Figuring Out What's In Your Food

Consumers Are Left To Wonder Which Genetically-Modified Foods They Might Be Eating

(CBS)  According to a recent CBS News/New York Times poll, 53 percent of Americans say they won't buy food that has been genetically modified. But CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian reports that it's not that easy to avoid. While most packaged and processed foods do contain genetically modified ingredients, the labels don't have to say so.

Robyn O'Brien teaches her kids to keep a close eye on the labels of the foods they eat.

"In terms of labeling," she says, "they're not always comprehensive and thorough."

What concerns parents like O'Brien is not what's listed, but what is not. Particularly foods made with genetically modified organisms - or GMOs.

"My concern as a mother is, are these kids part of a human trial that I didn't know that I had signed them up for," O'Brien says.

Today, more than 90 percent of the U.S. soybean crop is genetically modified - had its DNA altered to increase production and withstand chemical weed killers like roundup. Nearly three-quarters of all corn planted in the U.S. genetically modified.

Experts say that means if it comes in a can or a box and the label lists soybean oil or corn syrup as ingredients, odds are that it contains GMOs. Overall, 65 percent of all products in your local grocery store have DNA-altered ingredients...not that you'd know it by looking.

"The industry that makes genetically modified foods fought so hard to make sure that it wasn't labeled," nutritionist Marion Nestle tells Keteyian.

Nestle, a former FDA advisor, says this was a fight that boiled down to one basic fear.

"They didn't want it labeled because they were terrified that if it were labeled, nobody would buy it."

Robert Brackett is spokesman for the Grocery Manufacturers of America.

"I think that consumers have that information available to them if they want to look for it," says Brackett, "You can find it on websites. You can go directly to the manufacturer."

When pressed by Keteyian to explain his organization's role in providing information to the consumer, Brackett said, "Well, it's our responsibility to make sure that the foods that are put in the grocery store shelves are safe."

The FDA and bio-tech giants like Monsanto say there's no evidence that GMOs are anything but safe, but food safety advocates ask: how would we know, if the food is not labeled?

"Labeling is the only way that health professionals are going to be able to trace if there is a problem," says Andy Kimbrell from the Center for Food Safety. "For example, if you're a mother and you're giving your child soy formula and that child has a toxic or allergic reaction, the only way you'll know if that's a genetically-engineered soy formula is if it's labeled."

The FDA does not require "disclosure of genetic engineering techniques...on the label," calling GMOs the "substantial equivalent" of conventional crops.

Baloney, says Kimbrell.

"There is nothing - nothing, substantially equivalent from a conventional crop to a GMO crop," he says. "And in every cell of these new GMO foods are bacterias we've never seen in food before: viruses, genetic constructs, antibiotic bugs that they put in there, laboratory contructs that they've put into every cell of these foods."

A new CBS News poll found that 87% of consumers would like GMO ingredients to be labeled, just as they are in Europe, Japan and Australia. Yet the U.S. Congress has never even held a vote on the issue, to give shoppers the opportunity to exercise their most basic right - to make a choice.

[fleabag75]

As I have said countless times, the average American male is more concerned about the quality of motor oil that goes into his car than the quality of food that goes into his body. And just think, the car is only temporary.

[AlwaysSmiling]

For brianbwb: "Sharing many of these concerns, Monsanto made a commitment in 1999 not to commercialize sterile seed technology in food crops. We stand firmly by this commitment. We have no plans or research that would violate this commitment in any way."

http://monsanto.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=59&item=136

Of the four that I checked (Monsanto, DuPont, Dow, and Bayer) only Monsanto has specified their position on the subject.

My question is this. Did you read the websites that I provided as references? Or did you just discount them without bothering?

Have a nice day:-)
Patrick.

[rf35]

Companies like DuPont and Monsanto are developing GM foods that produce sterile fruit, so the farmer cannot save a portion for replanting, once your land is infected with Monsanto''''s "terminator" foods, the farmers around the world will be forced to buy seed from Monsanto and DuPont.

They have developed GM corn, which any farmer knows is wind pollinated, then they sue farmers whose crops were infected by their product.

Posted by brianbwb at 02:12 AM : May 13, 2008

Well, which is it? Are they sterile or not? If they are suing farmers for having their corn pollinated by the GM corn, then it must be producing offspring, therefore it is not sterile. If it is sterile, the pollination is not causing more corn plants to be produced, no profit being made, and there%u2019s nothing to sue over.

For those of you worried that your food is making you allergic to something, go find a knows %u201Cpure%u201D source of seed and start subsistence farming! Weirdoes. The only thing you%u2019re allergic to is reason.

[pameladrew]

This is a watershed moment in American media who have carefully omitted any discussion of Monsanto and GMO foods since the first President Bush Administration.

For nearly a decade I have tracked the legislation, politics, science and spin surrounding these crops, the privatizing of the food supply and the connection to skyrocketing food allergies and illnesses.

In 2007 I released a documentary film to challenge the issues banned in America. The site has a wealth of information and trusted sources to use for those looking for accurate follow up. The web is filled with front groups by industry so look carefully for trusted sources.

There are many like Consumers Union who have established a record of truthfulness in their Consumer Reports that are good sites to begin with; no need to accept my view but do take my words of caution and know the source.

My links only make it a little faster and are in no way all inclusive. www.roundupreadynation.com

Knowledge is power, know what you are swallowing!

[pameladrew]

This is a watershed moment in American media who have carefully omitted any discussion of Monsanto and GMO foods since the first President Bush Administration.

For nearly a decade I have tracked the legislation, politics, science and spin surrounding these crops, the privatizing of the food supply and the connection to skyrocketing food allergies and illnesses.

In 2007 I released a documentary film to challenge the issues banned in America. The site has a wealth of information and trusted sources to use for those looking for accurate follow up. The web is filled with front groups by industry so look carefully for trusted sources.

There are many like Consumers Union who have established a record of truthfulness in their Consumer Reports that are good sites to begin with; no need to accept my view but do take my words of caution and know the source.

My links only make it a little faster and are in no way all inclusive. www.roundupreadynation.com

Knowledge is power, know what you are swallowing!

[nsf-ralph]

The issue is food labels that are (in FTC parlance) "truthful and not misleading." FDA has taken the unlawful position that since we all "know" (without any risk analysis testing) that GMO products are the "same" as natural products the Govt must not only refuse to mandate truthful GMO status labeling, but must also forbid "GMO Free" labeling, so we sheeple don''t make the "bad" decision of preferring what the CBS/Times poll shows we prefer....

Not logical. Not lawful either. Sandra Day O''Connor, writing for the majority in Thompson v Western States (2002) stated the law:

"We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information."

What to do? Join the Natural Solutions Foundation eAlert list, the largest Health Freedom list in the world, at http://www.globalhealthfreedom.org

Also check out two Yahoo!Group forums:

Just Say No to GMO

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-genetically-modified-foods/

and

Morgellons-GMO

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Morgellons-GMO/

Ralph ******** JD
NSF Trustee

Th

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by patdickey43

There is an important point that you''re missing, pat.

Companies like DuPont and Monsanto are developing GM foods that produce sterile fruit, so the farmer cannot save a portion for replanting, once your land is infected with Monsanto''s "terminator" foods, the farmers around the world will be forced to buy seed from Monsanto and DuPont.

They have developed GM corn, which any farmer knows is wind pollinated, then they sue farmers whose crops were infected by their product.

Think for a minute about the consequences of a staple food monopoly on world food prices, and how healthy you will be when you cannot afford to buy the food at their price, and have no alternatives, because their infections wiped out other strains.

[AlwaysSmiling]

Thank God the media is starting to pay attention to this issue. It is VITAL!that Americans start to pay attention to what is being done to our food. It is making us all sick. We are all getting cancer and unnatural allergies... we are all lacking in nutrition. We are all suffering from depression, anxiety and lack of vitality because of the lack of nutrition in our food........

Posted by mhamilton60 at 05:57 PM : May 12, 2008

---

mhamilton, I eat processed and boxed food (along with fast food) on a daily or bi-daily basis. However, I also eat fresh food. The last physical that I got, I was in great health. My point?

I eat GMO food (whether I know it or not). Your quote says We are ALL.... We are ALL.... We are ALL... My point is, I don''t have cancer that I know of. I''m allergic to BS and hospitals, but NOTHING food-related. And my nutrition is fine... So, we are ALL doesn''t include me. Since I live in Iowa, I think I''m an American...

Unless you''ve got a statistic that shows something my doctor doesn''t, be careful about saying "We are ALL"...

Here''s a thought for everyone to consider.... If it is proven that GMO foods are indeed bad, do you think people will sue companies like Monsanto? And, as for those same companies, how long do you think they''ll stay in business?

Do you really think they''re betting their farm so to speak, without researching the health hazards?

Have a nice day:-)
Patrick.

[mhamilton60]

Thank God the media is starting to pay attention to this issue. It is VITAL!that Americans start to pay attention to what is being done to our food. It is making us all sick. We are all getting cancer and unnatural allergies... we are all lacking in nutrition. We are all suffering from depression, anxiety and lack of vitality because of the lack of nutrition in our food. Genetically modified food should not even be allowed to be produced! I don''t want it on the label.. I want it out of my food altogether! Other countries are rejecting American food because of the deadly ingredients and side effects our food has on people. WAKE UP AMERICA! TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK!

[AlwaysSmiling]

Also, since I was limited to 1500 characters, I didn''t point out that the two comments that I quoted contradict each other. One says "We don''t know the effect becuase no testing is being done." where the other one says "Research shows that it doesn''t break down the same way..."

And the CORN that isn''t digested by humans that made it into the food supply, was that GMO corn, or "Field Corn" which anyone from the Midwest knows is meant for animals? If I had to guess, I''d say "Field Corn".

So, buy fresh sweet corn from the guy in his pickup at the corner. Oh wait, he doesn''t label that it''s "Pioneer" or "Dekalb" or any specific brand. So you don''t realize that the fresh sweet corn that you bought is "GMO" corn... And if you buy it from his pickup, did you honestly even give a thought to whether it''s "GMO" or not? I''m guessing "NO" since there wasn''t a label to read. Same thing with your "Farmer''s Market".

And, a lot of the genetic research is being done by Universities and colleges. Not by Monsanto, DowAgroSciences (the second link), Bayer, Syngenta, or Cargill.

A couple of comments mentioned Bt Cotton. Last time I checked, no one intentionally eats cotton. Also, my understanding is that the organic community has actually embraced the Bt Cotton seed, since it means less pesticides that they have to use. I could be wrong about this though.

Have a nice day:-)
Patrick.

[AlwaysSmiling]

"GMOs threaten crops the world over. Furthermore, we have no way of knowing whether these foods breakdown in our digestive track they way they should or not, because no testing that we know of is being done. However, WE DO KNOW THAT there is corn that cannot be digested by humans and has gotten into our food supply."

"That is NOT true. Research has demonstrated that the modified dna of the GMO organisms affects the functionig of your body''''s cells for a few days after it is "broken down" and absorbed into your body''''s cells! We don''''t yet know what affects that has in terms of your physical and mental functioning, but it is absolutely NOT the same as eating real food."

Care to quote sources of all of this information? I''m not saying they''re wrong nor right. But if you don''t have sources to back the quotes up, then you can be accused of fear-mongering.

A little research (google) gives you Monsanto''s side of the story... http://tinyurl.com/65uyq4 and http://tinyurl.com/6am7z9 (Since they were singled out in the article).

http://tinyurl.com/579urq (Another well-known company who''s using Genetics and Biotechnology)

http://tinyurl.com/5gflno (Cargills'' information on Biotechnology)

http://tinyurl.com/5ppxvz (Syngenta''s information on Biotechnology)

http://tinyurl.com/68xbkr (Bayer Crop Science information on Biotechnology)

Now, I wonder why the reporter didn''t show anything from the other side of the story???

Have a nice day:-)
Patrick.

[rudy654-2009]

What do you think you are eating, plants as they existed thousands of years ago? They have been highly bred and highly modified.] I do not mind modifications to raise the protein level, add nutrients, make the plants more drought tolerant, decrease their reliance on fertilizers. Posted by LawyerTom1 at 03:20 PM

Shut up. Most of us who even know what GMOs are, know the great difference that exists between the cultivation of a species for agriculture and the monopolizing intent of Monsanto through gene splicing. I hate it when retardss like yourself come on here and think you are intelligent.

[lawyertom1]

GMO food is not the issue; the issue is what is the modification to accomplish. [I find it funny that some folks freak out over GMO. What do you think you are eating, plants as they existed thousands of years ago? They have been highly bred and highly modified.] I do not mind modifications to raise the protein level, add nutrients, make the plants more drought tolerant, decrease their reliance on fertilizers. I am a bit skeptical about adding genes to make pesticides, even those as innocuous as Bt. I prefer farmers utilize IPM strategies so that resistance will be held in abeyance for as long as possible. Adding Bt genes is no different than exposing the pests to sprays, and thus the development of resistance that follows. Admittedly, some clever types have, at least at the bench level, come up with some work-arounds, but I still prefer little or no pesticide to a constant dose, however it comes to be.

[rf35]

If there were substantial problems with human consumption of genetically modified food, we would be seeing it clearly by now. It doesn''t bother me one bit if the genes of my corn flakes have been tweaked. If they struck up a conversation with me at the breakfast table, then I''d be worried. As it is, they haven''t, I haven''t grown any extra eyes, and my idiot nephew had ADHD before anyone even thought of direct genetic alteration. Before that, it was all cross-pollination for hybrid species. Of course, if the population was at a sustainable level, we wouldn''t need GM crops, would we? If you don''t like GM food, stop at two children! Otherwise, shut up and color!

[tucano2]

Every modern country, e.g. Australia, all the European countries, the U.K., etc. REQUIRE PROPER LABELS TO DISCLOSE GMO''s. Only the USA and it''s prostitute FDA does not require such labels despite the demands of nearly 100 percent of Americans. Inexcuseable.

[usbrit-2009]

Didn''t the US sue the European Economic Community (EEC) over GMO corn? I believe the contention was unfair trade practices because the EEC''s ban on GMO''s effectively froze the US producers out of the European market as so much US produced grain was GMO. I also believe the EEC won.

[fuzzybear9]

Hello America and Cudos to CBS for an important
News Topic

what is in your food America ?

Fuzzy please don`t hold back !

Feces , Human Feces, and Lead,
yes with Wally`s Mart importing all that
mexican and chinese produce,
and with most of the current farming practices of the
Lemore California farming community adopting these practices we have
Feces, Lead, Botulism, Ecoli, and a couple others I missed.
being a part of your stable diet.
its all apart of the FDA`s attempt to give Americans a balanced diet. from the Four Food Groups
Feces
Botulism
Ecoli
and
Lead

sincerely growing my own chickens Bear
Fuzzy

[nsf-ralph]

Excellent reporting! This is an important issue wherein the US FDA position is not only irrational but also illegal.

FDA says that it knows people would choose non-GMO products if given the choice, and since that would be a "bad" choice, consumers shouldn''t have the information. Thus, FDA opposes both required GMO labeling and permissive GMO Free labeling.

The US Supreme Court in Thompson V Western States laid that illegal attitude to rest in 2002:

"We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information."

If readers are concerned about these issues, they can get more information by joining the Natural Solutions Foundation eAlert list at: www.healthfreedomusa.org or www.globalhealthfreedom.org

We''ve also set up two Yahoo!Groups forums at:

Just Say No to GMO

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-genetically-modified-foods/

and

Morgellons-GMO

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Morgellons-GMO/

Ralph ******** JD
NSF Trustee

[nsf-ralph]

Excellent reporting! This is an important issue wherein the US FDA position is not only irrational but also illegal.

FDA says that it knows people would choose non-GMO products if given the choice, and since that would be a "bad" choice, consumers shouldn''t have the information. Thus, FDA opposes both required GMO labeling and permissive GMO Free labeling.

The US Supreme Court in Thompson V Western States laid that illegal attitude to rest in 2002:

"We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information."

If readers are concerned about these issues, they can get more information by joining the Natural Solutions Foundation eAlert list at: www.healthfreedomusa.org or www.globalhealthfreedom.org

We''ve also set up two Yahoo!Groups forums at:

Just Say No to GMO

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-genetically-modified-foods/

and

Morgellons-GMO

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Morgellons-GMO/

Ralph ******** JD
NSF Trustee

[nsf-ralph]

Excellent reporting! This is an important issue wherein the US FDA position is not only irrational but also illegal.

FDA says that it knows people would choose non-GMO products if given the choice, and since that would be a "bad" choice, consumers shouldn''t have the information. Thus, FDA opposes both required GMO labeling and permissive GMO Free labeling.

The US Supreme Court in Thompson V Western States laid that illegal attitude to rest in 2002:

"We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information."

If readers are concerned about these issues, they can get more information by joining the Natural Solutions Foundation eAlert list at: www.healthfreedomusa.org or www.globalhealthfreedom.org

We''ve also set up two Yahoo!Groups forums at:

Just Say No to GMO

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-genetically-modified-foods/

and

Morgellons-GMO

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Morgellons-GMO/

Ralph ******** JD
NSF Trustee