General Mills’ Ken Powell Maintains Opposition to Labeling GMOs

Ken Powell, chairman and CEO of General Mills Inc., restated his opposition to mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms, commonly called GMOs, at a conference in California.

The conference, called Brainstorm Green, was put on by Fortune. In an uneditedtranscript posted by the magazine, Powell said GMOs are safe and they're part of a solution to feeding the world's growing population.

Powell said he didn't have a problem with specialty retailer Whole Foods' recent announcement it would require GMO information on labels.

He said he's not opposed to Whole Foods' policy because General Mills' organic brands -- such as Muir Glenn, Cascadian Farms, Larabar and Food Should Taste Good -- that it sells to Whole Foods are GMO free.

Powell said virtually every product in the grocery store contains GMOs, and he doesn't think it's a good idea to label those as having GMOs.

 

General Mills spent about $1 million lobbying with other food manufacturers to defeat a measure in California that would have required GMOs to be disclosed on food labels, according to the story.

If such a rule was implemented on a state-by-state basis, it would cost consumers more because manufactures would have change how they manage their supply chains, Powell said.

He added that there wouldn't be room to include GMO information on product labels.

 

"Consumers tell us, and I think they're right, that they want to know about the ingredients, they want to know the nutrition information of that product, they want to know if there's a safety thing, if there's peanuts in there or something like that. They need to know these things. But we should restrict the use of that label for this important information, and limit it to that. If we broaden it to other things that could be anything, I mean it could be anything, causes that we have, things that we believe in, we'll need to add pages to the label, and we simply don't think we should do that."

Source:

www.bizjournals.com

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want to help these blog , like and share the facebook page :

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

 

Biosecurity Board suspends entry of 26 GMOs to Turkey

The Biosecurity Board has decided to ban the entry of 26 genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into Turkey amid ongoing debates about whether genetically modified rice passed through customs.
The board, which is the deciding body on the issue in the country, unanimously rejected the entry authorization demands.The banned products include genetically modified sugar beet and rapeseed, which are permitted in European Union countries as feeders.Also, the demand to use 22 types of genetically modified corns as fuel was rejected unanimously on the grounds of scientific concerns about the products.With these decisions, only 19 products were allowed to enter Turkish markets.
Corns and soy in 19 genetic types have been authorized to be imported for use as animal feed.
Board calls for further research
The board also called on universities and the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) to conduct research on genetically modified products.
The Biosecurity Board’s decision came right after a debate on genetically modified rice. Recently, executives of three food companies were detained on grounds that rice about to be imported into Turkey from the Mersin port was genetically modified. The executives were later released. This incident has caused the debate on GMOs to heat up again. American officials joined the debate, saying legislation in Turkey should change and that penalties for GMOs should be moderated.
Corn and soy, in which GMOs are intensively used, are used as feed for chicken, fish and cattle. Corns generally make up about 10 to 20 percent of cattle feed, while soy constitutes less than 10 percent of this feed. Soy products are mostly used in fish feed.
The usage of GMOs as animal feed poses a threat to human health since scientific research has revealed that GMOs could pass from animals to humans when their meat is consumed.
U.S. officials demand Turkey facilitate usage of GMOs and soften the penalties on the issue.
Source:
www.organicconsumers.org
http://worldtruth.tv


If you want to help these blog , like and share the facebook page :

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblogv

 

STUDY REVEALS GMO CORN TO BE HIGHLY TOXIC

If you want this blog to get up with great information:
Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

A leaked study examining genetically-modified corn reveals that the lab-made alternative to organic crops contains a startling level of toxic chemicals.

An anti-GMO website has posted the results of an education-based consulting company’s comparison of corn types, and the results reveal that genetically modified foods may be more hazardous than once thought.

The study, the 2012 Corn Comparison Report by Profit Pro, was published recently on the website for Moms Across America March to Label GMOs, a group that says they wish to “raise awareness and support Moms with solutions to eat GMO Free as we demand GMO labeling locally and nationally simultaneously.” They are plotting nationwide protests scheduled for later this year.

The report, writes the website’s Zen Honeycutt, was provided by a representative for De Dell Seed Company, an Ontario-based farm that’s touted as being Canadian only non-GMO corn seed company.

~

“The claims that ‘There is no difference between GMO corn and NON Gmo corn’ are false,” says Honeycutt, who adds she was “floored” after reading the study.

According to the analysis, GMO corn tested by Profit Pro contains a number of elements absent from traditional cord, including chlorides, formaldehyde and glyphosate. While those elements don’t appear naturally in corn, they were present in GMO samples to the tune of 60 ppm, 200pm and 13 ppm, respectively.

Honecutt says that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (FDA) mandates that the level of glyphosate in American drinking water not exceed 0.7 ppm and adds that organ damage in some animals has been linked to glyphosate exposure exceeding 0.1 ppm.

“Glyphosate is a strong organic phosphate chelator that immobilizes positively charged minerals such as manganese, cobalt, iron, zinc [and] copper,” Dr. Don Huber attested during a separate GMO study recently released, adding that those elements “are essential for normal physiological functions in soils, plants and animals.”

“Glyphosate draws out the vital nutrients of living things and GMO corn is covered with it,” adds Honeycutt, who notes that the nutritional benefits rampant in natural corn are almost entirely removed from lab-made seeds: in the samples used during the study, non-GMO corn is alleged to have 437-times the amount of calcium in genetically modified versions, and 56- and 7-times the level of magnesium and manganese, respectively.

These studies come on the heels of a recent decision on Capitol Hill to approve an annual agriculture appropriations bill, even though a provision within the act contained a rider that frees GMO corporations such as the multi-billion-dollar Monsanto Company from liability. The so-called “Monsanto Protection Act,” written by a lawmaker that has lobbied for the agra-giant, says biotech companies won’t need federal approval to test and plant GMO-crops, even if health risks are unknown.

“The provision would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of an illegal, potentially hazardous GE crop while the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) assesses those potential hazards,” reads a letter to the House of Representatives that was delivered to Congress last month with the signatures of dozens of food businesses and retailers, as well as interest groups and agencies representing family farmers. “Further, it would compel USDA to allow continued planting of that same crop upon request, even if in the course of its assessment the Department finds that it poses previously unrecognized risks.”

Source:

RT

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want this blog to get up with great information:
Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

You Think GMO Is Scary? Nano Tech is Here, In Your Store

Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated!

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

 

Nanotechnology is measured in billionths of a meter, encompassing all aspects of life from food to medicine, clothing, to space. Imagine hundreds of microcomputers on the width of a strand of hair programmed for specific tasks....in your body. Sound good?

Engineering at a molecular level may be a future corporations' dream come true, however, nano-particles inside your body have few long-term studies especially when linked to health issues. Despite this new huge income-generating field there is a growing body of toxicological information suggesting that nanotechnology when consumed can cause brain damage (as shown in largemouth bass), and therefore should undergo a full safety assessment.

It is possible for nano-particles to slip through the skin, suggestive of a potential unnatural interaction with the immune system, or when micro particles enter the blood-stream. Some sunscreens on the shelf  today, for instance, have nano-particles that might be able to penetrate the skin, move between organs, with unknown health effects. Nano-particles in cosmetics have few regulations done by FDA.

Regulators are proposing that food companies that want to use tiny engineered particles in their packaging may have to provide extra testing data to show the products are safe.

The Food and Drug Administration issued tentative guidelines Friday for food and cosmetic companies interested in using nanoparticles, which are measured in billionths of a meter. Nanoscale materials are generally less than 100 nanometers in diameter. A sheet of paper, in comparison, is 100,000 nanometers thick. A human hair is 80,000 nanometers thick.

Thomas Faunce, of the Australian National University, who holds an Australian Research Council fellowship that looks at public nanotechnology health issues, said study's findings are significant and strengthens the case for mandatory labeling, and that stringent safety data should be required from manufacturers.'' Research is showing that nano-particles have the capacity to damage living cells and the precautionary principle should be applied,'' he said.

In 2005, The Helmut Kaiser Consultancy Group, global leaders in pro-nanotechnology, stated that about 300 nano-food products were available on the market worldwide estimating that market alone was worth 5.4 billion dollars in the USA. That was then.

 

By 2015, (just a few years away) they predict that nanotechnology will be used in 40% of the food industries. According to these consultants, by 2040, nano-produced food, with correct nutritional composition, maintaining the same taste and texture of organically produced food, will be commonplace, the norm.

It is clear that nanotechnology is already in the in some food and cosmetics, (including anti aging products and sunscreens).  'Smart' packaging and tracking, is ubiquitous. Invisible, (to the naked eye and some microscopes), edible nano-wrappers, complete with bar codes can track not only early spoilage, but improve the taste of food, or, whatever is called food.  Manufacturers are excited because the availability of food would no longer be affected by limited resources, bad crop weather, water problems, etc.  A modern way to feed the world.

Oh, don't expect an informative label on nano-particles in your products. Although marketers are thrilled to present benefits to make wrinkles vanish, or illuminate skin flawlessly, there are health and unknown downsides.

Where is the public debate, on the labeling of nano particles in your foods, or cosmetics, or the risks? Probably no where...Political leaders are still arguing on requiring GMO (genetically modified) labeling, it seems.

When lab rats are starved, and given a choice to eat organic potatoes or GMO, they go right to the organic. When only given the GMO potato they will eat it, or starve to death... (studies have shown severe damage subsequently). What do rats know?

So the next time you reach for something that say's 'smart'...think about what that means. Learn what you can about the source of what you put in, or on your body. Smart mini micro computers to control your skin and body fluids?

Source: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/

http://worldtruth.tv

Subscribe in a reader