Monsanto Bail Out

If you have been following the debate over GMOs you know that Monsanto has planted a lot of misinformation to paint detractors as charlatans. Independent studies condemning GMOs are thusly said to be “pseudoscience.”

It is up to you to study the evidence on your own. Not even blogs like this one are likely to satisfy those who are confused or those who believe Monsanto has their best interest at heart. However, when it comes to laws and regulations you may be able to formulate an opinion more readily. This is especially true when it comes to food labeling. Ninety percent of Americans feel it is their right to insist on knowing what their food contains. You may or may not choose to consume GMO food once alerted-it is also your right.

Consider the opinion of attorney Jonathan Emord. He is one of the few lawyers who have successfully argued before the Supreme Court on issues pertaining to consumer rights and supplementation. He is the author of three books, ” The Rise of Tyranny ,” ” Global Censorship of Health Information ,” and ” Restore The Republic .”

On July 27th 2015 he posted on is website,, a report on a House of Representatives bill that is practically a Monsanto bail out: it seeks to make it illegal for any state to pass laws and regulations labeling food as GMO or Natural. Read for yourself:

On July 23, the House of Representatives voted 275 to 150 to pre-empt all state laws governing genetically engineered ingredients in foods. The true purpose of that bill written by Mike Pompeo, Republican from Kansas, is to conceal the presence of genetically engineered ingredients in foods by prohibiting the requirement that foods containing GMOs disclose that fact on their labels. In other words, Pompeo’s bill codifies deception.

The bill is entitled (in Orwellian doublespeak), the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, thus deeming concealment of the presence of a bioengineered ingredient “accurate” labeling. Opponents of the bill have referred to it as the DARK Act (Denying Americans the Right to Know Act); indeed, in a failed amendment Congressman Jared Polis of Colorado tried to have the official name of the bill changed to that title.

If the bill passes the U.S. Senate and President Obama signs it into law (which, no doubt, he will), it will pre-empt and render unenforceable every state and local law concerning GMOs, including Vermont’s law that requires GMO labeling; the laws of several counties that protect organic farms from cross-contamination by GMO farms; and state laws that prohibit use of the term “Natural” on products containing GMOs.

By disguising the fact that a food contains a GMO, the bill makes consumer deception legal. In this way it protects the economic interests of big agricultural concerns that favor GMOs. Indeed, some like to call this bill the Monsanto Protection Act.

Some 90 percent of American consumers have reported in surveys that they want to know whether GMOs are in the foods they purchase. The fact of GMO ingredients is thus material to most consumers’ food purchases. A very large and growing percentage of consumers buy organic products, understanding those products to be GMO free. If this bill becomes law, no one who purchases a food, whether fruit, vegetable, or meat, will know for sure whether it is free of genetically engineered ingredients. Indeed, even foods labeled “Natural” will be able to contain unidentified genetically engineered ingredients. Moreover, this bill excludes from the definition of “genetically engineered” all foods having RNA modifications and all foods containing certain amounts of GMO content.

Having passed the House, the bill now moves to the Senate where another battle against deception is underway.

The Pompeo bill is not only one that codifies deception, it distorts the free market. It is an anti-competitive measure designed to protect GMO ag firms from market challenges arising from organic products. Rather than admit the presence of GMOs in their foods and defend those ingredients, GMO ag firms have chosen to hide the presence of GMOs and deceive consumers who find GMOs in foods to be a fact material to a purchasing decision. That non-disclosure approach will have the protection of law under this bill. All manner of ingredients, even ones that are largely believed “safe,” are routinely identified on nutrition facts panels, but when it comes to genetically modified ingredients, Monsanto and big agriculture wish to receive a special exemption. In this way, a majority of the members of the House of Representatives have chosen GMO ag firms as market winners, overriding the free choice of American consumers.

By making it difficult for consumers to know just which products are GMO-containing, proponents of the DARK Act seek to profit off of consumer ignorance and confusion. If offered a choice between an organic pea and a GMO-containing pea, most Americans prefer organic. In the ordinary course, we let the market decide who wins and loses. In a free market, it would be up to Monsanto and its friends to convince consumers that GMO-containing foods are better for them.”

Hugo Rodier, MD is an integrative physician based in Draper, Utah who specializes in healing chronic disease at the cellular level by blending proper nutrition, lifestyle changes, & allopathic practices when necessary.

Leave a Reply


captcha *

Information on this blog is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for the advice provided by your physician or other healthcare professional. You should not use the information on this blog for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing any medication or other treatment. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Please consult your health care practitioner with any questions or concerns you may have.