Evan Eberhardt 
Member since Nov 12, 2013


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Links to Me

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Recent Comments

Re: “Does I-522 really still have a chance?

I understand government skepticism these days. It is well deserved. But at times some mild intervention isn't always a bad thing. Nutrition labeling is required and I don't see people up in arms against that. Here is some information made available to you, do with it what you will. GMO labeling would be identical in nature. You are not worried about GMOs, well then ignore it and keep your head in the sand. For those of us concerned, it is of great use so we can better let the market work by choosing brands appropriately. True, the market is creating this option anyway, but that is primarily towards health conscious brands which makes up a small percentage of all grocery. For the less inclined masses it would be useful just to see how much they care or not. What Monsanto and the other biotechs fear is that people will see that label and get curious, get on the Internet and begin reading. And it doesn't take long to unravel the scam. Hell, even Dr. Oz recently called out on national TV the bald-faced lie of less pesticide use (which some ignoramus or perhaps a paid shill already posted on these comments). Pesticide use has risen dramatically; the complete opposite of the claims. Glyphosate is a dangerously toxic substance and the EPA just raised the limits way up since we now have superweeds (thanks again biotech for your short-sighted idiocy!). For those of us who have done our homework, we see the coming disasters of modern agriculture. Labeling at least sheds light on how the ingredients were sourced so we can all make better choices.

7 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Evan Eberhardt on 11/12/2013 at 1:11 PM

© 2014 Inlander
Website powered by Foundation