With no debate and only a voice vote, the US House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture (July 14, 2015) passed out of committee HR 1599, a bill to preempt states' rights to label GMOs. Within hours, it was announced that the bill will go straight to the House floor, as early as the next week, with no vote in the Energy and Commerce Committee.

When Congress votes this week on legislation to block GMO labeling, far more will be hanging in the balance than the simple question of whether consumers will be allowed to know whether their food was produced with a novel – and still largely unproven – technology.

Much broader principles are at stake.

One is whether consumers have the right to use their food dollars in ways that reflect their values.

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) - Rocker Neil Young is lending his support to the state’s efforts to label foods containing genetically modified ingredients.

Young, who performed in concert Sunday at the Champlain Valley Exposition in Essex Junction, appeared earlier with Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin and donated $100,000 to a fund devoted to defending Vermont’s genetically modified organism, or GMO, labeling law from legal challenges.

Morton Biskind, a physician from Westport, Connecticut, was a courageous man. At the peak of the cold war, in 1953, he complained of maladies afflicting both domestic animals and people for the first time. He concluded that the popular insect poison DDT was the agent of their disease. DDT, he said, was “dangerous for all animal life from insects to mammals.”

The Reign of DDT

Yet, he was astonished at what little was done to restrict or ban DDT. On the contrary, officials and scientists defended it:

“[V]irtually the entire apparatus of communication, lay and scientific alike, has been devoted to denying, concealing, suppressing, distorting… [the bad news about DDT]. Libel, slander and economic boycott have not been overlooked… And a new principle of toxicology has… become firmly entrenched…: no matter how lethal a poison may be for all other forms of animal life, if it doesn’t kill human beings instantly, it is safe. When… it unmistakably does kill a human, this was the victim’s own fault – either he was “allergic” to it… or he didn’t use it properly,” he wrote (Biskind 1953).

A new study published today in the peer-reviewed journal Agricultural Sciences reveals genetic engineering of soy disrupts the plant’s natural ability to control stress, and invalidates the FDA’s current regulatory framework of “substantial equivalence” used for approval of genetically engineered food (GMOs).

CHICAGO — Products labeled as non-G.M.O. are increasing in use among millennials — and among baby boomers, people in Generation X and pretty much all age groups in the United States, according to data from the Natural Marketing Institute.

Data from the N.M.I. shows use of food labeled as non-G.M.O. rose to 59% of the general U.S. population in 2014, which was up from 53% in 2013 and 37% in 2012. Among millennials, the percentage rose to 72% in 2014 from 61% in 2013 and 45% in 2012. For Generation X, the percentage slipped to 58% in 2014 from 60% in 2013, but it was up from 41% in 2012. For baby boomers, the percentages were 49% in 2014, 47% in 2013 and 29% in 2012. For the “mature” generation, the percentages were 44% in 2014, 39% in 2013 and 28% in 2012.

By almost any measure, the U.S. system that judges the safety and effectiveness of genetically modified ­organisms is out of date.

This week the House Agriculture Committee is expected to mark up and vote on a bill that would take away the right of states to label food with genetically modified ingredients, or GMOs.

For many years, Monsanto along with many other companies that specialize in biotechnology, have been given free reign to set the rules and standards on genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

A federal judge today ruled that the Maui GMO Initiative passed by Maui voters in November 2014 is invalid because the county does not have the authority over the matter.