I-522 Rally for Our Right to Know at the Capitol Steps in Olympia - October 17th 1-3pm!

Press Release;

Governor Inslee is undecided about I-522 and labeling genetically engineered foods. 

On October 17th at 1pm, hundreds of Washington residents supporting I-522 will converge on the steps of the Capitol Building in Olympia to deliver signatures, post cards and stacks of letters in support of this initiative to Governor Inslee's office. 

The governor will also be provided with supplemental information on I-522 (see below). The rally will include endorsing organizations, parents, children and many voters who wish to urge the governor to take a stand with the people on this issue.

We also encourage Governor Inslee to talk one-on-one with the people to understand all we are asking for is the basic right to know what is going on with our food and labeling genetically engineered food is an important piece of information everyone who eats deserves to know.

For more information on I-522 and a full list of endorsers, go here

Volunteers for I-522 are volunteers from around the state joined together to help pass I-522 and get GMOs labeled in Washington State.

Volunteers For I-522 - Supplemental Facts on I-522 for Governor Inslee 

1. Washington voters want labeling of GM food:

National and local polls have consistently found that a vast majority of the Americans want the choice of whether or not to buy GM food. 350,000 Washingtonians submitted signatures to get I-522 on the ballot and hundreds of businesses, farmers, organizations, elected officials and residents have endorsed it (see http://yeson522.com/endorsements/.) Opponents of I-522 are a handful of giant, powerful biotech and food companies, and a couple of very wealthy citizens.

2. I-522 is not arbitrary or complicated: 

Sixty-four countries have labeling laws. For simplicity I-522 conforms to those laws. Large processed food companies that use GM ingredients already label their products in those countries.

3. Washington farmers support I-522:

Most Washington farmers are small and local. I-522 would protect conventional farmers who can't afford organic certification, and the measure would protect their exports from being rejected by the many countries that ban GM crops. For a list of the many farmers who support I-522, see: http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#farmers-ranchers.

4. Shoppers will not pay more for groceries:

Consumers in the over sixty countries who already label, have not seen prices go up. Companies have not seen costs skyrocket. Costs did not soar when nutritional information was added to labels, though food manufacturers resisted it. Businesses also have eighteen months to comply with the new labeling requirement.

The Fiscal Impact Statement provided by the state Office of Financial Management in the Washington Voter Guide, estimates implementation costs at $3,368,000 over six fiscal years. Divided by six years and by residents over eighteen, that comes to "less than a dime" (nine cents per person, per year). 

Opponents of I-522 have aired hundreds of commercials citing claims by the Washington Research Council that I-522 would cost $22 million a year. The Washington Research Council is an industry organization that was paid to conduct the study. It lacks substantive economic proof to support its estimated cost.

5. I-522 is not anti-biotech:

There is no provision in I-522 to ban biotech food. It simply provides consumers with choice. 

6. I-522 does not require pet food to be labeled:

Unlike California’s Proposition 37, I-522 only relates to food for human consumption. See Section 1 (18): http://yeson522.com/about/read/.

7. There are no U.S. government safety studies of GM food:

The FDA does not conduct safety assessments of GM food. It relies on data provided by the biotech companies who produce the food. Independent scientists in the U.S. must obtain permission from biotech companies to conduct health studies.

The American Medical Association recently called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods (See “GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA” by Monica Eng, Chicago Tribune June 19, 2012.)

In April of 2000, the National Academy of Sciences expressed concerns about GM foods and the lack of safety testing: “There is reason to expect that organisms in US agro-ecosystems and humans could be exposed to new toxins when they associate with or eat these plants.” (http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9795&page=130). 

The NAS also pointed out the danger of pleiotropic effects (multiple effects in an organism from the addition of a novel gene), causing allergic reactions to unexpected proteins, toxins or allergens. (Ibid, p. 134) The report highly recommended stringent testing on the part of the FDA. There is no safety testing of GM foods in the U.S., so such testing has yet to be conducted.

Press Contacts:

Cindy Black, Seattle - 206.552.3276, cindy@kcsalesgroup.com

Florence Vincent, Olympia - 360.264.6055, florencev2008@gmail.com

http://volunteersfori522.org/

###