And who exactly is being “bought and paid for”?
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a misleadingly named organization run by a lobbyist for Big Food, recently wrote an article undermining the harm of GMOs and downplaying the need for GMO labeling. It said that “organic food promoters like the Non-GMO Project and the Organic Consumers Association are warning shoppers about nonexistent risks to get consumers to pay more for organic”—essentially stating that there’s a vast organic conspiracy afoot, with “ideological activists…trying their hardest this holiday season to add to the stress and worry from the grocery store to the table.”
The big website Daily Caller ran the article with a headline suggesting that supporters of GMO labeling—like ANH-USA—are “bought and paid for” by organic food producers. As you know, ANH-USA is a grassroots consumer organization and has not been “bought and paid for” by anyone, certainly not by organic food producers. Can CCF say the same? As you’ll see below, they may ironically be leveling a charge at others that should instead be leveled at themselves.
A website established by PETA states that “CCF was set up…with a $600,000 ‘donation’ from tobacco company Philip Morris.” The big tobacco company presumably wanted a “consumer” organization as part of its public relations campaign against critics of smoking. The PETA website raises many other interesting questions about the corporate funding and practices of CCF and its founder.
SourceWatch adds that CCF’s contributors have included Coca-Cola, Cargill, Monsanto, Tyson Foods, Outback Steakhouse, Wendy’s, Brinker International, and Dean Foods. In 1999 (the most recent year the info was available), CCF’s advisory board was comprised largely of representatives from the restaurant, meat, and alcoholic beverage industries. In 2011, CCF received $1,391,700 (almost their entire revenue) in gifts and grants.
The CCF article goes on to recast GMOs as being “crops improved with biotechnology,” calling them “perfectly safe” and repeating the old myths about how GMOs lower costs, help the economy, have no environmental or health effects, and will help feed the world—myths we have thoroughly debunked time and again.
This so-called “consumer group” seems to take a consistently Big Food and Big Biotech industry stance—for example, they claim that the recent study showing rats to have a similar neurological reaction when eating Oreos as they do when given cocaine or morphine “over-hypes” the idea of food addiction. Likewise, they state that many who warn of too much mercury in food or the potential for salmonella contamination in CAFO poultry cage systems are just “dietary scolds” with “wide-ranging agendas.”
7 comments
Comments are closed.
Yep, those darn alarmist lefty hippies and their wide-ranging agendas, like wanting antibiotics that work when they need them, and not having salmonella contamination and mercury in their family’s food. Who do they think they are anyway? Next thing you know, they’ll be wanting clean water and breathable air.
The ones who oppose pasteurization evidently do want Salmonella contamination.
Dear Sirs: The bio-tech world is advancing so rapidly that the average citizen cannot keep up with it. In addition, much of what is going on is not front page news so we are left to researching for ourselves. I am so thankful for groups like Alliance for Natural Health who provide the research and where to substantiate it so that I can better understand what I need to do to eat healthy. What makes organic food more expensive is the obtrusive federal regulation. Big food producers not only get a wink and a nod from the FDA, there is tax incentives and grants for their “test tube” experimentation that never receives adequate, unbiased testing before unleashing it on the unsuspecting public. The people at the top of the production of these experimental foods have no sense of responsibility to the people they entice to consume them. I am so thankful for Alliance for Natural Health for stepping up to the plate to make us able to be pro-active in this fight to keep our food healthy and, thus, keep us healthy.
Thank you for sharing factual knowledge and just laws about natural health! ! ! ! ! ! ! Perhaps you would consider using a different message than fighting such as bringing factual awareness and laws to support that.
Does natural health leaders not want to communicate peace ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ?
Also in regards to removing comments- Why set unnecessary limitations? Why impose the judgment of what is abusive, foul language, personal attacks, discourteous and uncivil unless it is discriminatory to one’s rights?
Again thank you for your factual knowledge and just laws sharing on Natural Health! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
As usual the very rich and powerful, with their extreme greed and total lack of morals or care for anything other than themselves is willing to do terrible things to humanity. The phony organizations and lies they spread are hard to believe. These people should be brought to justice and charged with crimes against humanity. These people are truly the lowest form of life.
I am appreciative of you addressing public awareness about the ignorance and damage food industry is promoting. However, I would not communicate the idea of fighting but rather the right of the people to factual awareness and just laws. Many compliments to you for sharing such awareness and just laws.
As far as your perception of removal of comments- I would ask you why create unnecessary limitations? Why impose a judgment of what is abusive wording, foul language, personal attacks, discourteous and uncivil unless it is discriminatory to one’s rights? In whose perception should that be?
Otherwise I am glad to read your input and contribute mine.
The only one with an agenda is center for consumer propaganda. Organic food cost more because they don’t get the subsidies that big food gets and have to deal with government bias against organic farming.