8 Reasons Monsanto is Defeating GMO Labeling Initiatives
Let's really see what we're up against
The moneyed corporations running the GMO show certainly don’t make it easy. Now that they have won not one, but four different GMO labeling battles, what makes anyone think we can win against Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, Bayer, Cargill, and the GMA, just to name a few Round-Up-Ready giants? Though a difficult food war to overcome, we do have the power and collective voice to win – but we must all know what we’re up against.
“If you are going through hell, keep going.”
~ Winston Churchill
First, we were defeated in Washington and California, then came Oregon and Colorado. Not to mention Vermont and Maui County are still up to their necks in Monsanto fertilizer, trying to win their right to democratically voted-upon GMO labeling initiatives in drawn out court battles.
So what, besides ridiculous (and often illegal) campaign spending, still stands between us and knowing what is in our food?
Sure, Prop 37 in California was defeated by a slim margin using agro-chemical money to the tune of $47 million, but there must be something more. The proposition lost by less than 2%.
Indeed, GMO labeling supporters were outspent by 5 to 1, but what else allowed biotech to win in this and other labeling campaigns?
Without ignoring claims of vote-fixing and the illegal campaign contributions, biotech has an advantage in other areas we should all take account of.
Here are some more reasons we have lost the GMO-labeling (let alone simple banning) fight:
1. Millions of Dollars in Propaganda
For people who pay attention to the GMO issue, they are torn between claims by scientists showing the dangers, and claims made by industry-supported ‘scientific’ studies which show GMOs cause little to no harm. The problem is that most of the American population doesn’t really know what GMOs are, so when biotech spends millions of dollars tapping the market, it generally becomes an overriding success. Just try telling a less uninformed person that the CDC is corrupt – their bias is so strong that they will label you a conspiracy theorist, even though CDC whistleblowers themselves have come out pointing to layers of lies and payouts within the agency.
Even those who are wary of GMOs don’t really understand why they are dangerous, and therefore chalk it up as an issue that simply doesn’t warrant concern. Even after early biotech creations like ‘golden rice’ were debunked, people still believe it can ‘feed the world.’
But we don’t need GMOs to feed the world.
2. Most People Just Don’t Know
Not everyone has seen the documentary GMO OMG or Bitter Seeds. When I lived at an apartment complex a few years ago and talked to college-educated, working-class folks in their late 20s and early 30s about GMOs, more than half of them had never heard of them, and those who did thought it was a ‘conspiracy’ theory. The fact is that even though millions don’t want to eat GMO foods, many people don’t even know what a genetically modified food is.
3. Anti-GMO Whistle Blowers are Subject to Character Attacks and Name-Calling
This article on Discover Magazine’s website completely tears Mike Adams of Natural News a new one. The title is: “GMO Worry Warts: This is Your Brain on Ignorance and Ideology.” While I’m not defending everything in Adams’ article, this Discovery piece is just one of thousands that are circulated to keep people afraid of even asking the question – are GMOs really safe?
A 14-Year veteran Reuters reporter was targeted by Monsanto in the same way. As long as people who bring GMO questions to the fore of conversation are demonized and ridiculed, the layperson won’t feel confident to ask questions, or demand labeling. Even though thousands of scientists, celebrities, and others have come forward on GMOs, the smear campaigns continue.
Remember, entire presidential elections have been won and lost using this Bernaisian tactic.
4. Legal Shenanigans
If there were truly a democratic process concerning GMO labeling, then why would anti-labeling advocates sue to try to get labeling off a bill? Wouldn’t the people’s decision be ample to tell food manufacturer’s what they want? While strange language has been used repeatedly to claim GMOs are safe, Citizens Against the Maui County Farming Ban filed suit against the county clerk and state chief elections officer to remove a GMO initiative from the ballot in Maui County.
Their claim was that the wording of the initiative is confusing, misleading, and is geared to deceive voters. Hmm, sounds like a tactic of biotech. Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist with the Consumers Union who has presented clear claims against biotech has been accused of the same thing. It reminds me of a playground bully tactic – utilizing the very same logical argument and then spinning it to use it in a ‘debate’ against the one who originally presented the idea.
5. Straight up Lies
Monsanto has stated, “The safety and benefits of these [GMO] ingredients are well established.”
Truthfully, the safety and benefits of these ingredients are NOT well established. No long-term study exists on either the safety or benefits of GMOs, so there is no basis for Monsanto to make this claim. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not even require safety studies of genetically engineered foods.
However, some independent studies raise questions about links to allergies and other potential health risks as severe as cancer, kidney failure, altered DNA, antibiotic resistance, and more. Monsanto also spouts claims by the American Medical Association, that GMOs are safe.
If you believe everything this corrupt establishment says, I’ve got a melting glacier to sell you. The AMA has lied about medical malpractice, carcinogenic cancer drugs, and more.
6. Overwhelmed
After the labeling initiative failed in California in 2012, there was some suggestion that voters just had too many items on their ballots that presidential election year to parse the competing GMO claims.
7. Confusing Ballots
It has also been stated that the Yes to Labeling vote was confusing on many ballots, as people could not determine if they were voting yes or no based on the verbiage on the ballot.
8. Money. Money. Money.
In a world that worships the almighty petro-dollar, I can’t go without mentioning money. I know I proposed a look at reasons biotech is winning without looking at the money trail, but the fact remains that money buys votes.
- Money makes regular folks like farmers decide to buy GMO seed because they believe it will be cheaper to grow their crops using it (overlooking long term damage to the environment and human and animal health).
- Money lines the pockets of legislators who pass laws that support Monsanto and Pepsi-Co, not people who are trying to feed their families nutritious, healthful food.
- Money allows our President to sign into law the “Monsanto Protection Act,” even though during his campaign he spoke against genetically modified food.
- Money (more than $30 million in just one year) is what allows Monsanto and their buddies to lobby against GMO labeling of any kind.
While raising more money for labeling campaigns will help, there are numerous other fronts that can be addressed when fighting the biotech bullies to get our food labeled, in the least – though an outright ban would be better.
As we continue to jump through hoops to get GMOs out of our food supply, we can look for new ways to reverse the labeling tide. Ultimately, I’m planting my own non-GMO garden, but until these Franken foods are eliminated completely, even that isn’t entirely safe due to cross-pollination.
We must continue the fight, until it is won.
 | Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga. |
Looks like the Devil has the best cards
Can someone please explain to me why, in point number 1 in that pictorial that shows who supports and who opposes labeling, there are some of the same vendors on both sides?
They used the corrupted electronic voting system to flip the vote at the last minute. The millions they spent on propaganda fighting the labeling was just so the cattle would believe the lie that the GMO labeling initiative had failed organically. Nothing is farther from the truth…
I would not discount that theory, it’s happened before so why not now.
These Monsanto creatures are through. Swinging on the gallows polls, swinging on the gallows polls.
They are winning, because there are educated people out there that realize there is a tremendous amount of data showing gmo safety and zero showing otherwise. Even your own research is flawed as you list Bayer and Cargill as roundup supporters. Gayer while in gmos are actually a competitor of roundup. Cargill, while the use to own a seed company and a fertilizer division, now has neither in the US. They buy what farmers grow, they really don’t care what it is.
There actually isn’t a lot of data out there showing GMO safety. Regardless of what you believe personally, why does labeling hurt? I have a right to know what’s in my food and make a personal choice of what I purchase based on what I feel is best for me. GMO labeling is required in other nations AND is already labeled in the US for products being exported to other countries. If GMO’s are safe, why won’t Monsanto allow studies to prove one way or another? If they truly believe their product is safe then prove it. Why spend multiple millions of dollars fighting labeling? Spend that money on research and prove your product is safe. Why do we need a “Monsanto protection act” which protects them against legal action from consumers that get sick on their product? Sounds pretty fishy to me. Labeling will not increase the price of food as labeling already exists.
There are thousands of studies proving safety as well as generations of livestock that have been fed gmos with not a single incident. Not to mention the billions that consume them daily and have for years, again without a single reported incident. As far as your right to know? Where does it stop? Why not the state it was grown in? The county? The town? The farmer? The hybrid? The fertilizer program? The weed control program? The insecticide program? The fungicide program? Buy organic it is already labeled.
You’re going to have to raise the quality of your BS, .. your assertions above were simply Laughable. GMO crops .. made to survive radical deluges of the hyper poison glyphosate ‘RoundUp’ .. only manage therefore to arrive at market bearing Outrageous Amounts of the toxin [whereas any normal plant would have been killed by it long ago and the farmers might tend to take that as a hint that it’s wildly deadly.] That’s simply for the RoundUp-Ready crops. If they are additionally a crop that’s GMO-mutated to carry bacillus thuringiensis (BT Toxin) then their very nature has such a pro-inflammatory effect when eaten that insects (which can survive a Nuclear Holocaust) burst open and die from it on the spot. But, magically, -we’re- supposed to be ‘OK’, even though the toxic effect is identical: pathogenesis of the body’s normal microbiota. Feed these GMO foods to pigs and they become violent and cannibalistic, eating each other. Feed it to sheep and it destroys their intestines and the sheep shrivel up and die. Feed it to miniature cattle and it will bloat and then kill over 90% of the herd. Feed it to laboratory rats and they become Sterile (unable to Ever have offspring) in just three generations.
Safe? Without incident? You’re either a fool or a liar.
The GMO crops are ‘RoudUp-Ready’, .. awesome, .. but the Mammalian Genome Is Not.
Label fights are the distraction. Most European nations do not allow this poison to be sold as ‘food’. Why? Because ‘food’ is nourishment and energy. It’s life-positive. It doesn’t alter your gut flora to be pathogenic and/or sterilize you. That [big hint for you here] is the mark of a Poison. 🙂
You have to be joking. Nobody could even be dumb enough to make that stuff up. Think of what you are saying. Every pig that eats gmos is violent? What do you think these hogs do eat today then? What do you think happens to all the corn and soy we produce? If what you said was true do you really think farmers would keep feeding it after seeing the results? Your mighty Europe is the worlds largest importer of gmo corn by the way. Even they feed it to their livestock and then put it unlabeled on the shelf. What you need to do is actually learn the truth like how and why Bt actually works. It is no more than a simple protein that insects are unable to breakdown, while the more complex digestive systems of mammals process it and allows it to pass through harmlessly. You know your old scare tactics we interesting twenty months into gmos, but after twenty years the population would be at least down fifty percent and ag in a mess instead of what we have today. It isn’t hard but try and open those eyes.
“GMO Roberts”, you have provided no rational nor reasonable argument against labeling GMO products. People should not have to buy “organic” to avoid GMO food — food is SUPPOSED to be organic to being with.
I suppose you would have also supported the non-labeling of “FDA approved” sugar substitutes like aspartame and saccharine as well.
I am for labels that matter. There is no reason for gmos to be labeled besides a persons’ wants NOT needs. Organic takes care of wants. Yes it is more expensive, but on the other hand wants should be. Your sugar substitutes do serve a purpose. They are very helpful to those that can’t have sugar. If people were allergic to gmos then that would be a could reason to label. However, there is not a single case of a gmo allergy that has ever been reported. What has been reported are allergies to things like corn, not gmo corn, but all corn.
So are GMO’s – for export only products. Just label it here and be done with it.
Please cite your sources for the “tremendous amount of data showing GMO safety”. Thank you.
Its the normal industry conducted 90 day trails …
Gmodangeroustalk. Com