Why would a company with an organic food brand oppose Proposition 37?
If organic foods can't contain genetically modified ingredients, why would organic food companies have a problem with labeling foods that contain them? This infographic will help you understand.
Thu, Oct 11 2012 at 12:51 PM
Why would the parent company of Muir Glen organic foods or the parent company of Horizon organic dairy products donate money and align with Monsanto against California’s Proposition 37
? If the bill to get foods made with genetically modified ingredients (GMOs) labeled passes, Muir Glen or Horizon wouldn’t need to put labels on their products. Organic foods aren’t allowed to contain GMOs. At first, it might not make sense. But, take a look at this infographic created by the Cornucopia Institute
, and you’ll see why.
When organic brands are owned by mainstream food companies that aren’t committed to the standard that all of their products are organic, it’s not in the company's best interest to support GMO labeling. For example, if General Mills, the parent company of Muir Glen, got behind Proposition 37 and it passed, the company would have to label its Progresso or Nature Valley Granola products if they contained GMO ingredients.
Unrelated to this infographic, but related to Proposition 37, Michael Pollan has an excellent post for the New York Times titled Vote for the Dinner Party
, in which he discusses what’s at stake with Proposition 37. You should click on over and give it a read.
The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.