Tag Archives: Genetically modified organism

Analysis by the Legislative Analyst of Proposition 37, the “California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.”

This the text of the analysis done by the Legislative Analyst on the proposed Proposition 37, the “California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.” (PDF file here) Genetically Engineered Foods. Mandatory Labeling. Initiative Statute. Background Genetically Engineered (GE) Foods. Genetic engineering is the process of changing the genetic material of a living organism toContinue reading “Analysis by the Legislative Analyst of Proposition 37, the “California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.””

Genetically engineering microbes to work for us

Interesting video from the Open University. Genetically engineered (GE) E. coli bacteria produce much of today’s insulin supply. By using GE, we are turning microbes into “tiny factories” that happily churn out what they get re-programmed to do.

The Straight Poop on GMO Labeling

During June, two items hit the news involving unsavory (to some) food options. The first was a letter to the Record-Bee from a local organic grower taking me to task for my column, “Something Fishy This Way Comes.” The grower accused me of being against “choice.” She contended, if genetically modified (GM) food is notContinue reading “The Straight Poop on GMO Labeling”

Are You Eating Genetically Modified Foods? Relax. We’ve been eating GMOs for many, many years

You people in the developed world are certainly free to debate the merits of genetically modified foods, but can we please eat first? – Dr. Florence Wambugu of Kenya   Over at TheEnvironmentSite.org Environment Forum, EcoBlogger has posted an article titled Are You Eating Genetically Modified Foods? 7 Tips to Avoid Eating GMOs! I wouldContinue reading “Are You Eating Genetically Modified Foods? Relax. We’ve been eating GMOs for many, many years”

Are biotechnology and sustainable agriculture complementary or contradictory?

The Economist is hosting an online debate. At issue, biotechnology. The statement is: “This house believes that biotechnology and sustainable agriculture are complementary, not contradictory.” Defending the motion is Pamela Ronald, a professor of plant pathology, University of California, Davis. The number of people on Earth is expected to increase from the current 6.7 billionContinue reading “Are biotechnology and sustainable agriculture complementary or contradictory?”