Washington, D.C.—Consumers Union, the public policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, is urging Congress to reject the proposals contained in the misleadingly named “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015,” which was reintroduced by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) today. The bill would prohibit states from establishing or carrying out mandatory labeling of genetically engineered (GE) food, and would explicitly allow GE foods, known as GMOs, to be labeled “natural.”

“Consumers have a right to know if their food has been genetically engineered,” said Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives at Consumers Union. “States should not be prohibited from requiring GE labeling.”

The bill would direct the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to continue its current policy, in which any labeling of genetically engineered food must be the voluntary choice of the food producer. The bill was reintroduced just days after a World Health Organization research arm, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), categorized the herbicide glyphosate (trade name Roundup), used on virtually all GE crops, as a “probable carcinogen.”

Consumers Union senior scientist Michael Hansen, Ph.D. said, “The new status of glyphosate, so widely used on genetically engineered crops, as a probable carcinogen, heightens consumer concern and increases consumer support for mandatory labeling.”

Perhaps no group of science deniers has been more ridiculed than those who deny the science of evolution. What you may not know is that Monsanto and our United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) are among them. That's right: for decades, Monsanto and its enablers inside the USDA have denied the central tenets of evolutionary biology, namely natural selection and adaptation.

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration completed its evaluation for two varieties of apples genetically engineered by Okanagan Specialty Fruits, Inc., and for six varieties of potatoes genetically engineered by J. R. Simplot Company and concluded that these foods are as safe and nutritious as their conventional counterparts.

Glyphosate, 2,4-D, and dicamba found to affect bacteria in ways that could promote resistance to common antibiotics.

By Elizabeth Grossman on March 24, 2015

This has not been a good week for glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and other herbicides. On Friday, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that it had classified glyphosate, the United States’ most widely-used pesticide, as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Now, the chemical has another strike against it. A study published today by the American Society of Microbiology’s journal mBio has linked glyphosate and two other widely-used herbicides–2,4-D and dicamba–to one of the most pressing public health crises of our time: antibiotic resistance.

This study found that exposure to these herbicides in their commercial forms changed the way bacteria responded to a number of antibiotics, including ampicillin, ciprofloxacin, and tetracycline–drugs widely used to treat a range of deadly diseases.

No one knows how much of this pesticide is in the produce we eat

The herbicide glyphosate, known by the commercial name Roundup, is the most commonly used agricultural pesticide in the U.S. on farms. (Home gardeners use it too.) Yet we have no idea how much of it is in our food because the government doesn’t regularly test produce for it.

Glyphosate use has increased tenfold in the past 20 years thanks to the rise in genetically modified corn and soy. Most of those crops are engineered to be resistant to glyphosate, which means Roundup will kill the weeds but not the crops. According to Charles Benbrook, Ph.D., of Washington State University, data shows that U.S. farmers used enough glyphosate in 2014 to apply the equivalent of almost three-quarters of a pound on every acre of farmland used to grow crops. “When a single pesticide is used that widely, people can’t help but be exposed to it,” Benbrook says.

Genetically-modified food giant Monsanto said it will pay about $350,000 to settle class action lawsuits brought by farmers in seven states over tainted wheat.

The FDA said this week that new varieties of genetically modified fruits and vegetables are safe for consumption, The New York Times reports. The safety review covered six varieties of potatoes engineered by J. R. Simplot Company and two varieties of apples from Okanagan Specialty Fruits.

Over the past decade, certain foods that were originally grown organically have been replaced by replicas promoted to be better than what nature has provided. These genetically modified organisms, backed by Monsanto, came with fantastic promises of easier farming, higher yields, and optimized nutrition. However, independent studies have now shown genetically modified organisms may be causing more harm than good.

The debate between the pro-biotech and non-GMO camps increasingly looks more like scorched earth than common ground. Biotech seed makers like Monsanto and Syngenta, along with farmer groups, argue that genetically modified crops are critical to feed a growing global population.

Restrictions are an effort to combat pest resistance

In an effort to combat pest resistance in corn crops around the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing restrictions on the amount of corn containing the Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) trait that farmers are allowed to plant.

The specific reason for the proposed restrictions is to try and reduce the impact of the corn rootworm. Michael Gray, an entomologist from the University of Illinos at Urban-Champaign told The Wall Street Journal corn rootworm can cost farmers between $1 and $2 billion in damages.

If the EPA’s proposal is successful, farmers would have to follow better insect management protocols like crop rotations or planting a "refuge area" that includes corn witthout the Bt trait in areas that are susceptible to rootworms. The EPA’s concern is that if the rootworm becomes even more resistant, farmers will be forced to use more synthetic products which could pose a threat to the environment.

The EPA is suggesting about 35% of corn fields to be planted with another crop after two consecutive years of corn.