GMO Labeling to Appear on Washington Ballot

GMO Labeling to Appear on Washington Ballot

By Alyssa Carducci, The Heartland Institute 
The mission of the Heartland Institute is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems.( Smokers Rights )

Sowing Fear
“I-522 is about freedom of choice so we can decide what we feed our families and whether we want to buy and eat genetically engineered foods,” said Trudy Bialic, spokesperson for PCC Natural Markets.

Gregory Conko, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, says consumers have a right to know if products they purchase have negative health consequences. However, requiring producers to provide notice of genetically modified ingredients misleads people into believing a health risk exists, Conko said.

(Steve Forbes: “Over its 25-year history, CEI has played a critical role in preventing the worst of the left's utopian nightmares from becoming reality, and in undoing some of the damage those policies have created.”)

“The use of recombinant DNA techniques—what’s generally referred to as biotechnology, genetic engineering, or genetic modification—to modify foods does not itself make a food more or less safe, or change the nutritional value of a food,” said Conko. “So labeling a product as ‘genetically modified’ gives consumers no useful information.”

‘Betrays a Political Agenda’
Todd Myers, environmental director at the Washington Policy Center, says non-genetically modified (GMO) crops have negative impacts that could be listed on labels as well.

Myers points out non-GMO crops often require more water, more fertilizer, and more herbicides. Each of these factors could harm the environment and even human health.

----------------

The Ripple Effects of Flawed Agbiotech Regulation
By Gregory Conko, Henry I. Miller,
January 9, 2013

Senator Durbin is wrong on energy drinks ban
By Michelle Minton,
November 28, 2012

Mass. biotech reaps Monsanto deal
By Gregory Conko,
August 30, 2012

--------------------

CA Prop 37: Tobacco/DDT Advocate Henry Miller and the Dubious Scientific Credibility of Labeling Opponents

Meet Henry Miller -- a spokesperson the No on 37 campaign has been all too eager to promote as an arbiter of good science and someone we can trust with our families health. Miller has been featured in No on 37 television ads, written outrageously deceptive opinion editorials, and has presented himself as an "unbiased" scientific expert.

And now he's been caught misrepresenting Stanford University -- forcing the No on 37 Campaign to pull and reshoot a statewide television ad identifying Miller as "Dr. Henry Miller, MD, Stanford University," without disclosing his affiliation with the Hoover Institute, a right-wing think tank at the University. In other words, he works ON the Stanford campus as a corporate propagandist, but ISN'T a Professor at Stanford University.

-----------------------

Washington Policy Center exposed: Todd Myers

Todd Myers has spoken at the Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change. In case you didn't know, the Heartland Institute has received significant funding from ExxonMobil, Phillip Morris and numerous other corporations and conservative foundations with vested interest in the so-called debate around climate change. That conference was co-sponsored by numerous prominent climate change denier groups, think tanks and lobby groups, almost all of which have received money from the oil industry.

Why not just call it the Washington Fallacy Center? For a litte more background, including ties back to the Koch Brothers, go HERE. In fact, Jack Kemp calls it “The Heritage Foundation of the Northwest.”