Quantcast
Environmental News for a Healthier Planet and Life

10 Reasons to Oppose the Senate Version of the DARK Act

Food

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.

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.

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

Nine out of 10 consumers want GMO labels on the package, not high-tech gimmicks.

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

Food companies change their labels all the time. Studies show that GMO labels will not act as a warning. Even Campbell’s Soup agrees that GMO labeling 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

Pamela Anderson: If Louisiana Prisons Go Vegan, I’ll Come Cook and Serve Lunch to the Inmates

DARK Act Is Back With New Bill in the Senate

NBA Superstar Ray Allen to Open Organic Fast-Food Restaurant

Organic Milk and Meat Is Healthier for You, Scientists Say

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Moroccan patients who recovered from the novel coronavirus disease celebrate with medical staff as they leave the hospital in Sale, Morocco, on April 3, 2020. AFP / Getty Images

By Tom Duszynski

The coronavirus is certainly scary, but despite the constant reporting on total cases and a climbing death toll, the reality is that the vast majority of people who come down with COVID-19 survive it. Just as the number of cases grows, so does another number: those who have recovered.

In mid-March, the number of patients in the U.S. who had officially recovered from the virus was close to zero. That number is now in the tens of thousands and is climbing every day. But recovering from COVID-19 is more complicated than simply feeling better. Recovery involves biology, epidemiology and a little bit of bureaucracy too.

Read More Show Less
Reef scene with crinoid and fish in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Reinhard Dirscherl / ullstein bild / Getty Images

By Elizabeth Claire Alberts

The future for the world's oceans often looks grim. Fisheries are set to collapse by 2048, according to one study, and 8 million tons of plastic pollute the ocean every year, causing considerable damage to delicate marine ecosystems. Yet a new study in Nature offers an alternative, and more optimistic view on the ocean's future: it asserts that the entire marine environment could be substantially rebuilt by 2050, if humanity is able to step up to the challenge.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
A daughter touches her father's head while saying goodbye as medics prepare to transport him to Stamford Hospital on April 02, 2020 in Stamford, Connecticut. He had multiple COVID-19 symptoms. John Moore / Getty Images

Across the country, the novel coronavirus is severely affecting black people at much higher rates than whites, according to data released by several states, as The New York Times reported.

Read More Show Less
Four rolls of sourdough bread are arranged on a surface. Photo by Laura Chase de Formigny and food styling by Lisa Cherkasky for The Washington Post / Getty Images

By Zulfikar Abbany

Bread has been a source of basic nutrition for centuries, the holy trinity being wheat, maize and rice. It has also been the reason for a lot of innovation in science and technology, from millstones to microbiological investigations into a family of single-cell fungi called Saccharomyces.

Read More Show Less

Trending

A coral reef in Egypt's Red Sea. Tropical ocean ecosystems could see sudden biodiversity losses this decade if emissions are not reduced. Georgette Douwma / Stone / Getty Images

The biodiversity loss caused by the climate crisis will be sudden and swift, and could begin before 2030.

Read More Show Less