By Christina Sarich, Natural Society
During a recent agricultural summit in Iowa, Ted Cruz used the words “anti-science zealotry” to describe the viewpoint of the over 90% of Americans who want GMOs labeled. Like Hillary Clinton, Cruz seems to have picked sides in the GMO debate, and his name calling isn’t very pretty.
As S.D. Wells has said:
“The term anti-science is pure propaganda from Monsanto, regurgitated by Cruz, and doesn’t even make sense. If health enthusiasts are ‘anti-science,’ then GMO proponents are ‘pro-genocidal-science.’ Hitler used science, too, to exterminate over 6 million innocent people. Are people who are against that type of science also ‘anti-science’?”
Cruz recently told his audience – whoever that is – through the Washington Post, not to let “anti-science zealotry” shut down GMOs. This remark came at a time when major food corporations are doing an about-face on GMO labeling due to Vermont’s mandatory bill going into effect this July.
He also said that the anti-GMO movement is driven by “hysteria.” Considering that so many people are against agrichemical companies like Monsanto, Dow, and Syngenta and the food companies who have been (illegally) blocking food transparency, Cruz must be expecting a hefty paycheck. Declaring such a thing is otherwise a bit of political suicide.
Cruz also stated:
“People who decide that is what they want, they can pay for it already, but we shouldn’t let anti-science zealotry shutdown [sic] the ability to produce low-cost quality food for billions across the globe.”
Perhaps Cruz and Clinton can join in a hearty GMO meal after they are both ousted from their political positions in the very near future.
As Anthony Gucciardi previously reported:
“Beyond the science, there’s also the public outrage. As I’ve told you time and time again, we have seen massive public support across the board for GMO labeling, with mainstream polls demonstrating this:
The New York Times: 93% found to be in support of labeling GMOs
MSNBC: 96% in support
Reuters/NPR: 93% in support of full labeling
Washington Post: 95% in support of full labeling
Consumer Reports: 95% agree GM animals should be labeled
ABC News: 93% want federal GM labeling mandate
As we get closer to the 2016 elections, GMO labeling will continue to be a key issue that countless millions will be demanding answers on. Candidates like Ted Cruz, who speak towards a public that is desperate for a political revolution, could very well supercharge their campaign by adding GMO labeling initiatives to their agenda. After all, these initiatives are what helped Senator Bernie Sanders rise to the public eye to a much larger degree.”
Sanders, the only mainstream candidate who strongly supports mandatory GMO labeling, has said:
“When parents go to the store and purchase food for their children, they have a right to know what they are feeding them. GMO labeling exists in 64 other countries. There is no reason it can’t exist here.”
Sanders also strongly favors small and mid-sized family farms, regional food systems, and stopping the domination of the food supply by a few large corporations. He opposes trade deals like the TPP that would force America to accept agricultural products from countries that have little quality control or regard for workers’ rights.