Title : Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37
link : Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37
Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37
Because the near future the vote on November 6, 2012 for Proposition 37 in California, there has been a lot of heat that goes back and forth in relation to GM foods. So far, 10 's of millions of dollars have been channeled to the opposite side of the bill, with giant Monsanto biotechnology dealing a whopping $ 4.2 million alone .Monsanto has also recently published a page on your site entitled "position Paper: proposition 37 California proposition Labelling", where giant attempts GMO to explain why it is logically against labeling OMG. Needless to say, the place reeks of false and misleading statements, and often downright deceit. Here are the top 7 is located Monsanto wants you to believe the labeling of GMOs and Prop 37.
Top 7 Lies Monsanto
1. the bill "would require a warning label on food products." GM foods do not require a warning label (although it should!) Actually, foods made with GMOs would say, "produced in part with genetic engineering" or "may occur partly genetic engineering, "- not a warning label, but a clear warning to those of us who want to avoid GMOs. The idea of the bill labeling of GMOs is to make consumers aware of what they are consuming, not to hit GM in each label. We have a right to know.
2. "The safety and benefits of these ingredients are well established."
This may be the funniest of all statements. While there is no long-term studies represent the dangers or benefits of GM, many studies using a range of 'short' time show not only how GMOs are a danger to human beings but also the environment and biosphere . One study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences shows that GM corn and other GM foods contribute effectively to the epidemic of obesity and causing disruption of organs.
Through genetic modification of masses of nature through transgenic crops, animals, biopesticides, and the mutated insects that are created as a result, the mega biotech corporations threaten the overall genetic integrity of the environment, as well as the whole humanity . This is only one reason that GM crops are forbidden continuously worldwide in countries like France, Peru, Hungary and Poland.
3. "The FDA says that such labeling it would be inherently misleading to consumers. "
Although the FDA may think that labeling of GM foods could be misleading, in fact, the opposite is true. Most consumers are in the dark when it comes to genetically modified organisms residing in their purchased food. Foods that are sold containing GMOs hidden is much more misleading than letting the consumer note.
The FDA can call 'misleading' from 'GMOs are safe, "but research shows that this is far of truth.
4. "the American Medical Association has just returned to say that there is no scientific justification for special labeling of genetically modified foods."
Although the true, the Medical Association of the United States also recently called for mandatory studies premarket GMO safety. - virtually polo decision opposite of the above quote seems that the AMA has a double standard no matter which view is taken Here is a quote from the Consumers Union recently noted in its reaction for the announcement of AMA.
"the position of the AMA with mandatory labeling not it is consistent with its support for mandatory safety assessment before marketing. If unexpected adverse health effects, such as allergic reaction, occur as a result of GE, then labeled perhaps might be the only way to determine that the GE process was related to adverse health effects. "5." ... The main proponents of Proposition 37 are special groups and special interests who oppose biotechnology foods that are not necessarily dedicated to the production of food supply in our country . "
int production of food supply in our country? Countless farmers, food producers and consumers who are participating with its proposal to support hard-earned dollar 37. in fact, not engaged many farmers have taken against Monsanto in the past by widespread genetic contamination.
Here are a growing List endorsements for the bill labeling GMOs.
6. "the California proposal would serve the purposes of a few special interest groups at the expense of most consumers."
Monsanto says "at the expense of most consumers." Perhaps the biotech giant is not far from the labeling of GMOs and want the pro label-side has an advantage of 3 to 1, based on surveys recent. Most consumers really want GM food labeled. It is no secret that government organizations such as FDA and USDA are in bed with Monsanto , but this is a decision for the people -. No governmental organization
has also been revealed Monsanto has control of virtually all US diplomats , and the company has even used its enormous influence to force other nations to accept their genetically modified crops through economic threats and political pressure.
7. "consumers have ample food choices today, but may be denied these options if Prop 37 prevails."
There is absolutely no reason to think that because Proposition 37 food choices would be limited. In fact, the bill would add value to the purchase by consumers, since no one would have to "eat in the dark 'and unknowingly consume GMOs
Source:. Natural Society
additional Sources:
The Huffington Post
"Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37", article source: riseearth.com
Thanks for Reading Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37
Thank you for reading this Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37 Url Address https://healthnbeautyarticles.blogspot.com/2012/08/monsantos-top-7-lies-about-gmo-labeling.html
0 Response to "Monsanto’s Top 7 Lies About GMO Labeling and Proposition 37"
Post a Comment