GMO labeling and organic agriculture threatened by federal legislation

The DARK Act is a bill in Congress that Denies Americans’ Right to Know whether our food is made with genetic engineering. It passed in the U.S. House of Representatives on July 23.

Senate vote is expected early in September.

MEME FOR FB Toomey Casey


Call today:

Tell your U.S. Senators to VOTE AGAINST the DARK Act.

Sen. Robert Casey: (202) 224- 6324 (DC), (814) 357-0314 (Central PA), (814) 874-5080 (Erie), (866) 461-9159 (Harrisburg), (610) 782-9470 (Lehigh Valley), (215) 405-9660 (Philadelphia), (412) 803-7370 (Pittsburgh), (570) 941-0930 (Scranton)

Sen. Patrick Toomey: (202) 224-4254 (DC), (814) 453-3010 (Erie), (717) 782-3951 (Harrisburg), (814) 266-5970 (Johnstown), (610) 434-1444 (Lehigh Valley), (215) 241-1090 (Philadelphia), (412) 803-3501 (Pittsburgh), (570) 941-3540 (Scranton)

Call – then please share this info with your personal networks on Facebook and elsewhere.

Is it okay for a doctor to give only a partial diagnosis? People need consistent information to make decisions. But the DARK Act outlaws mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food anywhere in the U.S. It also:

(1) nullifies 130 existing laws in 23 states that require labeling GMOs or regulating cultivation of genetically engineered crops, trampling states’ rights and local autonomy;
(2) eradicates organic crops’ protection from GMOs, undermining organic certification;
(3) allows foods labeled “natural” to include genetically engineered ingredients;
(4) relies on food manufacturers’ voluntary labeling of GMOs, resulting in a patchwork of information;
(5) makes genetically engineered food impossible to trace, thereby relieving manufacturers of liability for their effects; and more.

Tell your Senators:

Give me consistent information about GMO food!
Let me decide what to feed my family!


New England Journal of Medicine Article

GMOs, Herbicides, and Public Health

Philip J. Landrigan, M.D., and Charles Benbrook, Ph.D.
N Engl J Med 2015; 373:693-695 | August 20, 2015 | DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1505660

Closing paragraph:

“Finally, we believe the time has come to revisit the United States’ reluctance to label GM foods. Labeling will deliver multiple benefits. It is essential for tracking emergence of novel food allergies and assessing effects of chemical herbicides applied to GM crops. It would respect the wishes of a growing number of consumers who insist they have a right to know what foods they are buying and how they were produced. And the argument that there is nothing new about genetic rearrangement misses the point that GM crops are now the agricultural products most heavily treated with herbicides and that two of these herbicides may pose risks of cancer. We hope, in light of this new information, that the FDA will reconsider labeling of GM foods and couple it with adequately funded, long-term postmarketing surveillance.”


Environmental Health News

Yes: Food labels would let consumers make informed choices

By Patricia Hunt of Washington State University and 20 other scientists

Closing paragraph:

The AAAS statement notes that “GM crops are the most extensively tested crops ever added to our food supply.” The statement should have included the fact that the Food and Drug Administration’s testing program is voluntary. Our experience with other well-studied consumer products (tobacco, asbestos, bisphenol A, phthalates) demonstrates that a large number of tests provide no guarantee of safety. Typically, evidence of harm has only emerged when testing has been conducted independently of those who benefit from the product or practice. Unfortunately, years of manufactured doubt by those with a vested interest have and continue to slow public health decisions that rightfully should be based solely on science.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>