Yes or No on 92? Cut through the crap, and the answer will reveal itself.

Election tensions are ramping up here in Oregon – on some issues more than others. In this past week, we received no less than three mailings from those representing the NO-side of Measure 92 – the Measure calling for labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods. Per recent polls, the overwhelming majority of Americans favor labeling of GE foods – this one, from ABC, indicates a whopping 93% of us want to know exactly what we put in our mouths.

Field and farm

First, I suppose, we should define “genetically modified” v/s “genetically engineered”. Genetic modification is an age-old concept. From the murky beginnings, one of the cornerstones of emerging civilizations has been learning to manipulate seeds and bloodlines  in order to improve size and quality of crops and domestic animals. Through selective breeding, hybridizing, continued propagation of natural mutations, grafting, and so on, new or refined varieties emerged, sometimes to great societal effect. But, until the 1980’s, no one thought to cross one specie with another. After a decade in biotech labs where the basic genetic makeup of crops and animals were successfully altered with DNA from differing species, new products were introduced on the market in the mid 1990’s. In 1992, the FDA took its hands off any supervision of these new crops, relying instead on the bum science of the Biotech industry, and their continued assurances that their altered products were ‘substantially equivalent’ to the unaltered versions. But given that “Genes from insects, animals, and humans have been added to crop plants; human genes have been added to pigs and cattle. “ people are understandably getting antsy, and demand to know. And this is what Measure 92 is about.

Seeing these made me  imagine the bottomless coffers the NO-campain is no doubt benefiting from...

Seeing these made me imagine the bottomless coffers the NO-campain is no doubt benefiting from…

The gist of the NO-side’s message is that labeling will affect pricing for consumers. This is, for the most part, bullshit. 64 nations around the world, including all of EU, already require labeling of GE foods, so all US exports have to comply. In other words – THEY ARE ALREADY DOING IT!  The European Union is acting on the premise of “better safe than sorry”, and are exercising the “Precautionary Principle”. You see, these new technologies were all implemented without thorough testing of either short- or longterm effects on either humans, or environment . Nobody – here or over there – can offer any guarantees whatsoever that they are safe, because that assertion has yet to be proven. An interesting, but probably not coincidental, circumstance is that all these countries offer universal health care to their citizens. They are not about to embrace such a giant Unknown without a healthy dose of trepidation, because they want to keep their citizenry healthy. So, there you have it! Every genetically modified product that is exported to these 64 nations requires labeling. In addition, on our home turf, Maine, Connecticut and Vermont have already voted to require labels, so even stateside, the wheels toward fair and open communication between producer and consumer have been set in motion.

The Nay-sayers go on to point out that those who want to avoid genetically engineered food are already free to do so – the mailings suggest that anyone concerned can just buy food that is labeled “organic” or “non-GMO” foods. Sure they can. Organic growers who want to market the fact that they are organic, have to go through an exorbitant, multi-layered, highly demanding and costly process to prove that they produce foods that is pure and free of either toxins or strange genes. In the light of the hurdles the organic farmers have to jump to prove their worthiness, I find the amount of whining from the Biotech side ironic, when all that is requested is that they tell consumers about their process – that the food is genetically engineered. If anything, the costs incurred might level the playing field between the two somewhat. And really, if GE food is so fantastic – why in the world are its creators not willing to come clean and be proud about it?

Tractor sign

Tractor crossing – the Willamette Valley really is a hotspot for the agricultural industry.

A good point from the NO-side is that this really is something that should be implemented on a federal level. I agree, but given the abysmal state of the most inefficient Congress US voters have ever seen, I believe individual states are probably better off fending for themselves. Besides, the USDA and FDA – the federal organs that are supposed to regulate these sorts of things, have been hopelessly laissez-faire in their approach. The fact that the combined Biotech industry – Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, et al. – spent over half a BILLION dollars lobbying Congress between 1999 and 2011 speaks volumes of the state of affairs, wouldn’t you agree?

Labels are everywhere. Wine bottles declare sulfites, egg cartons tell you whether or not the eggs came from free-range chickens, sandwich meats state the presence of nitrates, etc. I have yet to hear either producers, distributors, or retailers bitch about it. If Biotech were truly interested in fair and open communication, they wouldn’t constantly engage in shady deals and secret back room negotiations behind locked doors. One of the full-color pamphlets we received goes on to lament the millions of dollars required for enforcing the adopted regulations – should Measure 92 pass. They are probably right – Monsanto & Co (who btw are bankrolling the NO-campaign) are the worst kind of crooks, and should probably have their entire organizations scrutinized.

IMG_1346

Measure 92 is “complicated and misleading”, and “poorly written”, say the Nay-sayers. It might be – I honestly don’t know. But I DO know that what really matters is that it passes, as I think its implementation will hugely improve future protections for consumers and farmers alike, as well as holding the Biotech industry in check. In its essence, it is a good, worthy idea. Any crinkles can, and will, be ironed out later. The first round of the Affordable Care Act isn’t perfect either, and the idea that developed into the Common Core was quickly hijacked and thwarted by a bunch of opportunist edupreneurs.  At the most basic level, both were intended to improve countless lives, but will likely need a few years of streamlining to function properly. Measure 92 will get my YES-vote, even if it’s not perfect. Because I really, really want to know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About annamadeit

Born and raised in Sweden, my aesthetics and outlook on life are strongly shaped by a culture rich in history and tradition. I care a great deal about environmental responsibility, and my aesthetic reflects the visually clean, functional practicality and sustainable solutions that are the hallmarks of modern Scandinavia. I was trained as an architect at the University of Cincinnati and as a color specialist at the Scandinavian Colour Institute in Stockholm. I'm obsessed with plants and gardens, and aim to take my skill set a step further by designing gardens as well as interiors. As someone so aptly said: " Architecture is the skin that separates the exterior from the interior". So true - you can't successfully focus on one without incorporating the other. I'm also an avid cook, and I love to ski. In addition, I put time and efforts into trying to rectify things that I feel are wrong in my immediate community. As you will see, The Creative Flux will touch on all these things, and more. For sure, it's all over the map, but then again - so am I! Welcome to my blog!
This entry was posted in Rants and raves and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Yes or No on 92? Cut through the crap, and the answer will reveal itself.

  1. annamadeit says:

    Reblogged this on The Creative Flux and commented:

    I just had to write this…

  2. Felicia says:

    Information is power!

  3. Thank you for posting this, I’m a YES on 92 all the way. I want to know. We all deserve to know.

  4. Thank you for educating me on this. In my old age, I’m spending more time looking at labels and making decisions as to whether or not I should eat something or pick a better option. I’m all for more information on labels and more transparency.

  5. Very well written. I especially like the point: “And really, if GE food is so fantastic – why in the world are its creators not willing to come clean and be proud about it?” … And why are they pouring heeps of money into the NO campaign? It’s pretty obvious they are worried about losing money if the measure passes, which I sure hope to God it does!

  6. Kit Aerie-el says:

    Well written, fact-based, excellent points. I hope this measure passes in Oregon, and that it begins a domino effect for the rest of the states.

    • annamadeit says:

      Thanks Kit! I sure hope so too. I think the real aversion to labeling stems from fear of a very real possibility that people will avoid buying their stuff. Would love if we could get all those 93% to vote YES on this one… 🙂

  7. Jenni says:

    yes! Love this post!

  8. Even more so now than ever, with the door now opened for using 2-4d on GE crops. It’s not only what is being put in the crops but sprayed on them too.

    • annamadeit says:

      Yes Debbie – it is so damn scary… Those GE seeds are responsible for the huge upswing in herbicide use in recent years. That, and the very real threat of irreversible seed contamination is terrifying. We should all grab our pitchforks and march on Washington!

  9. Elvis says:

    The “misleading” assertion of the NO-camp’s objection to the measure is based on the understanding that labeling food for GMO content implies that is somehow inferior to non-GMO food. My belief is that people can think for themselves and if they choose to interpret labeled GMO foods as inferior, so be it. We aren’t and shouldn’t be in the business of protecting Monsanto by keeping their altered foods a secret. They are really such whiners. The measure is not “poorly written”, it just doesn’t include those foods over which the FDA or USDA has jurisdiction, like meat and dairy. Basically their objections to themeasure are specious. And this year you can vote for 92!

    • annamadeit says:

      Absolutely true, Jane! And you can get your lovely garden that I will use my newfound voting powers and VOTE! It really is a great feeling to be able to not only call them on their crap, but also add my voice to the – hopefully – many others, and vote the measure down. 🙂

  10. mbsopinion says:

    Thanks for so intelligibly summarizing this issue, Anna. I had that same thought about the opposition’s opinion that this measure is “poorly written.” We consumers cannot and should not have to wait for a perfectly crafted bill before we are given access to the exact ingredients in our food. Personally it is my hope that passing this measure will start to ball rolling on companies producing food with the quality standards we all wish for all foods our children eat. Bottom line (in MB’s opinion) is nobody knows (and everyone admits this is true) what the long-term affect of GMO may be. I’m old so GMO probably won’t kill me but I feel that my duty is to work to protect future generations from our apathetically accepting these capitalists’ claim that GMO is “safe.”

    • annamadeit says:

      I’m with you, MB… The most important thing is that it passes. Tweaks can happen later, IMHO. 🙂 Hopefully, it will pass and then we can tackle the absurdity of seeds being patented. Madness…

  11. Pingback: Flutter & Hum

  12. Pingback: Bloom Day – November 2014 | Flutter & Hum

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s