MNN - Mother Nature Network

the National Academy of Sciences." [3] Bob Goldberg quoted in OC Register article, "Money pouring in to defeat Prop. 37. Opponents say genetically modified foods have no evidence of being harmful; proponents want labels" "I'm motivated to go against Prop. 37 because it's anti-scientific," said UCLA plant biologist Bob Goldberg. "It's no different to me than people not getting a vaccine because they think it might be responsible for causing autism. Am I for consumers' right to know? Absolutely. But labeling has to have a purpose. We use labeling, like with cigarettes, for things that might be potentially harmful." [3] Bob Goldberg quoted in LA Times article, "Study Points to Health Problems with Genetically Modified Foods" "Bob Goldberg, a plant molecular biologist at UCLA, said the study didn't offer any credible explanation for why the engineered corn would cause tumors. The changes made to plants to help them resist Roundup involve a protein that is naturally present in all plants people eat every day, he said." [3] Bob Goldberg quoted in San Fransisco Chronicle article, "Biotech Food Measure Prop. 37 on Ballot" "Bioengineered crops are the safest crops in the world," said Bob Goldberg, a molecular biologist, professor at UCLA and member of the National Academy of Sciences. "We've been testing them for 40 years. They're like the Model T Ford. There is not one credible scientist working on this that would call it unsafe." [3] A Collection of Soybean Seed Transcription Factor Gene Knock-Out Lines Has Been Generated Sixty-three soybean seed transcription factor gene RNAi knock-out lines were generated in collaboration with Dr. David Somers at Monsanto. Transcription factor genes chosen for study were identified in our NSF-funded project "What Are the Genes Required to Make a Soybean Seed," using laser capture microdissection (LCM) and Affymetrix GeneChip technologies. All of the RNAi lines are available to the soybean community from Monsanto through a standard MTA process. To initiate this process, please contact either Bob Goldberg (bobg@ucla.edu) or David Somers directly at Monsanto (david.a.somers@monsanto.com). [3] Professor Robert Goldberg a UCLA professor of Botany was instrumental in the defeat of Prop 37. It appears that his enthusiasm and hard work to defeat that measure did not stem-out of his passion for GMO, but out of his loyalty to his masters at Monsanto who employ him and fund his research in UCLA. This professor’s GMO ideology turns out to be based on money and co-optation by global corporations that own most of congress, politicians, scientists and researchers in the United States, as well as international leaders and political figures, and anyone who will advance their control over the food supplies in the world. Control the food and you control the people! Professor Goldberg is a little pawn in this scheme. Unfortunately, he has used his position as public employee in a public University (UCLA) to advance a political agenda and a product/technology that was sponsored by a private company. That is a clear conflict of interest. Professor Goldberg a simultaneous employee of Monsanto and of UCLA has used and abused his position under the guise of science. He used the University as a vehicle to push a political agenda induced by his Masters in Monsanto. He blatantly and arrogantly bragged about his connection to Monsanto and his work on their GMO soy seed, as well as his victory over prop 37. He proclaimed himself a hero for defeating this measure and for knowing what is best for humanity. Meanwhile, he continues to misrepresent the proposition and calls “the right to know” as an “ideology.” Apparently, the university’s leadership is oblivious to ethical violations and was not bothered with this professor’s conduct, which gives the observer the sense that this practice is common and welcomed in UCLA, in order to help the university obtain grants and receive publicity through the publishing of any bogus study that might generate funding. Has UCLA become a cradle for pseudo-science and selective ethics, or is this a common practice in all universities? We all have to be wary of Megalomania that can plague any humanoid who acquires some type of power, and immune ourselves with reality to keep us grounded and ethical. Unfortunately, global corporations (like Monsanto) have once again succeeded in robbing local, national and international farmers from their right to individual sovereignty, and have forced them to become less self-reliant and dependent on the Monsanto GMO seeds. The anti- prop 37 campaign was plagued with lies, fear mongering, and misinformation. Per example, the No on 37 campaign falsely attributed a direct quote to FDA in the campaign mailer. The quoted attribution, which appears below, is entirely false and fabricated. FDA did not make this statement and does not take a position on Prop 37. [1] "The US Food and Drug Administration says a labeling policy like Prop 37 would be inherently misleading." US Food and Drug Administration In addition, Professor Goldberg the self-proclaimed hero, the well-paid public employee the Monsanto loyal servant, and the opponent of prop 37 did not win this battle on his own. In reality, the companies listed below have contributed millions of dollars to confuse and scare the public, in order to deter Californians from practicing their constitutional right to know what they are consuming. This is a list of some of the contributors to the “No on 37” campaign [2], including: • MONSANTO COMPANY $4,208,000.00 • E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO. $4,025,200.00 • PEPSICO, INC. $1,716,300.00 • BAYER CROPSCIENCE $1,618,400.00 • DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC $1,184,800.00 • NESTLE USA, INC. $1,169,400.00 • COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA $1,164,400.00 Conclusion: It is amazing that a simple label has created so much heat and controversy. It makes you wonder that if Professor Goldberg and his Masters at Monsanto are so certain that genetically engineered food is the way of the future, then, why did they fight so hard and so dirty against prop 37? A tiny GMO label would be no different than the existing label that allows the public to know where their grapes or peaches come from. It is unfortunate that the herds will continue to empower the elite to do the thinking for them, because of the mental paralysis they experience when faced with independent thinking, inquiring, and making a decision on their own. They dwell in their web of fears that disable them from doubting authority and taking responsibility for their actions. Instead, they will always choose the lazy path over dissonance and critical thinking. References: 1. www.carighttoknow.org/possiblefraud. Press release, posted on October 18, 2012. California Right to Know Calls for Criminal Investigation of No on 37 For Possible Fraud for Misuse of FDA Seal and Fabricated FDA Quote 2. www.brandchannel.com/.../Prop.-37-Puts-Labeling-of-Genetically-M...Posted on August 20, 2012. Prop. 37 Puts GMO Labeling To California Voters 3. www.mcdb.ucla.edu/Research/Goldberg/news_index.htm