Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition

  1. #1
    Bryan Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition

    On Sunday, September 30, 2012 7:34:37 PM UTC-5, Mark Thorson wrote:
    > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    >
    > and dietary supplements. They've got lots of reasons
    >
    > to oppose this proposition.
    >
    >
    >
    > http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx
    >
    >
    >
    > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    >
    > main victims, not Monsanto. It's basically a hunting
    >
    > license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.


    I do not believe that GMO foods are inferior to conventional, but the opponents of GMO have legitimate arguments for environmental consequences, and especially for the rights of farmers to save seed that was contaminated through no deliberate action on their part. Monsanto's argument is like, if I rape your daughter and she becomes pregnant, I should be able to force her to have an abortion. That's nutty.

    --Bryan

  2. #2
    Mark Thorson Guest

    Default Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition

    The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    and dietary supplements. They've got lots of reasons
    to oppose this proposition.

    http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx

    Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    main victims, not Monsanto. It's basically a hunting
    license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.

  3. #3
    Pete C. Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition


    Mark Thorson wrote:
    >
    > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    > and dietary supplements. They've got lots of reasons
    > to oppose this proposition.
    >
    > http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx
    >
    > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    > main victims, not Monsanto. It's basically a hunting
    > license for lawyers looking to extort a fast buck.


    Fixed it for you...

  4. #4
    graham Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition


    "Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    > and dietary supplements. They've got lots of reasons
    > to oppose this proposition.
    >
    > http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx
    >
    > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    > main victims, not Monsanto. It's basically a hunting
    > license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.
    >


    The term "natural" in the quack remedy and food supplement business is the
    most misused term out there.
    Graham



  5. #5
    John H. Gohde Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition

    On Oct 1, 8:52*am, "graham" <g.ste...@shaw.ca> wrote:
    > "Mark Thorson" <nos...@sonic.net> wrote in message
    >
    > news:[email protected]..
    >
    > > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    > > and dietary supplements. *They've got lots of reasons
    > > to oppose this proposition.

    >
    > >http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx

    >
    > > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    > > main victims, not Monsanto. *It's basically a hunting
    > > license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.

    >
    > The term "natural" in the quack remedy and food supplement business is the
    > most misused term out there.
    > Graham


    Perhaps, if you were to focus. The topic is GMO food labeling!

  6. #6
    John H. Gohde Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition

    On Sep 30, 8:34*pm, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
    > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    > and dietary supplements. *They've got lots of reasons
    > to oppose this proposition.
    >
    > http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx
    >
    > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    > main victims, not Monsanto. *It's basically a hunting
    > license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.



    That is what they say. Here is what the TEXT of Prop 37, actually
    states in print.

    Prop 37, starts on page 31.

    http://tinyurl.com/9tx666d

    -----
    PROPOSED LAW
    The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
    The California Right to Know Genetically
    Engineered Food Act
    SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS
    ....
    (k) The labeling, advertising and marketing of genetically engineered
    foods using terms such as “natural,” “naturally made,” “naturally
    grown,” or “all natural” is misleading to California consumers.
    -----


    What we got here is one more massive governmental regulation. Thus,
    to avoid lawsuits all food retailers in California, would have to
    start out labeling every item or food bin in their store as follows.
    “May be Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering.” Then one by
    one, at the retailer level, individual food items would have to be
    certified GMO free.

    YES, small mom and pop stores would probably be forced to go out of
    business.

    I will be writing an editorial on this topic.

  7. #7
    graham Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition


    "John H. Gohde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    On Oct 1, 8:52 am, "graham" <g.ste...@shaw.ca> wrote:
    > "Mark Thorson" <nos...@sonic.net> wrote in message
    >
    > news:[email protected]..
    >
    > > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    > > and dietary supplements. They've got lots of reasons
    > > to oppose this proposition.

    >
    > >http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx

    >
    > > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    > > main victims, not Monsanto. It's basically a hunting
    > > license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.

    >
    > The term "natural" in the quack remedy and food supplement business is the
    > most misused term out there.
    > Graham


    Perhaps, if you were to focus. The topic is GMO food labeling!
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Take your finger out of your arse and read the OP's first sentence!



  8. #8
    John H. Gohde Guest

    Default Re: Natural Products Association Opposes CA GMO Labelling Proposition

    On Oct 1, 12:31*pm, "graham" <g.ste...@shaw.ca> wrote:
    > "John H. Gohde" <john.h.go...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]...
    > On Oct 1, 8:52 am, "graham" <g.ste...@shaw.ca> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > "Mark Thorson" <nos...@sonic.net> wrote in message

    >
    > >news:[email protected]..

    >
    > > > The NPA represents manufacturers of natural foods
    > > > and dietary supplements. They've got lots of reasons
    > > > to oppose this proposition.

    >
    > > >http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/...t_Prop_37.aspx

    >
    > > > Mostly, they oppose it because they would be its
    > > > main victims, not Monsanto. It's basically a hunting
    > > > license for lawyers looking to make a fast buck.

    >
    > > The term "natural" in the quack remedy and food supplement business is the
    > > most misused term out there.
    > > Graham

    >
    > Perhaps, if you were to focus. *The topic is GMO food labeling!
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Take your finger out of your arse and read the OP's first sentence!



    Take your finger out of your arse and read my second reply.

    Then Read what I had posted in my first reply, again.

    Perhaps, if you were to focus? The topic is still GMO food labeling!
    Whether or NOT the definition of "natural" has anything to do with it,
    is highly debatable.

    For sure, it is NOT what NPA has suggested.

    I have read both analyzes of Prop 37, as well as the entire text of
    it. What the NPA is maintaining is pure bunk.

    So, Take your finger out of your arse! Arse

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32