General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"No GMO" is now officially an advertising gimmick...
Saw it today, in the frozen dinners, the "Lean Cuisine"
"Now with organic ingredients"
https://www.leancuisine.com/
And the price has gone through the roof.
Just like I said about organic food.
Just a giimmick to jack up prices.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Archae
(46,359 posts)Question:
Is it free from sodium chloride (or as I call it: "sod-em killide" ? And you're it came from a non-gmo salt tree that was organically farmed?
Answer:
Ben, yes. It's also free of NSA nanobots and government fluoride that will give you teh autizmz.
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Oh it's salt...bummer...
Shandris
(3,447 posts)Since it wouldn't be one when first introduced (unless astroturfed of course...God I hate the sleaziness of 'business' these days), wouldn't it become a gimmick instead?
I think you're right, that it has become one. I noticed just last night in the store some of the same things (not to mention the new 'Premium Milk market' -- the term makes me want to choke someone (not literally!)).
But really, if you're buying processed foods and expecting them to be 'organic', you probably haven't put too much thought into what organic really means. So I'm totally unsurprised that it becomes a gimmick.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Someone figured out that there's an elitist segment of the market prone to pseudoscience, willing to pay a lot more for a product that has no guarantee of superior nutrition, health, safety, or sustainability.
Organic really means nothing. The standards are completely arbitrary. It doesn't even mean organic as lots of synthetic products are on the NOP approved list.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)They lost to the large corporate farmers determined to undermine the concept and reality.
So your post shows a total lack of understanding how organic labels came about and how stacked in the largest corporations favor the laws are.
Archae
(46,359 posts)And organic is always much higher.
I've seen organic produce being sold at 2, 3, even 4 or more times what non-organic is.
And now Lean Cuisine (which always was rather expensive,) is now jacking up their prices even higher just for sticking a new label on the boxes.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)multiple times. It's been proven. Using mono-culture, petrochemical laden farming methods is categorically BAD for life on planet Earth.
The only reason 'mainstream' products are cheaper is because they are subsidized by government and because of of the control of the market the large corporations have.
Your OP's trying to "debunk" anything you don't like are so poorly informed it's pathetic.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Organic standards originated with trade associations established by organic farmers. You would do better not to simply make things up and then pretend others have a "total lack of understanding", as such things generally lead to embarrassment when you are proven wrong.
http://www.ccof.org/ccof/history
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Not the same.
I know someone whose job it was to Lobby Congress regarding Organic standards, although your obvious bias makes it seem unlikely you care about facts regarding this topic.
here are some relevant links:
http://consumersunion.org/news/u-s-department-of-agriculture-guts-national-organic-law/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/02/AR2009070203365.html
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Right after you claim some kind of superior knowledge on the subject?
Here's what you ridiculously claimed:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027242093#post13
The USDA organic seal "came about" in 2002. 7 years prior to the links you posted. Trade organizations were certifying products back in the 70's.
Your post shows a total lack of understanding of how organic labels came about.
Skittles
(153,226 posts)people are so freaking gullible
swilton
(5,069 posts)and know where your food comes from - i.e., know your farmer and eat locally sources as opposed to globally sourced food.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Also, apparently America's largest retailer didn't get the memo about "jacking up prices..through the roof" :
http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2014/04/14/wal-mart-strikes-a-deal-with-wild-oats-to-sell-cheaper-organic-foods/
Thirdly, many major food companies have turned down GMO ingredients quietly and with no change in pricing -- I can't see how THAT fits with your theory.
I see only one, McDonalds, and who the hell CARES if they go to McD's if the food is organic or not?
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But that's just me.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Because a "GMO-free" label would not let companies charge certified Organic prices for non-GMO food.
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)"We'll let folks know whether their food has been genetically modified because Americans should know what they're buying" -Candidate/Senator Obama
How about this?
I Used to Work as a Scientist with GMOsNow I'm Having Serious Second Thoughts About The Risks
http://www.alternet.org/food/i-used-work-scientist-gmos-now-im-having-serious-second-thoughts-about-risks
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)decisions and not have to avoid all GMO's in order to avoid any.
alp227
(32,065 posts)Any scientifically ignorant Yahoo's?
This line of "informed decisions" to justify GMO labels are so annoying. All it is is pandering to the lowest common denominator.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)You aren't doing yourself any favors here.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)It could start like the process that lead to USDA Organic - initially a voluntary label by a third party that evolves into an official label. It could start right now.
Except the anti-GMO people aren't fighting for that. Instead, they're fighting a lengthy regulatory battle and battle to change the laws. Leaving consumers who want to avoid GMOs to purchase much more profitable organic products while a very, very, very long battle is fought.
"Big food" is not only on the GMO side.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)I"m not against all GMO's. With labeling I could avoid, for example, the ones that allow high amounts of Roundup to be used (that is absorbed by the plant and can't be washed off.)
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Hence my link above to "GMO Free" salt.
But like the organic label, a certification entity can be set up to set the "rules", and then they hand out their own label. In the case of organic, that evolved into the government's label today.
Not if the label only says "Contains GMOs". You need a "RoundUp resistant" label, not a GMO label.
Also:
Nope. At least, I'm presuming you mean "stored in the plant" and not just "absorbed". It's metabolized by the plant. It also breaks down naturally in about a week, and farmers are not allowed to spray it on their crops for a month or two before harvest.
Nope. Glyphosate is water-soluble. You don't even need a cleaner to wash it off.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Washing it off will not remove what has been absorbed.
And residues can remain stable in foods for a year or more, even processed foods.
http://cals.arizona.edu/crops/pdfs/062512%20Maximizing%20the%20Use%20of%20Glyphosate.pdf
Glyphosate must be absorbed into the foliage to be translocated to the sites of action.
https://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/press_releases/foee_4_human_contamination_glyphosate.pdf
Glyphosate-containing herbicides are applied in large amounts to both genetically modified
(GM) crops and non-GM crops. GM crops may receive two or three applications of
glyphosate in a season [1] while glyphosate-containing herbicides may be sprayed just
before harvest onto non-GM cereals, pulses, sunflowers and oilseed crops. This is done to
remove weeds and dry out the grains, a process called dessication [2]. Glyphosate remains
largely unchanged in non-GM plants, but GM plants will convert glyphosate into aminomethyl
phosphonic acid (AMPA), N-acetyl-glyphosate or N-acetyl-AMPA, depending on the type of
genetic modification used [3]. When conducting risk assessments of residues in food, the
European Food Safety Authority views such breakdown products as equivalent to glyphosate
[4].
Once applied, glyphosate and its break down products are transported throughout the plant
into the leaves, grains or fruit [5]. They cannot be removed by washing, and they are not
broken down by cooking [6]. Glyphosate residues can remain stable in foods for a year or
more, even if the foods are frozen, dried or processed [7]. Some processing may even
concentrate the residues; for example, during production of wheat bran the glyphosate
residues may be concentrated by a factor of four [8].
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)It means the idea of GMOs is seen as negative to a lot of shoppers now., drives home the message on the shopper's mind of
"No GMOs" a dozen times while in the store.
Archae
(46,359 posts)"Vaccines cause autism!"
"Jews are in a plot to control the world!"
"Liberals are communists!"
"GMO food is poison/Monsatan/frankefoods!"