Susan G. Koman Response to Pinkwashing Letter and KFC Buckets

The following post is not intended to offend. I just personally believe that there is an awful lot of lying going on in America, both in the for-profit and the not-for-profit camps. I get really angry when companies con people and play on their weaknesses. And I get even angrier when I learn the money that not-for-profit companies make is not really used for the purposes in which it was intended. Especially when a company like Susan G. Komen for the Cure, that makes $400 million (2010) in earnings per year, spends a miserly 21% or $84 million on actual research. Doesn't it make you just a little bit curious as to where the other $316 million goes?

As a Real Food eater, I am very aware of what processed foods can do to our bodies and how the chemicals used to process them can actually cause us to get sick, sometimes terminally. So, when I saw that Susan G. Komen for the Cure had partnered with KFC, I was outraged. I signed my name to a letter from Breast Cancer Action that indicated my level of angst. I am writing this post so that I can not only share that letter, but the follow-up letter from "some unnamed person" at SGK and my response to that letter. If this is an area that is sensitive for you, you might want to stop reading now.

Original Letter to SGK and KFC
Dear KFC and Susan G. Komen for the Cure,
I am appalled by your “Buckets for the Cure” partnership. I share Breast Cancer Action's shock at this outrageous campaign, which uses the breast cancer epidemic to improve the American public's perception of KFC, and increase the company’s profits from the sale of pink buckets of chicken. There is no doubt in my mind that countless people affected by breast cancer find this campaign offensive and upsetting, as is evident from many blog posts and Facebook pages I have seen.

KFC (with Susan G. Komen for the Cure’s blessing) is engaged in one of the worst examples of pinkwashing. A pinkwasher is a company that purports to care about breast cancer by promoting a pink-ribboned product while at the same time manufacturing products that contribute to the disease. In this
case, KFC is encouraging people to buy pink buckets of chicken to demonstrate its alleged commitment to ending the breast cancer epidemic. However, KFC's food is unhealthy and much of it is marketed to low-income communities. KFC thus contributes to the significant problem of providing poor food choices
for low-income communities in the United States, who disproportionately suffer from poor breast cancer outcomes and other problems that may be exacerbated by an unhealthy diet.

Instead of partnering with a corporation that sells unhealthy food, I believe that Susan G. Komen for the Cure should work with companies that do not contribute to the breast cancer epidemic.

Response from SGK
Thank you for your email. The KFC partnership in 2010 helped Komen reach women in about 800 communities not currently served by a Komen Affiliate, with the pink buckets and links to a website with breast health information. It also helped us raise more than $4.2 million for cancer research and other
programs.  It has not been continued this year. I hope this is helpful to you.  Please feel free to email back if you need more information.

Sincerely,
Susan G. Komen for the Cure

My response back to SGK
Dear Unnamed Person at Susan G. Komen for the Cure:
Thank you for your canned response. But, no, your response was NOT helpful! Encouraging people to eat disgusting fried chicken that 1) has been raised on factory farms and treated with hormones and chemicals that have been shown to contribute to breast cancer, and 2) contributes to obesity which is one of the factors which increases a persons chances of getting breast cancer - all in the name of curing Breast Cancer??? Ludicrous! Do you people even read your own website???

And let's address that $4.2 million that you so proudly admit to earning. How do you justify the fact that only 21% of those funds actually go towards research and finding a "cure"? And quite frankly, I don't think you really do want to find a cure because if you did there are any number of other ways that all those funds could be used rather than supporting Big Pharma and putting more money in their pockets with your support of chemotherapy (chemical poisoning) and radiation (burning).

An article in Oncology Today (2004) reported that the survival rate of women in the US who received chemotherapy was only 2.1%. Michael Boyer, head of Medical Oncology at the Sydney Cancer Centre, disagrees. He says that the survival rate is closer to 5%. And Guy Fague (The War on Cancer: An anatomy of failure, a blueprint for the future. Springer, 2005), concluded that chemotherapy for cancer is based on "flawed premises with an unattainable goal, cytotoxic chemotherapy in its present form will neither eradicate cancer not alleviate suffering." So, I ask, why is SGK focusing on treatment??? I truly think the pharmaceutical companies have the treatment piece covered. Why would an organization that is called, "Susan G. Komen for the Cure" not be funding and contributing 100% OF IT'S PROCEEDS to finding that cure? 

And here's another question for you, where does the other $3.3 million from selling buckets of chicken go???? Salaries, marketing, pinkwashing??? And while we are questioning where the money is spent, is it really necessary for the CEO of a non-profit organization to make $500,000+ a year? That's more than the president of the United States. Even Steve Jobs, past-CEO to one of the most profitable companies in the world, only made $1/year. Sounds like there are a few more things going on at SGK then a "cure" for breast cancer, but that's just me...     

While I am certainly glad to hear that someone at your organization has come to their senses and realized that buckets of greasy, MSG and soy oil soaked chicken is NOT the correct affiliation for breast cancer awareness and cure, I am still stunned that SGK allowed themselves to be aligned with KFC in the first place. And as long as the pinkwashing continues, I will continue working from my side to educate anyone and everyone about who and what SGK for the Cure is really all about.

Again, thank you for your time in providing a canned response. Please don't waste time responding back if you can provide nothing more than SGK rhetoric. I can read all about it on your website.

Please let me know what you think...is SGK doing what they should be in seeking a cure for breast cancer?

Susan G. Komen Deems BPA Safe

When I wrote this post, The Pink Cure Nonprofit Gone Bad, just a few days ago (about how the Susan G. Komen Organization has become a nonprofit organization that I no longer trust or care to be associated with), little did I know that there would be further fodder again so soon.

SGK Deems BPA Safe
The Susan G. Komen Foundation is denying that BPA (bisphenol A) causes cancer and that it has been linked specifically to an increase in breast cancer. Specifically, the website says: "Links between plastics and cancer are often reported by the media and in e-mail hoaxes. However, there is no scientific research to support a link between using plastic items, such as drinking water from a plastic bottle, and the risk of breast cancer. Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical found in some plastic food and beverage containers. Small amounts of BPA from the containers can get into the food and beverages inside. As a result, we can be exposed to low levels of BPA. At this time, there is no evidence to suggest a link between BPA and the risk of breast cancer."

REALLY???!!! For an organization whose main focus is the prevention and treatment of breast cancer to allow such careless, blase statements on their website is truly shocking. Not only is the information misleading, it demonstrates a significant ignorance by the individual who wrote it. SGK has become a place where many go for information, for hope. And now we know that the information is at best questionable and, at worst, completely wrong. It raises the question of why? Why would SGK not at least make the statement that there have been concerns and they are doing research? Isn't that what they are supposed to be all about?

Perhaps to find the the best answer to this question, we need to follow the money trail. Many of SGK's biggest sponsors are corporations who utilize the chemical, BPA, in their products and have also downplayed the health concerns. Sponsors - Coca-Cola (the shareholders voted by a 3-to-1 margin to continue using BPA in the lining of its soft-drink cans), Geneal Mills, Georgia Pacific and 3M - just to name a few. Is it surprising that 3M, who has contributed more than $1 million to SGK since 2007, is also a member of The American Chemistry Council? The same council who has doggedly insisted that BPA is safe. The same council who has fought fiercely against fedeal and state proposals to ban the chemical.

SGK has come under heavy criticism for the statements on their website. In an interview, SGK's chief scientific adviser, Dr. Eric Winer, had this to say in response to the criticism, "If a woman is particularly worried about plastics, she can avoid plastics in her life." Throughout the interview, Winer deflected other experts' criticisms by stressing personal responsibility. "Nothing stops an individual woman from living her life a certain way. And if she chooses to do that, she can do that." Sounds like another medical "professional" riding the CYA train to hell.

More Chemicals Downplayed
Sadly, SGK's role of downplaying the link between chemicals and breast cancer isn't limited to BPA. Organochlorine pesticides (including the infamous DDT) is also listed as one of the "Factors That Do Not Increase Risk" on their website. A 2007 study published in Environmental Health Perspectives even suggested that women exposed to DDT as adolescents were five times more likely to develop breast cancer during adulthood. SGK's position on the role chemicals play in cancer perhaps reflects the debate within the public-health community over the importance of addressing the influence of environmental factors on cancer. Research has shown that only about 10 percent of breast cancer cases in the United States can be traced to hereditary factors. "We now know from just a whole lot of science that environmental variables have a strong influence on gene expression," said Dr. Ted Schettler, Science Director of the Science and Environmental Health Network.

BPA Studies
Following are statements from studies that have shown the link between BPA and breast cancer and many other health problems. Note that none of these studies were conducted by the companies actually using BPA.

"More than 130 studies have linked BPA to breast cancer, obesity, and other health problems," according to the United States' President's Cancer Panel (2010).

"A study by the California Pacific Medical Center found that BPA even made healthy breast cells behave like cancer cells and decreased the effectiveness of yet another breast cancer drug."

"According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 93% of Americans have detectable levels of BPA in their bodies. New analysis by the CDC indicates that many Americans are exposed to BPA at levels far above the safety threshold set by the EPA."

"Of the more than 100 independently funded experiments on BPA, about 90% have found evidence of adverse health effects at levels similar to human exposure. On the other hand, every single industry-funded study ever conducted -- 14 in all -- has found no such effects." - The Real Story on BPA

"Promise Me" Perfume Toxic?
And last, but certainly not least, the SGK foundation has come under further attack over their "Promise Me" perfume. A rival cancer-fighting charity claims that the perfume contains toxic chemicals that are not only not listed on the label, but linked to breast cancer. The executive director of Breast Cancer Action, Karuna Jagger, said that they had the fragrance tested after concerns that "it contains a number of chemicals of concern that are not listed on the ingredients." "I let them (SGK) know what chemicals were found and they responded in a confusing way," she told CBS San Farncisco.

SGK responded first by saying that they test all their ingredients and then stated that they were working with their manufacturer to reformulate the perfume. So which is it, is it safe because you tested it or does it need to be reformulated because it includes toxic chemicals that have been linked to breast cancer?

In a world teeming with man-made chemicals with unknown long-term effects, using ANY artificial ingredients is taking a chance with your health and the health of those around you (none of us has a say about what a stranger or friend uses on their own body and exposes us to). SGK's act of partnering with a manufacturer to "pink brand" a product that includes chemicals linked to breast cancer just proves that they are no different than any other organization (albeit they certainly have more free money to work with). They have put profit before people, health and humanity.

Linked at Real Food Wednesday.

The Truth About Your Food - Taco Bell Mexican Pizza

The next post in the series, The Truth About Your Food (see Doritos, see Skittles, see Subway 9-Grain Wheat)...

What's really in...Taco Bell Mexican Pizza = 540 calories, 30g fat (8g saturated), 1,020mg sodium.
It's Italian, it's Mexican, it's...well, it's got a whopping 64 different ingredients, so it's hard to tell just what exactly it is. On the face of it, this meal doesn't look too bad. There are two pizza shells, ground beef, beans, pizza sauce, tomatoes and three cheeses. Nothing alarming, right? Even the nutritional vital signs, while high, compare favorably to most fast-food pizzas. It only gets scary when you zoom in on what it takes to stitch those pieces together. That's when you see all of those 64 smaller ingredients, including an astounding 24 in the ground beef alone. Yikes!

Now, some of those ingredients amount to little more than Mexican seasonings and spices, but there are also loads of complex compounds such as autolyzed yeast extract, maltodextrin, xanthan gum, calcium propionate, fumaric acid and silicon dioxide. Any of those sound familiar? The last one might - if you've spent any time at the beach. But chances are you normally refer to it by its common name - sand.

That's right, sand is made from fragmented granules of rock and mineral, and the most common of them is silicon dioxide, or silica. This is also the stuff that helps strengthen concrete and - when heated to extreme temperatures - hardens to create glass bottles and windowpanes.

So, why exactly does Taco Bell put sand in the Mexican Pizza? To make it taste like spring break in Cancun? No quite. As it turns out, Taco Bell adds silica to the beef to prevent it from clumping together during shipping and processing. The restaurant uses the same anti-caking strategy with the chicken, shrimp and rice.

I "love" this letter from Taco Bell...they justify adding spices and chemicals that they conveniently label "other ingredients" because plain ground beef from CAFO farms tastes boring. Perhaps if they used a better quality of meat - the kind raised humanely, grass fed without antibiotics, hormones, etc. - it wouldn't be necessary to add their "12% secret recipe".

SOURCE:
David Zinczenko

The Truth About Your Food - Subway 9-Grain Wheat

To continue in the series, The Truth About Your Food (see Doritos, see Skittles)...

What's Really in...Subway 9-Grain Wheat (6") = 210 calories, 2g fat (.5g saturated), 410g sodium
Okay, so you're probably not in the habit of ordering a la carte bread loaves at Subway, but there's a good chance you've eaten at least a few sandwiches built on this bread. The good news is that Subway actually delivers on the nine-grain promise. The bad news: eight of those nine grains appear in miniscule amounts. If you look at a Subway ingredient statement, you'll find every grain except wheat listed at the bottom of the list, just beneath the qualifier "contains 2% or less". In fact, the primary ingredient in this bread is plain old white flour and high-fructose corn syrup plays a more prominent role than any single whole grain. Esentially this is a white-wheat hybrid with trace amounts of other whole grains like oats, barley and rye.

So, outside the nine grains, how many ingredients does Subway use to keep this bread together? Sixteen, including such far-from-simple ingredients as DATEM, sodium steroyl lactylate, calcium sulfate and azodiacarbonamide. But here's one that's a little unnerving: ammonium sulfate. This compound is loaded with nitrogen, which is why it's most common use is as fertilizer. You might have used it to nourish your plants at home. And Subway does the same thing; the ammonium sulfate nourishes the yeast and helps bread turn brown. What, did you think that dark hue was the result of whole grains? Hardly. It's a combination of the ammonium sulfate and the caramel coloring. Seems like Jarod might frown on that sort of suberfuge.

From Examiner.com:
Subway's 9 Grain Bread:
You may think that the bread that they make in house would be considered fresh, right? Think again. Here is a list of the ingredients for a piece of their 9 Grain Bread, which sounds oh-so-hearty. My annotations are in bold type to help you understand what this food is really made of:
Enriched wheat flour (wheat flour, barley malt, niacin, iron, thiamin mononitrate, riboflavin, folic acid) (anytime a flour is enriched, it means that the food manufacturer has stripped the flour of nearly all the vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants, so they are legally bound to introduce back in the synthetic vitamins) , water, yeast (source of MSG, and a common allergen), high fructose corn syrup (need I say more? a cause of blood sugar imbalances and weight gain), whole wheat flour, wheat gluten, contains 2% or less of the following: oat fiber, soybean oil (Genetically Modified), salt, wheat bran, rolled wheat, rye nuggets, dough conditioners (DATEM, sodium stearoyl lactylate), yeast nutrients (calcium sulfate, ammonium sulfate), degermed yellow corn meal, rolled oats, rye flakes, caramel color (contains cancer-causing nitrates, and is GM), triticale flakes, parboiled brown rice, refinery syrup, honey, barley flakes, flaxseed, millet, sorghum flour, azodiacarbonamide (Use of azodicarbonamide as a food additive is banned in Australia and in Europe. In Singapore, the use of azodicarbonamide can result in up to 15 years imprisonment and a fine of $450,000), natural flavor (another source of MSG) (maltodextrin, natural flavor, silicon dioxide, lactic acid). Contains wheat.

Subway's Oven Roasted Chicken Patty:
Oven roasted chicken with rib meat (conventionally produced with growth hormones, pesticides, antibiotics), water, seasoning (corn syrup solids, vinegar powder [maltodextrin (GM sugar syrup, source of MSG), modified corn starch & tapioca starch, dried vinegar], brown sugar, salt, dextrose (a sugar derived chemically from starch), garlic powder, onion powder, chicken type flavor [hydrolyzed corn gluten (MSG!), autolyzed yeast extract (MSG!), thiamine hydrochloride, disodium inosinate & disodium guanylate]), sodium phosphate.
That chicken sure went through the ringer, didn't she? Bathed in MSG (a flavor enhancer that is a nuerotoxin used to make mice obese for diabetes trials in labs). Lathered in sugar.

Subway anyone???

SOURCE:
David Zinczenko
Natalie Pescetti

The Truth About Your Food - Skittles

Continuing with my series, The Truth About Your Food (see Doritos)...

What's Really in Original Skittles...1 pack = 250 calories, 2.5g fat (saturated), 47g sugar
They're sweet, chewy and brightly colored. Now, what are they? Well, the basic formula for each chewy neon orb is a gross mashup of sugar, corn syrup and hydrogenated palm kernal oil. That explains why every gram of fat is saturated and each package has more sugar than two twin-wrapped packages of Peanut Butter Twix.

So, those three ingredients plus a few extra fillers are basically all it takes to get the general consistency and flavor, but to achieve that color spectrum, Skittles brings in a whole new list of additives. When a Skittles ad tells you to "taste the rainbow", what it is really telling you to do is taste the laboratory-constructed amalgam of nine artificial colors, many of which have been linked to behavioral and attention-deficit problems in children, which prompted the Center for Science in the Public Interest to petition the FDA for mandatory labels on artificially colored products. The FDA's response: we need more tests.

In the meantime, there's a very large-scale test going on all across the country, and every Skittles eater is an unwilling participant. And that doesn't even factor in the blood-sugar roller coaster you go on when you ingest a Skittle's bag worth of sugar.

SOURCE:
David Zinczenko

The Truth About Your Food - Doritos

Men's Health editor in chief and author of the series Eat This Not That, David Zinczenko, wrote an article -The Truth About Your Food. It's really interesting information and had a huge impact on me long before I began my Real Food journey.

What's Really in Nacho Cheese Doritos...11 chips = 150 calories, 8g fat (1.5g saturated), 180mg sodium
The concept is, well, sort of brilliant: nachos and cheese without the hassle of a microwave. Or even a plate, for that matter. You just tear open the bag and start snarfing. And as a parting gift, Dorito's leave your fingers sticky with something that looks like radioactive bee pollen. Now here's the question: Do you have any clue what's in that stuff? Here you go -

To create each Dorito, the Frito-Lay food scientists draw from a well of 39 different ingredients. How many does it take to make a regular tortilla chip? About three. That means that some 36 ingredients wind up in that weird cheese fuzz. Of those 36, only two are ingredients you'd use to make nachos at home: Romano and cheddar cheeses. Alongside those are a cache of empty carbohydrate fillers like dextrin, maltodextrin, dextrose, flour and corn syrup solids. Then comes a rotating cast of oils. Depending on what bag you get, you might find any combination of corn oil, soybean oil, cottonseed oil and sunflower oil. Some of these will be partially hydrogenated, meaning they give the chip a longer shelf life and spike your heart with a little shot of trans fat. (The reason you won't find this on the label is that FDA guidelines allow food manufacturers to "round down" to zero.)

And then, after the fats and nutrionally empty starches, there's a seasoning blend, which includes things like sugar, "artificial flavoring" and a rather worrisome compound called monosodium glutamate. Monosodium glutamate, or MSG, is the flavor enhancer largely responsible for the chip's addicting quality. The drawback is that it interferes with the production of an appetite-regulating hormone called leptin. A study of middle-aged Chinese people found a strong correlation between MSG consumption and body fat. What's more, the FDA receives new complaints every year from people who react violently to MSG, suffering symptoms like nausea, headaches, burning sensation, numbness, chest pains, dizziness and so on. Talk about radioactive bee pollen.

SOURCE:
David Zinczenko

Are You Getting the Flu Shot?

I took my son to the pediatrician last week and there were signs all over the facility announcing that "flu shots had arrived". A special area had even been set up so that you could come in and get a flu shot without having to have an appointment or see a doctor, similar to what is offered at local retail outlets. It's very disturbing to me that you can walk into any number of drug stores (and other locations), pay a fee and get a flu shot. Heaven forbid, what if you were somehow harmed by the shot and incapacitated, how would anyone treating you even know that you had gotten a flu shot?

Meanwhile, back at the Pediatrician's office, the person sitting at the desk when we checked in asked if we were going to get flu shots that day. Very nicely I said, "no we are not going to get flu shots". Then, we were escorted back to the examining room, the nurse taking the vitals mentioned that flu shots were available. When I didn't give a response one way or the other, she asked if we would be getting flu shots. Once again, I nicely said that we would not be getting flu shots. She then looked at me and said, "so, you are refusing the flu shot for you and your son?" Refusing? How about I'm exercising my constitutional right to say no?! I responded, "I would not say that I am refusing, rather that I am declining the flu shot". And then, the pediatrician informed us that flu shots were available and asked was my son going to get one? At that point, I began to wonder if they were making a commission on each flu shot they "sold".

I'll admit, two or three years ago I wouldn't have hesitated to get the shot for my son (I have never had one and don't ever plan to get one), but since I began to read and find out exactly what Big Pharma and the FDA are up to, my decisions about what enters our bodies has changed drastically. I believe it needs to be a personal and educated choice that everyone should make for themselves. But what I experienced at the pediatrician's office really made me question the lengths that health care facilities will go to get people to have a flu shot. I am certain that there are a lot of people who would have just gone ahead and gotten the shot for themselves and their child if they had been in my situation. We have been trained since birth to believe that "doctors know best" and we make decisions and choices based upon that belief system regardless of whether it is sound or not.

I truly hope that some of you will pause and think twice about getting a flu shot for yourself or a loved one. But don't just take my word for it (or your doctor's), please do some research of your own. Find out the pros and cons, the risks, the side effects, etc. Here are some links that will give you more information and more to think about:
Why I never Get Flu Shots or Snorts by Chet Day
Dr. Mercola Flu Shot Information
The Forbidden Truth About the World Health Organization's 2009 "Pandemic"
What's in the Flu Shot?
Funny Video of What's in a Flu Shot?

Please leave a comment and let me know if you do or do not get a flu shot and why/why not. I look forward to hearing from you!

Kashi Serves Up "All-Natural" GMO Soy, Corn and Sugar

As a young girl growing up in Michigan we visited the Kellogg's manufacturing plant on numerous occasions and I have very fond memories of the company as a whole, so it was VERY disappointing to learn about their most recent betrayal of consumers. Like so many of you, I too believed, purchased and consumed many of the Kashi products produced by Kellogg's, thinking that I was getting a better, healthier product that I could trust. It is outrageous to me that Kellogg's knowingly mislead consumers with their false claims and outright lies (and continues to do so)!

Kashi products have been labeled "all-natural" and/or containing "nothing artificial" since 1999, but in reality there are many unnaturally processed, synthetic and GMO ingredients in their products. Kashi senior nutritionist and healthy lifestyle expert, Jeff Johnson, said that the company stands by it's claims. He said, "Kashi provides comprehensive information about our foods to enable people to make well-informed decisions. We stand behind our advertising and labeling practices." Those same advertising and labeling practices that prompted a class action lawsuit by consumers. The suit claims that Kashi products aim to take advantage of a booming market for natural foods and beverages - a market that is growing by leaps and bounds.

The FDA, which regulates the labeling of packaged foods, currently has not defined the term "natural", but it has said that a product is not natural if it contains synthetic or artifical ingredients. I honestly don't know how much more "unnatural" GMO soy can be??? Which leads me to ask, "Mr. Johnson - what part of synthetic and artificial do you not understand?"

Another thing that greatly concerns me is that Kashi has a campaign directed at kids through parents, who not knowing any better, are purchasing these Frankenfoods for their kids. These parents have been led to believe that they are purchasing healthier items for their children when in reality they are paying more money for the same garbage in different packaging. On Kashi's home page there is a large block of text that states - "Want to help your kids eat better? We want to help. Explore our Kid-friendly top-10 favorites and get tips on serving your family good-for-you foods." Well, if GMO sugar, GMO corn and GMO soy are healthier, than Kashi just might be on to something...

This post was shared at Traditional Tuesdays and Real Food Wednesday.

Biotech Interests Using Big Guns to Fight GMO Labeling

I recently ran across a publication named, Western Farm Press. Described on it's wesite as Timely Reliable Information for Western Agriculture, what I found were a bunch of California biotech, BigAg proponents whose main purpose is to tell lies about organic and conventional farming, GMOs and to oppose anyone who wants to see GMO labeling become mandatory. From the amount of time and space that is devoted to these topics, there is obviously a very large concern that anti-biotech is starting to get way more attention than these BigAg proponents feel comfortable with.

In a recent article, Harry Cline refers to those of us wanting truth in labeling as the "anti-biotech/anti-genetically modified/anti-science crowd". He adds, "it is about time this GMO labeling issue be tackled head-on so the public can be told the truth. Truth is, everything we eat today has been genetically modified, using either conventional plant and animal breeding or biotech technology." Yes, it is time that the truth be told, but it is a much different truth than what BigAg or Western Farm Press would have us believe.

The article goes on to state that a University of California team of scientists has identified no less than 14 different "so-called" genetically modified feedstuffs that are fed to cattle. Included are: Roundup Ready corn, Bt grain and silage corn as well as distillers grain; Roundup Ready soybeans, Roundup Ready cottonseed, Bt cottonseed, Roundup Ready alfalfa, Roundup Ready canola, BST used to increase milk production, genetically-engineered Renet used in 90 percent of commercial cheese production, Roundup Ready sugar beets, glufosinate-resistant corn grain and silage, glufosinate-resistant cotton, glufosinate-resistant canola and imidazalione-tolerant corn.

While not all dairy cows are fed the list of chemicals, obviously enough cows are that Mr. Cline believes that all milk coming from the state of California would have to be labeled GMO. And, honestly, isn't that the real issue????? Dairy farmers are so concerned that if their milk is labeled GMO, consumers will stop buying it and drinking it.

Mr. Cline then goes on to spout the "absurdity" of the anti-biotech movement, the scarcity of products worldwide and how the only "logical" answer is biotechnology and scientific advancement. Maybe Harry should ask the farmers in India how biotechnology and Round-Up Ready frankenfood is working for them.

It's called GM Genocide - an estimated 125,000 India farmers have committed suicide after planting genetically modified "magic" seeds. Coerced by Monsanto and other biotech companies with promises of higher yield and big returns on investment, the farmers purchased the GMO seeds only to have the crops fail miserably and, in turn, be massively indebted to the BigAg companies. Many of the farmers have ingested the very insecticide they were told they wouldn't need, to kill themselves. The seed cost is 1,000 percent more than conventional, non-GMO seed. India farmers and some state governments are fighting back, taking legal action against Monsanto and turning to organic Indian crops instead of GMO.

Mr. Cline, you said, "it is time agriculture and food processors take on this anti-biotech crowd straight out, with the facts and put a stop to this mandatory GMO labeling nonsense. It is time consumers are told the truth." Yes, it is time consumers are told the truth. But let's tell the whole truth, not the "truth" that BigAg, the USDA, the FDA and people like you twist to suit your own purposes. Perhaps you and your biotech ilk won't be satisified until what happened in India happens in the US.

SOURCES:
Organic Consumer Association
Mail Online
Western Farm Press

This post was shared on Fight Back Friday.

What's Really in Ice Cream

Do You Know What's in Your Ice Cream?
Recently, I was in my local mainstream grocery store, picking up the very few items that I feel comfortable purchasing there, and walked over to the frozen section to check out the ice cream options as my son had been asking for ice cream. I picked up one, put it back, grabbed another brand, put it back, one after the other, reading the ingredients listed on the packaging. I was amazed and completely grossed out by what I read on the labels. THIS is what food manufacturers are calling Ice Cream??? And there is an entire aisle, as there is in every grocery store chain, devoted to this chemically-laced Frankenfood. I admit that there was a time when I would have put whatever brand was on sale into my cart and taken it home. But as I have become more aware of EXACTLY what is in our food, I am more and more baffled as to why anyone is purchasing these foods...am I the only one who actually reads the labels??? In case I am, let me share with you what is in grocery store ice cream...

Here is the ingredient list for Breyer's Original Chocolate Chip Chookie Dough Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Whey, Natural Tara Gum, Natural Flavor, Annatto (Color). Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Pieces: Wheat Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Palm Oil, Water, Soybean Oil, Powdered Sugar (Sugar, Cornstarch), Chocolate Liquor, Salt, Cocoa Butter, Natural Flavor (Milk), Soy Lecithin, Baking Soda. Chocolate Flavored Chips: Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa Powder (Processed With Alkali), Milkfat, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla Extract.

Here is the ingredient list for Publix's Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Cookie Dough Pieces (Wheat Flour, Brown Sugar, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin)Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils)Water, Natural Flavors, Soy Lecithin and Salt) Corn Syrup, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali), Butter Oil, Lecithin, Vanilla) Cookie Dough Flavor (Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Natural Flavors, Molasses and Salt) Stabilizer (Carob Bean Gum, Guar Gum) Natural Flavor and Annatto Color.

Here is the ingredient list for Edy's Nestle Toll House Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Frozen Dairy Dessert: Skim Milk, Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough [Wheat, Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Margarine (Soybean Oil, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Soy Lecithin, Natural Flavor, Mono and Diglycerides, Annatto Color, Turmeric Color, Vitamin A Palmitate, Whey) Soybean Oil, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla Extract) Eggs, Water, Corn Starch, Molasses, Soy Lecithin, Natural and Artificial Flavor, Salt]Cream, Semi-Sweet Chocolate [Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Milkfat, Soy Lecithin, Vanillin (Artificial Flavor) Natural Flavor] Sugar, Dextrose, Corn Syrup, Polydextrose, Corn Starch, Malodextrin, Mono and Diglycerides, Cellulose Gel, Cellulose Gum, Guar Gum, Natural Flavor, Sorbitol, Carrageenan, Citric Acid, Annatto Color.

Here is the ingredient list for Blue Bell Homemade Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream (no Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Available): Milk, Cream, Sugar, Skim Milk, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Corn Syrup, Natural and Artificial Vanilla Flavor, Cellulose Gum, Vegetable Gums (Guar, Carrageenan, Carob Bean)Salt, Annatto Color.

Here is the ingredient list for Blue Bunny Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Original Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough {Bleached Flour, Sugar, Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils)Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla and Natural Flavoring) Water, Corn Syrup Solids, Sodium Bicarbonate, Salt, Artificial Flavor) Buttermilk, Whey, Corn Syrup, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Dextrose, Soy Lecithin, Vanillin) Guar Gum, Mono & Diglycerides, Natural Flavors, Artificial Flavors, Sodium Phosphate, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Citrate, Carrageenan, Polysorbate 80, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Molasses, Salt.

Here is the ingredient list for Ben & Jerry's Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Cream, Skim Milk, Liquid Sugar, Water, Unbleached Wheat Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Egg Yolks, Butter, Eggs, Expeller Pressed Soybean Oil, Chocolate Liquor, Coconut Oil, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali)Vanilla Powder, Milkfat, Soya Lecithin, Carrageenan.

Here is the ingredient list for Haagen-Dazs Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Cream, Skim Milk, Cookie Dough (Flour, Sugar, Butter, Coconut Oil, Brown Sugar, Corn Oil, Water, Fructose, Corn Syrup Solids, Salt, Vanilla, Baking Soda) Sugar, Chocolaty Chips (Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa Processed with Alkali, Cocoa, Butter Oil, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla) Egg Yolks, Natural Vanilla. 

Here is the ingredient list for Mayfield Select Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Milkfat and Nonfat Milk, Cookie Dough and Chips {Cookie Dough [Flour(Bleach White), Sugar, Brown Sugar (Sugar, Molasses) Margarine (Liquid and Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Whey Solids, Mono and Diglycerides, Soy Lecithin, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Beta Carotene (Color)Vitamin A Palmitate)Water, Vanilla, Salt, Baking Soda] Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin (Emulsifier), Artificial Flavoring] Sugar, Corn Syrup, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Sweetcream Buttermilk, Whey, contains Less than 2% of Molasses, Guar Gum, Mono and Diglycerides, Xanthan Gum, Polysorbate 80, Cellulose Gum, Carrageenan, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Annatto (Color), Salt.

Here is the ingredient list for Mayfield Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Select Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Nonfat Milk, Sugar, Corn Syrup, Cookie Dough {Unenriched Flour, Brown Sugar, Sugar, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin]Water, Natural Flavors, Soy Lecithin, Salt, Sodium Bicarbonate) Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate, Coconut Oil, Soy Lecithin (an Emulsifier)Vanilla Extract, Salt] Vanilla Extract, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Natural Flavors, Molasses, Mono and Diglycerides, Cellulose Gum, Guar Gum, Salt, Carrageenan, Annatto (Color).

Creamy, Healthier Ice Cream - What's the Catch?
On a quest to create an ice cream that provides full-fat and creamy flavor while at the same time providing the virtues of a bowl of steamed vegetables, the ice cream industry has probed the depths of the Arctic Ocean. So, for those people who struggle with temptation in the freezer section, new industrial processes have provided a way for manfacturers to produce very creamy, dense, reduced-fat ice creams with fewer additives.

What is this "miracle" probed from the depths of the Arctic Ocean, you ask? A protein cloned from the blood of an Arctic Ocean fish, the ocean pout. But, don't be alarmed, no fish will be mined - the manufacturers are not going to go to the cost of extracting this protein from the fish - a process that Unilever describes as "not sustainable or economically feasible". Instead, the compaay has developed a process for making it - altering the genetic structure of a strain of baker's yeast so that it produces the protein during fermentation. This ingredient, called an ice-structuring protein, makes the ice cream creamier by preventing ice crystals from growing. Ice Cream manufacturers using this genetically engineered protein include: Dreyer's/Edy's (Slow Churned), Breyers (Light Double Churned) and Haagen-Dazs (Light).

Almost all commercial ice creams contain industrial ingredients that mimic the effects of butterfat and egg yolks: some are natural (although still entirely unneeded), like carrageenan, extracted from algae plentiful in the Irish Sea; others are synthetic, like monoglycerides and diglycerides. Personally, I don't know what's wrong with making ice cream the old-fashioned way - cream, milk, eggs, sugar, vanilla extract. And if you want to know what's really in that carton, take it out of the freezer and set it in your sink overnight. Once thawed, all of the synthetics, gum, chemicals and junk will be left in the carton for you to see.

Needless to say, I did not purchase any ice cream from that grocery store. I did, however, buy some heavy cream to make my own.

SOURCES:
The NY Times.com
Zeer.com

This post is linked at Real Food Wednesday http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/08/real-food-wednesday-8312011.htmlutm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed3A+kellythekitchenkop+%28Kelly+the+Kitchen+Kop%29