VT AMICUS BRIEF FROM GROUPS: GIVE CONSUMERS GMO LABELS 92% OF U.S. WANTS!

CONSUMERS UNION NEWS RELEASE    

For Immediate Release:  Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Contact:  Michael McCauley, mmccauley@consumer.org or 415-431-6747, ext 7606 (office) or 415-902-9537 (cell)

Consumers Union, Ben & Jerry’s &
Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility

Join Together to Support Vermont’s GMO Labeling Law

Food Industry Challenges Vermont Law In Court
While it Pushes

Congress to Block all GMO Labeling Requirements

New York, NY -- Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, joined Ben and Jerry’s and Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility in submitting an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief today in federal court in support of the Vermont GMO labeling law.

The Vermont law, scheduled to go into effect in July, 2016, requires the labeling of genetically engineered food sold in the state.  The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), which includes large national companies like Pepsi Cola and Coca Cola that have long opposed GMO labeling, is seeking an injunction to stop the Vermont law from going into effect.  The U.S. District Court previously rejected GMA’s request for an injunction, and now the trade association is appealing that decision.

But some companies support the law, as do a broad range of consumer and environmental groups including Consumers Union. 

“Vermont’s law will help consumers make more informed decisions about the food they eat and can be implemented at little cost to manufacturers,” said Jean Halloran, Director of food policy initiatives at Consumers Union.  “The food industry should stop fighting the public’s right to know in court and start listening to what their customers want.”

Consumers Union and the other parties submitting the amicus brief argue that Vermont’s law serves a number of legitimate state interests, including advancing public health and safety, informing consumers concerned about potential environmental effects, avoiding consumer confusion, and protecting religious practices.  In addition, the brief notes that the labeling requirement does not impose significant – let alone irreparable – harm on the affected companies, as the GMA claims. 

While opponents of the law claim it would raise food prices, Consumers Union and the other parties note in their brief that the costs for food companies to comply with the law would be negligible.  “It costs next to nothing to change the wording on a package,” said Halloran.  “Companies do it all the time and they have until January 2017 before Vermont starts enforcing its law.”  A report commissioned by Consumers Union and prepared by an economic consulting firm, EcoNorthwest, found that based on existing analyses, requiring GMO labels on products would cost individual consumers less than a penny a day. 

“The easiest, cheapest way for companies to comply with the Vermont law would be simply to label all products nationally if they contain GMOs,” said Halloran.  “This is what consumers want.  A Consumer Reports poll in 2014 found that 92 percent of consumers support mandatory labeling of GMOs.”

In addition to challenging the Vermont law in court, GMA is supporting a bill in Congress that would nullify the measure and prohibit any other state law or the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from mandating GMO labeling.  Misleadingly named the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, consumer groups are calling it the Deny Americans the Right to Know or DARK Act.  The bill passed the House in July but is expected to have a more difficult time in the Senate.

“Vermont’s ability to decide for itself what kind of food labels it wants for its citizens is fundamental,” said Halloran.  “We believe the courts will uphold that right, and strongly urge Congress not to interfere with states’ rights to label GMO foods.”

###

Consumers Union is the public policy and advocacy division of Consumer Reports.  Consumers Union works for health reform, food and product safety, financial reform, and other consumer issues in Washington, D.C., the states, and in the marketplace. Consumer Reports is the world’s largest independent product-testing organization.  Using its more than 50 labs, auto test center, and survey research center, the nonprofit rates thousands of products and services annually.  Founded in 1936, Consumer Reports has over 8 million subscribers to its magazine, website, and other publications. 

Michael McCauley

Media Director

Consumers Union

mmccauley@consumer.org

415-431-6747, ext 7606 (office)

415-902-9537 (cell)

www.ConsumersUnion.org

GMO ROUNDUP for September 2,2015

CounterPunch

The Case of Glyphosate: Product Promoters Masquerading as Regulators? CounterPunch  - ‎Aug 24, 2015‎ And yet, this is an industry that tried to rubbish the now republished the Seraliniteam's study into GMOs and glyphosate (with unscientific polemics masquerading as scientific critique).

More evidence of Roundup's link to kidney, liver damage

Environmental Health News

- ‎Aug 28, 2015‎

In the 2012 study, different groups of rats were fed mixtures of genetically modified corn and Roundup. Researchers, led by Gilles-Éric Séralini, a professor of molecular biology at the University of Caen in France, reported cancers and other health ...

East Bay Express

Evidence Mounts that Roundup Is Toxic East Bay Express  - ‎Sep 1, 2015‎ Researchers, led by Gilles-Éric Séralini, a professor of molecular biology at the University of Caen in France, reported cancers and other health impacts from both the corn itself and the herbicide.

eNews Park Forest

Medical Journal Article Identifies Hazards of Pesticides inGE Crops eNews Park Forest  - ‎Aug 27, 2015‎ In addition to the recent IARC findings, the timing of Drs. Landrigan and Benbrook's positions is critical as both the U.S. and Europe examine GE labelinglaws. In the U.S., Congress is considering H.R. 1599, the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of ...

Food Dive

USDA faces lawsuit for allegedly not providing GMOrecords Food Dive  - ‎Aug 28, 2015‎ The USDA is the subject of a lawsuit brought by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) for its alleged failure to provide records on GMO crops as requested by the group. ... A recent study showed that a GMO label would not necessarily scare off consumers.

Wall Street Journal

Germany Versus Science Wall Street Journal  - ‎Aug 27, 2015‎ So much for Europe's efforts to put the junk science surrounding genetically modified (GMO) food to rest. Berlin last week signaled it will prohibit cultivation of GMO crops in Germany, even if the crops have been approved by EU scientific bodies and ...

vtdigger.org

Eight states, environmental groups back Vermont in GMOlabeling lawsuit vtdigger.org  - ‎3 hours ago‎ Some products contain a voluntary label indicating they were produced withoutGMOs. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger. Eight states and several organizations have filed briefs in federal appeals court supporting Vermont's food labeling law from 2014 ... Huffington Post GMOs: The Effects of Emerging Technologies Huffington Post  - ‎Sep 1, 2015‎ Agricultural Economist and scientist Chuck Benbrook has spent a good portion of his professional career studying the effects of agriculture, specifically GMO crops. In his 2012 study, "Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S ... Motley Fool Vandana Shiva: From Physicist to Anti-GMO Activist Motley Fool  - ‎Sep 1, 2015‎ Environmental activist Vandana Shiva has made a name for herself by fighting against genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. Her methods and her logical reasoning really resonate with those that want to rid the world of GMOs. That said, those on the ... Hawaiians At Increased Risk Of Pesticide Exposure From GMO Crops Environmental Working Group  - ‎7 hours ago‎ Hawaiians have seen firsthand that people near agrichemical companies' test plots of genetically engineered (GMO) crops are at increased risk of being exposed to toxic chemicals that drift off the fields.

LATVIA AND GREECE BAN GMO FOOD CROPS

Two More European Countries Ban Monsanto’s GMO Crops

Lorraine Chow | September 2, 2015 11:09 am | Comments

Two more European countries are rejecting genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Lativia and Greece have specifically said no to growing Monsanto‘s genetically modified maize, or MON810, that’s widely grown in America and Asia but is the only variety grown in Europe.

Lativia and Greece have chosen the “opt-out” clause of a European Union rule passed in March that allows member countries to abstain from growing GM crops, even if they are authorized by the EU. Scotland and Germany also made headlines in recent weeks for seeking a similar ban on GMOs.

According to Reuters, in many European countries, there is
widespread criticism against the agribusiness giant’s pest-
resistant crops, claiming that GM-cultivation threatens biodiversity.

Monsanto said it would abide by Latvia’s and Greece’s request to not grow the crops. The company, however, accused the two countries of ignoring science and refusing GMOs out of “arbitrary political grounds.”

In a statement, Monsanto said that the move from the two countries “contradicts and undermines the scientific consensus on the safety of MON810.”

Monsanto also told Reuters that since the growth of GM-crops in Europe is so small, the opt-outs will not affect their business.

“Nevertheless,” the company continued, “we regret that some countries are deviating from a science-based approach to innovation in agriculture and have elected to prohibit the cultivation of a successful GM product on arbitrary political grounds.”

According to NewsWire, the EU’s opt-out clause “directly confronts U.S. free trade deal supported by EU, under which the Union should open its doors widely for the US GM industry.”

In a statement on Thursday, the European Commission confirmed its zero-tolerance policy against non-authorized GM products. The commission said that it’s also consulting with the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in order to answer “a scientific question” on GMO crops that’s unrelated to trade negotiations with the U.S. The EFSA announced that it would release a scientific opinion on the question by the end of 2017.

The environmental group, Friends of the Earth Europe, however, has accused the European Commission of “bowing to pressure from large biotech companies to minimize the level of health and safety checks on imports” of GM crops.

“The Commission is working behind closed doors to undermine rules that guarantee Europe’s food is GM-free,” said Mute Schimpf, a Friends of the Earth Europe food campaigner, said in a statement. “They’re bowing to pressure from big biotech companies who want to bring GM-crops through the backdoor as part of the EU-U.S. trade deal.”

The group cites a leaked letter suggesting that the European Commission has asked the EFSA to explore bypassing food safety checks in the case of GM-imports.

“Undermining current food safety laws would mean the food on our plates could be contaminated with GMOs and we’d never know,” Schimpf continued. “It would have severe consequences for the food sector—low-level contamination could not be traced and products could never be guaranteed GM-free.”

SOIL NOT OIL! CARBON SEQUESTRATION: THE MISSING HALF OF CLIMATE CHANGE REMEDY

Published on

Sunday, August 30, 2015

by

EcoWatch

Why Are Climate Groups Only Focused on 50% of the Solution?

by

John Roulac 

'Our society has focused close to 99 percent of our climate efforts on 50 percent of the needed game plan—i.e., reducing the release of atmospheric carbon. Yes, we need to decarbonize our energy. Yet equally important is the need to recarbonize our soils, to sequester the carbon so that we don’t reach the tipping point of climate chaos.'

To the leadership at Greenpeace, Sierra Club, 350.org, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council and all other climate groups:

Your organizations have worked very hard, collectively, to reduce world reliance on carbon-centric oil, gas and coal. Thanks to your work to reduce pollution, we certainly have a healthier planet. High praise is in order for the success of your valiant efforts in the face of corrupt vested interests.

Yet I, along with many others, must still ask: Will your plan win the race against time to avert climate chaos? Anyone paying close attention can see that, even if the world doubles the rate at which it’s adopting wind, solar, bike lanes, electric cars and conservation, the excess carbon in our atmosphere and seas will still lead to intenseclimate chaos. For just one example, the temperature in Phoenix, Arizona, recently reached 117°.

Our society has focused close to 99 percent of our climate efforts on 50 percent of the needed game plan—i.e., reducing the release of atmospheric carbon. Yes, we need to decarbonize our energy. Yet equally important is the need to recarbonize our soils, to sequester the carbon so that we don’t reach the tipping point of climate chaos. This is relatively new information for many people.

In his article “Soil Carbon Restoration: Can Biology Do the Job?,” Jack Kittredge of the Massachusetts Chapter of the Northeast Organic Farming Association provides anexcellent report on the subject.

A recent EcoWatch article of my own provides an easy-to-understand overview, with links to organizations working on this vital issue.

Sometimes “group think” can stymie networks or organizations. Let me be especially direct. The current “half a game plan” or “50 percent solution” will in fact allow destruction of the planet, as solar, wind and reducing extraction alone cannot slow the carbon emissions fast enough as we surge toward an atmospheric 450 ppm.

The Link Between Monsanto, Industrial Ag and Ocean Health

Monsanto and industrial agriculture are contributing more to climate change than Exxon, Chevron and the entire transportation industry combined. Why keep that a secret? Millions of members of Greenpeace, Sierra Club, 350.org, Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) care deeply about the Earth, and yet have no clue about the elephant in the room.

The other untold secret is that Monsanto and the corporate media are not telling the world that we’re rushing to an ocean apocalypse. I give credit to the NRDC for its 2009Acid Test: The Global Challenge of Ocean Acidification, a powerful 21-minute video on ocean health narrated by Sigourney Weaver.

And, just as I’m writing this, I see that the NRDC is educating people on improving the cattle-grazing methods that impact our climate. A local Greenpeace chapter is also doing its part. The next time you think about stopping by Starbucks remember that millions of Starbucks lattes sold monthly directly correlate with the carbon-intensive industrial dairy production.

The sea is what makes life on this bountiful planet possible. The oceans are places of vast beauty and mystery.  The one-two punch of warming sea temperatures and excess carbon falling from the atmosphere is creating the conditions whereby oceans are becoming too hot and too acidic to sustain ocean health.

A Monster Algae Bloom Takes Over the Pacific Ocean

This summer a giant, toxic algae bloom stretches all the way from Alaska to California. Vera Trainer, a research oceanographer with the Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Washington State, told Reuters, “It’s the longest-lasting, highest-toxicity and densest bloom that we’ve ever seen.”

A giant, toxic algae bloom stretches all the way from Alaska to California. (Photo credit: NOAA)

Our acidic oceans (30 percent more so in the last 50 years, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) are making it hard for creatures like lobsters and oysters to form their shells.

Before long, the burning of coal, continued heating of the globe and carpet bombing of industrial-ag greenhouse gas emissions into the ocean will lead to an end of the seas as we know them. Nuclear seepage and plastics are adding to the issue. So far, plankton is dying, starfish are dying and sea lions are dying. Crabs will be next. And, unless we bring carbon into balance, within a few short decades most whales will also perish. This month, 30 dead whales washed ashore in Alaska. Something is very wrong with our oceans.

The climate movement, United Nations and most governments have shaped the climate debate by framing the story as being about how hot the Earth will be, or how high the oceans will rise by 2050. Yet we seem to be ignoring the much greater eco-peril of ocean acidification and the vital role of soil in balancing planetary carbon.

If the whales and dolphins could speak, surely they would implore us to: “Change how you raise your food and produce your energy, so that we can all live in harmony on land and sea.”

We see disinvestment campaigns for coal and big oil … what about Monsanto or Syngenta? The climate groups give Monsanto a pass, shining little or no light on the death and destruction it causes—both in its toxic impact and in its huge contribution to climate change.

500 Million Years of Research and Development

The oceans are dying. We need to balance the carbon cycle and reduce climate chaos without losing any more time. The scientific solution is one already proven by 500 million years of R&D. It’s called carbon sequestration. The Soil Story explains this process in an easy-to-follow five-minute animated clip with a sound track by Jason Mraz.

We can readily increase carbon farming—also known as regenerative agriculture. The good news is that hundreds of millions of farmers on small plots the world over already know a thing or two about this ecological farming methodology. Even the U.S. government is already working to help American farmers and ranchers increase soil carbon. Growing sea kelp is another innovative way to sequester carbon.

Collectively, your climate-focused groups annually publish millions of tweets, Instagrams, blogs, Facebook posts and press releases. But what percentage of the content is on that favorite “50 percent of the solution”—stop drilling and install more solar panels—and how much is on the Earth-based solution that returns carbon to the soil where it belongs? (I can tell you: Less than 1 percent proposes the latter solution). Imagine how much progress can be made by shifting your social-media focus to an elegant, win-win solution!

On a positive note, at least Greenpeace and Sierra Club are focusing on protecting ancient forests that sequester carbon. Funding is obviously an important issue. Groups may need to increase budgets, or allocate more to soil and oceans, to address these vital issues.

Becoming a Carbon-Literate Society

Yes, it’s high time the climate movement became more carbon-literate. The movement has done so much right, and its millions of participants would love to learn how they can be part of the solution by eating a diet that’s regenerative and that returns carbon to the soil. It’s a basic rule we learned in preschool: Put things back where they belong. We all have a huge opportunity to share this vital educational message. Paul Hawken’s Project Drawdown showcasing a hundred of the best climate ideas including planned grazing.

Many leaders of the growing carbon-farming movement will attend the Soil Not Oil Conference in Richmond, California, on Sept. 4-5, which will be live streamed on the web.

Also, Regeneration International is working on a November 2015 Paris event, to take place shortly before the world climate negotiations summit. Solar advocates and anti-Keystone-pipeline warriors can attend in order to become more carbon-literate, because today the U.S. is the most eco-illiterate society in the history of the Earth.

Soil fertility and natural systems are concepts as foreign to most Americans as the English language is to tribes of the Amazon. Many of these uninformed Americans are members of climate groups who look to your organizations for leadership—look to you to rise above the corporate corruption of Washington, DC, and Brussels, Belgium and provide the world with the wise council that is so desperately needed. We can do this!

Paris, Here We Come

As the CO2 in our atmosphere approaches 450 ppm and many leaders gather in Paris for climate talks, let’s focus on a winning plan—one that both decarbonizes our energy and recarbonizes our soil. Some recent good news is that France supports combining food security and carbon sequestration in soils as part of a global Paris agreement to fight climate warming, as French Agriculture Minister Stéphane Le Foll recently announced.

Readers, if you care about this issue, please share this article, along with your own thoughts, on the Facebook walls of Greenpeace, Sierra Club, 350.org, Environmental Defense Fund and NRDC.

The millennial generation, especially, must wear the mantle of leadership in these efforts, and those of us who are older must help them. The future of our planet is hanging in the balance.

© 2014 EcoWatch

John W. Roulac, founder and CEO of the superfoods company Nutiva, has also founded five ecological nonprofit groups, including GMO Inside and the Nutiva Foundation. John has written four books, including Backyard Composting and Hemp Horizons.

SOURCE:  http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/08/30/why-are-climate-groups-only-focused-50-solution