Is Cargill supporting ‘removal of GMOs from planet’ by partnering with Non-GMO Project?

|

[Read the GLP profile of the Non-GMO project here.]

[Cargill] recently partnered with the Non-GMO Project to help build a supply chain.

Non-GMO labeling appears to be the brainchild of Peter M. Ligotti, a Maharishi cult member and organic industry marketer. In a 1997 email to Whole Foods, Ligotti described the potential benefits of such a label:

Go for a total ban at the same time. When we do achieve a ban, we will need to know which products to leave on the shelves and which to throw away. Labeling the GE and NON-GE food will give us clarity when that day finally arrives.

By partnering with the Non GMO Project Cargill is now actively funding the movement to remove GMOs from our planet. By helping them build this supply chain, they are making it easier than ever for companies to continue using these deceitful labels.

And deceitful they are. Every claim Non-GMO Project makes on their web page applies to all seed breeding techniques. Exactly the reason Cargill faced these protests 20 years ago.

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Read full, original post: Why is Cargill now funding the anti-GMO movement?

For more background on the Genetic Literacy Project, read GLP on Wikipedia

  • SageThinker

    Talk about fear-mongering. The GMO cheerleader people are fear-mongering about the end of the world because Cargill is willing to label some food according to the contents, sort of like “fluoride-free” labeling on some toothpaste. Wow, end of the world! Look at Monsanto outreach rep below. Who is fear-mongering?

    You know who’s afraid and why? Biotech industry is afraid because it threatens their invisibility and therefore market share.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d37badefe15d2a3903894e7b4cd35e026e1738eee0a67dd97be5cf51137d91ee.png

    • Eric Bjerregaard

      Criticizing deceptive marketing tactics is not fear mongering. It is called taking corrective action. Something new to you as in order to do so. One needs to understand what is correct.

      • SageThinker

        I am the one criticizing deceptive marketing tactics. The agrochemical industry runs a huge propaganda campaign for exactly that purpose. Funny how you project, eh ?

        • Eric Bjerregaard

          Baloney Sageless, now you are lying to yourself. The agrochemicals are tested and regulated. The farmers are better educated than thou to make decisions. Every time they buy. They are saying you have no clue.

          • SageThinker

            Eric, you begin a comment with petty name-calling. Your comment makes little sense, as well. Point by point:

            The agrochemicals are tested and regulated.

            I see exactly how the science is gamed by Monsanto around glyphosate, from the very beginning, in many ways. Then the SciComm to the public and to regulatory agencies is also gamed like a with a propaganda campaign. If the testing and regulation were without a huge amount of industry influence (read: bias) then i’d accept this explanation.

            The farmers are better educated than thou to make decisions.

            We’re all people who eat food. Farmers are marketed to by the advertising / PR campaigns of the industry. I’m a carpenter and i use plywood. If i hear that a specific plywood is very toxic either when cutting it or when off-gassing in a structure then i would be happy to anyone who raises the red flag on this. And many many farmers are quite disgusted with Monsanto and do not use their products. Many organic farmers and those who eschew pesticides generally are of this mind, and they practice what they believe. So that argument is bunk. Sure, industrial farmers with the “maximize profit” mentality will use whatever does that, even if there are external harm not on their balance sheets. Same as any profession. Nice optics you went for there, though — to make me the guy who hates farmers or whatever. Typical industry PR meme.

            There you go, Eric. “Sageless” — ha ha. Pathetic.

          • Eric Bjerregaard

            You claiming to be a sage thinker is what starts the name calling. Plus the well earned disrespect resulting from your obscenity laced tirades from previous arguments. You have been making those same “gamed” claims for years and not been able to prove a single one. Ooh the mystery studies blah, blah, blah. The 43 year long and clear safety record alone shows you to be less than sage in your “”thinking?”” Many farmers are disgusted? Yet the seeds sell and disgust is not a safety issue. Organic? Now there is a marketing scam and “gaming” of the system. You lie and lie and lie. “industrial famers” What a dunce. Those are the efficient ones. Industrial techniques are a good thing. You are what is pathetic.