Seven GMO Loaded Brands You Should Avoid Buying

ver wonder which companies you should totally avoid, whether it’s because they create low-quality food or because they infringe on our food rights? Below you will see 6 huge players in the food industry to avoid and boycott. You can boycott their products for the best effect or you can petition them and ask them to stop throwing money at the anti-labeling campaigns.

Here are 6 huge conglomerates aiming to ruin your right to know what is in your food.

1. Pepsi-Co (Including Frito-Lay and Doritos)

This behemoth has hardly been touched by consumer frustration with GMOs, even it is just as guilty as many other companies when it comes to food secrets. This is also the company who had to settle a $9 million class-action lawsuit over Naked Juice false advertising – claiming the products were ‘all natural’ and ‘100% juice’ when they are actually full of GMOs. Pepsi-Co was also revealed as one of the big spenders behind the anti-labeling campaigns illegally filtered through the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association. The company topped the list with a $1,620,899 donation to keep you in the dark about GMOs.

2. Kellogg’s

This company is downright shady. Kellogg’s company recently paid $5 million to settle a class-action lawsuit for falsely labeling Kashi products as “All Natural” or “Nothing Artificial.” They have also contributed a total of $1.6 million to defeat GMO labeling initiatives. In a consumer lab test, it was also found that Kellogg’s uses 100% GMO corn in several of their breakfast cereals and other products. Kashi products even made it onto the Non-GMO project’s list of safe foods, but they aren’t safe at all.

3. General Mills

GM says:

“We don’t use genetically modified ingredients in original Cheerios. Our principal ingredient has always been whole grain oats – and there are no GMO oats. We use a small amount of corn starch in cooking, and just one gram of sugar per serving for taste. But our corn starch comes from non-GMO corn, and we use only non-GMO pure cane sugar.”

This is only in one type of cereal they sell, though. Only two percent of the company’s shareholders favor a complete GMO ban. GM’s CEO says, he “sees no reason within the United States to bar ingredients grown from biotech crops.”

4. Nestle/Gerber Co

This company puts GMOs in baby food. Need I say more? The company removed GMOs from baby formulas in South Africa after public pressure forced them to, but it continues to put them in American-sold versions. Formulas like Good Start and others contain GM soybean oil, GM soy lecithin, and GM maltodextrin, as well as corn syrup derived from GM crops. Along with Pepsi-Co and Coca-Cola, the company spent over $1 million to defeat GMO labeling in Washington, and more to defeat labeling in Oregon.

5. Hershey’s

Just how much will you like that chocolate bar after finding out that Hershey’s donated $800,000to defeat California’s Prop 37 and Washington’s I-522, and another $500,000 to defeat this year’s initiatives in Oregon and Colorado? The company has only one organic brand—Dagoba. Time for a boycott? After all, there are hundreds of non-GMO fair-trade chocolate makers out there. Try some of these non-GMO sweets instead.

6. Coca-Cola

This soda empire has contributed more than $1.5 million to keep your teeth rotting from consuming their GMO-filled sodas. They also utilize high fructose corn syrup that is almost entirely GMO-corn derived. Here are other sodas that contain GMOs, too.

7. Kraft

Kraft is also a big GMA supporter. Its website says:

“The use of genetically modified (GM) ingredients is not only safe for people and our planet, but also has a number of important benefits.”

For a full listing of the corporate bullies you need to voice your outrage too, take a look below:

Top Contributors to Colorado’s No on 105 Campaign

• Monsanto, $4.7 million
• DuPont/Pioneer, $3.04 million
• Pepsico, $1.65 million
• Coca-Cola, $1.1 million
• Kraft Foods, $1.03 million
• General Mills, $820,000
• The Hershey Co., $380,000
• J.M. Smucker Co., $345,000
• Dow Agrosciences, a Dow Chemical Company, $300,000
• Kellogg Co., $250,000
• Conagra Foods, $250,000
• Flowers Food Inc., $250,000
• Smithfield Foods, $200,000
• (*Source: No on 105 Campaign)

Top Contributors to Oregon’s NO on 92 Campaign

• Monsanto – $4.8 million
• Pepsi -$1.4 million
• Coke – $702,000
• Kraft – 870,000
• Land O’Lakes – $760,000
• General Mills – 695,000
• Dow – $368,300
• Hershey – $320,000
• Smuckers’ – 295000
• Kelloggs – 250 000
• ConAgra-250,000

source

Look How Much Bigger Thanksgiving Turkeys Are Today Than in the 1930s

Thanksgiving turkeys are one of America’s oldest holiday traditions. But with their giant size, stooped frame, and limited mobility, today’s birds bear little resemblance to their early counterparts. So how did we end up with these modern megabirds? According to Suzanne McMillan, senior director of the farm animal welfare campaign of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, it wasn’t by accident.

Up until the the 1950s, turkeys found on Thanksgiving tables were essentially the same as their wild counterparts. But then, says McMillan, American poultry operations began to expand to meet Americans’ growing demand for meat. Turkey farmers began to selectively breed birds for bothsize and speed of growth—especially in the breast, the most popular cut among American diners. The birds grew so fast that their frames could not support their weight, and as a result, many turkeys were bowlegged and could no longer stand upright. The male turkeys, or toms, got so big—as heavy as 50 pounds—that they could no longer manage to transfer semen to hens. Today, reproduction happens almost exclusively through artificial insemination.

At around the same time, producers also began moving their operations indoors, where they could fit more birds and ensure that they developed uniformly, so turkeys’ feeding and care did not have to be individualized. In these close quarters, birds began to develop infections, like sores on their breasts and foot pads. To prevent these problems, and also to encourage growth, producers added low doses of antibiotics to the birds’ feed. Also because of space limitations, birds became aggressive and often resorted to cannibalism. In response, hatcheries begantrimming birds’ beaks—known as debeaking—when they were a few days old.

If all of this makes turkey sound unappetizing, consider the latest development: As of October 20, turkey slaughter facilities were allowed to speed up their lines from 51 to 55 birds per minute—while also reducing the number of federal inspectors, as my colleague Tom Philpott has reported.

Consumer demand for cheap turkey has fueled these trends. The National Turkey Federationreports that turkey consumption has doubled over the last 30 years—today, theaverage American eats 16 pounds of turkey per year. Meanwhile, turkey prices haven’t increased much; in fact, this year turkey is cheaper than last year. Reuters reported that some grocery chains “use turkeys as ‘loss leaders’ to entice shoppers to buy other popular Thanksgiving foods.”

No wonder, then, that we end up trashing a lot of turkey:

If you don’t want to support turkey factory farms, McMillan says, look for birds that are certified through animal welfare programs. Grist has a good guide to picking a turkey with real humane bona fides here. A word of caution, though: This year, turkey giant Butterball says it has gone humane, but as Philpott reports, it so far hasn’t ditched many of the most cruel practices.

source

McDonald’s Wishes You Never Knew About These Things

When it comes to fast food arches, all that glitters is not GOLD. And in McDonald’s case, it’s difficult to say whether its fair share of criticism comes in spite of it being one of America’s most iconic brands, or perhaps because of it.

The fast-food chain’s come up for a dose of criticism in recent years over the nutritional value and sustainability of its offerings and for its low-paying jobs. And business has stumbled. Subway actually overtook McDonald’s in 2011 as the fast food chain with the most locations worldwide. Things got worse in the summer of 2012 when sales dropped for the first time in a decade, a slump from which McDonald’s has yet to recover.

When contacted by The Huffington Post, the fast food chain emphasized recent efforts to improve the McDonald’s experience for customers and employees alike.

“We now offer more choices and variety on our menu, as well as nutrition information so customers can make the choices that are right for them,” a McDonald’s USA spokesperson told HuffPost in an email. “We’ve most recently reinforced our commitments to sustainability in the areas of fish and coffee and we continue to offer a variety of training and professional development opportunities for employees who want to move from crew to management.

“We have a long history of continuous improvement and we will continue to meet our customers’ changing tastes and the changing needs of the communities we serve.”

Here are some moments in McDonald’s history the mega-chain would prefer you forget:

Its CEO-Worker Pay Gap Is Booming

The wealth gap between McDonald’s CEOs and its workers has doubled over the last 10 years, Bloomberg reported late last year. Employees are trying to change that by staging strikes calling for higher wages.

Its Marketing Targets Kids

McDonald’s has faced criticism for using marketing targeted at children (i.e. the Happy Meal) in order to gain life-long customers. Indeed, the company has in fact increased its marketing geared towards children even after criticism began to heat up following the release of the 2004 documentary Super Size Me, according to Time. The company gives away roughly 1.5 billion toys each year.

It Has Been Accused Of Rain forest Destruction

In 2006, Greenpeace accused McDonald’s of contributing to the destruction of the rainforest because the company allegedly used soybeans harvested from endangered areas to feed chickens it eventually served, Fox News reports. However, Greenpeace later teamed up withMcDonald’s to place a moratorium on trading soybeans that had been harvested from newly deforested areas, according to The Washington Post.

One Of Its Franchisees Was Accused Of Exploiting Workers

A McDonald’s franchise owner left the company after he was accused of exploiting student guest workers by paying them below minimum wage and providing them with substandard housing.

Its Coffee Has Caused Injuries

One of the most-talked about scandals in McDonald’s history is the lawsuit the company faced in 1992, after 79-year-old customer Stella Liebeck sustained third-degree burns from spilling a cup of the chain’s coffee. The jury ultimately awarded Liebeck more than half a million dollars in total damages, but that hasn’t stopped others from filing similar lawsuits against the chain.

Its Sales Aren’t What They Used To Be

Last August, McDonald’s announced sales had declined for the first time since 2003. Despite efforts to reinvigorate revenue, including the release of new menu items like McBites, the fast food chain continues to struggle.

It Has Been Accused Of Using Expired Chinese Chicken

Chinese state TV has accused McDonald’s and French retailer Carrefour of selling expired chicken products in separate incidents amid public anxiety in China over food safety. State-run CCTV has put out a video report by its “under cover Reporters” selling food which under the rules, should’ve been thrown away.

It Refuses To Assess Its Impact On Childhood Obesity

Despite accusations that McDonald’s is a major contributor to childhood obesity, the company has refused to assess the impact it has on children’s weight.

Its Employees Work On Christmas

In recent years, McDonald’s has urged its franchises to stay open on Christmas day. In addition, workers at company-owned restaurants didn’t receive overtime for working the holiday last year.

Its Oatmeal Isn’t Good For You

McDonald’s released an oatmeal option for breakfast as part of an overall aim to make its menu more nutritious. The only problem is, the oatmeal isn’t so healthy, the New York Times reports.

It Has Some Products That Totally Bombed

McDonald’s has had its fair share of products that have fallen flat — McLobster anyone? One of our favorite fails might be the McDLT that was discontinued over backlash regarding the environmental impact of its packaging . The sandwich came in two styrofoam containers. One housed the lettuce and tomato, the other, the burger. The goal was to keep the vegetables cold and the burger hot. But even a jingle-singing Jason Alexander with a full head of hair apparently couldn’t save the sandwich, which the company eventually pulled.

Source:

www.huffingtonpost.com

This Is What McDonald’s McRib Actually Looks Like

The approaching winter can mean only one thing: the return of McRib season at McDonald’s! The McRib is back at McDonald’s. The popular limited-time item features a formed ground pork patty (shaped to vaguely resemble a mini rack of ribs) slathered in barbecue sauce and complemented by slivered onions and pickles on a long cornmeal-dusted roll.

For reference, this is what a McRib is supposed to look like, according to McDonald’s:

Now — and this is not for the faint of heart — here’s what it looks like in frozen form, according to a Redditor’s friend who works at McDonald’s:

Judging from the boxes featured in the background, we’re assuming that the “Boeuf Canadien” is from the land up north. Naturally, this has prompted an onslaught of “McRibbed for Pleasure” cracks across the internet, while others are appalled that the guy in the photo didn’t use gloves. Thank goodness for priorities.

The frozen McRib in question appears to be from a Canadian location. The sandwich is currently available across Canada until December 2.

A McDonald’s spokesman told The Huffington Post in an e-mail:

One reason our customers love the McRib is its fun and wonderful shape. Just like a burger patty is formed to be round and flat, we form the iconic McRib in the shape of traditional ribs. We then flash freeze the patty to seal in flavor and freshness, just like you freeze meat in your own freezer, before going to our restaurants.

Source:

www.huffingtonpost.com

Coca-Cola Bottles May Require Cancer Warning Label

Coke Bottles May Require Cancer Warning Label if Drink Ingredients Not Changed 

Back in January, the state of California added to its list of cancer-causing chemicals an ingredient commonly used in flavored soda beverages, which has sent major shockwaves throughout the processed food industry. And according to numerous reports, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and evenWhole Foods are having to alter their soda beverage recipes in order to avoid being required by the state of California to label their products as causing cancer.

The cancer-causing chemical in question is 4-methylimidazole, or 4-MI, a byproduct formed during the production of caramel color, an additive commonly used in processed cola beverages. According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), caramel color produced using ammonia or ammonia-sulfites creates both 4-MI and 2-MI (2-methylimidazole), which have been shown to be carcinogenic (cspinet.org/new/pdf/caramel_coloring_petition.pdf).CSPI last year petitioned the U.S.Food and Drug Administration(FDA) to remove its “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) status from caramel colors produced in this way, but the FDA refused, insisting that caramel color with 4-MI is safe. But Californians apparently believe otherwise, as they overwhelmingly voted to have 4-MI added to the list of toxic substances covered under California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Proposition 65.

As a result, corporate beverage giants are having to change the way they produce caramel color in order to maintain levels of 4-MI that are below the threshold limit. In the process, they are having to spin the story publicly to make it seem as though 4-MI is not dangerous, and that altering the beverage formulas will not change the taste, color, or consistency of their beverages.

But a 2008 study published in the journal Archives of Toxicology found that 4-MI is toxic, and that it is linked to causing clonic seizures, hyperactivity, impaired gait, chronic inflammation, focal fatty change in the liver, carcinoma, leukemia, and adenoma, among other conditions. The study essentially confirmed that 4-MI is carcinogenic (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

If it is possible to make caramel color without 4-MI, why have beverage producers continued to knowingly produce the toxic variety?

In a public statement, Coca-Cola denied that 4-MI is carcinogenic, and openly called the cancer warning mandate “scientifically unfounded.” But the science speaks for itself, particularly in beverage products made by Coca-Cola and PepsiCo that have been shown to have high levels of both 2-MI and 4-MI. CSPI covered this extensively in its petition to the FDA:

cspinet.org/new/pdf/caramel_coloring_petition.pdf

It is no big secret, in other words, that 4-MI is an “undesirable” byproduct of the caramel color manufacturing method long-used by both Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. And yet these companies have continued to rely on this method, despite obvious awareness about its toxicity, even though less-toxic methods were most obviously a viable alternative.

The CSPI report names Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Dr. Pepper Snapple Group Inc.’s Dr. Pepper, andWhole Foods’ 365 Cola as having unsafe levels of 4-MI that will have to be reformulated. The same report says the amounts of 4-MI contained in these beverages before the reformulation is responsible for causing roughly 15,000 cancers in the U.S. every year.

Source:

www.naturalnews.com

Four Fast Food Ingredients Way Worse Than Horse Meat

It’s ‘McRib season’, and thousands across the nation are scrambling to use online websites like the ‘McRib locator‘ to stuff the McDonald’s McRib sandwich down their throats. A sandwich that is not only full of genetically modified ingredients, a medley of toxic fillers and preservatives, but also some ingredients that are actually banned in other nations around the world. But honestly, are you surprised?

The McRib is the result of intensive marketing by McDonald’s. Utilizing the basics of supply and demand through creating scarcity over the McRib by only unleashing the culinary abomination for a fraction of the year that is only known once it is released, McDonald’s fans have been known to ‘hoard’ McRib sandwiches and eat them in extreme excess. It’s even a topic of the popular documentary Super Size Me, where filmmaker Morgan Spurlock (who gorges himself with McDonald’s for 30 days only to find serious health consequences) encounters ‘McRib hunters’ who actually travel the country eating McRib sandwiches.

McDonald’s even made McRib fans sign a petition to ‘save the McRib’ online, bringing out a conglomerate of fans to bring back their favorite franken sandwich.

What’s Inside a McDonald’s McRib Sandwich?

But what’s really inside the McRib specifically that makes it such a food abomination? Containing over 70 ingredients, the McRib is full of surprises — including ‘restructured meat’ technology that includes traditionally-discarded animal parts brought together to create a rib-like substance. Here’s some of the disturbing substances found within the McDonald’s McRib sandwich:

A flour-bleaching agent used in yoga mats

Out of the 70 ingredients that make up the ‘pork’ sandwich, a little-known flour-bleaching agent known as azodicarbonamide lies among them. At first glance, this strange ingredient sounds concerning enough to look into. After a little research, you will find that even mainstream media outlets have generated content revealing how azodicarbonamide is actually used in the production of foamed plastics. Foamed plastics like yoga mats and more.

What’s more? In Australia and Europe, the use of azodicarbonamide as a food additive is banned. In Singapore specifically, use of this substance in food can result in a $450,000 fine and 15 years in jail. Thank you McDonald’s for supplying the nation with such healthfulingredients.

‘Restructured Meat’ from Pig Heart, Tongue, Stomach

McDonald’s McRib is famous in some circles for utilizing what’s known as ‘restructured meat’ technology. Since McDonald’s knows you’d never eat a pig heart, tongue, or stomach on your plate, they decided instead to grind up these ingredients and put them into the form of a typical rib. That way, consumers won’t know what they’re putting into their mouths. As the Chicago Magreported, the innovator of this technology back in 1995 said it best:

“Most people would be extremely unhappy if they were served heart or tongue on a plate… but flaked into a restructured product it loses its identity.Such products as tripe, heart, and scalded stomachs…”

So in other words, it’s not actually a rib. Instead, it’s a combination of unwanted animal scraps processed down in major facilities and ‘restructured’ into the form of a rib. Then, 70 additives, chemicals, fillers, and GMO ingredients later, you have a ‘meat’ product that tastes like ribs.

For a visual representation with a full list, here’s an image summarizing what it calls the ‘McDiabetes McRib’ — complete with GMO indicators (click to enlarge):

source