I’m Voting “yes” on California’s Proposition 37

I’m in favor of labeling genetically engineered (GE) foods. And so I’m voting for California’s Proposition 37, the “California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act,” in November. Prop 37 calls for the labeling of all whole (GE) foods, like Monsanto’s GE sweet corn currently being sold at Wal-Mart, and processed foods with GE ingredients like corn syrup and soy lecithin sold in grocery stores in California. I’m voting for it and I’m posting the “nut shell” version of why I’m voting for it (that I recently composed in response to a family friend’s request for background information related to Prop 37) below.

But first, in the interest of full transparency, I want to disclose that am working on the Prop 37 campaign. I’ve written a couple of op-ed pieces, I’ve met with editorial writers from a couple of California newspapers, and when newspaper or radio reporters ask Prop 37 staff for the name of a scientist they could talk to about genetic engineering technology who is not a “zealot” in favor of it and who, therefore, might be able to provide a more balanced explanation of it, the staff often send them to me. I am a volunteer; I receive no payment of any kind for my time and effort in connection with the Prop 37 campaign.

In a nutshell:

“I’m definitely voting “yes” on Prop 37. Citizens in a capitalist democratic society like ours have the right to know what’s been added to their food, and there are laws on U.S. books indicating the same. The foreign protein in the GE tomato I helped bring to market was regulated as a food additive but after officially approving that GE food FDA came out and declared that no other GE food need be regulated similarly; currently, the FDA does not require regulation of nearly all GE foods. (One exception is when a foreign gene was obtained from an organism known to cause allergies in humans.) In fact, it’s possible to create a GE food that doesn’t require regulation with any U.S. agency, FDA, USDA or EPA, so no, you can’t trust the FDA to ensure that the foods produced using this powerful technology are safe.

One source of risk with these foods is that the process(es) for introducing the genes into the crops is [not under the control of the genetic engineers] and the foreign genes often, at rates as high as 40-60% of the time, land in a plant gene disrupting and mutating it. Therefore, regulation is necessary on a case-by-case basis.

Also, the tomato I worked on was labeled in grocery stores and they flew off the shelves. (In Davis the owner of the store rationed them, two GE tomatoes/person/day.) I think not labeling just makes people distrust the technology.

But, safe or not, Prop 37 is about having the right to know what’s in our food and how it was produced. And I believe we should have that right in the U.S. These companies label their products for sale in other countries, they should label them for us as well.”

To conclude, if you’re a registered voter in California, I urge you to vote “yes” on Prop 37 in November’s election.

This entry was posted in Biotechnology and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to I’m Voting “yes” on California’s Proposition 37

  1. petemrtno says:

    Your argument is very persuasive; I am voting YES on Prop 37. Among many other transparency issues, the European Union requires all 27 countries to reveal on label if a food is genetically modified. Why do we continuously have to fight for the same information? A Democrat was president when the FDA said no regulation of GM foods was necessary (except when the modifying agent was an allergen), and a Democrat is again president, decades later. Where is a difference?

  2. Susanne Karlak says:

    We will too!

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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s