Cali's Proposition 37 - Should Genetically Engineered Food be labeled?

What is Proposition 37?
By Jan. 1, 2014, front-of-package labeling indicating "genetically engineered" would be placed on raw GMO food products. Similar labels for bulk food would appear on shelves or bins. Processed foods, including canned, frozen and milled products, would carry labels saying they were "partially produced" or "may be partially produced ... with genetic engineering."
The measure’s been dubbed by supporters as the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act. It qualified for the California ballot with nearly 1 million signatures.

The initiative defines genetically engineered food as produced from a plant or animal whose biological traits contain DNA that has been manipulated in a laboratory at the cellular level. Pioneered more than two decades ago, the technique boosts productivity by making crops resistant to insects, plant diseases, pesticides and herbicides. The biggest successes have been with commodities that are staples in most processed foods (corn, soybean, sugar beet).

What is at Stake?
·         Genetically engineered crops account for about 90 percent of U.S. corn, soybean and sugar beet production.
·         An estimated 70 percent to 80 percent of processed foods sold in supermarkets could be affected, along with a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables.
·         Labeling in California could set a precedent that’s followed nationwide.
·         Food Items exempt from labeling: Most meat and dairy products, eggs, certified organic foods, alcohol, restaurant meals.  
·         Foods could not be labeled "natural" if any of their ingredients were genetically engineered.

Players supporting Prop 37 labeling of GMO foods
·         Website: http://justlabelit.org/  (carighttoknow.org was another support website, but it’s gone now?).
·         Natural food businesses and activists
·         Those fearing big companies could gain monopolies over supplies of expensive patented seeds that make crops resistant to being doused with herbicides

A California-specific poll, released Thursday by the Business Roundtable and the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy, showed Proposition 37 has a 3-to-1 ratio of support, with 64.9 percent of prospective voters favoring it, compared with 23.9 percent opposed.

Ctrl + click here for exhaustive list of supporters.

Players opposing Prop 37 labeling of GMO foods
·         Website: noprop37.com
·         Multinational companies including PepsiCo, Coca-Cola and Kellogg
·         Processed food and biotech industries

Opponents say labeling would unfairly besmirch popular and reputable products, raise food prices and spur frivolous lawsuits while doing little to protect the public’s health. Passage of the initiative could create a cumbersome patchwork of state food-labeling laws if other states follow California’s lead, they contend.

Ctrl + click here for exhaustive list of opponents.

Regulatory Bodies are ok with GMO foods
·         The U.S. Food and Drug Administration decreed genetically engineered foods to be safe.
·         The FDA’s labeling policy since 1992 has said it "has no basis for concluding that bioengineered foods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way.”

Reference: July 22 article in the Boston Herald, originally featured in LA times

Read More

SNAP to Health: A Fresh Approach to Strengthening the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)

On July 18th, a Capitol Hill Briefing convened leading public health experts to discuss “SNAP to Health.” An initiative, spearheaded by the Center for the Study of the Presidency and the Congress (CSPC), to pinpoint current shortcomings of SNAP and present recommendations to strengthen the efficiency of the program to alleviate food insecurity, promote sound nutrition, and take on the obesity epidemic. It was a timely gathering, considering the SNAP program’s impending re-authorization as part of the 2012 Farm Bill. Below are some take home messages from the briefing, compiled by Christine Gary, MS, from our Washington, DC office.

In hopes of providing a roadmap for strengthening current SNAP, the CSPC released an evidence-based comprehensive report offering 10 recommendations.

1. Protect current funding levels for SNAP.
2. Collect data on SNAP purchases.
3. Identify a set of integrated strategies that would help align SNAP purchases with the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
4. Focus attention on children’s health in SNAP
5. Use incentives to make fruits, vegetables, and whole grains the easy choice
6. Establish stronger food stocking standards for SNAP retailers
7. Provide states with flexibility to evaluate fresh approaches to SNAP with waivers to pilot test and evaluate possible program changes
8. Promote innovation in SNAP by establishing a Center for Health and Nutrition Innovation at the USDA.
9. Create a partnership between the USDA and the HSS to move SNAP towards health
10. Establish a Federal Interagency Taskforce as a national strategy of identifying fresh approaches to strengthen SNAP.

Featured Speakers at the Briefing:
The Honorable Rosa DeLauro gave a passionate plea for Congress not to cut SNAP funding, positioning the question of funding as more than just dollars and cents, and elevating it to a debate on the moral responsibility of a government to take care of its most vulnerable.

The Honorable Ron Wyden implored the audience for support of his proposed amendment that would grant states the legal authority to give waivers for pilot programs providing incentives for healthy purchases with SNAP dollars.

Dr. Walter Willett cited surveys showing that 80% of Americans support maintaining or even increasing current SNAP funding, provided the program raises its nutritional standards.

Dr. David Ludwig brought up animal studies that show metabolic changes conferring a predisposition to obesity after fasting periods. He connected these findings to the fact that many low income Americans don’t know when their next meal will be, and depend on SNAP as a way out of chronic fasting.

Dr. Marion Nestle highlighted how food marketers often target minorities and low-income families with advertisements pushing nutrient-poor fare. Food retailers promote junk food that can be purchased with SNAP benefits over produce b/c it grants a higher profit margin.

To continue the conversation on improving SNAP, visit CSPC’s virtual town hall at www.snaptohealth.org.

Read More

The Root’s Focus on Obesity Conference

The Root Magazine held a “Focus on Obesity” conference today at the Washington Post as part of their Black, Fit & Healthy Series. The American Beverage Association sponsored the event, along with the Office of Minority Health in the Department of Health and Human Services, and HBO. Sam Kass, White House assistant chef and senior policy advisor for food initiatives, delivered the keynote address. Three series of panels brought together prominent speakers from government and private groups that fight obesity within the African American community. The conference was geared towards discussing solutions to the obesity epidemic. Below are some ideas panelists threw out, compiled by Christine Gary, MS, from our Washington, DC office.

Home and Community Solutions
·         With Bloomberg’s proposed soda ban setting the stage for this panel, speakers championed the individual citizen’s informed choice over governmental bans or taxes on food.
·         The panel instead supported educational health campaigns, parental role models, and community partnerships.
·         Mayors are connecting the private and public sector to fund community renovation. By partnering with organizations, cities can create safe clean parks, sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.
·         Churches and workplaces are now incorporating wellness services.

Sam Kass Keynote Luncheon
·         The Army says obesity is the #1 disqualifying factor for service in the military. Four-star generals say obesity is the #1 threat to national security. Sometimes out of shape recruits need pre boot camp before boot camp.

Disparities Solutions Panel
·         Health care providers need to understand the cultural dynamics and gender specific issues w/n the African American community.
·         Doctors should be reimbursed for providing the ongoing counseling needed for lifestyle changes.
·         ACA allocates $16 million in funds for obesity and hypertension, and $74 million in prevention funds (which include obesity as it relates to heart disease and diabetes). But small communities and non-profits are competing with big boys (John Hopkins and AHA) in a losing battle for funds.
·         Instead of talking about childhood obesity, which can plant seeds for body image issues, shift dialogue to spotlight health; how to build healthy families and healthy cities and communities.
·         Why are white people the gold standards against which African Americans are compared? Journalists need to be aware of what stories they cover and promote. Recently a study claiming black girls don’t benefit as much from exercise as white girls got extensive media coverage, even though the study was fraught with design errors.

School-Based Solutions Panel
·         Physical education should be kept in schools and held to high standards. It should incorporate assessable learning outcomes and planned sequential sessions. The CDC has a Physical Education Curriculum Analysis Tool.
·         Get creative. Serve pizza w/ portobello mushrooms the children grew in a school garden during science class.
·         Panelists debunked the assumption that it costs more to eat healthy.
·         The ABA representative said their recent change in school beverage offerings was well received, and credited the focus groups they had with mothers prior to for the smooth transition.
·         Two good resources mentioned were the National Wildlife Federation’s Eco-schools program, and the Parent-Teacher Association’s family-school partnerships.

See the full conference agenda; Find The Root on Facebook; Follow them on Twitter; Event hashtag: #focusonobesity

Read More

Farm Bill Clears House Agricultural Committee

Farm Bill Clears House Agriculture Committee

The House passed their version of the Farm Bill July 12th

• It took a 15 hour marathon deliberation session of 109 offered amendments.
• The bill passed by a healthy and bipartisan 24-vote margin, 35-11. Here’s a table showing the party breakdown.
  

Voted for the Bill	Voted against the Bill
13 Democrats	7 Democrats – Who didn’t like the deep funding cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
22 Republicans	4 Republicans – Who didn’t like the bill’s high price tag and the farm subsidies it offers farmers.

Industry Groups and Critics remain unsatisfied

• The House bill does not win favor across the board.
• Environmental groups are upset that it allows for increased pesticide use and less stringent rules for genetically engineered crops.
• Food groups worry cuts to the food stamp program could leave two to three million people without food benefits.
• Groups of fiscal conservatives maintain the bill is still too generous with federal subsidies to well-off farmers.

How is the Senate version and House version of the Farm Bill similar?

• Both Senate and House bills consolidate conservation programs and change commodity protection programs. These adjustments save about $1.9 billion annually, compared with current spending.

How do the Senate version and the House version of the Farm Bill differ?

• The House Farm Bill saves $35 billion over ten years; the Senate Farm Bill saves $23 billion.
• The differential in savings comes completely from the far steeper cuts to the SNAP program in the House Farm Bill, which cuts $16.5 billion compared with the Senate’s $4.5 billion cuts.

Why can’t we be friends?

Farm Subsidies and Nutrition Programs have proven to be fodder for contentious debate, with opposing sides unlikely to compromise. To sidestep the all-too-predictable bitter floor debate on both issues, it is speculated that House Speaker John Boehner (OH-8) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (VA-7) may opt for negotiations in conference committees. Committee Chair Frank Lucas (R-OK-3) and Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D-MN-7) would negotiate a Farm Bill middle ground with their Senate counterparts, Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Pat Roberts (R-KS).  The bill that results from their dealings would be put on fast track for approval, with just one more roll call vote on the House floor.

The Legislative Clock is ticking…

• Three more weeks before the House leaves on their five-week summer recess.
• After the break, only eight legislative days remain before the current farm bill expires come midnight on September 30th.

Read More

The Great Health Care Rip-Off of the 21st Century

This post originally appeared on Food Politics, Marion Nestle's blog. So, imagine it's her speaking, not me. Kthxbye.


When you buy cigarettes and junk food, you wind up paying twice: once for the goods, and once again for the health problems the companies create but don't help fix.

I've been at meetings in London and Geneva on non-communicable (what we call chronic) diseases and how to prevent them.
On the way to Europe, I did some catching up on reading past issues of The Lancet and ran across this letter from Sally Casswell of the School of Public Health at Massey University in Auckland.
Professor Casswell was responding to an article arguing that a major priority in chronic disease prevention should be to strengthen the capacity of countries to deliver primary care services.
Yes, professor Casswell writes, primary care is important. But it is even more important to focus prevention efforts on the environmental factors that influence the behavior of individuals and cause them to need primary care services in the first place.

Do we really want to continue to live in a world where the oversupply and marketing of tobacco, alcohol, unhealthy processed foods, and soft drinks is tolerated simply to allow continuing profits for the shareholders of the transnational corporations producing and distributing them, while the taxpayer funds the health services and pharmaceutical response to the ensuing disease and injury?

This is a refreshing way to look at this problem, and one well worth pondering.

Read More