It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bill backed by Koch brothers and Monsanto to block GMO labeling laws in US

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by AutumnWitch657
 


Maybe because we don't know what kind of adverse affects eating these genetically modified foods will have on our health in the long run. Our bodies are sensitive machines that can easily get out of wack if the right balance isn't maintained. What we ingest can and does mutate our cells, causing cancer and other adverse conditions.
edit on 7-4-2014 by JewelOfDenial because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yeah, without seeing the coming bill it is hard to tell.

From the 10 or so articles I sampled they used the words "prohibit" labeling instead of something like labeling to say it is GMO or non-GMO. The word prohibit that throws me, but maybe the actual bill won't be that.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 12:22 PM
link   
The problem is they don't believe we are stupid, they know we are. And lazy. And gutless. And greedy. And naive. And gullible. And confused. And compromising. and not deserving of the free country that hundreds of thousands of patriotic Americans gave their lives to create (prior to 1913).



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Didn't Obama stack his administration with ex Monsanto officials? Monsanto runs FDA and parts of EPA under Obama....don't see the Koch brothers helping Obama's Monsanto pals...



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   
The Obama-Monsanto connection seems much stronger...tying Koch brothers to Monsanto is a biiiiiig stretch....Monsanto/GMOs are Obama's child.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by JewelOfDenial
 


There's nothing that is not plant material right? It's still tomato in a tomato and corn in corn. They just interbreed the ones that produce the best or graft those genes into the seeds to make them produce more or larger or what ever the desired trait is. If you get a corn crop that is draught resistant you want that trait in future crops so you use those plants to fertilize other plants to encourage draught resistance. I don't see the problem. It's not like they are injecting human DNA into plants or anything. Thomas Jefferson taught plant grafting back in the 18th century. Ben Franklin wrote about cross pollination to improve crops. It's as old as agriculture itself. How to grow better crops. Better fertilizers insect control. As a gardener I can tell you these things are important. If the farmer had to pay workers to pull weeds our produce would be a luxury item.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by JewelOfDenial
 


Also if our bodies were so delicate we would have perished from the ice age or any of the plagues or devastating flu epidemics that have ravaged the earth. We are the ancestors of the ones who survived. We're the offspring of the strongest ones.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


I'm sorry but I'm gonna have to deny ignorance here... Corporations are NOT people. They are made up of people and technology, but to state corporations are people is wrong on so many levels.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I seem to remember a very similar bill being introduced a while back, think it made it through Congress, but got shot down in the Senate.
Oh, here is the article, from The Huffington Post


The Senate voted overwhelmingly -- 71 to 27 -- against an amendment to the sweeping farm bill, squashing a measure that would not have required labeling of genetically modified organisms
"The concept we're talking about today is a fairly commonsense and non-radical idea," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the sponsor of the amendment, said shortly before the vote.

Others in the Senate saw things differently, though.

the chair of the Agriculture Committee, argued that the measure "is not germane to the farm bill" in the first place. She also said the labels run counter to science and the public interest in healthy food.

"We see wonderful work being done by foundations like the Gates Foundation and others, that are using new techniques to be able to feed hungry people," she said



"I believe we must rely on the FDA's science-based examination before we make conclusions about food ingredients derived from genetically modified foods,
They currently do not require special labeling because they've determined that food content of these ingredients does not materially differ from their conventional counterparts."

Huff Post.

Damn them all!
Damn them all to hell!



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by AlaskanDad
 

The Koch brothers are totally right. Any product that is GMO-free can be labeled as GMO-free. These products then get additional sales from people who prefer GMO-free products. Problem solved, without violating the fundamental freedom of speech.

Why is it people always look to violating people's rights as the first and best solution? The constant attacks on people's basic liberties are non-stop and never-ending. If people would think of non-violent solutions first before resorting to forceful solutions, we would never have these problems.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by wayforward
 


The problem with the non GMO labeling is that it put's into the minds of the consuming public that GMO is the norm and that directly undermines non GMO's original and proper placement as the norm.


It doesn't only potentially poison the food but also our minds!



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 10:50 AM
link   
The GMO label would only slow Monsanto's sales, the GMO-free law puts expense of testing and the danger of cross contamination and being sued upon their competition.

The GMO-free label is brilliant from Monsanto's point of view.

The strange thing here is people are willing to pay more for the non-gmo foods yet the farmers are being manipulated into growing Monsanto seed for crop insurance reasons and others.

Monsanto's political ties run deep with Searle, Rumsfeld, Aspartame and Agent Orange, it's almost like a branch of the government ,except it pays dividends on Wall Street.
edit on 8-4-2014 by AlaskanDad because: added italics and edited the sentence for clarity



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by AlaskanDad
 


The GMO label would only slow Monsanto's sales, the GMO-free law puts expense of testing and the danger of cross contamination and being sued upon their competition.
Interesting point of view. Usually what we hear from the mandatory labeling side is "it's only a label, what's the problem?"
Testing? A "non-GM" label is no different from an "organic" label.
If a consumer is concerned about GM, a "non-GM" label is more useful that a label which says "may contain GM material."




The strange thing here is people are willing to pay more for the non-gmo foods yet the farmers are being manipulated into growing Monsanto seed for crop insurance reasons and others.
The strange thing is, people are willing to pay more for organic foods. And the reason that organic foods cost more is because it is more expensive to produce organic foods.
Farmers grow GM crops for one reason. They are more cost effective.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Phage

Farmers grow GM crops for one reason. They are more cost effective.


That's not entirely true. As a cotton and onion farmer, we and many of the farms around me have been coerced into planting Monsanto GM seeds.

www.nationofchange.org...

www.examiner.com...
Everyone has the explicit right to know what is in the food they eat and how it was produced. No Exceptions!!!


edit on 8-4-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by olaru12
 


That's not entirely true. As a cotton and onion farmer, we and many of the farms around me have been coerced into planting Monsanto GM seeds.
I don't see anything about coercion there. I see a case of a seed supplier illegally selling patented seed and a farmer knowingly replanting it. Replanting is contrary to the contract. Reselling seed is contrary to the contract. If farmers don't like the contract they don't have to buy the seed. If they don't want GM seed they don't have to buy it. But you know that it isn't just GM plants that are patented, right? Many hybrids are also patented and the owners of the patents also do not allow replanting.
 


Everyone has the explicit right to know what is in the food they eat and how it was produced. No Exceptions!!!
Sure, but how does a label which says "may contain GM material", whether or not it does, help? In the US, someone who is concerned about GM should be quite aware that any soy product probably contains GM material, 94% of the soy grown in the US is GM. Any corn product probably contains GM material, 88% of the corn grown in the US is GM.

Should inorganically grown crops also specify that they are inorganically grown?

For those who are concerned, a "non-GM" label makes more sense. For those who aren't concerned (like me for example) it doesn't matter. I'm not going to go looking for a "may contain GM" label or a "non-GM" label.

edit on 4/8/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Most of the foods I buy are labeled NON-GMO usually by non-GMOproject.org. Its really tough to avoid GMO's and I will not accept they are safe when so many acts of corruption have brought them into almost everything people eat. I do not think anywhere near enough transparent testing has been done and I could never accept things like roundup being added to a foods dna.

If I am wrong so be it as I am no scientist but I am going to keep buying locally grown organic foods as much as possible and if enough people follow suit then no one will plant GMO's.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Slickinfinity
 




If I am wrong so be it as I am no scientist but I am going to keep buying locally grown organic foods as much as possible and if enough people follow suit then no one will plant GMO's.

Good plan.
It will accomplish more than mandatory labeling of GM products.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   

DietJoke
reply to post by wayforward
 


The problem with the non GMO labeling is that it put's into the minds of the consuming public that GMO is the norm and that directly undermines non GMO's original and proper placement as the norm.


It doesn't only potentially poison the food but also our minds!


People should not base their diet on what is normal and people should not violate other people's basic right to the freedom of speech either.



new topics




 
26
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join