Everyone’s favorite evil corporation is once again trying to stop people from knowing what is in their food:
SB 595 [in Kansas] bans two types of labels. The first is a label based on composition of the food product that can’t be confirmed through lab analysis. There is no current commercial lab test that can detect rBGH. Therefore, this would knock out labels such as rBGH-free, rBST-free, or Does not contain artificial hormones.
The current industry standard requires that farmers sign an affidavit swearing that they don’t use rBGH. The second provision in the bill knocks that out. In both instances, the bill makes an illogical leap that just because something isn’t demonstrated by a lab test or is sworn to by affidavit or other sworn statement, then its misleading. This would knock out any production-related labels, such as “Our farmers pledge not to use rBGH (rBST, artificial hormones).”
Monsanto is getting clobbered in the marketplace. Dairy after dairy is going rBGH-free, all over the country. We estimate that at least one third, and probably 40-50% of all fluid milk sold in the U.S. is rBGH-free, and its going higher all the time. This is costing Monsanto millions of dollars and they are pulling out all the stops to reverse the trend. Their strategy is simple prevent consumers from knowing whether dairy products are rBGH-free or not by censoring label information.
Whats even more incredible about this bill is that it would appear to cover ANY food, not just dairy products. This is beyond what weve seen in bills/rules weve been fighting in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana. I’m not even sure it’s intended to go that far. There are all kinds of food labels that can’t be verified by lab tests state of origin, country of origin, bottled water claims (such as spring-fed or from a particular location) and (possibly) organic, to name a few.
Craig Volland:
I believe this bill would also ban the label “free range” for meats which is critically important to small farmers in Kansas who sell direct to eaters or to restaurants. That’s because it is verified to our customers by testimonial or affidavit, not certification. Also, depending on how they define “agricultural product” ti could snag baked goods and jams and jellies, for example, that use some or all organically grown inputs but the processer may not, her- or himself, be certified organic.
-EatLocalKC
Go to the link above for the full story. This is a very important issue. Monster corporations are losing in the market place as people who eat food (are there another kind?) realize the deception and poison they’re being fed. Buying local and knowing what is in a package, how the animal was raised, etc empower consumers. That hurts Monstersanto and they’re fighting back with dirty pool.
If you are in Kansas then take action now while you still have the right to honest labeling.
Everyone else, watch out for this sort of nefarious legal twisting of the regulations to suite the evil empires of Big Ag. Sounds like something out of Store Wars!.
And to think ‘they’ talk about terrorists! What is our country coming to? Must we all drop down to support big Ag? Factory farming? It does appear that ‘they’ want all small farmers/ranchers/hobby farmers OUT, so ‘they’ can reap the profits. Grrrr…
Comment arlene — February 15, 2008 @ 10:40 am
Should we not encourage dairies, beef producers to put on their labels, advertising to have a phone number, website to “check our truth in labeling”? Or create a symbol which means purity. Seems the new political game to redefine something and declare it something else…
Comment D. Cox — February 15, 2008 @ 10:58 am
Write the State Chamber of Commerce. Explain that you will not vacation in, buy any product from, or spend a cent in the state of Kansas (plus will start a “contact information tree” unless the law to protect the population from rGBH free products being labelled is permitted. Then write 5 educational op eds to Kansas papers to educate the Kansas population of the dangers they face. Go proactive! It won’t take any longer than to read your email. It’s time corporate dictatorship and skullduggery stopped before it stops us and American children. Let’s show a little patriotism to our fellow citizens and take this on as Americans. The alternative is to be forced to fight bad laws state by state which fights would be much easier and more probable for corporations to win.
Comment Jack — February 15, 2008 @ 11:08 am
I’d really like to know why so many states have suddenly started to try to pass new labeling laws or regulations. This isn’t a coincidence. Someone is getting paid off.
Comment Barbara Steever — February 15, 2008 @ 11:39 am
There are 2 tests in Europe that detect artificial rBST in milk, and one in the US, none of which have been approved by the FDA, which is why they can say
There is no current commercial lab test that can detect rBGH.
Thought you all might like to know.
Connie
Comment Connie — February 15, 2008 @ 12:14 pm
I hope all the people of Vermont are voting for Ron Paul
this Presidential election.
He is the only one running
that will stop the NAIS
in its tracks.
http://knowbeforeyouvote.com
Comment Libertysilver — February 15, 2008 @ 4:21 pm
A letter to Kansas, if it is still okay to label it that
Dear Kansasians (Kansas people),
I just read that SB 595 out your way is aimed at stopping labels on your food.
link
It’s about that Monsanto junk in the milk again, ain’t it? Darn, the issue just doesn’t die, does it? You can stomp on it, and you can shoot it, and you can take out back and dig a big hole and bury it, and next thing you know, here it is, coming at you again, only worse. It’s a little bit like Night of the Living Dead which I didn’t actually see that but I’m guessing it was about more and more ghouly kind of things coming to get you no matter how much you try to kill ‘em off.
You gotta give those Monsanto boys credit for grit and determination, there’s no two ways about it. And imagination. Kind of twisted, but imagination none the less. Kind of like the kind a serial killer has, is what comes to mind. You know, where you just wonder what they are going to do next, just knowing it’ll be worse, and nothing’s going to make ‘em give up on their unnatural desires.
In this case, it seems to be some kind of perverted need to have people “DRINK YOUR GODDAM MILK - withou knowing what’s in it.
Nah. I got that wrong. It ain’t about drinking it, at all. It’s only about buying it.
Need to change that slogan. Not “Got milk?” Way too friendly. Also makes people think, “What’s it “got” in it?”
Maybe they could change it to “You better BUY the goddam milk or else.” Now, that’s catchy. And then they could add, “We don’t care what you do with it after that.”
What’s for sure, though, is they don’t go by popularity. Dairymen can’t stand ‘em and the some in the public just practically spit on their products, but they just go right around all that, cheery as can be, like they didn’t even notice. They just run right off to some to the legislature and lean, and lean and be extra sweet to and take ‘em out somewhere fancy. I’m just guessing.
Anyway, maybe Kansas’ legislators like their families to eat and drink things they don’t know nothing about and think that’s the better way. No news is good news. Out of sight out of mind. That kind of thing. Ignorance is bliss. Remember the Maine, and all that.
Whether it’s the being sweet thing or the Ignorance is the way to go in a democracy thing, they trot off to see your legislators and presto, freedom of speech gets ground right up - faster you can grind up a cow on rBGH. (And they go fast, those rBGH cows. They get worn out 2 years early from putting out so much milk. Heck, they been putting out milk like … well, like a cow on drugs.)
Shh. Ain’t supposed to say “rBGH.” That’s true in Kansas now, right?
What I don’t get, though, is if the stuff is supposed to be fine for us, how come Monsanto don’t yell from the rooftops “Hey, there, we got rBGH in our milk and the next guy doesn’t.” Just why is that?
They don’t even want the guys “without” it to say they don’t have it. They won’t even let ‘em swear they don’t. They won’t say it’s there and no one can say it ain’t.
Imagine your mother asking you if you got Johnny’s toy and you say, “maybe I do and maybe I don’t but I’m not telling.” Uh-oh.
Does Monsanto need someone to explain that “maybe I do and maybe I don’t” is just real irritating to anyone listening to that? And making other people keep your secrets - especially about something that might be kind of bad for you or your kids, gets on people’s nerves?
Some people think the rBGH is kind of like poison. Imagine you ask if my milked poisoned and people in Kansas have to say “we ain’t telling.”
“The current industry standard requires that farmers sign an affidavit swearing that they don’t use rBGH. The second provision in the bill knocks that out. In both instances, the bill makes an illogical leap that just because something isn’t demonstrated by a lab test or is sworn to by affidavit or other sworn statement, then its misleading. This would knock out any production-related labels, such as “Our farmers pledge not to use rBGH (rBST, artificial hormones).”
So, in Kansas, does that mean you can’t say an apple is an apple without having some white-coated scientist there to prove it or a lawyer in a three-piece suit to make it “so”? Whoohee. You are in a mess of trouble over there. Are all your legislators on drugs like your cows (or some of your cows only you can’t tell us which ones are and which ones aren’t, can you?)?
When Monsanto says everything has to be certified, does that make them certifiable?
Kansas ain’t what it used to be, that part is for darn sure. People don’t know what’s what anymore and they can’t tell even if they do. Really to goodness, you people don’t even need to do drugs over where y’all are.
The farm sure has changed, hasn’t it? Even Old MacDonald is singing a different song.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that farm he had some lawyers, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
With a patent here and a lawsuit there,
here a patent, there a lawsuit,
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that farm he had some drugs, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
with a steroid here and a hormone there
here a steroid, there a hormone
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that farm he had some lobbyists, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
with a lobbyist here, and a law there,
here a lobbyist, there a law,
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that farm he had some seeds, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
with DNA here, and contamination there,
here DNA, there contamination,
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that farm he had some Bt corn, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh
With a toxic liver here, and a toxic kidney there,
Here a toxic liver, there a toxic kidney,
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that farm he had an old shed, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh
With some Agent Orange here, some PCBs there,
Here some pesticides, there some Aspartame,
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Old Monsanto had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh,
And on that farm he had some friends, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
With George Bushes here, and Hillary Clinton there,
Here Bushes, there Hillary,
Old MacDonald had a farm, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
But in Kansas you’d have to say:
—– had a —–, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
And on that —– he had some —-, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
With a —- here and a —- there,
here a —-, there a —-,
—- had a —-, ee, aye, ee, aye-oh.
Poor Kansas … if we can still use that label.
Comment R.B. Ghispoison, IMHO — February 18, 2008 @ 10:06 pm
Jack - comment 3 - is exactly right. 1000 emails to the Chamber of Commerce or the Travelers Bureau would have a huge impact.
The Kansas Chamber of Commerce
835 SW Topeka Blvd., Topeka, KS 66612-1671
Phone: 785-357-6321 Fax: 785-357-4732
E-mail: info@kansaschamber.org
Comment Linn Cohen-Cole — February 18, 2008 @ 10:17 pm