Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Avatar for DaleProp37

( DaleProp37 )

Comments made by DaleProp37

Former Anti-GMO Activist Says Science Changed His Mind

I support Labeling GMOs because I believe we have the right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families – we deserve an informed choice.

Genetically Modified/Manipulated/Mutated Organisms (GMOs) are manmade plants and animals created in a laboratory destined for human consumption. GMOs contain the genes of foreign species . . . a genetic manipulation that cannot occur in nature (only in the laboratory). The FDA does not require GMOs to be tested for long term impacts on human health. According to the Institute for Responsible Technology, there are 65 documented health risks associated with eating genetically engineered food. There are numerous independent scientific studies from around the world that raise serious doubt on the safety of GMOs and the toxic pesticides they produce internally or absorb from the toxic chemicals intentionally applied by the farmer. Learn for yourself about GMO Myths and Truths by reading the summary report http://www.earthopensource.org/index.... or watching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_ztZG... . I do not believe it is ethical to be putting an unproven technology into the food we feed our children solely for the financial benefit of the world's largest biotech, chemical and junk food manufacturers.

Over 60 countries now require labels on Genetically Engineered food, and many of these also have severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale. Countries with mandatory labeling include Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, Russia and all of the countries in the European Union. Some of the countries with severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale are Germany, Switzerland, Hungary, Ireland, the Philippines, Australia, Peru and Japan. The U.S. and Canada are two of the only developed nations in the world without GMO labeling due to the powerful lobbying influence of the industries that profit from producing and using GMOs.

The biotech and junk food industries don’t believe consumers in the US deserve the same level of protection and information as citizens in other nations around the world. I believe this is because labeling the ingredients that are genetically engineered would result in monumental consumer rejection once awareness of GMOs are revealed to the uninformed masses. Consumer rejection of GMOs threatens the profits of the companies that manufacture and use GMOs as well as institutions that conduct research on behalf of the biotech industry. I believe some university scientists are against labeling GMOs because their lively hood is threatened if a loss of research funding occurred because of reduced consumer demand for the products they help develop for the biotech industry. I won’t be trusting members of a scientific community, funded by an industry that creates toxic substances, to present an unbiased opinion of these products.

May 1, 2013 at 12:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Bill To Label GMO Food — Dr. Bronner And Biologist Weigh In

The most common GMOs in the US are corn, soy, canola, beet sugar, cotton, Hawaiian papaya, alfalfa, and squash (zucchini and yellow). GMOs may be hidden in common processed food ingredients such as: Amino Acids, Aspartame, Ascorbic Acid, Sodium Ascorbate, Vitamin C, Citric Acid, Sodium Citrate, Flavorings (“natural” and “artificial”), High Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, Lactic Acid, Maltodextrins, Molasses, Monosodium Glutamate, Sucrose, Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), Xanthan Gum, Vitamins and Yeast Products.

Packaged foods already have labels showing nutrition, allergy information and other facts consumers want to know. Labeling GMOs will make it easier for consumers to know if the food they buy contains GMOs without having to make sense of a long list of unfamiliar ingredients.

Visit any of the following websites for more information about the medical, environmental, political and social issues associated with artificially Genetically Engineered food (GMOs) . . .

http://www.ResponsibleTechnology.org
http://www.CenterForFoodSafety.org
http://www.NonGMOProject.org
http://www.GMO-Journal.com

April 29, 2013 at 3:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Bill To Label GMO Food — Dr. Bronner And Biologist Weigh In

I support Labeling GMOs because I believe we have the right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families – we deserve an informed choice.

Genetically Modified/Manipulated/Mutated Organisms (GMOs) are manmade plants and animals created in a laboratory destined for human consumption. GMOs contain the genes of foreign species . . . a genetic manipulation that cannot occur in nature (only in the laboratory). The FDA does not require GMOs to be tested for long term impacts on human health. According to the Institute for Responsible Technology, there are 65 documented health risks associated with eating genetically engineered food. There are numerous independent scientific studies from around the world that raise serious doubt on the safety of GMOs and the toxic pesticides they produce internally or absorb from the toxic chemicals intentionally applied by the farmer. Learn for yourself about GMO Myths and Truths by reading the summary report http://www.earthopensource.org/index.... or watching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_ztZG... . I do not believe it is ethical to be putting an unproven technology into the food we feed our children solely for the financial benefit of the world's largest biotech, chemical and junk food manufacturers.

Over 60 countries now require labels on Genetically Engineered food, and many of these also have severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale. Countries with mandatory labeling include Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, Russia and all of the countries in the European Union. Some of the countries with severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale are Germany, Switzerland, Hungary, Ireland, the Philippines, Australia, Peru and Japan. The U.S. and Canada are two of the only developed nations in the world without GMO labeling due to the powerful lobbying influence of the industries that profit from producing and using GMOs.

The biotech and junk food industries don’t believe consumers in the US deserve the same level of protection and information as citizens in other nations around the world. I believe this is because labeling the ingredients that are genetically engineered would result in monumental consumer rejection once awareness of GMOs are revealed to the uninformed masses. Consumer rejection of GMOs threatens the profits of the companies that manufacture and use GMOs as well as institutions that conduct research on behalf of the biotech industry. I believe some university scientists are against labeling GMOs because their lively hood is threatened if a loss of research funding occurred because of reduced consumer demand for the products they help develop for the biotech industry. I won’t be trusting members of a scientific community that is funded by an industry that creates toxic substances to present an unbiased opinion of these products.

April 29, 2013 at 3:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Prop 37 Could Set National Tone On Labeling Genetically Modified Food

There are many scientists that support Genetically Engineering (GE) as a scientific technique that also support Prop 37 specifically and Labeling GE Food in general. They recognize that this is still an experimental technology and may contain unknown health risks when applied to food crops are they are now with Corn, Canola, Soy, Sugar Beets. For a good read from a scientific prospective that supports Genetic Engineering and Labeling of GE Food visit http://biotechsalon.com.

Needless to say, I am Voting YES on PROP 37 so I can avoid GE Food and the risk associated with this unproven technology and the highly toxic herbicide chemicals that are associated with them.

November 6, 2012 at 12:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Supporters Of GMO Labeling Call 'No On 37' Campaign Mailers 'Criminal'

One of the most worrisome issues associated with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in our food supply is that long term human safety studies are neither required nor conducted in the United States (for politically motivated, not scientific reasons).

Most Americans are unaware of the existence of Genetically Engineered ingredients in the food they eat and that they are untested for long term safety on children, adults or humans of any age. Monsanto and other biotech corporations have actively suppressed several legislative efforts to mandate labeling of GMOs to intentionally keep Americans uninformed to protect their profits. At best GMO developers might conduct a 42 day chicken study and/or 90 day rat study but these self serving studies presented to FDA are carefully constructed to limit or hide negative data. The biotech industry prohibits their studies to be reproduced by independent scientists making them highly questionable for scientific validity. In contrast, pharmaceuticals must undergo human safety testing for FDA approval whereas Genetically Engineered food does not. It is unethical and dangerous for an unproven, unnatural, manmade substance to be secretly sold and unknowingly consumed over a lifetime by Americans, especially by our children.

For something as vital to our biological survival as food . . . supporters for GMO Labeling seek ingredient disclosure to protect themselves and their children from being human guinea pigs unknowingly consuming a manmade laboratory substance developed solely for the financial benefit of huge multinational biotechnology and chemical companies.

Current Genetically Engineered crops are developed to be grown in conjunction with dangerous proprietary chemical herbicides or designed to produce their own internal pesticide in every cell of the plant, including the part that is consumed by children and adults. There is no evidence showing any nutrition benefit for Genetically Engineered crops grown in the United States yet there is a growing body of scientific evidence these crops and use of their associated chemical herbicides and internal pesticides are causing significant biological and ecological harm. Roundup, the herbicide that over 50% of all Genetically Engineered crops are engineered to tolerate, is not safe as has been claimed by Monsanto. Animal and Human epidemiological studies have found an association between Roundup exposure and miscarriage, birth defects, neurological development problems, DNA damage, and certain types of cancer.

The report, “GMO Myths and Truths, An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops”, presents a large body of peer-reviewed scientific and authoritative evidence of the hazards to health and the environment posed by Genetically Engineered crops (GMOs). Read the summary and full report here:

www.earthopensource.org/index.php/rep...

October 29, 2012 at 12:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Prop 37 Could Set National Tone On Labeling Genetically Modified Food

One of the most worrisome issues associated with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in our food supply is that long term human safety studies are neither required nor conducted in the United States (for politically motivated, not scientific reasons).

Most Americans are unaware of the existence of Genetically Engineered ingredients in the food they eat and that they are untested for long term safety on children, adults or humans of any age. Monsanto and other biotech corporations have actively suppressed several legislative efforts to mandate labeling of GMOs to intentionally keep Americans uninformed to protect their profits. At best GMO developers might conduct a 42 day chicken study and/or 90 day rat study but these self serving studies presented to FDA are carefully constructed to limit or hide negative data. The biotech industry prohibits their studies to be reproduced by independent scientists making them highly questionable for scientific validity. In contrast, pharmaceuticals must undergo human safety testing for FDA approval whereas Genetically Engineered food does not. It is unethical and dangerous for an unproven, unnatural, manmade substance to be secretly sold and unknowingly consumed over a lifetime by Americans, especially by our children.

For something as vital to our biological survival as food . . . supporters for GMO Labeling seek ingredient disclosure to protect themselves and their children from being human guinea pigs unknowingly consuming a manmade laboratory substance developed solely for the financial benefit of huge multinational biotechnology and chemical companies.

Current Genetically Engineered crops are developed to be grown in conjunction with dangerous proprietary chemical herbicides or designed to produce their own internal pesticide in every cell of the plant, including the part that is consumed by children and adults. There is no evidence showing any nutrition benefit for Genetically Engineered crops grown in the United States yet there is a growing body of scientific evidence these crops and use of their associated chemical herbicides and internal pesticides are causing significant biological and ecological harm. Roundup, the herbicide that over 50% of all Genetically Engineered crops are engineered to tolerate, is not safe as has been claimed by Monsanto. Animal and Human epidemiological studies have found an association between Roundup exposure and miscarriage, birth defects, neurological development problems, DNA damage, and certain types of cancer.

The report, “GMO Myths and Truths, An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops”, presents a large body of peer-reviewed scientific and authoritative evidence of the hazards to health and the environment posed by Genetically Engineered crops (GMOs). Read the summary and full report here:

www.earthopensource.org/index.php/rep...

October 17, 2012 at 9:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

A Look At Measures On November's Ballot

One of the most worrisome issues associated with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in our food supply is that long term human safety studies are neither required nor conducted in the United States (for politically motivated, not scientific reasons).

Most Americans are unaware of the existence of Genetically Engineered ingredients in the food they eat and that they are untested for long term safety on children, adults or humans of any age. Monsanto and other biotech corporations have actively suppressed several legislative efforts to mandate labeling of GMOs to intentionally keep Americans uninformed to protect their profits. At best GMO developers might conduct a 42 day chicken study and/or 90 day rat study but these self serving studies presented to FDA are carefully constructed to limit or hide negative data. These safety studies are never peer reviewed by independent scientists making them highly questionable for scientific validity. In contrast, pharmaceuticals must undergo human safety testing for FDA approval whereas Genetically Engineered food does not. It is unethical and dangerous for an unproven, unnatural, manmade substance to be secretly sold and unknowingly consumed over a lifetime by Americans, especially by our children.

For something as vital to our biological survival as food . . . supporters for GMO Labeling seek ingredient disclosure to protect themselves and their children from being human guinea pigs unknowingly consuming a manmade laboratory substance developed solely for the financial benefit of huge multinational biotechnology and chemical companies.

Current Genetically Engineered crops are developed to be grown in conjunction with dangerous proprietary chemical herbicides or designed to produce their own internal pesticide in every cell of the plant, including the part that is consumed by children and adults. There is no evidence showing any nutrition benefit for Genetically Engineered crops grown in the United States yet there is a growing body of scientific evidence these crops and use of their associated chemical herbicides and internal pesticides are causing significant biological and ecological harm. Roundup, the herbicide that over 50% of all Genetically Engineered crops are engineered to tolerate, is not safe as has been claimed by Monsanto. Animal and Human epidemiological studies have found an association between Roundup exposure and miscarriage, birth defects, neurological development problems, DNA damage, and certain types of cancer.

The report, “GMO Myths and Truths, An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops”, presents a large body of peer-reviewed scientific and authoritative evidence of the hazards to health and the environment posed by Genetically Engineered crops (GMOs). Read the summary and full report here: http://www.earthopensource.org/index....

October 6, 2012 at 6:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

A Look At Measures On November's Ballot

Nearly 50 countries require labels on Genetically Engineered food (GMOs), and many of these also have severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale. For political (not scientific) reasons the U.S. and Canada are two of the only developed nations in the world without GMO labeling.

PROPOSITION 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) is a common sense initiative that would require non exempt foods and beverages sold in California retail stores to be labeled if they are produced with Genetic Engineering or contain Genetically Engineered ingredients. The initiative simply requires that a notation be added either on the front or back package stating that the food is "Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering", or "May be Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering". For whole foods that are not packaged, such as sweet corn or fresh fish, store shelves would be required to post a sign or label stating the phrase "Genetically Engineered". In addition to this disclosure, Genetically Engineered foods would be prohibited from being advertised as ‘Natural’. This makes sense since Genetically Engineered food by definition of their creators is not natural.

Packaged foods already have labels showing nutrition, allergy information and other facts consumers want to know. Contrary to the misrepresentation of corporate opponents, PROP 37 is easy to comply with and does not create new bureaucracies, force manufactures to change ingredients or ban the use of genetic engineering.

The most common Genetically Engineered crops are Corn, Soy, Canola, Sugar Beets, Cotton, Hawaiian Papaya, Alfalfa, and Squash (zucchini and yellow). However GMOs are also processed into common food ingredients such as: Amino Acids, Aspartame, Ascorbic Acid, Sodium Ascorbate, Vitamin C, Citric Acid, Sodium Citrate, Flavorings (“natural” and “artificial”), High Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, Lactic Acid, Maltodextrins, Molasses, Monosodium Glutamate, Sucrose, Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), Xanthan Gum, Vitamins and Yeast Products.

PROPOSITION 37 will make it easier for consumers to know if the food they buy contains GMOs without having to make sense of a long list of unfamiliar ingredients.

The founder of PROP 37, a Grandmother from Chico, is joined by thousands of Californian citizens fighting for honesty and transparency in our food labeling. Unlike the multinational chemical and junk food manufactures who oppose PROP 37 because they fear loss of profits from the rejection of their GMOs we have nothing to financially gain or loose by the outcome of PROP 37. We fight for the belief that we have the right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families and that we all deserve to make a fully informed choice.

Read the proposed law and learn more about PROP 37 and the biological and environmental hazards of Genetically Engineered Food at http://www.carighttoknow.org

October 6, 2012 at 6:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Prop 37 - Label GMOs Education & Volunteer Meeting In Carmel Valley -- 09/27/12 at Jimbo's Naturally!, 12853 El Camino Real, San Diego, CA

Nearly 50 countries require labels on Genetically Engineered food (GMOs), and many of these also have severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale. The U.S. and Canada are two of the only developed nations in the world without GMO labeling.

PROPOSITION 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) is a common sense initiative that would require non exempt foods and beverages sold in California retail stores to be labeled if they are produced with Genetic Engineering or contain Genetically Engineered ingredients. The initiative simply requires that a notation be added either on the front or back package stating that the food is "Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering", or "May be Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering". For whole foods that are not packaged, such as sweet corn or fresh fish, store shelves would be required to post a sign or label stating the phrase "Genetically Engineered". In addition to this disclosure, Genetically Engineered foods would be prohibited from being advertised as ‘Natural’. This makes sense since Genetically Engineered food by definition of their creators is not natural.

Packaged foods already have labels showing nutrition, allergy information and other facts consumers want to know. Contrary to the misrepresentation of corporate opponents, PROP 37 is easy to comply with and does not create new bureaucracies, force manufactures to change ingredients or ban the use of genetic engineering.

The most common Genetically Engineered crops are Corn, Soy, Canola, Sugar Beets, Cotton, Hawaiian Papaya, Alfalfa, and Squash (zucchini and yellow). However GMOs are also processed into common food ingredients such as: Amino Acids, Aspartame, Ascorbic Acid, Sodium Ascorbate, Vitamin C, Citric Acid, Sodium Citrate, Flavorings (“natural” and “artificial”), High Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, Lactic Acid, Maltodextrins, Molasses, Monosodium Glutamate, Sucrose, Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), Xanthan Gum, Vitamins and Yeast Products.

PROPOSITION 37 will make it easier for consumers to know if the food they buy contains GMOs without having to make sense of a long list of unfamiliar ingredients.

The founder of PROP 37, a Grandmother from Chico, is joined by thousands of Californian citizens fighting for honesty and transparency in our food labeling. Unlike the multinational chemical and junk food manufactures who oppose PROP 37 because they fear loss of profits from the rejection of their never proven safe GMOs, we have nothing to financially gain or loose by the outcome of PROP 37. We fight for the belief that we have the right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families and that we all deserve to make a fully informed choice.

Read the proposed law and learn more about Genetically Engineered Food and PROP 37at http://carighttoknow.org

September 29, 2012 at 1:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Prop 37 - Label GMOs Education & Volunteer Meeting In Carlsbad -- 10/06/12 at Jimbo's, Naturally!, 1923 Calle Barcelona Carlsbad, CA

Nearly 50 countries require labels on Genetically Engineered food (GMOs), and many of these also have severe restrictions or bans against GMO food production or sale. The U.S. and Canada are two of the only developed nations in the world without GMO labeling.

PROPOSITION 37 (The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) is a common sense initiative that would require non exempt foods and beverages sold in California retail stores to be labeled if they are produced with Genetic Engineering or contain Genetically Engineered ingredients. The initiative simply requires that a notation be added either on the front or back package stating that the food is "Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering", or "May be Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering". For whole foods that are not packaged, such as sweet corn or fresh fish, store shelves would be required to post a sign or label stating the phrase "Genetically Engineered". In addition to this disclosure, Genetically Engineered foods would be prohibited from being advertised as ‘Natural’. This makes sense since Genetically Engineered food by definition of their creators is not natural.

Packaged foods already have labels showing nutrition, allergy information and other facts consumers want to know. Contrary to the misrepresentation of corporate opponents, PROP 37 is easy to comply with and does not create new bureaucracies, force manufactures to change ingredients or ban the use of genetic engineering.

The most common Genetically Engineered crops are Corn, Soy, Canola, Sugar Beets, Cotton, Hawaiian Papaya, Alfalfa, and Squash (zucchini and yellow). However GMOs are also processed into common food ingredients such as: Amino Acids, Aspartame, Ascorbic Acid, Sodium Ascorbate, Vitamin C, Citric Acid, Sodium Citrate, Flavorings (“natural” and “artificial”), High Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, Lactic Acid, Maltodextrins, Molasses, Monosodium Glutamate, Sucrose, Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), Xanthan Gum, Vitamins and Yeast Products.

PROPOSITION 37 will make it easier for consumers to know if the food they buy contains GMOs without having to make sense of a long list of unfamiliar ingredients.

The founder of PROP 37, a Grandmother from Chico, is joined by thousands of Californian citizens fighting for honesty and transparency in our food labeling. Unlike the multinational chemical and junk food manufactures who oppose PROP 37 because they fear loss of profits from the rejection of their never proven safe GMOs, we have nothing to financially gain or loose by the outcome of PROP 37. We fight for the belief that we have the right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families and that we all deserve to make a fully informed choice.

Read the proposed law and learn more about Genetically Engineered Food and PROP 37at http://carighttoknow.org

September 29, 2012 at 1:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous