A measure that would require most foods made with genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled in California was significantly behind early Wednesday.

Supporters of Proposition 37 said consumers have a right to know whether food has been genetically altered, particularly when the long-term health impacts are unclear. Opponents argued that the labels would stigmatize foods that are scientifically proven to be safe. With more than 94 percent the precincts reporting, voters rejected the proposed labeling law. California would have been the first state in the nation to pass such an initiative.

Scientists conclude GMOs are toxic on Mammalian Health

“We said from the beginning that the more voters learned about Prop. 37, the less they would like it,” said Kathy Fairbanks, a spokeswoman for the opposition. “We didn’t think they would like the lawsuits, more bureaucracy, higher costs, loopholes and exemptions. It looks like they don’t.”

The measure calls for genetically engineered foods to include labels on either the front or back of the product. Whole foods, such as sweet corn and salmon, would have a sign on the shelf. Products such as alcohol, beef, eggs and dairy are exempt.

“Whatever happens tonight, this is a win,” said Grant Lundberg, CEO of Lundberg Family Farms, co-chair of Yes on 37. “Never before have millions of Californians come together to support giving consumers a choice about genetically engineered foods.”

This is baffling, who wouldn’t want to know whats in their food?



  1. super77 says:

    Ignorance is bliss.

    And maybe a tumor or two will give you a super power.

    • Dallas says:

      agreed.

      Monsanto (chemical company) spent about a million dollars a day in ads to keep this information off the food label.

  2. iwishiwasaballer says:

    too easy to blame Monsanto

    Californians are just idiots

    we even voted to raise taxes on ourselves

    • saintkaze says:

      The problem with the measure wasn’t stupid Californians. it’s that the measure was filled with loopholes for all kind other products that should be labeled, but weren’t going to be. Anyway how’s your stare doing with passing this kind of measure.

  3. CPBrown says:

    Surprise – science wins. Not unfounded fear mongering.

    • super77 says:

      Time will only tell.

      I can’t say that I completely trust our government, Monsanto or any other agricultural biotech company’s stamp of approval that this doesn’t have negative long term effects. Our government is incompetent and these companies have to much at stake financially. They have shareholders for God’s sake.

    • Ken says:

      What science? The science funded by Monsanto? Or the science funded by organizations such as the USDA which is headed up by former Monsanto executives? I don’t advocate forcing people or companies to anything, but I also don’t believe everything that comes from the State Sciences Institute.

  4. Eric says:

    In general I like the idea behind labeling food, but when it comes down to it, I think this would been another Prop 65. Does anyone even notice those signs anymore?
    Also – what is the line between a GMO food and cross-breeding? Are they any “heirloom” foods in the stores anymore?

    Maybe we should have the reverse of that law – put a strict definition on the word “heirloom” and allow foods that match the definition to be labeled as such – much like the legal definition of “organic”

    • Sea Lawyer says:

      Cross-breed two varieties of the same species and splicing genes of insects into soybean DNA is quite another.

    • Dallas says:

      I don’t care to eat new life forms created by some company and sure as hell want to know which ones they are.

  5. Ned Ludd says:

    These damned machines will cause our children to be born as ungodly heathens.

  6. UncDon says:

    The eating of laboratory rats at Monsanto’s cafeteria only causes cancer to those who haven’t been inoculated at a Monsanto health clinic.

  7. Hoser says:

    I live in California and voted No. Not because I love Monsanto, quite the opposite, but the details of the law were so severly flawed that just about EVERYTHING was exempt for having to put a label on it. I saw as more of an opportunity for large agri-businesses to strong arm/intimidate/extort small family run farms. Read the literature if you can find it. It’s alarming what qualified for an exemption.

  8. kmfix says:

    The non-gmo food producers should label their own food as non-gmo. Consumers will make their own decisions at that point.

    • Poison Apple says:

      I agree, in BIG letters with a caption that says “Do YOUR products say non-GMO? If not, why?”

    • ECA says:

      kM
      here is a problem for you..
      You are a food Creator, you make CAKES/bread/some product…
      HOW are you going to test the goods sent to you?
      Over 2/3 of corn in the USA is GMO..
      Potatoes…at least 50% are GMO
      Wheat?? I couldnt even guess..
      most of the foods in the USA have become GMO..

      Here is a small trick to test..
      HOW big is the crop per acre. NON-GMO cant be grown in TIGHT crops, they need more room to grow.
      Do you find a few bugs EATING it, will mice EAT it??

      Canola is a GMO..its a converted rape seed.
      Soybean, is another GMO..

      Explain to me, how you get Vegetable oil?? and its not from a vegetable..

      • NobodySpecial says:

        Simple – make it from imported Eu/Canadian wheat.

        If consumers start demanding that their cakes are made from imported wheat then US wheat farmers will stop using GMO.

        • ECA says:

          ns,
          do you know what Canola oil is..
          Canada OIL..
          I suggest you think abit harder. As even MUCH of canada is GMO.. Also they have a Much shorter growing season..for the price.

      • mharry860 says:

        ECA, the problem, except for the oils, is that we’re not even supposed to be eating that stuff. Read “Deadly Harvest”, it’s not the only source for what it claims either. No grains, no dairy (eggs exempted), no starches, no beans (except green), no jalapenos.

        • eca says:

          You REALLY want something strange?
          Look up Amino acids, and HOW we get them in our diets..

          you are almost correct.
          We are Omnivores..we need to eat abit of Everything in the environment..
          There are 40 types of apple..
          There are at least 20 types of Tomatoes..
          There are MORE grains then you can count..
          BLEACHED WHITE isnt a grain..its a process.

          Our diets are supposed to be about 80% BULK..NOT 50% SUGAR..or other strange products.
          you should also look up Which crops are REGULATED..

  9. ECA says:

    http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/37/title-summary.htm

    oN THE LEFT IS THE SELECTION OF WHICH PARTS TO READ..

    For anyone that knows, reading this crap gets Complicated.

    A point I would like to make.
    If the bugs cant eat it, and the Mice/rats WONT eat it..SHOULD WE..

    In my area(farming areas) we usually get a couple mice per year wondering into homes over fall/winter..(not to bad) I aint seen any in the last 2 years. Also the owls and hawks in the area, are MORE into the towns.(looking for food) and they arnt Picky if its your CAT or small dog.

    Nature is interesting. and so is Cross pollination. ANY dominant Crop can over whelm any other.

    I also see a few medical conditions popping up, and will leave those to you to Noticed..in the near future.

  10. MikeN says:

    So why couldn’t they just have the legislature pass it?

  11. MikeN says:

    What happened to the proposition that eliminates the suburbs, I think it was 32?

  12. spsffan says:

    Well, I hemmed and hawed over this one but eventually decided that it needed a no vote. Not because I don’t want to know what’s in my food. Not for love of Monsanto. Not because I think there either is or is not anything particularly wrong with the science behind genetically modified substances.

    The proposition, like so many that find their way to the ballot, was flawed. Too many loopholes, and too much burden placed on the retailer (as opposed to the manufacturer or packer) of food items.

    I’m not particularly concerned about health effects from GMA foods, but as one who CAN eat peanuts fresh from the shell and fresh oranges, but CAN’T eat pre-shelled peanuts or peanut butter or orange juice, I understand that everyone is different and for some folks some genetic mutation may be a bad thing.

  13. noname says:

    Voters voting to be ignorant and have chosen to live in knowledge squalor! WoW!

    We are living in a “Post-Informed Thinking” and “Post-Responsibility” society. People are turning their self-responsibility for healthy living over to business under the guise it’s good for business and it’s good for jobs!

    It’s not like Business or Tobacco companies would ever hurt the health of their customers would they?

  14. MWD78 says:

    i guess California is right on the mark for the amount of Fluoride in its water supply, and will serve as the benchmark for the rest of us. now they know just how much they need to use to keep our brains soft.

  15. Reck re. 8tional says:

    Most states have a law that a liquor store cannot locate within x amount of feet of a church. BUT. A church can locate right next door to an existing liquor if it wants to. The liquor store SHOULD have the same rights!! What’s up with that shit?

  16. Admfubar says:

    hey just look at it this way..

    http://www.bizarrocomics.com/?p=8412

  17. Mark says:

    People bemoaning the lack of this amendment’s passage should look at the results of proposition 65 which drove massive labeling requirements based upon faulty research and fear. There’s a way to regulate things like this and it involves studies, research, cost/benefit analysis, and proof. It’s not through the amendment process where the average vote has zero good information to make an informed vote.

    • McCullough says:

      And how long does that process take, 20 years? In the meantime, people have a right to choose if they want to feed their young children this crap, now.

      Trust the government and the corporation and eat it if you will, I don’t care.

  18. sargasso_c says:

    Another way to achieve a similar level of public awareness would be to label foods as “non-GMO derived” or “certified organic”. Producers who are incapable of meeting audit requirements of the label can’t use it. A serial number or a bar code could show a trace to source, where the food came from.

    • noname says:

      Smart, very smart.

      It’s like a stuck nut. Sometimes you have to turn the other way to loosen it.

      I can’t see what legal standing GMO producers should have in objecting to a “NO GMO” label.

      But then again, people did vote to be ignorant and not take responsibility in making family food choices.

  19. Yankinwaoz says:

    I am a Cal voter, and I voted no on this too.

    Here is why. Because our initiative system is broken. It is now used by corporations who can’t get their schemes past Sacramento. So the write horribly lopsided, deceptive, and sometimes just plain evil initiatives. I didn’t understand this proposal, so I am not going to vote for it. I don’t think I am dumb. I tried to understand it. But I don’t think I know enough about it, or can detect the gaping loopholes snuck in there.

    As a rule of thumb, for me, I vote no on all initiatives unless I am given a damn good reason why I should. To me, these are all attempts to bypass the state legislative process with its checks and balances. If a group, or company, has a good idea, then take it to Sacramento and get it passed. Don’t try to pull a fast one.

    Also, unlike laws, passed proposals can’t get fixed. So if we pass a flawed one, it takes another damn one to fix it. I’d rather they take these “good ideas” and get them passed like a normal law.

  20. dave m brewer says:

    What are you guys arguing about..? You all need to chill out… Puff…puff…puff… Were all screwed it doesn’t matter!

    Hey Adam, you should have moved to Colorado…puff…puff…puff…

  21. orchidcup says:

    This is exactly why I grow my own food and consume most of what I grow myself.

    More than 90% of the so-called food in the average grocery store is processed or modified in some way.

    People are sick and obese today because they eat at Sonic or McDonald’s and never consume pure and unadulterated vegetables and fruits. A 12-pack of beer every day is not a good source for carbohydrates.

    Wake up and smell the coffee, folks. You are being poisoned by Agribusiness and chemical companies.

    • Dallas says:

      agree. what’s in the food supply is awful.

      This explains why Alphie lactates.

    • PoonofWug says:

      People are obese because of a surplus of calories. Eat less, it does not really matter what. Everything we eat has been genetically modified in some way, nature does these things at random.

  22. ECA says:

    WELL,
    here is a synopses of what BUSINESS IS..
    How do I make money?
    How do I make more money?
    HOW can I cut corners?
    HOw many short cuts can I take?
    Sugar is to expensive..(only in the USA, restricted market) Lets use something ELSE.. oh! that less expensive, but I need CHEAPER..CHEAPER..
    WOW, heres a way to grow 10 times more..LETS DO IT..
    OH! WOW, heres a seed that dont need to be Weeded..It kills everything around it..Cool.
    Heres a plant that BUGS wont eat, Wonderful..
    Heres a plant that Mice wont bother…
    Heres a Seed that has ALL THAT…

    Nature took YEARS to create the seed that we could eat..but do you know WHY?? because we would do the SAME as other animals..PASS IT..and seed other locations. but we dont EAT the seed..we BEAT it down and take out the BULK, then eat the Germ in a power…That seed cant SEED.. And a good 80% of USA people have NEVER eaten RIPE food.(maybe a banana)

    They grow so much FOOD in the USA(it used to be Plains and forests, LIKE BRAZIL) that we EXPORT over 60% of the crops.

  23. Moran says:

    Codex alimentarius.

  24. MikeN says:

    I guess people on this site are anti-science.

    • ECA says:

      WHICH SCIENCE??
      The Science of being able to put something on a shelf that expires in 6-12 months, because they removed all the Proteins, and other materials that would spoil, in 2 weeks??
      Food that is so, pasteurized, homogenized, Sterilized, and artificially Flavored..
      I will bet that at least 60% of the people reading this, have NEVER tasted REAL milk. the stuff with abit of Creame in it.. regular Store milk is 1/2 water..
      how about a PICKED RIPE tomato??

      How about religious science?? you think this planet is only 4000 years old??

      • noname says:

        Does fresh, still warm breast milk count?

        • eca says:

          depends on what you FED her first..

          I could leed you out to the areas where they raise cows, on the dairy… And I would believe that in the first Few hours Strapped to a pole, you would think twice about drinking milk from a dairy.
          That a dairy cow has a life of 5 years, Pregnant and milking.. And given drugs to keep them milking.
          I will let you ask them what happens to the calves..

          Strange fact, that in 1999, they CUT the cow herds around the USA, by about 20%, and kept up the amount of milk production..

  25. ECA says:

    Check for Storms in your area..there are to many reasons for NET slow down.

  26. You know, at lunch I ate gene products from 6 different plants all mixed together. Then had some fish gene products mixed with legume gene products, and wheat gene products with cow gene products. And according to common sense, there was probably some insect gene products to a minor extent on everything.

    Using biotech to transfer genes cross species should require labeling for potential immune reactions, but the fear is nonsense. Remember this next time you have a chicken Caesar frankensalad, with gene products from bacteria, fowl, plants all mixed together in your gut.

    • eca says:

      Can I give you a BARE estimate..
      that human kind have killed over(way over) 50% of all the creatures in Europe and the americas.. I cant tell how many from other countries, but considering SOME of them have a high population and smaller size then the USA..I think the animals are having difficulty..

  27. noname says:

    California is finally realizing it needs to be business friendly.

    With the relaxed labeling laws, it time to start making and selling certified and boldly labeled organic all natural “Soylent Green” with no GMO added! It’s a dead certain 120% return on investment opportunity.

    Flavors include, Dark Mocha, White Blanch, Red Tan, Yellow Oriental or our favorite Mystery Mix.

    It’s like having the old folks over for a night of drinks!

  28. rabid monkey says:

    Well here is an argument for the other side of the coin concerning the toxicity of GMO’s. This article points out specifics on how such conclusions cannot be drawn based on the study performed:

    Under Controlled: Why the New GMO Panic Is More Sensational Than Sense –> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/09/21/under-controlled-why-the-new-gmo-panic-is-more-sensational-than-sense/

    • rabid monkey says:

      in particular I though this fact was interesting: “Then of course, there is the question of the animals themselves. Who were these rats? As it turns out, the rats used in the study were the Sprague Dawley rat strain, a widely used strain in biomedical and behavioral research. Unfortunately, this strain is prone to specific diseases…including the development of tumors. Up to 57% of female Sprague Dawley rats have been shown in other studies to develop tumors, especially mammary tumors, spontaneously.”

    • rabid monkey says:

      here is a poignant question raised by the article I cited: “And as some critics have pointed out, if GMO maize and Roundup, both highly utilized agricultural products, really caused a drastic increase in tumors, why haven’t we seen this in humans? Mark Tester, research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, expressed this concern to the Science Media Centre: “The first thing that leaps to my mind is why has nothing emerged from epidemiological studies in the countries where so much GM has been in the food chain for so long? If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren’t the North Americans dropping like flies?!”

  29. MartinJJ says:

    It reminds me of this demo Jamie Olivier gave to some schoolkids about chicken nuggets:
    Jamie Oliver – Nugget experiment epic failure
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9B7im8aQjo

    In other episodes the children could not even tell what an union, a tomato or what most vegetables were when he showed them.

    So, labeling food probably would not make any difference anyway.