For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Genetic Engineering page and our Millions Against Monsanto page, and our California News page.

Below under the BIG RED HEADLINES is the text from the No On Prop 37 web site. We are taking the time to qualify these “facts” based on a careful and complete analysis of Proposition 37, related research materials, and 60 years of experience in the industry. Not surprisingly, the “facts” they are using are inflated, conflated and sometimes just plain wrong.

There is plenty to discuss and understand about Proposition 37, the California Right to Know Genetic Engineered Food Act. Let’s just be honest and transparent when we do so.

When you discuss Proposition 37 in your community, we encourage you to understand the position of the “No On 37” group and be able to correct some of the assumptions the group is using to convince Californians to vote against the measure. Our comments are indented in italics under each section below.

Index to Non on Proposition 37 Statements:

“Conflicts with Science”
“Has Special Interest Exemptions”
“Increases taxpayer costs”
“Authorizes Shakedown Lawsuits”
“Means Higher Food Costs”
External links and references

“PROP 37 CONFLICTS WITH SCIENCE”[Back to Index]

Biotechnology, also called genetic engineering (GE), has been used for nearly two decades to grow varieties of corn, soybeans and other crops that resist diseases and insects and require fewer pesticides. Thousands of common foods are made with ingredients from biotech crops. Prop 37 bans these perfectly safe foods only in California unless they’re specially re-labeled or remade with higher cost ingredients.

The assumption that genetically engineered foods are “perfectly safe” is merely a wishful PR statement. GE foods are known to be dangerous in many documented cases to humans, animals and the environment. The problem is that the safety of GE foods is not studied or monitored by independent government agencies in the US. By placing its own proponents and advocates in the roles of regulators at the FDA, USDA, NIH, CDC, and USAID, the biotech industry has successfully stifled significant and strident internal dissent that continues to call for more oversight, testing, and caution. The US government has abdicated its responsibility to protect the nation’s food supply. Relying on “government approval” of GE foods for reassurance is false comfort for anyone considering the possibility of GE food dangers and consequences.