Pizza was the single biggest contributor of sodium to the diet of young Americans in the period...
|
A federal judge handling a lawsuit filed in California over ‘all-natural’ claims on Mission tortilla chips has...
|
The enormous potential of the gluten-free bakery sector will grow even more when the gap between regular...
|
Kraft’s plan to split itself into two standalone business units will help the market see more clearly...
|
Big interview: Steve Hughes, CEO, Boulder Brands
Back in 2008/9, Boulder Brands CEO Steve Hughes had a lot of sleepless nights. The struggling Smart...
|
A new analysis of where Americans are getting their calories from has thrown up some surprising results,...
|
Comment
Read the full May 14 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report ‘Sodium intake in populations’
-all 200 pages...
|
Recent data from Symphony Consulting (click here
), shows that while US retail sales of products making ‘natural’...
|
GMO labelling bill (Prop 37) will not cause frivolous lawsuits
Contrary to the assertions of Mr Nedelman and others, serious legal analysis of Prop 37 on GMO labelling shows clearly that it will not cause ‘bounty hunter’ lawsuits.
Dr. James C. Cooper, a former Federal Trade Commission official and an adjunct professor of law at George Mason School of Law, compared Prop 37 with a prior piece of Californian legislation on toxic chemicals, Prop 65, which did trigger frivolous lawsuits. Dr Cooper found that the Label GMO initiative contains “important differences [which] substantially reduce the potential for Label GMO to foster the type of abusive private litigation associated with Proposition 65.”
Dr Cooper’s main findings were:
1) Label GMO provides seven years in which producers can gradually reduce the GMO exposure of their products from no more than 5% to zero.
2) So long as food or supplement producers have a sworn statement from their supplier stating that, to the supplier’s best belief, there are no GMO elements in their ingredients, the producer is immune from suit.
3) The producer is also immune from liability if the food is certified organic and certified GMO-free by an independent organization. No doubt it will make sense for food producers to help create an independent certifier.
4) Once a violation has been identified, the producer has 30 days in which to correct it, in which case there is no liability.
5) There is no “bounty” for plaintiffs who initiate lawsuits.
Read more here: http://www.anh-usa.org/label-gmo-proves-progmo-camp-wrong/
Posted by Adam Smith, Alliance for Natural Health International
07 August 2012 | 12h12