The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
10 Reasons to Oppose the Senate Version of the DARK Act
This week, the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture will consider a new version of the DARK Act, which would prevent states from requiring labeling of genetically engineered (GMO) foods and stop pending state laws that require labeling from going into effect. The U.S. House of Representatives already passed legislation blocking your right to know what’s in your food.
Here are the top 10 reasons to oppose the Senate version of the DARK Act:
1. Americans have a right to know
Nine out of 10 Americans want the right to know what’s in their food and how it’s grown—regardless of age, income or even party affiliation.
2. 64 nations have GMO labeling
Two-thirds of the world’s consumers—including citizens of Russia and China—have the right to know whether their food contains GMOs.
3. Voluntary labeling won’t work
Food companies have been able to make voluntary GMO and non-GMO claims since 2001 and consumers are more confused than ever. The Senate DARK Act would actually make it harder for companies like Campbell’s Soup to voluntarily disclose the presence of GMOs.
4. Consumers want clear labels, not codes
5. Food labels help correct confusion
Federal rules already require many disclosures to alleviate consumer confusion, ranging from “orange juice from concentrate” to “imitation crab.”
6. No patchwork quilt
State GMO labeling laws are virtually identical, so there will be no “patchwork” quilt of different state laws. Besides, states already require state-specific food labels for everything from “cottage foods” to butter and cheese grading.
7. GMO labels will not increase food prices
8. GMO crops increase weed killer use
The widespread adoption of GMO corn and soy has led to an explosion in the use of the weed killer glyphosate, which is linked to cancer. Thousands of schools and churches are in the zone of crops routinely sprayed with glyphosate.
9. Farmers support gmo labeling
One-third of harvested acres are not genetically engineered but are threatened by drifting pollen from GMO crops and pesticides. No wonder the National Farmers Union and other farm groups support GMO labeling.
10. We don’t need GMOs to feed the world
Studies show that simple changes—such as reducing food waste and using fertilizer and water more efficiently—would do much more to feed the world than GMOs. What’s more, conventional crop yields are keeping pace with GMO crop yields.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
It was early in the morning last Thursday, and Jonathan Butler was standing on the Fred Hartman Bridge, helping 11 fellow Greenpeace activists rappel down and suspend themselves over the Houston Ship Channel. The protesters dangled in the air most of the day, shutting down a part of one of the country's largest ports for oil.
By C.J. Polychroniou
Climate change is by far the most serious crisis facing the world today. At stake is the future of civilization as we know it. Yet, both public awareness and government action lag way behind what's needed to avert a climate change catastrophe. In the interview below, Noam Chomsky and Robert Pollin discuss the challenges ahead and what needs to be done.
Food manufacturer General Mills issued a voluntary recall of more than 600,000 pounds, or about 120,000 bags, of Gold Medal Unbleached All Purpose Flour this week after a sample tested positive for a bacteria strain known to cause illness.
Extreme weather events supercharged by climate change in 2012 led to nearly 1,000 more deaths, more than 20,000 additional hospitalizations, and cost the U.S. healthcare system $10 billion, a new report finds.
A Bay Area conservation group struck a deal to buy and to protect the world's largest remaining privately owned sequoia forest for $15.6 million. Now it needs to raise the money, according to CNN.
The Rugby World Cup starts Friday in Japan where Pacific Island teams from Samoa, Fiji and Tonga will face off against teams from industrialized nations. However, a new report from a UK-based NGO says that when the teams gather for the opening ceremony on Friday night and listen to the theme song "World In Union," the hypocrisy of climate injustice will take center stage.
By Wudan Yan
In June, New York Times journalist Andy Newman wrote an article titled, "If seeing the world helps ruin it, should we stay home?" In it, he raised the question of whether or not travel by plane, boat, or car—all of which contribute to climate change, rising sea levels, and melting glaciers—might pose a moral challenge to the responsibility that each of us has to not exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of climate change. The premise of Newman's piece rests on his assertion that traveling "somewhere far away… is the biggest single action a private citizen can take to worsen climate change."