Big Food

New Feature: Thank a Lawyer

Over the decades, the right wing has done a pretty good job brainwashing the American public into thinking that “trial lawyers” are evil and greedy. That meme has come in handy in the No on Prop 37 campaign’s scaremongering about imaginary “shakedown lawsuits.” (Read more on Prop 37.) So that got me thinking, it’s high-time to refurbish the image of lawyers, especially those fighting against Big Food. (See my post from July, Top 10 Lawyers Working to Improve the Food System for a good start.)

The following three stories have all been in the news in just the past week. Each illustrates the important role of lawyers in helping to curb various harms of our industrialized food system. Watch this space for more stories like these. And if you know any lawyers, please give them a hug; they could probably use it.

Environmental groups win challenge to gene-altered crops on National Wildlife Refuges in South

Monsanto Roundup-Ready Alfalfa Should Be Blocked, Court Told

Dairy farmers threatened with lawsuit for ground contamination

Full disclosure: Each of these stories involves lawyers from the Center for Food Safety, where I am a consultant. However, I did not write this on their behalf.

Busted: Food Myths Brought to You by Corporate Front Groups

Over the past few months, I’ve been writing about Proposition 37, the California initiative that would require foods made through genetic engineering to be labeled, a policy that is common sense in 61 other countries, but has been denied to Americans thanks to lobbying by Big Biotech. One of the most prominent food myths perpetuated by the likes of Monsanto is that we need genetic engineering “to feed the world.”

Continue reading →

California Newspaper Editorial Boards Spread False Claims and Faulty Logic on Proposition 37

Each election season, proponents and opponents of the various initiatives on the California ballot hope for the state’s major newspaper endorsements. While you can’t expect every paper to endorse your side, Proposition 37, which would require labeling of foods produced using genetic engineering, seems to have had a string of incredibly bad luck. So incredible, in fact, that the reasoning behind several California newspaper endorsements of a No vote has me scratching my head.

Read rest at Center for Food Safety…

Did Monsanto Write This Op-Ed Signed by a UC Davis Professor?

UC Davis: University of California

As I recently explained, University of California at Davis agriculture researchers are heavily influenced by the funding they receive from Monsanto and other big biotech players. This conflict of interest explains in part why we are seeing several UC Davis professors author reports and op-eds opposing California’s Proposition 37, which would require labeling of foods containing GMOs.

Continue reading →

Addendum to Article on UC Davis Reports on California’s Prop 37

I recently wrote about how two reports out of the University of California at Davis made questionable claims regarding Proposition 37, a California initiative that would require GMO foods to be labeled. The author of the one of the articles, Colin Carter, wrote to inform me that his article “was an independent analysis” and that he “did not receive any funds from the No on Proposition 37 campaign.”

Prop 37 Sparks Clash Between Organic Brands and Parent Companies

Even if you don’t live in California, you have probably heard of Proposition 37, which if passed in November, would require labeling of foods containing genetically engineered ingredients. The state-wide initiative has been causing quite a stir, in part because of the companies that are opposing the measure. Read rest at New Hope …

University of California at Davis Reports Make Dubious Claims on Prop 37

UC Davis: University of California

Last week I wrote about how the No on 37 campaign – the California ballot initiative that would require labeling of GMOs foods – is relying on experts with questionable credentials to do its bidding. Over the past few weeks, two expert reports have emerged from the No campaign that also warrant closer scrutiny.

Continue reading →

Meet the Scientific “Experts” Claiming GMO Foods are Safe

Last month, I wrote about how the food industry has hired powerful consultants with ties to Big Tobacco to oppose California’s Proposition 37, which would require labeling of all genetically engineered foods. Now, the No on 37 campaign (ironically named the “Stop the Deceptive Labeling Scheme”) is putting up alleged scientific experts to do its bidding, once again taking a page from the tobacco industry playbook.

Continue reading →

McDonald’s and Coca-Cola – An Unhealthy Alliance

This week, the New York City Board of Health is expected to approve Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposal to limit the size of sugary soft drinks. Motivated by rising diet-related chronic diseases (along with healthcare costs), the mayor’s attempt to rein in out of control portion sizes caused quite a media firestorm. Predictably, the soda lobby has come out swinging, complete with an industry front group called, “New Yorkers for Beverage Choices.”

A better name would be, “Soda Pushers for Continued Profits.”

Continue reading →

Top 10 Lies Told by Monsanto on GMO Labeling in California

right to know

The battle in California over Proposition 37, which would require labeling of foods containing GMOs, is really heating up. Millions of dollars are already being poured into the opposition campaign, with much of it going to former Big Tobacco shills. Over at GMO HQ, Monsanto recently posted this missive called “Taking a Stand: Proposition 37, The California Labeling Proposal,” in which the biotech giant explains why it is opposing the measure (to the tune of $4.2 million so far).

Continue reading →