Will California’s GM food referendum change what America eats?

June 13, 2012 – HEALTH - Last month, nearly 1m signatures were delivered to county registrars throughout California calling for a referendum on the labeling of genetically engineered foods. If the measure, “The Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act,” which will be on the ballot in November, passes, California will become the first state in the nation to require that GM foods be labeled as such on the package. This is not the first time that the issue has come up in California. Several labeling laws have been drafted there, but none has made it out of legislative committee. Lawmakers in states like Vermont and Connecticut have also proposed labeling legislation, which has gone nowhere in the face of stiff industry opposition. And the U.S. Congress has likewise seen sporadic, unsuccessful attempts to mandate GM food labeling since 1999. What makes the referendum in California different is that, for the first time, voters and not politicians will be the ones to decide. And this has the food industry worried. Understandably so, since only one in four Americans is convinced that GMOs are “basically safe,” according to a survey conducted by the Mellman Group, and a big majority wants food containing GMOs to be labeled. This is one of the few issues in America today that enjoys broad bipartisan support: 89% of Republicans and 90% of Democrats want genetically altered foods to be labeled, as they already are in 40 nations in Europe, in Brazil, and even in China. In 2007, then candidate Obama latched onto this popular issue saying that he would push for labeling – a promise the president has yet to keep. In Europe, only 5% of food sold contains GMOs, a figure that continues to shrink. In the US, by contrast, an estimated 70% of the products on supermarket shelves include at least traces of genetically engineered crops – mostly, corn and soy byproducts and canola oil, which are ingredients in many of America’s processed foods. Given their unpopularity with consumers; labeling “Frankenfoods” would undoubtedly hurt sales, possibly even forcing supermarkets to take them off their shelves. In one survey, just over half of those polled said they would not buy food that they knew to be genetically modified. This makes the financial stakes for November’s referendum vote huge. California is not just America’s leading agricultural state, but the third most populous state in the nation. If companies are made to change their labels in California, they may well do so all over the country, rather than maintain a costly two-tier packaging and distribution system. –Daily Mail

Thanks!

there is another great notice by NaturalNews about another attempt of control of eugenics

Reuters promotes eugenics with 'abortion is safer than giving birth' headline

http://www.naturalnews.com/034787_abortion_childbirth_eugenics.html

and a question

Could this Reuters article's headline be part of an early psy-op (psychological operation) attempt to reverse the decline in abortions?


it seems there is no understanding of values of life.