The USDA has proposed a rule for mandatory labels on genetically engineered foods. And the proposal is a travesty for the farmers who work to produce non-GMO foods and the consumers who want to know what’s in their food.
USDA appears to have set out to mislead and confuse most consumers:
. Instead of using the long-accepted terms genetically engineered, GE, or GMO, the agency is proposing to use terminology that most consumers would not recognize, namely “bioengineered” and its acronym “BE.”
· Companies would be able to use a symbol instead of words or letters – and USDA’s proposed symbol includes a smiley face or a sun in pretty yellow and green colors. That’s not informational labeling, its propaganda!
· While the USDA’s own study showed that many consumers would be unable to read digital QR codes (because of a lack of a smartphone, unreliable internet, or otherwise), the agency is still proposing to allow companies to use digital QR codes in place of readable labels
THE SOLUTION: On-package text using the accepted terms “GE” or “GMO”, or an easily understood neutral symbol.
And, more fundamentally, the USDA’s proposed rule doesn’t even include many foods made from genetically engineered ingredients:
· New forms of genetic engineering such as CRISPR (gene editing) and Synbio (Synthetic Biology) could be excluded. So only foods with the older GMO crops would be labeled, while consumers would be left in the dark about all the new foods coming down the line — such as oranges, cacao, potatoes, soy, and canola – using CRISPR and other gene-manipulating technology.
· The agency has left open whether many processed foods made with GE commodity crops should require labels. Many of these products, such as cooking oils, sodas, and candies, are so highly refined that current DNA tests may or may not “show” the GE content in the final product, despite the original ingredient indisputably being GE. If left out, hundreds of GE foods will not have to be disclosed.
THE SOLUTION: Any food made with ingredients that were genetically engineered by any method should be labeled as such.
If you sign an online petition, USDA will count all of those signatures as a single comment. To really make your voice heard, you need to submit your comment directly to the USDA.
In addition, personal comments that explain your reasons have a greater impact. It’s more effective to comment on just one or two of the issues, and include your reasons, than to simply list all the problems we discuss above.
Deadline: Tuesday, July 3, 2018, at 11:59 pm.
Before you go to the Regulations.gov website, write your comment down in Word or another file – that way, if there is an internet glitch, you don’t lose it.
I am a [farmer, small food business, consumer, parent …. ]. I urge USDA to provide clear, on-package labeling of foods that contain ingredients made from genetically engineered crops, regardless of the specific type of technology used.
Use the discussion above to help you choose which issue(s) you want to comment on. Your comment can be as short or as long as you like – what matters most is providing your individual thoughts and reasons.
To submit a comment online:
1. Go to https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=AMS-TM-17-0050-0004
2. Copy and paste your comment in the top box, or attach the file
3. Fill out your personal information and then click the “continue” button at the bottom.
4. It will go to a page that shows you what your comment will look like on the site. It also allows you to edit the comment if you want to.
5. At the bottom, there will be a statement that you have to confirm: “You are filing a document into an official docket. Any personal information included in your comment and/or uploaded attachment(s) may be publicly viewable on the web. I read and understand the statement above.”
6. Click the box, then click “submit comment” under it. The site will give you a receipt with your comment number on it.
You can also send your comment in by fax: (202) 690-0338
Faxed comments should include the following reference:
Date Posted: May 4, 2018
Federal Register Number: 2018-09389
Docket ID: AMS-TM-17-0050Agency: Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)Parent Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Thank you for taking action!🖨️ Print post
Chef-Doctor Jemichel says
The USDA is the result of an “Act of Congress”. “Acts of Congress” are limited to the Lawful jurisdiction of the “United States” which is entirely a proprietary-based jurisdiction that is clearly defined. This means the “Acts” pertain only to what is actually on or directly engaged with government-owned property. Therefore the “Lawful jurisdiction” of the USDA is limited by the same limitations of the “proprietary-based jurisdiction” of “Congress”. The problem is that the American people do not know what these limits are! It is a problem because government takes advantage of this lack of knowledge and as it has been said “…. people are destroyed for lack of knowledge!
In any case – the evidence regarding the USDA “to mislead and confuse” goes all the way back to the original “Act” and so it is not surprising by this writer that this truth-oriented Foundation should write: “USDA appears to have set out to mislead and confuse most consumers”! In both this instance and concerning the original Act of Congress the confusion occurs by not “using the long-accepted terms” and/or common language that is clearly understood by the American people.
Calling Congress members does not solve the above mentioned “problem” that this writer sees as underlining faulty “rules”. Any one who knows the Organic Laws of The United States of America will be able to see that Congress has continuously extended its jurisdiction under “color of law”. The first check for this overextension should be with the fifty independent and sovereign states (but not by the corporate fictions with similar sounding names as the original states) .
The “confusion” is truly unimaginable! That fact needs to be well noted because when any legal agreements are involved in any of this (or any other) “rule” it can be lawfully voided on the basis of the confusion!
 in the fourth Organic Law of September 17, 1787 along with the third Organic Law known briefly as the “Ordinance of 1787: The Northwest Territorial Government”.
 Hosea 4:6
Christine Zecca says
Right now I never buy anything that is not labeled organic or that doesn’t have a label stating that it is non GMO certified. Otherwise I assume everything in the center of the grocery store is toxic and should be avoided like RoundUp.
My body is so poisoned that I now have Parkinson’s. Hummm I wonder why?
Chef-Doctor Jemichel says
Sorry to hear about the Parkinson’s, Christine!
I also “wonder why” and just looked into a holistic, Mind-Body, “new medicine” presentation regarding the biological symptoms:
I wish you well!
Chef-Doctor Jemichel says
P.S. Another article that includes a mention of Parkinson’s and possible benefit with saunas. ~ https://www.curezone.org/blogs/fm.asp?i=2137324