default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

We should have been like Japan and required labeling for genetically modified foods

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 12:00 am

Recently, Japan canceled its bid to purchase 25,000 metric tonnes of wheat, because they discovered that it was a genetically modified organism — “GMO.” In contrast, California voters defeated Proposition 37, which would have mandated labeling whenever a food contains a GMO.

In summary, Californians expressed that they don’t wish to be notified of a commodity which Japan won’t even allow to cross their borders. Apparently, the Japanese have a better education on this topic than California voters.

Myself, I have to find a way to eat food without ingesting GMOs in a society where notification is not required. The GMOs are in many places, and it is difficult to avoid them. I think that the Japanese made the right decision.

There was a massive campaign to defeat Proposition 37. One of the campaign ads stated that farmers would have suffered if Proposition 37 had passed. In my opinion, I scarcely doubt that anyone here in Lodi would have suffered a single dime. Conversely, the farmers have lost a very important customer.

In the massive ad campaign to defeat Proposition 37, I didn’t see any scientific evidence or theory of the health effects of ingesting GMO foods.

Let me ask the readers a question. If a food were resistant to weed spray, then why would that food not contain weed spray by aerial spraying, rather than spraying on the ground while the plants are in dormancy? If a food were capable of killing insects by genetic activity, then why will that genetic message not operate in the gut? Why would these characteristics not contaminate our livestock? Why would these characteristics not cross-pollinate to the neighbors (if we were saving the seed for next year)? Why would these characteristics not be important to notify on a label?

Daniel Hutchins


Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Ed Walters posted at 10:54 am on Sat, Jun 22, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 638

    Daniel: Yes I am entitled to my opinion, and thanks for asking as I do have a healthy body to prove my claims, as I walk my dogs and lift weights to keep my body in good working order. As a matter of fact I consumed an ear of corn last night for dinner, which without a doubt had a form GMO in it. It was very good and I plan to have more. I am 75 years old and without a doubt through my life travels I have consumed GMO. I feel fine and don`t glow in the dark. Daniel, have a good and healthy day.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 10:02 am on Sat, Jun 22, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    You are entitled to your opinion.
    Do you have a healthy body to prove your claims that your consumption of GMO foods supports a strong and healthy body?

  • Ed Walters posted at 12:19 pm on Fri, Jun 21, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 638

    Daniel: Forgive me for not doing my homework, in reference to China`s coal fired power plants, just read where you cannot purchase a mask to fend off the pollution in Singapore as the air quality is the worst ever. And your worried about something that might or might not be a creditable problem in this country. If you are aware, cow waste cannot be used as fertilizer for human consumption, only for silage corn grown for animals, mainly cows. Now I suppose you will stop the purchase of milk, your a hard man to please Daniel.

  • Ed Walters posted at 11:58 am on Fri, Jun 21, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 638

    Daniel you had a reason to respond to my post, if nothing more than to express your opinion and since this is an open forum anything goes, hope you enjoyed yourself. Now on to a more important subject, did you read Andrews post, puts it in prospective against what ever you dreamed up. There is a limit to everything, except in China where wearing a mask is mandatory when venturing outside. While this might be off the subject, it in a way reflects problems everyone is having on Mother Earth. Coal fired power plants in China and also in Pennsylvania make for breathing on a regular basis most difficult. And last but not least Daniel, you address people as them and doesn`t surprise you, I can only take a stab at who you are referring to. You state you have a sampling of people from society, what percentage are we talking about. 1-10. If you believe everything you have written about, there must be a Trader Joe`s or a farmers market near by.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 9:27 am on Fri, Jun 21, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    This change in regulations on glyphosphates does not surprise me.
    Nothing they do can surprise me.

    It is important that we do our part by keeping people informed, but also, doing our part to make sure that we are not supporting them.
    If we enter into adhesion contracts with them, then we are supporting them, and here comes ignorance again, most people aren't even aware of the adhesion contracts and they wonder why they get into so much trouble for doing absolutely nothing to harm anyone.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:55 pm on Thu, Jun 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Based on the comments generated by your letter, I can only hope this "sampling" is not indicative of society as a whole.

    just curious daniel... Are you aware of the EPA's new regulations (already in place) regarding glyphosate residues on crops?
    If not, the new regulation can be viewed HERE...

    In short...

    It allows forage and hay teff to contain up to 100 ppm glyphosate (that's over one million times the concentration needed to cause cancer according to a recent study). See PubMed source here:

    It allows oilseed crops (flax oil, canola oil, soybean oil, olive oil, etc.) to contain up to 40 ppm glyphosate (which is over 100,000 times the concentration needed to cause cancer)

    It RAISES the allowable glyphosate contamination level of root crops (such as potatoes) from 200 ppb to 6000 ppb.

    It allows glyphosate contamination of fruits at anywhere from 200 ppb to 500 ppb.

    Of course those commenting on your letter will probably say the alarming increase in cancer tumors in rats that were fed glyphosate in their drinking water has nothing to do with the glyphosate.

    Ignorance is bliss! [sleeping]

  • daniel hutchins posted at 9:25 pm on Thu, Jun 20, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    Here in this column, we have a sampling of people from society, and here we have someone who doesn't want to be notified if his children or someone else's children are eating fruits and vegetables that were sprayed with weed spray.

    I don't think such people would spray their own food with weed spray once a week before they eat dinner, but if they are not notified and someone else sprayed the food with weed spray, it would be OK.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 9:21 pm on Thu, Jun 20, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    I don't even know why I responded to your nonsense that has nothing to do with the issue.
    Big business is poisoning people, and you make reference to starving children in Africa to justify the poisoning of people here in America.

    Are you a Monsanto sales person?

  • Ed Walters posted at 1:41 pm on Thu, Jun 20, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 638

    Daniel: I doubt you would rather starve than eat anything that has been GMO, since hunger hurts. Not that I give the US government any credit, however I would wonder if it harmed the vast population of the United States, someone would stand up and have it taken off the market. As Brian stated, any food that comes close to having GMO in it has been around many years. For all I and everyone else knows it has done no harm, sorta tastes like chicken. In energy drinks, you never know.

    Joanne: I looked up Cassava, where else but on Google, give it a try for yourself, lots of information and to numerous to install my post. You state that the Republicans have no means to pass any legislation to help this country, well I suppose we will have to leave it to the Demos, nothing yet. Perhaps the Supremes will get into the fray, and another 5-4 vote going nowhere.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:45 am on Thu, Jun 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    I would be surprised if these individuals were not also washing down their GMO's with a favorite aspartame laced beverage.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:29 am on Thu, Jun 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    and this guy signed the legislation into law... [sleeping]


  • daniel hutchins posted at 11:42 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    Since it is in the corn, it will get into our livestock.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 11:41 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    Brian, I think this is only about 15 years old, and it is now a monopoly in many parts of the world, including the United States where labeling is optional.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 11:39 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    According to Wiki, corn, soy beans, cotton seed, and papaya have 75% chance of being genetically-altered, and we don't even know. (Based on my memory. If someone will look, these numbers might be different, and now of course, we can add wheat to the list.)

    Certain popular chain stores which contain low cost foreign produce, have a 100% chance of containing these GMO produce.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 11:37 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    It is not breeding. It is not a hybrid.
    Literally, Monsanto has the ability to go into the genes and splice a segment that will perform a designer function, like manufacture pesticide to kill insects, or manufacture an immunity to herbicide.

    As I alluded in the letter. These functions will cross into the friendly bacteria in our small intestines, and they will continue to function in our gut for a very long time. That is, our intestines will manufacture insecticide.

    In regards to being resistant to weed spray, what this means is that the farmer can call in an aircraft crop duster to spray weed spray on top of everything, including the food that we will eat. This means that our food will now contain Roundup.

  • Brian Dockter posted at 9:28 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2866

    There's been geneticly modified food for a long time. Before it was just called domesticated vegetation. What's all the fuss?

  • daniel hutchins posted at 7:53 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    Starving children does not justify toxic food.
    Apparently, you don't understand the health effects.
    I'd rather starve.

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 3:18 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488


    I heard a segment the other day on NPR about (I want to say) Cassava growing in Africa (Uganda?). This root vegetable has been the victim of a disease that destroys the whole crop and Monsanto has developed a GMO that is resistant to the disease.

    The "local" that was being interviewed was convinced that Monsanto had introduced the disease intentionally so that farmers would be compelled to buy their GMO product.

    Sound like anyone we know?

    BTW - the Monsanto Protection Act was passed by a Republican Congress. One must wonder what their agenda was since they have NO capability of passing ANY legislation that is actually helpful to this country.

  • Thomas Heuer posted at 2:42 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1671

    I agree Ms Bobin
    For once I find myself in total agreement with Daniel on food labeling for GMO ingrediants. I too voted for the proposition for GMO labeling. And that commercial you mentioned I've also seen it a few times but not from the begining so I think I missed what it's all about. A real effective commercial eh.

  • Ed Walters posted at 1:22 pm on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 638

    Everyone that expressed their point of view concerning GMO have that to consider, you can purchase food with or without it, just read the label. On the other hand there are millions of people that are starving as I type that would be more than happy to eat just about anything they could get their hands on, and could care less if it contained GMO. To observe small children with bloated stomachs due to a lack of anything to eat would be more than happy to receive anything to eat. Do you think due to a lack of labeling that they give a hoot. Nothing like a full belly---- right Joanne. Hard to argue that point. Same goes for people anywhere that go hungry on a daily basis. Now on to that double cheeseburger, with fires.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 10:39 am on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    I couldn't mention any names in the letter, lest subject myself to litigation, but Andrew got it in the first post.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 10:38 am on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    I'm glad to hear that you voted in favor of 37.
    I support government-mandated labeling. (I think that answers the question of regulation.) There would then be an avenue of court enforcement wherever GMO sneak into foods which are not labelled.

    BTW: responding to your old comment which criticized that I said United States is a corporation, I have the link where you can find it in Great Britain: companieshouse.gov.uk. Click "Find company information." Search for United States, then try United States of America. Many others are in there also. You would be surprised. "We the People," "In God We Trust," "E. Pluribus Unum," It goes on and on.... Also, there is landmark legislation in the united states shortly following the civil war, but reading this legislation does not make it clear except if you are a lawyer.

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:49 am on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Here is a question: Daniel, are you anti-government regulation, or pro-government regulation?

    Reason for this question: Prop 37 would have been a government mandate to provide GMO labeling information, which I supported.

    This falls within the same lines as the ridiculous commercial that has been running on TV - I'm not even sure what the commercial is protesting, but definitely something about government dictating what foods we buy, perhaps the added tax on sodas and sugary drinks.

    Scenario: A very intelligent looking woman, presumably a mother, is seen walking the aisles of her local supermarket commenting on how she can read labels and can determine for herself what foods she should buy for her family. Her final comment in the ad is that SHE should be the one to determine what foods she serves her family, not the government.

    Irony? First she claims that she can read the (government mandated) labeling on the food packages and that allows her to make intelligent decisions.

    Second, she complains about government mandates.

    I agree that GMO's should be clearly labeled. I've seen many packages, especially vegetarian/vegan products, that contain this labeling, mostly because these producers know that their primary customers want to know what's GMO and what's not.

    Keep up the "good fight" Daniel!

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:41 am on Wed, Jun 19, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Q: Who signed the Monsanto Protection Act?

    A: Well, this guy did... http://youtu.be/j_pb_CHKHHg [sleeping]


Recent Comments

Posted 43 minutes ago by Thomas Heuer.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

Joanne Its so good to see your name on these boards again. I miss your insightful commentary. Don't stay away [thumbup]


Posted 51 minutes ago by Thomas Heuer.

article: Letter: Our leaders need to be better r…

Great Letter Eric [thumbup]


Posted 3 hours ago by Steve Schmidt.

article: Letter: Our leaders need to be better r…

Obama is a socialist in the same sense that Mitt Romney is a fascist.


Posted 4 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Our leaders need to be better r…

"Conservatives as the culprits in ever human evil that has befallen mankind. THAT is the legacy our political leadership (both Parties…


Posted 4 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Our leaders need to be better r…

So you're part of that 30%? You (and the rest of your percentage) hate him because his father was black and his mother was white. You thi…



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists