USRTK: Sneak Peek At How GMO Labels Will Be Used.

Hey everyone.  It's been a while, because I haven't really had much new to write about. if you are finding this blog for the 1st time, please go back and check out past posts where I discuss all the major food and ag issues.

A lot has already been written about the USRTK's Freedom Of Information Act requests aimed at 14 publicly employed academic researchers, and I'm not the news. For those not in the know, here are some links to read up on the story:

Discover Magazine - Keith Kloor
American Association for the Advancement of Science - Keith Kloor
Wired - Alan Levinovitz
Biofortified - Karl Haro von Mogel

In making these requests, the US Right To Know campaign has tipped their hand at how they would behave if #GMO labeling went into effect.  Allow me to explain...

The FOIA is widely acknowledged to be somewhat disingenuous in this case.  Despite what the USRTK claims, that researchers are doing the bidding of some corporate master, they know better.  If they had evidence strong enough to prove a direct pay off of(or veiled threat to) academic researchers by ag/food corps, then they would have blown the lid off that story long ago.

This isn't about that.

This is about guilt by association.  Food and ag scientists are employed all over the world in their area of expertise: food companies, ag companies, and public universities.  These researchers often communicate with each other about research, perhaps asking for guidance when something stretches beyond their very specific area of expertise, or to get help with experimental design, or to ask other scientists to elaborate further on recently published research findings.  If we had these methods of communication even 20 years earlier, we would be light years ahead in our understanding of food and ag science. 

Communication between scientists is a very good thing.  

Also, people doing this type of work tend to already cross pollinate the public/private divide through switching jobs.  Two scientists may have already been co-workers, students, or old advisers when the other was doing post grad work and are still keeping lines of communication open.

What USRTK will do with the information retrieved on the tax payer's dime is run a simple keyword search, then publish those emails, regardless of how innocent they are, and try to say that big food/ag is in cahoots with university researchers.  Do not expect anything to be published in context. The USRTK will exploit the highly conspiratorial mindset of the Food Hysterics that follow them. 

Let's say they find an email where Kevin Folta contacts a former student of his who now works for Monsanto about going biking, perhaps their vacation times line up or they both are participating in the same biking event.  In reality, this is nothing... just two people riding bikes, but to a suspicious and cynical food activist, this could be some sort of smoking gun they will show to everyone they are trying to turn against food and ag science.

That brings me to the issue of labeling #GMO.

Labels will be used in the same way the emails obtained through the FOIA will be abused. Watch how USRTK handles the benign, routine communications between scientists and see whether they try to make mountains out of mole hills.  My guess is that they will and this is the same type of strategy that would be employed if #GMO labeling becomes law.  It doesn't matter what the label is, it only matters that it's a label, Just like it doesn't matter what the emails say... only that there are emails.

Please keep in mind that labeling isn't the end of USRTK's strategy, only the very beginning; after which, you will see a massive and very product specific campaign aimed at strong arming companies into dropping ingredients developed using a genetic modification.  Ultimately, they want to end #GMO


p.s.

I am poor, and while nobody has paid me to write this, there is a PayPal Donate button at the top of the blog.  I currently have $50 to my name and I'm in between jobs. If anyone wishes to make a donation, it will be greatly appreciated and will go towards food/rent/utilities. I don't smoke or do drugs, so you have no need to worry about your donation being abused.  Thanks in advance to any who donate. Thanks for reading.

An Investment In Future Shoppers.

I've already blogged about the #GMO debate many times, but I think it's important for me to bring some clarity to the issue, to paraphrase the great Todd Glass.

Ok, so we have the Washington state #GMO labeling initiative I-522. If this passes, then most foods that have genetically modified ingredients will have to have a label stating so.

Why do farmers, scientists, science writers, and people in the industry have an issue with this?

First of all, the label serves no safety or educational function. If you buy the wrong kind of flour, your bread may turn out horrible. If you buy something with an undeclared allergen, you could go into anaphylactic shock and possible die. So it's important to label things like what kind of flour because cake and all purpose flour and flour made with summer or winter wheat may function differently.  We label allergens so people can easily see what to avoid... for obvious health reasons.

If you accidentally buy a food with a #GMO ingredient, nothing different will happen to you. Nothing.

So why label it?

Why would the Organic Foods lobby be funding I-522?

For those of you that don't know, foods classified as 'Organic' must not use #GMO inputs in their production.  So at first glance, it would appear that the Organic Foods lobby would have no dog in this fight... so why be involved?

This is where the label's purpose comes into focus...

Ok, so let's say you are Whole Foods and business is pretty good.  Organic food as an industry has been growing at around 25% a year for at least the last 5 years now. Pretty soon, that growth will reach a lag phase and start to level off.  Whole Foods is aware of this and know that they need fresh customers to sustain year over year growth.

Well, one way to guarantee more customers is to tell people your food is intrinsically better because it isn't #GMO.  

So how do you do that?  

You could list all the ways that non-GMO foods are demonstrably better... but what if you can't prove that?  The other option is the tried and true practice of propaganda.  You don't tell them why your food is better, you tell them the other food is so much worse.  Doubt is easy to grow and impossible to discount completely because one cannot disprove a negative.

So you spread propaganda about #GMO and you associate #GMO with big corporations(unlike mom & pop stores like Whole Foods).  You introduce doubt by saying the studies aren't big enough or long enough or independent enough.

The next step for Whole Foods is to warn people about every product you don't want them to buy... a label.

The label serves as a warning or to put it mildly, a reminder to choose a different food.  Now here's the catch: most grocery stores sell conventional foods and have a small organic section.  The organic section isn't really the big money maker and is subsidized by all the regular groceries. Grocery stores in general operate on a pretty thin profit margin.  So when people read what is essentially a warning label, they will start to buy USDA Organic foods, which means that regular grocers will see sales drop on about 90% of it's inventory.

This is where Whole Foods comes in...

Stores like Safeway and QFC will take a big hit to their private brands as well as the nightmare of having to segregate stock for Washington stores from it's distribution inventory for Oregon, Utah, Idaho, etc.  They may even have to close some Washington stores because of this.  But who will be there waiting with their mostly #GMO free inventory and a distribution system already designed to keep certain foods separated?

Whole Foods.

And you can bet Whole Foods can expect to pick up major market share as sales from their competition drops. It will be a major windfall for them.

Soon, Washington residents may have no major grocer to go to except Whole Paycheck, and Whole Foods will be waiting with open arms.

The single most important issue in all of food and agricultural sciences.

Credit to the internet for this meme pic. I think it may be traceable to RDFRS. Beyond that, I don't know.

I replied to a Facebook post in regards to an article posted on the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science Facebook page...  You know how the internet is...  Anyway, I spent enough time on the response that I thought I would post it.  The battle for GMO survival has become the single most important issue in all of food and agricultural sciences. Every scientifically literate person has a responsibility to read up on the arguments for, against, and all of the credible research.

Nothing else has been more closely studied, scrutinized, and validated for safety as GM foods that are approved for market.  No other foodstuff gets more criticism from unsubstantiated claims and from people thoroughly unqualified to discuss plant genomics than GMO.  

For the longest time, subject matter experts in biotech ignored the anti-gmo activists because they just assumed everyone else would see how irrationally hysterical they were being.  So we finally have SME's from both academia and industry speaking on behalf of biotech, but it's almost too late.  

Just as it is with racism, anti-semitism, and creationism, the science minded people will just have to hold on until more smart people are born and understand the scientific principal before we reach a critical mass of science literacy where these fairytale crisis dissipates quietly.  Education doesn't work if the anti side is so dug in and accuses anyone on the pro side of being a 'shill', but that doesn't mean the true SME's and the science literate public won't keep trying.  And similar to opponents of gay rights, the anti-gmo crowd will not be looked upon favorably 20 or 30 years from now.  As I would say to the anti-gay crowd, 'Don't you see where the future is heading?'.

Love it?  Hate it? Have a credible peer reviewed journal link for an article that wasn't already discredited? Post below.

Also... I'm poor.  This is a hard thing to say since most of my readers are fiercely self-reliant, 'up by the boot-straps types', but I was wondering if anyone noticed the PayPal Donate button on my blog.  I'm currently in between jobs and I'm getting behind enough to the point where I don't know how much longer I can stay in my meager apt.  

I'm not asking to be completely subsidized, I'm just asking that those who can, donate.  For my part, I will continue to look for work while posting more than I have been in the past.  I grew up on a hog farm with an outdoor toilet and a wood burning furnace, so hard work is something I grew up on. So while it's easy to grunt, 'Get a job!' and 'Get off yer ass!', please understand I am not a lazy person and I wouldn't so shamelessly promote the donate button if it wasn't getting serious. 

Hopefully, something good will come my way quickly, but until then, hope isn't paying the rent.  Thank you in advance for any donations, and to those who can't or won't donate, I still appreciate you taking the time to read this.

Sam

GMO Labeling or How To Best Protect The Right To Misinform Consumers.

It's been a while since I posted, so I thought I would dust off blogger and add another 1AM missive.  It get's harder to write about this stuff because it's already been said before and also there are now a respectable number of subject matter experts who are finally starting to write about food and ag issues.

What follows is a story about proposed GMO labeling legislation, one person's intro to that story on G+, and my comment on both.  It is not necessary to read the story.  You could even skip the intro to the story, but you may lose some of the context of my comments...

From +Malthus John 

The bipartisan legislation would require clear labels for genetically engineered whole foods and processed foods, including fish and seafood. The measure would direct the FDA to write new labeling standards that are consistent with U.S. labeling standards and international standards.

Sixty-four countries around the world already require the labeling of GE foods, including all the member nations of the European Union, Russia, Japan, China, Australia and New Zealand.

“This legislation is supported by a broad coalition of consumer groups, businesses, farmers, fishermen and parents who all agree that consumers deserve more – not less – information about the food they buy.”

According to surveys, more than 90 percent of Americans support the labeling of genetically engineered foods. In fact, many consumers are surprised to learn that GE foods are not already labeled.

Thanks +Bernie Sanders & Barbara Boxer!

Here is the story about the bill that Bernie Sanders(whom I like) and Barbara Boxer(whom I also like) have cosponsored

And here are my comments on the whole matter from my g+ acct:

 It's not because you want to know or that you want a choice, it's that you think there's a difference.  People who already made up their mind based on whatever misinformation they've bought into, probably already buy organic anyway.  This isn't for them.  This proposed legislation is for the minds of the uninformed consumers that the anti-gmo activists want to pollute with unjustified fear and misinformation.

The fact of the matter is that for all intents and purposes, there is no difference between, for instance, corn that is gmo and non-gmo.  For the consumer, there is no difference, but you want to scare them into thinking there might be.  

Anything approved to be on the market has already had allergenicity and toxicology studies validating it's safety, but no amount of studies will ever be enough for the anti-science, anti-gmo activist.  

It's the same as the conspiracy theorist who believes Sandy Hook was faked or the creationist that can never see enough evidence to convince them that evolution is real.  

You are just like them.