Petition to Adam H Putman, Carol Leger, Lawrence J. Hribard PhD (Senior Entomologist), Andrea Leal ( Director FKMCD Management), Phillip Goodman, Jill Cranney Gage, Brandon Pinder (Secretary-Treasurer), Stanley M. Zuba, MD (Commisioner), Beth Ranson, Danny Kolhage, Anderson H. (Andy) Racley, Ileana Ross- Lehtinen, Curtis Allen, George Neugent, Heather Carruthers, David Rice, Sylvia Murphy, Roman Gastesi Jr., Anderson H. (Andy) Rackley, Steven E. Dwinell, Angela Weeks-Samanie, Kelly Friend, Patricia Lucas, Tom McDonald, Commissioner, Dr. Bernadette Dunham, Lt. Governor Carlos Lopez- Cantera, Governor Rick Scott
Say No to Genetically Modified Mosquitoes Release in the Florida Keys
Right now, a British company named Oxitec is planning to release genetically modified mosquitoes into the fragile enviroment of the Florida Keys. The company wants to use the Florida Keys as a testing ground for these mutant bugs. Even though the local community in the Florida Keys has spoken -- we even passed an ordinance demanding more testing -- Oxitec is trying to use a loophole by applying to the FDA for an "animal bug" patent. This could mean these mutant mosquitoes could be released at any point against the wishes of locals and the scientific community. We need to make sure the FDA does not approve Oxitec's patent. Nearly all experiments with genetically-modified crops have eventually resulted in unintended consequences: superweeds more resistant to herbicides, mutated and resistant insects also collateral damage to ecosystems. A recent news story reported that the monarch butterfly population is down by half in areas where Roundup Ready GM crops are doused with ultra-high levels of herbicides that wipe out the monarch's favorite milkweed plant. What about our native species of Florida Keys Bats. Are there any studies being conducted to see if these mosquitoes will harm the native bat population? Why would we not expect GM (genetically modified) insects, especially those that bite humans, to have similar unintended negative consequences? Will the more virulent Asian tiger mosquito that also carries dengue fill the void left by reductions in A. aegypti? Will the dengue virus mutate (think antibiotic resistant MRSA) and become even more dangerous? There are more questions than answers and we need more testing to be done. Will the public be able to stop this program from happening if we don't want it? We were told that "public opinion would be taken into account." Dengue fever has been absent from the Florida Keys for years, which indicates the current methods of control and public education are working. What's the rush for this radical approach? Where is the third-party, peer-reviewed research on effectiveness and safety of GM mosquitoes other than Oxitec's own claims of success? Don't let Oxitec bully our community! We say no to genetically modified mosquitoes in the Florida Keys!
Petition to Food and Drug Administration
Ban GMOs and Educate People About the Dangers of GMOs
Please help ban GMOs and start educating the people about the dangers of them. People are ingesting food that they do not even know will do them harm. Our country is in many difficult situations, and nutrition is often forgotten in the midst of confusion and chaos. Then we wonder why our illnesses are on the rise and obesity becomes a problem. But eating healthy does not only mean eating fruits and vegetables, it also means caring about your food, where it came from, and what happened on the way. The problem is many people do not even know what GMO stands for, much less what it does. Please educate about and ban GMOs. Help people learn about the truth. I want to be part of the generation that puts an end to this nonsense, not the generation that just sits back and lets it happen. Between the years of 2001 and 2004, around 32,000 Indian farmers comminted suicide because they were spending more money on GMO seeds then they were making. Also, herbicide use has increased by 10x since the year 2000 because of GMOs. Now stronger GMO herbicdes and pesticides are being used, the more of this toxic substance is being digested my the population. More bugs and weeds that are immune to these pesticides and herbicides are being created, and it's only getting worse. Believe it or not, the USA lost 12 billion dollars in 2003 because of maketing issues with GMO soybeans. Contrary to the popular argument, GMOs can not help world hunger. Those 12 billion dollars were put to waste instead of put to good use. Please help my dream become a reality and change other's lives. Our nutrition will skyrocket and we will never have to think twice about where or what our food comes from again. Share this on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, or any other social media account you have. Talk to other people about the dangers and tell them the solution. We need all the help we can get. Help educate others on the dangers and go GMO-free. We need to end this problem once and for all, before it gets even more out of hand. Sign my petition and help us get another step closer to a GMO-free world.
Petition to KC Becker: Colorado House Majority Leader
Get Mandatory Labeling of GMOs on the Colorado Ballot!
Boulder is a community in Colorado that is known for being very health conscious and for being a community that values organic and natural food choices. The people of Boulder value their right to know what they are consuming, and their ability to choose healthy options with confidence. However, state and nationwide there are currently no laws calling for the mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food products. The people of Boulder, and Colorado, and even the nation don’t have the ability to choose GMO free food with confidence that the product they are buying is truly free from GMO ingredients. Instead, food companies have the freedom to label products as they please under no uniform standards or guidelines. Big food companies spend untold amounts of money each year on anti-labeling campaigns and lobbying in Washington for bills that would prohibit mandatory labeling of GMOs. So far they have been successful in suppressing the more than fifty percent of the country who are in favor of the required labeling of GMOs. The majority of Americans are in favor of nationwide labeling guidelines, yet legislation has not reflected this because the nation’s legislative branch has been giving favor to big business and not to its citizens. As citizens, our wishes and our rights are being disregarded. Big agribusinesses and anti-GMO organizations are feverishly pushing their agendas in our directions in an attempt to win us over. They are constantly battling for the upper hand and favor among government officials, but who benefits? Not the consumers. The battle between pro and anti GMO advocates has only distracted legislators and detracted attention away from the more prevalent issue: consumers are being denied the rights that we deserve. We as a state and a community are not being supported by our national representatives, so it is time to for us to turn to our state representatives and ask them to do us justice and get mandatory labeling of GMOs on the Colorado ballot. We, the people of Boulder and of the great state of Colorado deserve the right to choose with confidence. We deserve the right to have our voices heard. Join me in telling our state representatives that we want mandatory labeling laws on the ballot!
Petition to Cynthia Mathews, Zach Friend, Ryan Coonerty, Greg Caput, Bruce McPherson, John Leopold, Tim Fillmore, Dr. Arnold Leff, Andrew Strader, Michael C. Watkins
Ban Roundup in Santa Cruz County
Roundup is a commonly used pesticide here in Santa Cruz, California. Its active ingredient, glyphosate, is a harmful, type 1 carcinogenic chemical as declared by the state of California's Environmental Protection Agency. Santa Cruz County allows the spraying of this and similar toxic pesticides at schools, which unavoidably forces children to be exposed to cancer-causing chemicals. The city of Irvine had so many childhood cancer patients that a huge movement was created to ban pesticides from being used at parks and schools. WHY ISN'T SANTA CRUZ DOING THE SAME? There is an increasing amount of scientific research showing the multitude of dangers associated with Roundup use in the environment and human bodies. EVERYTHING toxic to plant and insect life will inevitably end up in our ocean and red wood forests, the natural environments that Santa Cruz county is so proud of and renown for! This kills marine and forest life, just as it kills the plants and insects its carelessly used for. Sooner than later, the entire developed world will regrettably understand the drastic effects of over-use of pesticides that we are seeing now: sky-rocketing cancer rates, super-weeds with resistance to all pesticides, diminished soil quality, and nearly all available food causing chronic gut inflammation. There are currently no restrictions to who can purchase Roundup and where they are legally able to spray it. Therefore, this dangerous chemical could be available for anyone and sprayed virtually anywhere in the public. This is a huge concern for parents, health conscious individuals, and organic gardeners. According to an article below, Santa Cruz county has joined Trinity, Mendocino, Humboldt, and Marin county in a GMO ban.This seems like a victory, but how is this being implemented? Has this ban in fact been enforced? If so, why can't Santa Cruz follow the lead of places like Richmond, CA and ban the use of Roundup and its main ingredient glyphosate as well? So far I have not seen any city reports that state that the county is free of pesticides, though its "integrative pesticide management reports" of the past have claimed that the county has been "reducing" pesticide spraying.We need more evidence that the county is living up to what the public needs. By signing this petition, we are requesting for Roundup to be banned from the shelves of all stores that sell it in Santa Cruz county. It could be easily and much more safely replaced with natural herbicides, such as Dr. Earth, which is sold at health conscious stores like Staff of Life. As a worldwide tourist destination, Santa Cruz is known for its natural beauty, wildlife, beaches, and redwood forests. Our famed monarch butterfly as well as the much needed honey bee are both declining rapidly in population, which the spraying of pesticides is largely contributed to. We want our children to have a healthy future, free of unavoidable environmental poisons. County of Santa Cruz most recent Integrated Pest Management Report June 2015 (notice the increase of glyphosate use from 2013-14): -http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/BDS/Govstream2/Bdsvdata/non_legacy_2.0/agendas/2015/20150623-664/PDF/024.pdf How and why Irvine, CA banned Roundup http://www.ocweekly.com/news/how-irvine-became-socals-first-non-toxic-city-7317638 CA cities/counties that have banned GMO's and Roundup -https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/fourth-california-county-santa-cruz-bans-gmos -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendocino_County_GMO_Ban https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/biod/trinityAP080404.php -http://www.projectcensored.org/richmond-ca-bans-glyphosate-found-in-monsantos-roundup/ -"The World According to Monsanto" documentary: start watching at 13:45 for shocking facts about the Roundup controversy and it's beginnings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPt6UG1cJdI -OEHHA Proposition 65 declaration of cancer causing substances: http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/CRNR_notices/admin_listing/intent_to_list/090415LCset27.html -Dr. Earth Organic Herbicides: http://drearth.net/products/organic-killer-sprays/weed-grass-herbicide/ -Local Good Times cover story about the bee disappearance in Santa Cruz: http://www.gtweekly.com/index.php/santa-cruz-news/good-times-cover-stories/7320-guild-save-the-queen.html -How Roundup has contributed to monarch butterfly decline: http://e360.yale.edu/feature/tracking_the_causes_of_sharp__decline_of_the_monarch_butterfly/2634/ -Academic researched articles and presentations on the dangers of glyphosate: https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/
Petition to Barack Obama
Veto S. 764, a "DARK" Act: Americans Have A Right To Know They're Consuming GMOs
On July 19th, President Obama was presented with S. 764, a piece of legislation regarding the use of labels for GMO foods; yet the measure itself has never been introduced on its own to either house of Congress. Although it’s also never been reviewed by a House or Senatorial committee, it was passed in the Senate on July 7th by a vote of 63-30 and the House of Representatives passed it in a landslide victory of 306-117 on July 14th. This bill will create the essential principles that’ll govern what’s actually considered “genetically modified”, how manufacturers are obligated to disclose if their products are derived from GMO ingredients, as well as whether or not they have a legal requirement to do so at all. Legislation regarding the topic of GMOs has been given the popular acronym of "DARK" or "Denying Americans the Right to Know". This is being done by a series of unrelated amendments attached to a bill, the "National Sea Grant College Program Act of 2015", that was original introduced to the Senate on March 17, 2015 by Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) and subsequently referred to and by the Senate's committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. The bill sought to "reauthorize and amend the National Sea Grant College Program, and for other purposes." The Sea Grant is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is a division of the Department of Commerce, and its mission is to “provide integrated research, communication, education, extension & legal programs to coastal communities that lead to responsible use of the nation’s ocean, coastal and great lake resources through informed personal, policy and management decisions.” On July 7, 2016, the Senate amended S. 764, eliminating the original text of the bill, sans for its enacting clause (the proposed intent concerning the Sea Grant), and put an amendment regarding GMOs in its place. Congress states that the Sea Grant is the “legislative vehicle for a measure concerning bioengineered food disclosure”. Therefore, the GMO measure is not a stand-alone bill; it is an amendment to a bill that is irrelevant in topic and scope. Its content has never been introduced to either house of Congress nor explored or considered by any Congressional committee. It has never been properly vetted and the Sea Grant legislation is being used because it was unanimously passed in the Senate upon its introduction and survived the Senate’s committee on Commerce, Science and Technology. This legislation now contains the "National Voluntary Bio-engineered Food Labeling Standard" or the so-called "GMO Bill". The term "bio-engineering" is narrowly defined to only include food that “contains genetic material that has been modified through in vitro DNA techniques” and/or “for which the modification could not otherwise be obtained through conventional breeding or found in nature”. This limits the definition to only include food that has been engineered by combining an egg or a sperm outside of the body while excluding other genetic engineering methods. It also ignores routine instances in which engineering is chosen over conventional breeding practices due to a desired increase in speed. It also expressly prohibits a "food derived from an animal to be considered a 'bioengineered food' solely because the animal consumed feed produced from, containing, or consisting of a bioengineered substance". This is problematic because much of U.S livestock that’s slaughtered for human consumption, as well as milk and egg producers, are all fed a steady diet of corn, soy and/or high fructose corn syrup, the majority of which has been genetically modified. Additionally, GMO labeling will only be legally required if the most predominant and/or second-most ingredient of the food would “independently be subject to the labeling requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act” and/or “the most predominant ingredient of the food is broth, stock, water, or a similar solution”. According to the legislation, there is also no standard, universal word, phrase or image that will be obligatory for businesses to include on their packaging as a requirement regarding mandatory disclosure of GMO derived ingredients. Manufacturers can choose whichever method is most appealing to them, including QR codes which can only be accessed via smartphones. Any company is allowed to place their GMO disclosure anywhere, including on social media. As long as it has technically been posted somewhere, this is deemed acceptable practice. All that’s required is an indicated telephone number on the packaging that will provide access to additional information. Therefore, an individual may have to call a telephone number to obtain information on the company's GMO policy for several items before making a purchase. It’s highly doubtful that a person would be able to investigate every package of food in their cart before purchasing. Therefore, a customer may be inadvertently supporting practices they don’t necessarily agree with but are now forced to support by default. Corporations should be legally required to make information regarding their manufacturing practices readily available to the public instead of forcing the burden of investigating onto the consumer. This bill’s content does not apply to retail food establishments. Incidentally, Congress will commission a study after the enactment of the bill to see whether or not its requirements negatively impact consumers. It’s a reactive action that does not specify a recourse in the event that its findings are indicative of a situation that needs to be remedied. In its closing, it calls for a preemptive measure that would forbid states from establishing a stricter labeling standard of their own: “No State or a political subdivision of a State may directly or indirectly establish under any authority or continue in effect any requirement relating to the labeling of whether a food or seed is genetically engineered, or was developed or produced using genetic engineering, including any requirement for claims that a food or seed is or contains an ingredient that was developed or produced using genetic engineering." Whether or not you agree that GMOs pose a public health danger is irrelevant. The real issue here is that the American public has the right to make an informed choice when purchasing food. They have a right to know what they're consuming and to be protected by a law that isn't discriminatory against racial minorities, the elderly and those who live with a low socio-economic status. Congress is protecting big business when they’ve been elected to protect the United States’ citizens. A policy that celebrates a true definition of the topic, champions transparency, creates a universal symbol and makes information readily available to Americans, is the solution.