I demand organic. It's that simple. I know, you're thinking, "Of course you demand organic. You wrote the Organic Manifesto and grew up on an organic farm." True, but, even if I didn't, I would demand organic and so should you. In lieu of giving you my big speech about how organics can feed the planet and make us safer, I will focus on one very good reason why I demand organic: GMOs. Genetically Modified Organisms, or, as the FDA says, foods that have undergone genetic modification, meaning they've been engineered and altered at the genetic level "using any technique, new or traditional."
Choosing organic is the only way, right now, that I can make sure I am not feeding my family potentially dangerous biotech ingredients. And although the food manufacturers have done a tobacco-industry-worthy job of trying to convince us that GMOs are safe, the truth is that the science is starting to say otherwise.
There aren't a whole lot of comprehensive studies out there on GMOs and the health impact they have on humans because scientists have to ask permission to do them, and because GMOs are patented by two major corporations, Monsanto and Syngenta. These patents make it extremely difficult to gain access to the information needed to study how GMOs affect human health. That said, here's a sampling of what has been published about GMOs:
So far, there's only been one published study on how GMO ingredients affect us when we eat them. It was in the journal Nature Biotechnology, and it found that after we eat GMO soy, some of the GMO genes are transferred to the microflora of our intestines and those GMO genes are still active.
Another study, published in Reproductive Toxicology, found Bt-toxin (used in genetically modified Bt corn) in the blood of 93 percent of the pregnant women studied and their babies. The study authors suggest that aside from eating products made from GMO crops, eating meat from animals fed GMO crops may lead to a "a high risk of exposure."
Finally, an Italian study published in The Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry found that in young and older mice fed Bt corn, there were changes to their immune systems that corresponded with allergic and inflammatory responses. In humans these same inflammatory changes are associated with arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, allergies, and autoimmune diseases.
So here are three studies: One reports that GMOs survive in our bodies -- they aren't killed in the stomach, as some have suggested, but travel to the intestine where they remain active in the body. Another study reports that we are exposed to these GMOs, not only from the GMO foods themselves, but also from eating animals that eat GMO foods. And finally, animal studies reveal that these GMOs may be linked to disease.
So I say, Just Label It!
Right now there is a grassroots effort underway to mandate the FDA to label GMO foods. In October, The Just Label It: We Have a Right to Know campaign filed a petition with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require mandatory labeling of GMO foods. It is supported by more than 450 businesses and organizations dedicated to food safety and consumer rights and more than 400,000 people have already raised their voices to tell the FDA we have the right to know what is in our food.
If there's nothing for us to worry about, then seed and chemical companies should freely allow studies to be done so that food companies can confidently label their products. Show us the science saying that there's nothing to worry about, and then label products, proudly: "Made Using Biotechnology." (Hmmm, "M.U.B" -- well, I'm sure their PR teams would come up with something catchier.) But the point is, show us the real science behind the safety claims, and then put your money where your mouth is. Although, according to a study in the journal Food Policy, studies that "cast genetically modified products in a favorable light" often have authors with either financial or professional ties to industry. So perhaps their mouths are already full.
Don't get me wrong; I don't blame the scientists. The problem is that most scientists are blocked from doing the non-biased work they need to do because seed companies will not fund or give permission for research unless they have the right to control what gets published. Which means that studies that cast an unfavorable light never see the light. We need transparency!
Again, I say Just Label It!
It seems like a simple solution, but manufacturers have decided that, if given the choice, we the consumers might not choose to buy GMO products. So, they've decided not to give us a choice, which doesn't seem very American.
And the FDA says they have "no basis for concluding that bioengineered foods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way, or that, as a class, foods developed by the new techniques present any different or greater safety concern than foods developed by traditional plant breeding." Maybe I should send them some of those studies, in case they missed them. Or maybe they should use some of the government money that is currently being spent to subsidize GMO crops to fund non-biased research that benefits the American people.
So, until our government and big business catch up, here's what you can do to stay safe:
Demand Organic! GMOs are banned in organic farming and in organic food, although as the U.S. Department of Agriculture approves more genetically engineered crops, the risk of cross-contamination through pollen increases.
Sign the Just Label It petition. Having choices in the marketplace is something that Americans take pride in, but that right is stripped of you every time you set foot in a grocery store because GMOs aren't required to be labeled. Ask the FDA to change that policy.
Know the Usual Suspects. Corn, soy, cotton, canola, and sugar (in nonorganic form) are the five ingredients most likely to be genetically engineered. Eighty percent of the packaged foods in the U.S. contain GMOs. If you can't buy organic, then look for the Non-GMO Project Verified seal. The group tests for GMOs, but not for pesticide residues.
Spread the Word. The best solution is education. The more people who know about the hazards of GMOs, the less people will want to consume them. And voting with our dollars is one of the most powerful ways to send the message: We demand the right to know what is in our food! Share this message with as many people as you can so that companies hear us loud and clear.
For more from Maria Rodale, go to www.mariasfarmcountrykitchen.com
Follow Maria Rodale on Twitter: www.twitter.com/farmkitchenblog
The increase of engineered food crops on U.S. and global farms in the past year-- and the new biotechnology developments on the horizon-- may surprise some:
http://humboldtsentinel.com/2012/02/11/a-bumper-year-for-genetically-modified-crops/
You and fellow HuffPo readers may use/reprint/link the article if you like and if it's helpful.
Very truly yours,
skippy massey
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpCEdtWPQSI
Dr. Lemaux said that FSANZ (Food Standards Australia New Zealand) is one of the most important resources regarding this study and referred to their analysis of it. FSANZ noted that the researchers SHOULD have done a thorough examination of each woman’s diet, since they were trying to make a nutritional connection, but they did not. Their explanation of pesticide levels in umbilical cord samples being quite highly linked only to consumption only of biotech crops/foods is one that raises questions. Based on other studies where researchers examined foods produced using biotechnology, it is surprising these researchers did not consider that the Bt protein detected in the blood could have come from a source other than biotech foods. For example, things like sprays that are regularly used by backyard and organic gardeners. That is important to their conclusions because only a minor percent of commercial biotech corn contains the specific Bt tested for by their assay and most of that corn is used for animal feed.
Most importantly, FSANZ says there are analytical weaknesses in conclusions made. Because of the seriousness of their claims, the research needs to be repeated by others and its implications analyzed properly.
Yes I'm being re-dictulous but the argument is the same.
I thought the uber-safe Europeans had all this food safety stuff figured out. After all, they have banned a lot of gmo.
But I see they still like their GMO medications like hepatitis vaccines and GMO insulin. Those GMOs are okeedoekee apparently.
The bean sprouts were contaminated by an independent pathogen. They could have contaminated your socks, (whether your socks are GMO or not).
Science is almost never an improvement on Natural systems that work. Our food works. As Raj Patel has said, the real problem of Golden Rice is not that it does or does not replace carrots, but that we live in a world where some people are too poor to afford carrots.
By the way, the Nanny State makes Pharmaceutical companies label prescription bottles. Is there no end to their meddling?
There are many dimensions to this argument from health to the environment that do not apply to organic foods.
______________________________
namyohorengekyo Never mind those pesky poor who might not want to eat non-GMOs. Why should they be given a choice? The free market mandates that they buy the least expensive option. And after all, they made their choice when they chose to be poor.
Oh, and the "purists" . . . Since G-d gave us every green thing to eat and dominate the world, ƭ*ϲk everybody else.
The only thing wrong with giving people the freedom to choose, in this instance, is that they will diminish the profit of the GMO industry.
__________________________________________
Rice, wheat, dry legumes, most fruit and veggies. The pesky poor who might not want to eat GMOs have plenty of choices of inexpensive foods. They do need to step away from the soda and fried snacks though.
I have no idea what you are talking about with the G_d statement. Especially if you believe God made us all, there really isn’t “everybody else”. And actually diminishing the profits of the "GMO industry" might be the only right thing with a loss of market.
BTW what do you think would happen to the price of food if we banned GMO crop? I bet the pesky poor would probably find themselves paying more for nonGMO foods that have GMO counterparts, including meat animals.
This just in: Rush Limbaugh snacks on GMO corn . . .
Has anyone ever heard of a great new life saving idea or product which the maker refuses to announce? Wonderful technology that the producer refuses to advertise?
Of course not.
If these things were labeled as they should, and will be, sales would plummet. Whether that's to the good or not can be decided later. First we must have a choice.
It's fascinating how this is about the only subject that the Freedom First types back peddle about. Suddenly the 'Nanny State' is OK when information is being withheld from us. It seems we're not clever enough to make up our own minds on this one.
This doesn't require new laws, or wasted ink. Just a single line on the already obligatory nutritional info on a label: Contains GMO.