Cenk Explains Why Money Trumps Everything on GMOs

[mother earth]

We need to get money out of politics and our food supply.

We need to be aware that big money pays for lots of things, reviews on products and schills on websites and bloggers.
There is no extreme big monied branding will not go to in order to disrupt, discredit and provide disinfo. And they've got
plenty of money to go around.

Lately, DU may as well be GOP or tea party science denial fests. Like Cenk says, there are no long term studies, and the short term ones are being squelched by the GMO oligarchs. Any democrat who buys into the BS that GMOs are somehow safe are lying or just plain ignorant. There is zero proof of anything they are saying. The so called "woo" they attempt to discredit is permeated in their lying and sanctimonious regurgitation of talking points and discrediting anyone who gets in their way.

Show me a pro-GMO'er here at DU and you've got yourself a science denier, a zealot who doesn't know truth from fiction.

There's a reason why there's such a battle against labeling these poisons, because they know people will look out for the health and welfare of their families. It's that simple. There are NO benefits to GMO's, none. The consumers are guinea pigs and they don't care one bit if they lose a few along the way....it's all about patenting every damned thing on this plant for privatization and profit.

True dems/DU'ers know all of this, the trolls here are just along for the fun filled lies and maybe a few bucks, science denial lives at DU, and we see you for what you are.

[DhhD]

1. Agreed. Science deniers are active on DU.

I am remembering the thread about astrophysicists and bio-molecular chemist relating to transformation, mutation, cell poisons and cross-kingdom GMOs being discussed by a consumer.

If GMO are not harmful, then why not label them? Why would an astrophysicist be afraid of labeling something, in their belief system, that is safe?

Wild type corn seed is one kind of organism and GMO cells are a different organism having its reproduction system changed into another species that cannot reproduce.

The world-wide scientific community should insist that these new organisms be renamed, therefore having a new bar code and sold separately at food stores and grain stores. A bend could simply read, Wild Type Corn. Monsanto want its organisms to remain separate, correct? Said so in court, correct? The grocery store binds could read, Company Name Corn and Wild Type Corn; by City Ordinance.

[KurtNYC]

2. I have worked on big budget ad campaigns and with a budget over $50 mil

part of the package for the advertiser is lots of polling to see how much the needle is moving. You see evidence of this in national elections when a candidate stops ads in a certain state -- they do so because they know, beyond the margin of error, that they are either going to win the state or it is unwinnable. With enough data, the advertiser can know how much they have to spend to get to 51%. It is likely that "No on 37" had even more funds available but simply stopped when they got to 51%. The final vote tally was:

Yes: 48.6%
No: 51.4%

But on the issue of GMOs, the battle has moved on. As in other areas (Market Basket and the Boycott of Staples, who are now closing 225 stores btw), consumers have discovered that they have the power to punish and reward. We are never "getting money out of politics" because the mechanism to do so doesn't exist. It is like asking for speeding tickets to be written at a NASCAR race. Money IS king but the good news is that the money in the hands of consumers is their vote for what they want the future to be. And collectively that is tons of money.

The fight against GMO labeling is the fight to keep consumers from having a choice about what they put into their bodies. Support for labeling cuts across the political spectrum with some polls showing as much as 90% of consumer in favor of labeling.

[drynberg]

3. Why are Monsatan and their ilk so afraid of GMO labeling?

Let's see...if just 5 or 10% of customers stopped buying a GMO product, marketers would panic... and changes would quickly follow. Duh. If you are a Troll, think about your kids and others' kids...and get smart. The quick payoff buck is nothing compared to throwing away the future of so many.

[panfluteman]

4. Maybe the Checkout Counter IS More Powerful than the Voting Booth!

The first step is to educate consumers and health care providers about the health risks and dangers of GMO foods, which are very real, and have a lot of good, solid evidence behind them. This is what Jeffrey M. Smith and his Institute for Responsible Technology are doing. Once consumers and the health care professionals who serve their health needs are adequately informed, a desire to avoid GMO foods or anything that might contain them naturally follows.

The whole labeling thing allows consumers to stick it back to the GMO companies: If you're so proud of your GMO crops and what they're doing for the world, why the heck don't you want them to be labeled? Why are you claiming that they are essentially no different from non-GMOs when you're addressing the consumer, yet will protect your patent and prosecute those non-GMO farmers who accidentally get downwind from your GMO farm and get contaminated with your pollen with such ruthlessness and severity? If you absolutely knew that they were just as safe as non-GMO foods, why fear and fight labeling with such dedication and ferocity?

An election initiative offers GMO companies and other corporate interests a great opportunity to flood the airwaves with their propaganda to fill brains of American voters when they are at their most receptive and vulnerable state, and when all critical thinking is turned off - when they're in front of the Boob Tube. But in contrast to an election event, consumers are making purchases every day of the year. The same thing goes with other progressive causes, like the fight against fracking - the greatest success seems to come from local community and grassroots action that circumvents the usual government channels and officials who can be bought off. It's the difference between conventional and decentralized guerrilla warfare - with the latter being the modality of choice for the poor underdogs - the concerned public.