Roundup (cancer causing substance) cases underway

[ironyak]

1...

[ironyak]

I'm right you're wrong, it's against God's will, it's FAKE NEWS, Trump is the best thing since sliced cheetos, and you're all worse than Hitler!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[My 2 cents]

But...but....

I really did want to get an answer to this question:

Suppose I have a company that makes canned soup. I want to make a corn chowder. I buy GMO corn from a local farmer or distributer. In my list of ingredients I want to list the corn as GMO corn. Am I at liberty to make this choice, or is there some sort of mandate from Monsanto that I cannot?

But I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

I want to list the corn as GMO corn.

My understanding of the fresh vegetable to canned vegetetable system is limited, but I believe Del Monte or Green Giant for instance have some of their own farms, and buy from private farms as well. Although it might be possible to grow GMO sweet corn and keep it separate from non GMO sweet corn, it would require extra effort and expense, which at the moment wouldn’t be warranted by being able to charge more for a GMO Inside! label. It wouldn’t be cost effective, so there’s no reason to do it. I doubt Monsanto has any rules in place to prevent a GMO Inside! label, but they’ve got lawyers enough to fix that if they found it necessary.



“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

[MarkD]

Ending this thread? But I just got here! Only 1 post.

[My 2 cents]

I doubt Monsanto has any rules in place to prevent a GMO Inside! label, but they’ve got lawyers enough to fix that if they found it necessary.

That would be my guess as well, but I was looking for something a little more solid than a guess.

I'm also guessing that your real motive for attempting to provide an answer is to assist in putting this thread to bed. Totally agree!

[AaronM]

No one here gets out alive

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

I was looking for something a little more solid than a guess.

OK, this might get us a little closer. It looks like Monsanto will not have a say in whether a canning company puts 'GMO Inside!' on the label, as it may yet become a government mandated requirement. The 'GMO' or more likely 'bioengineered' labeling law was passed in 2016, and it's in a public comment period right now. The train is rolling down the tracks, so unless an Executive Order switches the bill to a siding where it can park or crash into the rest of the train wreck currently exploding and imploding in and around our environmental protection laws:

Foodmakers will soon be required to disclose when their products contain genetically modified ingredients — but those labels may not be as obvious, or as comprehensive, as consumers expected.

The proposed rule also instructs foodmakers to use the term “bioengineered” to label such foods instead of “genetically modified,” a more recognizable phrase.

The proposed rule, which will now undergo a public comment period and could be finalized as early as this summer, represents a major milestone in the complicated, years-long process to regulate the labeling of genetically modified foods. Congress passed a mandatory-labeling law in 2016, but implementation has been delayed by questions about which foods should be covered and what types of labels foodmakers should use.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...1b9d11de00

[My 2 cents]

OK, this might get us a little closer.

Not really. My question was whether a company could choose to go BEYOND the minimum requirements, or whether Monsanto was limiting that choice in some way. I think your first response was closer. The question was hypothetical and borders on being moot because I doubt that any of these companies would choose this direction. It was just my curiosity. Thank you for trying, and thank you for the additional information in your last post.

Aloha, and RIP (this topic)

[Jeremy Lutes]

not... dead... yet...

A big part of this whole problem, in my humble opinion, is that science - as currently practiced - has a serious credibility problem. Is it any wonder that so many people are suspicious of things like glyphosate ? For your casual edification:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...ce/308269/

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...210944.htm

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2013/...at-the-lab

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2013/1...goes-wrong