In my hunt for blogging gold across the Internet this morning, I came upon a very disturbing (if not entirely surprising) article on the Organic Authority website. Written by Jill Ettinger, this article investigates the new Monsanto ‘sustainable’ sweet corn being sold at Wal-mart.
That label, in and of itself is FULL of contradictions, the most glaring being that GMO corn is in no way sustainable (I feel like we are saying that a lot recently). Announced last August, and set to Hit Wal-Mart Shelves this summer, Monsanto is pimping this new variety of sweet corn with tag lines like ‘“Simply put, farmers choose to grow biotech sweet corn because of all of these benefits—they can grow healthy plants in a sustainable way while producing sweet corn that is nutritious, fresh and flavorful.” We are going to intentionally leave aside the political ramifications of Wal-Mart selling unlabeled GMO corn, and how it will effect prop 37 in California this fall, for this blog post. But lets take a look at that wonderfully crafted PR statement. Except the part where they state that farmers are the ones that grow corn, all the other words are in service of a false sense of security Monsanto is cultivating around this product.
Wal-Mart has always presented itself as providing good quality products for the lowest prices, and weather or not I agree with that, many people who need to stretch their dollar do. We touched on a few problems with GMOs in a previous blog, but it needs to be pointed out that up until this point, no one has been eating GMO corn directly off the cob. It is going into things like cornstarch, HFCS, dry goods and animal feed. This new GMO sweet corn will have the pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis in every cell of the plant, and people will be putting these cells directly into their, and their children’s, mouths thinking that it is good for them.
We, at Currant Table, take a firm stand against GMOs. They are far too new to be able to predict any of the long term health ramifications, their cross pollination with regular varieties of veggies could have a catastrophic effect on species diversity, and since their introduction into our food system, food related allergies have spiked (see earlier post for details). In short, GMO’s are bad news.
Which brings us to the crux of this problem: Intentionally mislabeling and misinforming consumers so that they will continue to eat something that could be bad for them. We see this across the board in American food culture, and it is most often applied in a bait and switch maneuver. “Hey look over here! This is all natural! Hurry an eat it quick before you have the time investigate and realize that it contains GMO’s/Hormones/Bacteria/Pesticides.” This happens all the time, and in a later post we will go into detail about the pitfalls of supermarket labels. For now it is enough to say that everything must be taken with a grain of salt when you are the one to whom something is being sold. Be an informed consumer!
None of this comes as a shock to us, but in this case, misusing the term ‘sustainable’ to support a GMO product is unforgivable, and Monsanto is suggesting that Wal-Mart label what has been dubbed ‘frankencorn’, as just that. Sparing you a longwinded explanation of the triple bottom line of sustainability, we at Currant Table take it to mean that something is leaving the environment better for future generations, creating economic sustainability, and supporting the community. GMO’s represent the exact opposite of this, and we believe that everyone should be allowed to make up their own mind about eating them. 
In this country, we allow, and often encourage, those who may not have adequate financial means, or the desire for knowledge that those of you reading this blog do, to purchase food that could be harmful. They are tricked into doing so because valuable information is being withheld. In this case, the argument from the biotech companies is that if something is labeled GMO then people will think it is not as good, and therefore choose to purchase something else. In many cases, yes, this will happen. However there are many people who will continue to purchase those food items despite what they contain, but at least they will be doing so AFTER they have all of the information. It is not the job of Monsanto, Wal-Mart or, as is sadly the case, the USDA to make our decisions for us, and withholding information is tantamount to saying that we don’t have the right to make up our own minds.
Although knowledge, as they say, is power, and if the consumer were to suddenly have all the information, that could potentially cause an uncomfortable shift for those at the top. People will always make poor decisions, but at least if I am going to make them, I want to have all the info in the first place. Do french fries make you fat? Yes. Do I eat them from time to time ANYWAY? Yes!
Especially in light of prop 37, ‘The Right to Know’, looming on the horizon, it is even MORE important that we get involved, make sure our voices are heard, and, in the words of Pollan, vote with our forks!
As always, keep the comments constructive and respectful, we will make no progress without supporting each other. We would also like to thank everyone who commented last week, and made Meatless vs. More Meat Mondays our most viewed post! If you have topics that you would like to hear more about, please just let us know!
Organic Authority: Wal-Mart to Sell Monsanto’s ‘Sustainable’ Sweet Corn
Currant Table 