMO Labeling in California
The battle in California over Proposition 37, which would require labeling of foods containing GMOs, is really heating up. Millions of dollars are already being poured into the opposition campaign, with much of it going to former Big Tobacco shills. Over at GMO HQ, Monsanto recently posted this missive called “Taking a Stand: Proposition 37, The California Labeling Proposal,” in which the biotech giant explains why it is opposing the measure (to the tune of $4.2 million so far).
Lawsuit Alleges Frito-Lay’s GMO Snacks Aren’t “Natural”
In August, I reported on a lawsuit against ConAgra for deceptive labeling of its Wesson brand of cooking oils as “natural.” The case alleges that the products contain genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), which are not by any stretch of the imagination, natural. A similar case was recently filed in California (by the same class action firm – Milberg) against Frito-Lay — the snacks division of food and beverage giant PepsiCo.
Monsanto’s Hostile Takeover of the USDA
If you had any lingering doubt about who controls the food supply, the answer was made painfully clear yesterday when the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced its “Decision to Fully Deregulate Roundup Ready Alfalfa.” For years, a fight has been waging over Monsanto’s desire to plant genetically-engineered alfalfa seeds. (Most alfalfa is fed to cattle, which is why it’s so lucrative.) The court battle even found its way to the US Supreme Court, that’s how much is at stake. Thanks to organic food advocates fighting however they could, Monsanto has thus far been stymied.
Follow me
Archives
Hot Topics
Big Food
Public Health
Food Policy
Industry Tactics
Child Nutrition
Marketing to Children
USDA
Food Safety
PepsiCo
FDA
McDonald's
junk food
targeted marketing
GMO labeling
food safety
Food Law
GMOs
California Prop 37
childhood obesity
Obama
Let's Move
child nutrition
Coca-Cola
lobbying
fast food
Monsanto
Corporate Accountability International
Uncategorized
Ask a Food Lawyer
Alcohol Policy
Media
Labor