Viewpoint: While Kind Bar debunks ‘healthy’ organic sugar claim, it promotes equally deceptive non-GMO labels

htb spt pvxxxxa xvxxq xxfxxxe
Image Credit: Kind Bar

Dear Kind Bar:

[On March 6] you delighted people in the agriculture and science communities. Clif Bar tried to shame you into adopting all-organic ingredients by publishing an op-ed in The New York Times. But instead of caving to the pressure, you roasted them on Twitter by pointing out that sugar is sugar, whether it’s organic or not, and they have a lot in their products.

[Editor’s note: Amanda Zaluckyj is a Michigan-based attorney and farmer]

Now I’ll admit I was torn by this whole story. On the one hand, I loved seeing a large, recognizable company making a very public statement reminding folks that organic doesn’t mean healthy. On the other hand, I was surprised it was your company. I’ve looked at your products, but declined purchasing them because they sport non-GMO labels.

But [these] events had me look at your company again. And I really think we could make a really awesome team.

By we, I mean people like me. Farmers, scientists, and supporters….The only thing standing in the way….is your use of the non-GMO label and sourcing non-GMO ingredients. Why? These crops are safe….

Read full, original article: An Open Letter to Kind Bar: Join the Pro-Science Side

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}
screenshot at  pm

Are pesticide residues on food something to worry about?

In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring drew attention to pesticides and their possible dangers to humans, birds, mammals and the ...
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.