The second of a five-part series, this article examines in some depth how a number of European countries came to turn their backs on genetically modified (GM) crops. Belgian scientists apparently experimented with GM plants in the 1980s and instituted 50 different field trials, positioning Europe to be a world leader in plant biotechnology. A public backlash, fueled by fears over mad cow disease and food safety, followed the European Union’s approval of a pesticide-resistant corn, and no GM crop has since been approved. European scientists, concerned about the politicization of science, are apparently considering ways to restore public confidence in scientific integrity and the safety of GM crops. The Dutch have apparently proposed that the EU allow each member nation to make its own decision about whether to allow GM crops after giving consideration to a broad range of issues, including human safety, biodiversity, “cultural heritage,” and economics. The Dutch…
Category Archives Media Coverage
In the first of a series of reports, this article discusses the sugar beet growers from Oregon’s Willamette Valley involved in litigation that has, to date, successfully challenged U.S. Department of Agriculture decisions to deregulate genetically modified (GM) sugar beets without conducting appropriate environmental impact assessments. Organic farmers risk the loss of their EU markets if their crops become contaminated with GM strains, and GM farmers have apparently been unwilling to flag the location of their fields, fearing ecoterrorism and burned crops. The standoff reportedly led to the litigation which was brought by the Center for Food Safety, whose executive director is quoted as saying, “Every farmer should have the right to grow non-GMO crops and not fear contamination. Farmers shouldn’t be out there in constant fear that they’re going to be contaminated.” The article notes that while Europeans have been resistant to GM crops, U.S. consumers are largely unaware…
Rachel Maddow brought Rick Berman to her MSNBC-TV program on October 6, 2009, to find out how he funds the websites and other public relations initiatives he undertakes to challenge the science on issues ranging from trans fats and mercury in fish to high-fructose corn syrup. Berman claimed that his practice of nondisclosure, which is legal, is no different from what other groups do, no matter where they lie on the political spectrum. He contended that the information he posts on websites such as MercuryFacts. com or FishScam.com is based on science. Maddow, however, pointed out that one of his research directors, who provided written testimony to the Food and Drug Administration challenging studies purportedly showing a link between sweetened beverages and childhood obesity, has a degree in music and once produced a talk radio program.
One hundred three years after Upton Sinclair published his meatpacking industry exposé, The New York Times has published an article explaining how current food safety standards may be responsible for the 16 E. coli-tainted beef outbreaks that have occurred over the past three years. Revealing how failure to test all the scraps and trimmings and “mash-like product” in hamburger patties in 2007 purportedly led to a 22-year-old dance instructor’s illness and subsequent paralysis, the article “shows why eating ground beef is still a gamble.” Apparently, no federal rules require grinders to test their ingredients for the pathogen, and processors sample assembled products rather than individual shipments from slaughterhouses, making it difficult to trace the source of contamination. Parts of the article were reportedly read on the floor of House, and its revelations prompted a response from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the company that made the beef patties the…
According to a recent Orlando Sentinel article, consumers do not understand the difference between food products labeled as “natural,” which, for the most part, is an unregulated term, and those labeled “organic,” which carries extensive government regulation and requires certification. Some food producers are apparently taking advantage of consumers’ mistaken belief that “natural” is a greener term than “organic”; the natural food market reportedly grew 10 percent between 2007 and 2008 to $12.9 billion. Foods labeled “natural” are generally sold for less than those labeled “organic,” and producers can and do create their own definitions for what is “natural.” The article outlines the different rules applying to organic and natural food products. See Orlando Sentinel, September 29, 2009. In a related development, the French agency responsible for regulating competition and fraud has reportedly issued a note establishing requirements for foods sold as “naturel.” The document was apparently prepared for inspectors…
“Just as a doctor would prescribe different antibiotics for strep throat or tuberculosis, different probiotic species and strains confer different health benefits,” writes New York Times columnist Tara Parker-Pope in this article examining food-labeling claims that link Lactobacillus and other probiotic families to improved digestive health. According to Parker-Pope, some experts and scientific studies have suggested that specific probiotic strains may reduce diarrhea and the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome, but researchers have stopped short of a consensus on disease prevention and overall health maintenance. “It’s a huge problem for the consumer to try and make heads or tails of whether the products that are out there really work,” stated one assistant professor of medicine at Tufts University. The article notes that recent litigation involving yogurt maker Dannon Co. has also drawn attention to the issue. The company has apparently agreed to list the scientific names of the probiotic strains in its…
Noting that Washington, D.C.-based industry lobbyist Rick Berman will be on her MSNBC-TV program during the week of October 5, 2009, Rachel Maddow this week discussed the most recent campaign Berman’s Center for Consumer Freedom has undertaken on behalf of the producers of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Maddow showed viewers the clip of a new TV ad that directs those wanting to know more about how sugar and HFCS are the same to a website that Maddow said was, “brought to you by something called the Center for Consumer Freedom . . . headed by . . . Rick Berman, the D.C. public relations guy who runs these operations as nonprofits so they don’t have to disclose the names of the companies that fund them.” Maddow also said that the center “is not just here to convince you to stop worrying about sugar, they also link to their other sites like…
“Sugar is the most absurdly protected agricultural commodity in America,” according to health nutrition author and New York University Professor Marion Nestle, who answered reader questions about sugar policy during a September 20, 2009, online forum hosted by the San Francisco Chronicle’s website, SFGate.com. In explaining the so-called “sugar crisis,” Nestle stated that “Quotas allow U.S. producers to grow only specified amounts of sugar cane and sugar beets each year, for which the USDA [U.S. Department of Agriculture] guarantees a higher-than-market price.” She noted that these quotas and import tariffs have “ensured that Americans pay two or three times as much for sugar,” resulting in the “unnecessary transfer of $3 billion a year from 350 million Americans to a few thousand sugar growers and processors.” With these industry interests allegedly invested in “sugar protectionism,” Nestle reported that these policies might finally change partly “because the gap between domestic and world…
“It may take more than an analogy with tobacco to convince voters,” argues Daniel Engber in the first of two recent Slate articles questioning the effectiveness of a proposed federal tax on sugar-sweetened beverages and other “hyperpalatable” food products. Titled “Let Them Drink Water: What a Fat Tax Really Means for America,” the article asserts that state-levied soda taxes have thus far “turned out to be way too small to make anyone lose weight.” It states that any successful effort to deter consumption would require redefining soda as drug, not a beverage. “It’s hard to draw a line, though, between foods that are drugs and foods that are merely delicious,” opines Engber, who notes that under this regime, “Doughnuts are a drug; brioche is treat.” He concludes that fat taxes, which “[discriminate] among the varieties of gustatory experience,” would create an “apartheid of pleasure” that disproportionately affects those consumers most…
This article examines a new food-labeling campaign called the Smart Choices Program™, which uses the government dietary guidelines to identify “smarter food and beverage choices” for consumers. According to reporter William Neuman, the industry-backed system has apparently provoked the ire of some nutritionists who question the use of the green checkmark on “sugar-laden cereals like Cocoa Krispies and Froot Loops.” The Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture have also warned the program’s managers that the agencies will be monitoring the results to see whether the labels “had the effect of encouraging consumers to choose highly processed food and refined grains instead of fruits, vegetables and whole grains.” “What we don’t want to do is have front-of-package information that in any way is based on cherry-picking the good and not disclosing the components of a product that may be less good,” one senior FDA advisor was quoted as…
