After months of pressure from the organic community, including
thousands of its customers, the leadership of Whole Foods Market on
September 11 endorsed Proposition 37,
the California Ballot Initiative to require mandatory labels on
genetically engineered foods.
But the endorsement came with "reservations" and inaccuracies. It also included the false claim that company policy precludes Whole Foods and its executives from providing much-needed financial support to Prop 37, a campaign that consumers - the very people who have made WFM and its executives wildly profitable - overwhelmingly support.
Is it possible that Whole Foods wants to ride the GMO labeling popularity wave while it quietly works behind the scenes to prevent Prop 37, or any other GMO labeling law, from passing? Could it be that a GMO labeling law - especially one like Prop 37 that prohibits the use of the word "natural" on any food containing GMOs - would cut too deeply into the company's $9.8 billion in sales and $245 million in profits?
Right up until the company announced its lukewarm endorsement, Vice President of Global Communications and Quality Standards Margaret Wittenberg and other WFM top brass repeatedly stated that they would not endorse Prop 37. CEO John Mackey has reportedly claimed that "the jury is still out" on whether genetically engineered crops and foods are unhealthy for people or the environment. (Mackey also has stated that "no scientific consensus exists" to support global warming or climate change)
But the endorsement came with "reservations" and inaccuracies. It also included the false claim that company policy precludes Whole Foods and its executives from providing much-needed financial support to Prop 37, a campaign that consumers - the very people who have made WFM and its executives wildly profitable - overwhelmingly support.
Is it possible that Whole Foods wants to ride the GMO labeling popularity wave while it quietly works behind the scenes to prevent Prop 37, or any other GMO labeling law, from passing? Could it be that a GMO labeling law - especially one like Prop 37 that prohibits the use of the word "natural" on any food containing GMOs - would cut too deeply into the company's $9.8 billion in sales and $245 million in profits?
Right up until the company announced its lukewarm endorsement, Vice President of Global Communications and Quality Standards Margaret Wittenberg and other WFM top brass repeatedly stated that they would not endorse Prop 37. CEO John Mackey has reportedly claimed that "the jury is still out" on whether genetically engineered crops and foods are unhealthy for people or the environment. (Mackey also has stated that "no scientific consensus exists" to support global warming or climate change)
No comments:
Post a Comment