CONFIRMED! Lab tests show over 30+ popular food products contain GMOs. Are you eating them?

By Food Babe

This week headlines about GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) splashed all over major media outlets across the country. This media firestorm was in response to a new report released by Consumer Reports regarding GMOs in American food products. This report finally shared what I have thought all along: Non-labeled food products most likely contain GMOs if the ingredients include a corn or soy byproduct. 

Before I get into the shocking results of the report, I want to share with you why I personally try to avoid GMOs in my diet:

1. There are no mandatory safety assessments required before GMOs are introduced into our food system. 
2. GMOs have contributed to more toxic pesticide usage since their inception. I want the pollution of our earth to stop. The types of environmental chemicals we are being exposed to are what the President’s Cancer Panel says will destine 41% of us to get cancer in our lifetime.
3. There are no long term human studies to prove GMOs are safe. 
4. GMOs are responsible for killing bee colonies. Without bees, we are in big trouble.
5. I could go on with more reasons, but one in particular is very personal. I used to suffer from some of the worst allergies. I have been hospitalized multiple times because of them. I used to be on several prescription drugs to control them too. When I removed GMOs from my diet, eating a majority of organic whole, unprocessed foods, my allergies vanished and was able to stop taking all my prescription medications. I feel like I have ten times more energy now and feel incredible. For this reason alone, I take avoiding GMOs very seriously.

GMOs are running rampant in our food supply  

Earlier this year, the Consumer Reports Food Safety and Sustainability Center sent out secret shoppers to purchase more than 80 processed food products in New York and Seattle, which included a wide range of products all containing corn or soy ingredients: breakfast cereals, bars, corn chips, corn tortillas, baking mixes and flours, baby formulas, meat substitutes, soy “dairy” products, and tofu/tempeh products. Then, they tested these products to see if they contained any GMO ingredients, and if so, how much. This is important because the overwhelming majority of processed food in America contains corn or soy ingredients, which are also the most prevalent genetically modified crops, yet most major food manufacturers are strongly against labeling GMO ingredients. We are being left in the dark in this country, and virtually the only way to know whether a product contains GMOs is to have it tested – and that’s exactly what Consumer Reports did.  

What I love about their report is that Consumer Reports essentially just slapped a big fat GMO label on a few dozen everyday food products here in America, including many that are considered “Natural” and healthy. The manufacturers of these foods do not want you to know that their products contain GMOs and have collectively spent millions of dollars to fight against labeling laws, depriving us of our right to know. This is outrageous considering that 92% of American consumers want GMO labels on food and are becoming increasingly aware of how prevalent GMOs have become in our food supply. 

The “Natural” Label:  It’s a sham.

Consumer Reports tested several products that are labeled as “Natural” because they found that the majority of Americans still believe that the “Natural” label means that they are non-GMO. As I’ve written about in the past, the word “Natural” on a product means absolutely nothing in regards to GMOs  - the FDA has failed to define the use of this term which allows food manufacturers to deceptively label their products as “Natural” to trick us into thinking their product is better than the others on the shelf.  Consumer Reports notes that, “Consumers who want to avoid GE ingredients should not rely on products labeled “natural” to avoid GMOs. This label is highly confusing and generally misleading for consumers and Consumer Reports is asking the government to ban its use on food”.  They should - because GMOs are not natural.  As put by the Institute for Responsible Technology:  

“A GMO (genetically modified organism) is the result of a laboratory process where genes from the DNA of one species are extracted and artificially forced into the genes of an unrelated plant or animal. The foreign genes may come from bacteria, viruses, insects, animals or even humans… With genetic engineering, scientists can breach species barriers set up by nature. For example, they have spliced fish genes into tomatoes. The results are plants (or animals) with traits that would be virtually impossible to obtain with natural processes, such as crossbreeding or grafting.”

Yet, GMOs remain in “Natural” foods all over the country.  

Consumer Reports found that some “Natural” products contained similar amounts of GMOs as their counterparts without a natural label. For instance, they found substantial quantities of GMO corn or GMO soy in popular “Natural” foods such as Kashi GoLean Honey & Cinnamon hot cereal (owned by Kellogg’s), Utz All Natural Multigrain Tortillas, and Nature Valley Crunchy Oats ‘N Honey Granola Bars (owned by General Mills).

From Consumer Reports – Products guilty of using GMOs (A-Z):

Betty Crocker Authentic Cornbread & Muffin Mix
Boca Original Vegan Veggie Burgers
Corn Tortillas/Tortilla Flour
Doritos Oven Baked Nacho Cheese
Enfamil ProSobee Soy Infant Formula
General Mills Cocoa Puffs
General Mills Corn Chex
General Mills Kix
General Mills Trix
Gerber Good Start Soy
Jiffy Corn Muffin Mix
Kashi GoLean (in the process of of getting Non-GMO project verified)
Kashi GoLean Hearty Honey & Cinnamon (Hot Cereal)
Kellogg’s Froot Loops
Kellogg’s Special K Protein Chocolatey Peanut Butter Granola Snack Bar
Krusteaz Natural Honey Cornbread & Muffin Mix
La Banderita Corn Tortillas
Maseca Instant Corn Masa Flour
Mission White Corn Tortillas
Mission Yellow Corn Tortillas
MorningStar Farms Chik’n Nuggets
MorningStar Farms Grillers California Turk’y Burger
Nature Valley Crunchy Oats ‘N Honey Granola Bars
Nature Valley Protein Peanut Butter Dark Chocolate Chewy Bar
Nice! Oats & Honey Crunchy Granola Bar (Walgreens)
Old El Paso Crunchy Taco Shells
Ortega Yellow Corn Taco Shells
PowerBar Performance Energy Chocolate Peanut Butter
Quaker Life Original
Quaker Yellow Corn Meal
Similac Go & Grow Soy Infant Formula
Similac Soy Isomil
Snyder’s of Hanover Yellow Corn Tortilla Chips
Tostitos Multigrain Tortilla Chips
Utz All Natural Multigrain Tortillas (some lots tested were non-GMO)
Xochitl Totopos de Maíz (labeling claim “No GMO”) 

See the complete report here and the final results here.

Just because it seems healthy doesn’t make it non-GMO.

Several products that many people think of as healthy (even without a “Natural” label) tested positive for GMOs, like Quaker Life Original cereal, PowerBar Performance Energy Chocolate Peanut Butter bars, MorningStar Farms Grillers California Turk’y burgers, and Boca Original Vegan Veggie Burgers. Most disturbingly, all soy-based infant formulas they tested (that are not labeled organic) are made with GMO soy, which included Enfamil Prosobee, Gerber Good Start, Similac Go and Grow, and Similac Soy Isomil. If you are looking for the safest baby formula, be sure to check out this full investigation.

Unverified Non-GMO claims: Don’t fall for it.

One of the most shocking things that Consumer Reports uncovered is that Xochitl Totopos de Maiz original corn chips (the non-organic variety) contain on average more than 75% GMO corn, although they claim right on the front of the bag that they contain no GMOs. Consumer Reports tested 6 packages of non-organic Xochitl chips from different lots and found GMOs in every single one. These chips aren’t verified by the Non-GMO project, but they contain the misleading statements “All Natural” and “No GMO” on the package. This just goes to show that because there are no regulations in place to ensure that non-verified claims can be trusted, the only way to be certain that you’re avoiding GMOs is to look for the verified seal or 100% certified organic food. Most of the products that Consumer Reports tested without a Non-GMO Project Verified or Certified Organic label contained GMO ingredients - with few exceptions. Consumer Reports concluded that the “USDA Organic” and “Non-GMO Project” seal is reliable. This is why I do not purchase products that contain high-risk GMO ingredients without a 100% certified organic or Non-GMO Project Verified label.  

Tips to use this information and avoid GMOs at the grocery store:

• Never buy products purely based on “Natural” or “100% All Natural” label claims.  
• Look for 100% Certified USDA Organic labels on food.
• Don’t blindly trust a non-GMO ingredient label claim that is not verified with a Non-GMO project seal or verification of 3rd party testing or certified organic.  
• Read ingredient labels and watch out for this list of common GMO ingredients, particularly anything derived from corn, soy, canola, cottonseed, sugar beets, papaya, zucchini and squash.
• Do not buy any products that Consumer Reports verified contains GMOs (see the complete list from their report above). 

Consumer Reports supports mandatory GMO labeling

“Despite this consumer demand, there are no requirements for labeling genetically engineered ingredients in processed foods and there is extremely limited safety testing required. Without labeling, there is a lack of transparency in the marketplace and Consumers’ Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, is actively engaged in a campaign to have foods with GE ingredients (also known as Genetically Modified Organisms or GMOs) labeled. In the meantime, consumers are unable to make informed purchasing decisions”.

Consumer Reports dispel many of the myths (and lies) circulating about GMOs, such as:

• GMOs are necessary to feed the world (FALSE)

“it is interesting to note that the world already produces more than enough food to feed all its inhabitants. Hunger, whether in the US and or other parts of the world, is not caused by an insufficient quantity of food being grown. Rather it is caused by disparities in wealth, waste, wars, and market inefficiencies… Looking at the long term outlook, GE foods may actually threaten food availability and increase food costs”.

• GMOs are required to undergo pre-market safety testing by the FDA (FALSE)

“FDA, which regulates food safety, does not require any safety assessment of the GE crops, but invites companies to provide data for a voluntary safety review. This is in contrast to other major economies such as European Union, Australia, Japan, and China, which all require that a premarket mandatory safety assessment of GE crops is conducted”

• GMOs are safe for the environment (FALSE)

“GE crops can have a significant negative impact on the environment. Although the industry often claims that GE crops reduce pesticide use, in fact the opposite is true… The vast increase in herbicide use, especially glyphosate (trade name RoundUp), has caused weeds to become resistant to them, and this chemical is losing its effectiveness… In addition, studies suggest that glyphosate-tolerant crops and the use of glyphosate are likely more responsible for the large decline in monarch butterfly populations than are declines in the overwintering habitat in Mexico, since this herbicide use is wiping out most of the milkweed, which the Monarch butterfly depends on for food.”

• GMOs have been proven safe to eat (FALSE)

“There is global scientific agreement that genetic engineering has the potential to introduce allergens and toxins in food crops, to change the nutritional value, and to create other unintended changes that may affect human health.”

The tide is beginning to turn in this country – I can feel it!  

The more knowledgeable we become about the use of GMOs in our food, the more quickly we will get transparency. When we voice our opinion to these companies, they have proven time and again that they are willing to change – and they have. Consumer Reports noted that, “between testing and publishing of this report, that there were manufacturers who were obtaining or obtained Non-GMO Project Verified certification. This demonstrates an actively changing market that seems to be responding to consumer demand.” There are few things you can do to help keep this moving in the right direction:

• If you live in Oregon or Colorado, cast your vote in favor of GMO labeling this November. More information can be found on the Oregon Right to Know and the Colorado Right to Know websites.
• If you know someone who lives in Oregon or Colorado, call them, facebook them, tweet them or go visit them and ask them to cast their vote in favor of GMO labeling.
• If you live elsewhere, contact your state legislators and tell them you support mandatory labeling of GMO food.
• Join the Food Babe Army here - it’s completely free and you’ll be the first to know about any new investigations. 
• Spread the word by sharing this post with everyone you know.

Thank you for your commitment to a more transparent food system.

We have the right to know what we are eating!

Vani
(Food Babe)

Featured Product:
(available in 2 sizes)

In Health,

The Naturally Botanicals Team

www.naturallybotanicals.com

GMO Labeling Legislation Blossoming this Spring

Repost from Natural Products Insider | June 2 2014 | by Lindsay Carlson, Drew Paris and Sheila Shah

Legislation that would require food manufacturers and retailers to label products made with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is gaining traction throughout the country. Polls have shown widespread public support for GMO labeling laws. As of the date of this article, Vermont, Connecticut and Maine have already enacted GMO labeling laws, and bills have been introduced in at least 22 other state legislatures. Meanwhile, Congress is considering the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act (HR 4432), which would mandate that FDA set standards for labeling food products as it pertains to the presence or absence of GMO ingredients, and take a voluntary approach whereby industry players are allowed to choose whether to label their products as containing GMOs.

Impact on Food Litigation
The increase in proposed GMO labeling laws dovetails with an uptick in food labeling litigation. In recent years, food labeling litigation has primarily consisted of class actions involving food products that claim to be “natural." Generally, these cases are brought under state consumer protection laws, and allege that consumers are being misled by food products that are labeled as “natural," but actually contain synthetic ingredients or GMOs. Since a 2009 appellate ruling that a natural foods claim involving high-fructose corn syrup was not pre-empted by FDA, plaintiffs’ attorneys have targeted food manufacturers and retailers in similar litigation, including Kraft, ConAgra Foods, Dole, General Mills, Frito Lay, Snapple and Whole Foods Market.

The proliferation of state GMO labeling laws will likely intensify the litigation risk for food companies. Some 80 percent of foods found in grocery stores contain ingredients made from genetically modified crops. Under proposed GMO labeling laws, food manufacturers, retailers and suppliers may be subjected to new “omission" actions for failure to strictly comply with labeling requirements. GMO laws may provide an additional hook for the “natural" food litigation described above. Finally, GMO laws may be interpreted as endorsing a state policy position that a GMO ingredient is materially different from a non-GMO ingredient, and that GMO ingredients are unnatural and potentially unsafe.

Food labeling litigation has been further complicated by FDA’s silence on the issue. FDA has declined to provide guidance on these issues beyond a 1992 policy stating that GMOs do not “present any different or greater safety concern than foods developed by traditional plant breeding." Although FDA has jurisdiction, it has declined to provide a rule regarding the use of the term “natural." This regulatory ambiguity has let food companies with no choice but to make their own determinations as to whether their products may be called “natural." The proliferation of GMO labeling laws may finally force FDA’s hand.

Lessons from California
One out of every eight Americans is a Californian. Due to the size and reach of California’s economy, many companies adopt California’s standards for nationwide application. Industry insiders should therefore pay special attention to efforts to pass GMO labelling legislation in California. Though the bill was narrowly defeated on May 29, 2014, proponents have vowed to continue their fight.

Much of the proposed GMO labeling legislation is similar to California’s Proposition 65, a 1986 law designed to protect Californians from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or reproductive harm. Prop 65 requires businesses and landlords to warn consumers if products or environments may result in exposure to certain chemicals above designated thresholds. With 800 chemicals within its purview, Prop 65 has touched a staggering number of products and environments in the California economy. It seems every building is equipped with a Prop 65 warning sign, and they are so ubiquitous that consumers generally ignore them.

GMO labeling laws would reach an enormous number of products. Farms are expanding the use of genetically engineered crops that are used in processed foods. The Grocery Manufacturers Association estimated 80 percent of conventional processed foods contain GMOs. Under the proposed laws, all such foods would likely be subject to labeling requirements. Prop 65 led to financial incentives for litigation, burdening businesses with cumbersome cases and extensive costs of defense. One would expect similar from GMO labelling laws becomes law.

Despite the complexity of these issues, one thing is clear: laws on this issue are rapidly evolving, and the food industry should take care to monitor these developments and prepare for potential changes in their labeling practices.

Lindsay Carlson and Drew Paris are partners, and Sheila Shahis an associate in the Los Angeles office of Alston & Bird, a national law firm of more than 800 attorneys.

This month's featured product, Metal Detox 

Plus, click here to see other natural detox products 

In Health, 

The Naturally Botanicals Team

www.naturallybotanicals.com

7 Most Common Genetically Modified Foods

Reposted May 2014 | Originally Posted: 12/03/2013 8:38 am By Caroline Young

Genetically modified material sounds a little bit like science fiction territory, but in reality, much of what we eat on a daily basis is a genetically modified organism (GMO). Whether or not these modified foods are actually healthy is still up for debate -- and many times, you don't even know that you are buying something genetically modified.

It is not required to label GMOs in the U.S. and Canada, but there are substantial restrictions, and even outright bans, on GMOs in many other countries.

However, by 2018, Whole Foods Market will start labeling GMOs in the U.S. This grocery chains' locations in Britain already provide GMO labeled products, as required by the European Union. According to the EU, GMO refers to plants and animals"in which the genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination."

1) Corn
Almost 85 perecent of corn grown in the U.S. is genetically modified. Even Whole Foods's brand of corn flakes was found to contain genetically modified corn. Many producers modify corn and soy so they are resistant to the herbicide glyphosate, which is used to kill weeds.

2) Soy
Soy is the most heavily genetically modified food in the country. The largest U.S. producer of hybrid seeds for agriculture, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, created a genetically engineered soybean, which was approved in 2010. It is modified to have a high level of oleic acid, which is naturally found in olive oil. Oleic acid is a monounsaturated omega-9 fatty acid that may lower LDL cholesterol (traditionally thought of as "bad" cholesterol) when used to replace other fats.

3) Yellow Crookneck Squash and Zucchini
Numbers of this GMO veggie are relatively small, but genetically modified yellow squash and zucchini can be found in two different species in the U.S. The species contain protein genes that protect against viruses. Just like their other GMO counterparts, you won't be able to tell the difference between non-GMO and GMO zucchini or squash.

4) Alfalfa
Cultivation of genetically engineered alfalfa was approved in 2011, and consists of a gene that makes it resistant to the herbicide Roundup, allowing farmers to spray the chemical without damaging the alfalfa.

5) Canola
Canola is genetically engineered form was approved in 1996, and as of 2006, around 90 percent of U.S. canola crops are genetically modified.

6) Sugar Beets
A very controversial vegetable, sugar beets were approved in 2005, banned in 2010, then officially deregulated in 2012. Genetically modified sugar beets make up half of the U.S. sugar production, and 95 percent of the country's sugar beet market.

7) Milk
To increase the quantity of milk produced, cows are often given rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone), which is also banned in the European Union, as well as in Japan, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

Looking Forward: Do GMO Apples Give Us A Glimpse Of The Future?
GMO apples are currently under review by the USDA, and have been since 2010, when the company Okanagan Specialty Fruits, Inc., developed apple varieties that don't turn brownfor an entire two weeks after slicing.

Polyphenol oxidase (PPO) is an enzyme that causes the browning of Golden Delicious and Granny Smith apples, and scientists are now able to deactivate the gene. Some studies do show stripping fruits of PPO can impact a plant's susceptibility to diseases. The creators say they simply want people to eat more apples and while activating this gene slows the process of browning, it's still a natural process.

It's clear that other parts of the world view GMOs as health threats, but it's still an ongoing debate here in America. For now, many GMOs have been deemed safe by organizations like the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

This month's featured product, Metal Detox 

Plus, click here to see other natural detox products 

In Health, 

The Naturally Botanicals Team

www.naturallybotanicals.com

Vermont Lawmakers Pass GMO Labeling Bill; Governor Expected To Sign

  | by  DAVE GRAM and LISA RATHKE

Posted: 04/24/2014 4:22 am EDT Updated: 04/24/2014 8:59 pm EDT

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Vermont has raised the stakes in the debate over genetically modified foods by becoming the first state to pass a bill requiring that they be labeled as such in the grocery aisle, making the move despite the opposition of the powerful U.S. food industry.

Americans overwhelmingly favor such requirements for foods containing genetically modified organisms, but the industry fears a patchwork of state policies. The Vermont bill says genetically modified foods "potentially pose risks to health, safety, agriculture, and the environment" and includes $1.5 million for implementation and defense against lawsuits expected from the food and biotech industries.

The national Grocery Manufacturers Association, the food industry's main trade group, said it's evaluating how to respond. Options could include a legal challenge, labeling only foods that are sold in Vermont or making a wholesale change nationwide to avoid multiple labeling systems.

On a federal level, the association has urged policymakers to support requirements for labeling only if the Food and Drug Administration finds a health or safety risk.

Katie Spring, a farmer in the Vermont town of Worcester, says knowing what's in her food is a freedom-of-information right. She said she is proud of how she and her husband grow their food and is willing to be transparent with customers.

"As an eater and consumer myself, I want the ability to know what's in my food," she said Thursday, a day after the Vermont House approved Senate changes. Gov. Peter Shumlin said he plans to sign the bill. The requirements would take effect July 1, 2016, giving producers time to comply.

The Vermont Grocers Association is disappointed the state is going at it alone and had hoped for a regional approach. Having different state rules on food packaging "gets very costly, very confusing and very difficult for the entire food industry to comply with," said Jim Harrison, the association's president.

It's unclear how GMO labeling might affect consumers' wallets or food companies' bottom line if shoppers reject labeled foods.

In Europe, some food makers have opted to source more expensive ingredients that are not genetically engineered, said Gregory Jaffe, biotechnology project director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which does not support mandatory government labeling of genetically modified foods.

Genetically modified crops have been altered to be resistant to insects, germs or herbicides. They have led to bountiful crops and food production but stirred concerns about the dominance of big agribusiness and the potential for environmental harm. Some scientists and activists worry about effects on soil health and pollination.

The FDA and an industry group known as BIO, for Biotechnology Industry Organization, say there's no material difference between food produced with genetic engineering and food produced without it. But the Vermont bill cites a lack of consensus among scientists on the safety of GMOs and no long-term epidemiological studies in the United States examining their effects.

The labels will say "produced with genetic engineering" for packaged raw foods, or "partially produced with genetic engineering" or "may be produced with genetic engineering" for processed food that contains products of genetic engineering. Meat and dairy would be exempt.

A national New York Times poll in January 2013 found that 93 percent of respondents said foods containing GMOs should be labeled. Twenty-nine other states have proposed bills recently to require GMO labeling, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

More than 60 countries require such labeling, according to the Vermont Right to Know campaign.

Some farmers in Vermont, known for its organic food operations, see the bill's passage as a David-vs.-Goliath victory.

"This vote is a reflection of years of work from a strong grass-roots base of Vermonters who take their food and food sovereignty seriously and do not take kindly to corporate bullies," Will Allen, manager of Cedar Circle Farm in Thetford, said in a statement Wednesday after the House approved the bill.

This month's featured product, Metal Detox 

Plus, click here to see other natural detox products 

In Health, 

The Naturally Botanicals Team

www.naturallybotanicals.com