Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Monsanto Supported GMO Labeling in the UK

Posted by on Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Lewis Kamb at the Seattle Times notes something pretty interesting:

In September, the St. Louis-based biochemical giant dropped a single contribution of $4.2 million into the No on 522 Committee’s campaign account, after spending $8.1 million last year to help defeat a similar ballot measure in California.

But for a time in the late 1990s, Monsanto touted its support for disclosing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in foods sold in the U.K., including in separate ads that featured a genetically engineered potato and a strawberry.

“Recently you may have noticed a label appearing on some of the food in your supermarket,” one advertisement said. “This is to inform you about the use of biotechnology in food.

Monsanto fully supports UK food manufacturers and retailers in their introduction of these labels. We believe you should be aware of all the facts before making a purchase.

Jesus, that last quote, save for the "Monsanto" part, sounds like a Yes on 522 press release. Read the rest.


Comments (11) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
MacCrocodile 1
But if Monsanto likes it, we must oppose it! This is a completely legit reason to decide my vote!
Posted by MacCrocodile on October 9, 2013 at 11:33 AM · Report this
Matt from Denver 2
Timing is everything. There were no anti-GMO actions or groups to speak of, so they likely thought people would have a favorable opinion, therefore they should be able to market itto the public. Once the focus group research showed quite the opposite...
Posted by Matt from Denver on October 9, 2013 at 11:37 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 3
If anything, this is a condemnation of the ability of Americans to learn about topics and make informed decision on their own, as well as what Matt said @2.

@1: The only sensible course of action for us hysterical anti-corporate liberals is to not vote at all. You won't trick us Monsanto!
Posted by Theodore Gorath on October 9, 2013 at 11:41 AM · Report this
fletc3her 4
@2 Hiding the source of food simply because it is unpopular does not strike me as a good reason to oppose labeling.

Say people dislike bananas from Haiti for some reason. Is that a good reason for us to allow del monte to stop labeling the country of origin on their products? Even if it's a stupid reason?
Posted by fletc3her on October 9, 2013 at 11:55 AM · Report this
@1, 2 & 3 : Truly all great comments, good citizens!!!

Speaking of which, in America and throughout Africa, the Billy & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation have been industriously promoting Monsanto and their GMOs.

So let's take a closer look at they typical trustee on the Rockefeller Foundation (I'll avoid the obvious Gates Foundation as that would be stepping on too many local people?), and suffice it to say that the Gates (or Microsoft) hedge fund(s) and the Rockefeller hedge funds and said foundations being invested in those hedge funds, are heavily invested in Monsanto.

Typical Rockefeller Foundation trustee: Rajat Gupta.....

Rajat Kumar Gupta (Bengali:রজত কুমার গুপ্ত [ɾɔdʒot̪ kumaɾ gupt̪o]; born 2 December 1948) is an Indian businessman and philanthropist who was the Managing Director (chief executive) of management consultancy McKinsey & Company from 1994 to 2003. He was also a board member of corporations including Goldman Sachs, Procter and Gamble and American Airlines, as well as an advisor to non-profits such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Additionally, he is the co-founder of the Indian School of Business, American India Foundation, New Silk Route and Scandent Solutions.

Gupta was convicted in June 2012 on insider trading charges of four criminal felony counts of conspiracy and securities fraud. He was sentenced in October 2012 to two years in prison, an additional year on supervised release and ordered to pay $5 million in fines. In May 2013 he remained free on appeal.

From 2006-2011, he served as a Trustee for the Rockefeller Foundation.

(Also, take a close look at the Clinton Global Initiative next time you get a chance!)

Of additional interest:…

And speaking of Microsoft...... (they are teaming up with Lockheed Martin to control your data!)…
Posted by sgt_doom on October 9, 2013 at 12:00 PM · Report this
Will in Seattle 6
It is possible to be pro-science and pro-labeling, but only if not funded by the deniers
Posted by Will in Seattle on October 9, 2013 at 12:03 PM · Report this
Dougsf 7
Fear of witchcraft lasted much longer in the colonies than the Motherland.
Posted by Dougsf on October 9, 2013 at 12:11 PM · Report this
@4 I wasn't around for the debate on adding labels for country of origin. If that debate had looked like the 522 debate, and if the pro-label people made illogical or offensive arguments, I might well oppose country of origin labels. 'unpopular' might be among the best reasons for not labeling, if that public sentiment would mean more negative than positive outcomes.
Posted by wxPDX on October 9, 2013 at 12:15 PM · Report this
Eastpike 9
I'm for a mandate that would include ingredient-listing labels. We now read "soy protein", it would then read "GM soy protein". The whole warning label thing is really tasteless.
Posted by Eastpike on October 9, 2013 at 1:06 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 10
@ 4, where did I say I was against labeling?
Posted by Matt from Denver on October 9, 2013 at 2:01 PM · Report this
venomlash 11
This is kind of like how the NRA used to support universal background checks.
Posted by venomlash on October 10, 2013 at 10:57 PM · Report this

Add a comment


Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy