The "experts" have spoken, and here's what they have to say: You're just too stupid to handle a label on your food that says "this product contains genetically engineered ingredients."
Members (see the list here) of the subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture, along with four of their hand-picked puppets (um, experts), met last week to pat themselves on the back for the great job GMO crops and foods are doing of feeding the world, providing better nutrition and slashing the use of pesticides.
Yep, they're all doing a heckuva job. Except that they aren't.
But the best part of their meeting was the part where they insulted you and every other educated consumer who believes that, at the very least, you should have the right to know if your food contains GMOs.
Here's what one of the experts—Dr. David Just, Co-Director, Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Programs"—said at last week's meeting:
It is ignorance of the product, and it's a general skepticism of anything they eat that is too processed or treated in some way that they don't quite understand.
Oh, we understand, alright. Dr. Just works for Cornell, which is on Monsanto's payroll. Just like half the lawmakers in Washington who rode there on Monsanto's dime.
Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.-13), (pictured) acting chairman of the House Agriculture Committee's Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology and Foreign Agriculture, convened a public hearing last week to "consider the benefits" of biotechnology.
The attendees—members of the subcommittee and their so-called "experts"—gushed over the wonderfulness of toxic, chemical-drenched crops and foods. But what they were really trying to figure out was how to sell the same old lies about Monsanto's Empire to "ignorant" consumers who "just don't understand" GMOs.
We think we should let Rep. Davis, and all the members of the subcommittee, and all their bankrolled "experts," know that they can insult us all they want"—but they can't fool us. Monsanto has not only failed to deliver on promises of higher yields, better nutrition, fewer chemicals and happier farmers. But the Gene Giant is also poisoning our food and fields.
We've provided all the names of the subcommittee members, and the experts, in case your representative is on the subcommittee, and you want to contact him or her individually.
When consumers, 68 members of Congress, and food safety and animal welfare advocates objected to a new rule that could lead to contaminated poultry in grocery stores, and endanger the safety of workers who slaughter chickens, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) revised the rule.
But good luck finding out what the new-and-improved Modernization of Poultry Slaughter Inspectionrulesays. Because the USDA ain't sayin.'
Earlier this year, more than 100 groups (including the OCA) signed a letter to President Obama and USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack urging them to rescind what Food & Water Watch dubbed the "Filthy Chicken Rule." Hundreds of thousands of consumers also publicly opposed the rule.
How did the USDA respond? By making "secret" changes to the rule. And then working to push through a final version without public comment.
Maybe they're just too chicken to tell us the truth?
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) introduced an amendment to the spending bill that would have prohibited the USDA from spending any funds to implement the new rule. DeLauro had this to say about the USDA's secret changes and refusal to allow comments:
I remain concerned this rule drops food safety oversight from USDA into the hands of the industry itself and places workers in jeopardy. The Administration needs to address the concerns raised by myself, other members of Congress, and worker, consumer and animal welfare advocates, as they continue to finalize the rule. The Administration should also publish the revised rule now, open a 120 day comment period, and hold public meetings around the country. We need more transparency and public health stakeholders need to receive due consideration.
Some of us met last week with a state legislator who's also a Harvard-educated farmer. When he's not hard at work growing food and feeding his community, he's raising hell in the state capital defending the rights of farmers and consumers.
He reminded us that the origin of the word "radical" is "root." And that if you want to make substantive changes, sometimes you've gotta be a little bit radical.
You've got to pull up the old by the roots, and plant the new.
Ten, maybe even five, years ago, GMO labeling was a radical idea. Today, 93 percent of Americans demand it.
And GMO labeling is just the beginning. We've got a food and farmingsystem that isn't working. It's not working for our health. It's not working for family farmers. It's not working for the environment or the climate.
It's time to pull it up by its deeply-entrenched roots and plant anew. To do that, we're going to need a lot of hands.
We're often asked, "If I boycott all the GMA brands, including the 'Traitor Brands,' what brands should I buy?"
That's why we created the "Buy Organic Brands that Support Your Right to Know," a campaign on the popular buycott.com mobile phone app to help consumers identify brands owned by companies that are spending millions to defeat GMO labeling laws.
It works like this. First, download the app (it's free), and sign up for our campaign. Then take your mobile phone with you to the store, and use the app to scan the barcode on products before you buy them.
The app will look up the product, determine what brand it belongs to, and figure out what company owns that brand. Then it will cross-check the product owners against the companies and brands included in our "Right to Know" campaign.
To help promote the app, we're giving away a "Cook Organic, not the Planet" t-shirt every week to the consumer who scans the most items that week. You're automatically entered in the contest just by using the app.
It's free. It's easy. And it sends a powerful message to the corporations competing for our dollars.