Why This School District Became The First In North America To Go 100% Organic & Non-GMO

[Ichingcarpenter]

Last year, Sausalito Marin City School District became the very first completely organic and non-GMO district in the country. Its two schools are Bayside MLK Jr. Academy in Marin City and Willow Creek Academy in Sausalit. The program aims to improve students’ health and educate them about food, agriculture, and the environment. (source)(source)

The program was initiated by Judi Shils, the founder of the non-profit education and advocacy group Turning Green and the director of The Conscious Kitchen.

The move marks encouraging and tangible progress in the fight to take back our food which seemingly every mainstream media outlet is either ignoring or ridiculing. Several hundred scientists from around the world have expressed their concern that GMOs are dangerous for our health and that of the environment, and dozens of countries would seem to agree, since they have banned the import of GMOs into their countries and the growth of GMOs within them. Yet this is not what’s being reported.

Here’s what Irina Ermakova, VP of Russia’s National Association for Genetic Safety, said last year when Russia was mulling over the decision to ban GMOs:

It is necessary to ban GMOs, to impose moratorium (on) it for 10 years. While GMOs will be prohibited, we can plan experiments, tests, or maybe even new methods of research could be developed. It has been proven that not only in Russia, but also in many other countries in the world, GMOs are dangerous. Methods of obtaining the GMOs are not perfect, therefore, at this stage, all GMOs are dangerous. Consumption and use of GMOs obtained in such way can lead to tumors, cancers and obesity among animals. Bio-technologies certainly should be developed, but GMOs should be stopped…. [We] should stop it from spreading. (source)

more

http://wakingscience.com/2016/05/school-district-became-first-north-america-go-100-organic-non-gmo/

[angstlessk]

2. How long did it take to prove tobacco was dangerous?

They even had doctors advertising for brands of cigarettes...I know the industry knew, just not the general public.

Proof of health in the children will take years...and there is a myriad of control groups...the rest of school aged children!

[rjsquirrel]

3. False equivalence and you know it

Marin county is full of science denying wackos. How many of those kids don't have their vaccines either?

Show me the science that says organic food (around as a category for decades now) is healthier for children. It doesn't exist.

And nearly every fruit, vegetable, or animal product you eat is genetically modified and had been since the dawn of human agriculture and animal husbandry. You think cows or red delicious apples are products of natural selection?

[angstlessk]

5. You are the one being disingenuous...when talking GMO's they are not referring to

cross pollination, or splicing one plant to a similar plant...they are talking about injecting BACTERIA genes into plant genes.

And the study between tobacco and GMO's is not a false equivalence...so far most studies in the US and Canada have been paid for by Monsanto....

Part of the industry's response to the evidence linking smoking and disease was the formation of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC), later renamed the Council for Tobacco Research (CTR). The industry claimed that TIRC was an independent organization that would determine the truth about the health effects of smoking by funding independent scientific research. The documents show, however, that TIRC was originally created for public relations purposes, to convince the public that there was a "controversy" as to whether smoking is dangerous. As chapter 8 describes, CTR funded "special projects" whose research results could be used by industry lawyers to defend tobacco companies in court and to influence public opinion and public policy.

http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft8489p25j&chunk.id=d0e1246

The studies in countries where GMO's are banned were done independently of the GMO industry...whom to believe?

https://foodrevolution.org/blog/former-pro-gmo-scientist/

[rjsquirrel]

6. No arguing with a denier

Of all the things our schools need, wacko pseudoscientific hippie nuts who oppose vaccines and GMOs are not one of them.

Bye.

[angstlessk]

8. YOU brought up vaccines??? That is a distraction from the real debate. n/t

[Blues Heron]

4. Maybe they don't want their kids eating Roundup residue.

Organic, non GMO is one way to ensure that.

[rjsquirrel]

7. No it isn't actually

Last edited Tue May 24, 2016, 05:30 AM - Edit history (1)

Many many studies have shown organic produce is no healthier than non. Roundup is used on many non-GMO crops. GMO has nothing at all to do with how food is grown.

But in fact GMO technology makes it possible to breed resistance into plants so you don't need as much weed killer or pesticide.

Edited to add for clarity: breeding herbicide tolerance into some GMO crops is the major controversy, but breeding insect and weed resistance directly into the plant itself so you need fewer chemical inputs is also a major focus of GMO research.

The grasp of science by the loony fringe here is amusing. I'm a biology professor and do not fear GMOs.

You folks are spitting into the wind of history from a position of extreme western privilege.

[Blues Heron]

9. Organic *and* non GMO

is one way to ensure their kids don't eat Roundup residue. That's just a fact. Parents generally are quite cautious about their kids eating pesticide residue, and will take steps to avoid it.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

11. weed resistant? lol! you mean weed killer (roundup) resistant

[Nihil]

13. "I'm a biology professor and undo not fear GMOs."

> The grasp of science by the loony fringe here is amusing.

The grasp of English by the loony fringe of pro-GMO/anti-organic trolls is pretty amusing too.

It makes me wonder if you are deliberately attempting to mislead by interleaving the unrelated
facts with the general anti-organic bollocks or if it is a simple matter of incompetence.

"Roundup is used on many non-GMO crops" is true but it doesn't make its residues any less harmful,
just more widespread.

"GMO has nothing at all to do with how food is grown" is only marginally true (depends on the organism
involved) but it is explicitly excluded from any organic produce - organic *is* GMO-free regardless
of the organism.

"GMO technology makes it possible to ... so you don't need as much weed killer or pesticide"
is, again, only partially true - it is possible, just not done in practice to a significant amount
(compared to the other "justifications" of GMOs).

What *is* being "bred" (hah!) into plants is weedkiller resistance and pesticide resistance
and that results in more weedkiller or pesticide being used - hence more residue on the food grown
and eaten by the gullible/ignorant public.

And yes, the deliberate misdirection, smoke & mirrors and outright lying by the pro-GMO/anti-Organic
crowd is *exactly* the same as that used by the tobacco industry - even down to the marketing companies
that lead their campaigns.

[UnFettered]

10. What's wrong..

With kids learning and knowing where there food comes from. It doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

12. it's not.

Unfortunately we have 4-5 pro-gmo posters who love to jump into every thread and tell us we're wrong.