February, 22 2010, 09:30am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Charlotte Vallaeys, 978-369-6409
Mark Kastel, 608-625-2042
Corporate Baking Giant Sara Lee Hijacks Organics
“EcoGrain” Marketing Blitz — Greenwashing New Bread Produced with Toxic Agrochemicals as Something BETTER Than Organic
CORNUCOPIA, Wis.
With the
growing success of organics, and increasing consumer interest in buying foods
that were grown on sustainable farms without toxic chemicals, Sara Lee
Corporation has launched, with much fanfare, a marketing campaign for its Earthgrains bread, chock-full of
environmental-friendly catchphrases.
Sara
Lee claims that "Eco-GrainTM," an ingredient actually used in
small proportions in its Earthgrains brand breads, is more sustainable than organic grain.
What has been described as a "crass and exploitive marketing ploy"
has angered many in the organic community.
"Corporations
like Sara Lee clearly want to profit from consumers' interest in
ecological and healthy food production. But unlike organic companies,
Sara Lee is doing practically nothing to ensure its ingredients are truly
ecologically produced," said Charlotte Vallaeys, a Food and Farm Policy
Analyst at The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based organic industry
watchdog. "It's a crass example of a corporation trying to
capitalize on the valuable market cachet of organic, while intentionally misleading
consumers-without making any meaningful commitment to protect the
environment or produce safer and more nutritious food."
The
Cornucopia Institute, a farm policy research group, points out that the farmers
who grow Eco-Grain differ very little from most conventional grain producers
who use petroleum-based fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides, and have little
in common with certified organic farmers.
The
one attribute that Sara Lee uses to differentiate Eco-Grain production is that
the farmers, although they use chemical fertilizers, incorporate technology
that has reduced fertilizer usage by 15%. In contrast, as mandated by
federal law, organic farmers are required by law to reduce their synthetic
fertilizer use by 100%.
Organic
farmers use natural fertilizers, compost and crop rotations to enrich the
long-term health of the soil, without damaging the environment or potentially
contaminating the food produced.
However,
Cornucopia's Vallaeys points out that, "Even if their new fancy wheat were
truly superior, each Earthgrains 24 ounce loaf contains only 20% flour from
Eco-Grain, with the remainder of the bread's wheat coming from regular,
conventional wheat. The total reduction in chemical fertilizer use in a
loaf of EarthGrains bread therefore amounts to a meager 3%."
"Even
though they've done a countrywide media rollout, including underwriting spots
on National Public Radio, Sara Lee is, in essence, playing a shell game,"
said Mark A. Kastel, Codirector at The Cornucopia Institute. "Even
as they had the audacity to promote a bread with just 20% of their 'value
added' wheat, the rest of their product line has 0% content of the
Eco-Grain. If advertising executives could be charged with malpractice,
this would be a major felony," Kastel said.
The
Cornucopia Institute has written to the
CEOs of both Sara Lee and NPR requesting that the "misleading and
unethical" packaging and advertising campaign, and associated advertising
and underwriting, be immediately suspended while the corporations investigate
their propriety.
In
addition to the organic prohibition against chemical fertilizers, federal
regulations also prohibit organic farmers from using toxic pesticides that are
commonly applied to conventional wheat fields, including those growing
"Eco-Grain."
One
such pesticide typically used in conventional wheat production is
2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), which EPA researchers have correlated
with numerous birth defects of the respiratory and circulatory systems, as well
as defects like clubfoot, fused digits and extra digits. Other research
has linked the use of toxic pesticides on wheat fields to increased cancer
mortality rates.
And,
in addition to chemical fertilizers and pesticides, conventional wheat farmers
sometimes use synthetic fungicides and other chemicals to treat their fields.
"For
Sara Lee to claim that their wheat is ecologically grown and sustainable, when
they appear to make no effort to reduce or eliminate their use of toxic
pesticides, that have terrible effects on the environment and public health, is
highly disingenuous," says Nathan Jones, who grows organic wheat in King
Hill, Idaho and chairs the Organic Advisory Board of the Idaho State Department
of Agriculture.
In
addition to shunning toxic agrochemicals, organic farmers are required to
improve the long-term health of their soil, and increase biodiversity on their
farms.
"Unfortunately,
this is another example of a major agribusiness trying to blur the line between
products labeled 'organic' and 'natural'," stated
Kastel, who acts as Cornucopia's Senior Farm Policy Analyst. "It
seems that some corporations, like Sara Lee, appear more interested in
corporate profit and greenwashing than true environmental stewardship, and are
doing everything they can to take advantage of this confusion among
consumers," Kastel added.
"The
term 'natural' on products like bread is not regulated by state or
federal government," says Marion Nestle, Professor of Nutrition at New York University. "Companies that use
the term 'all natural' essentially come up with their own
definition."
In
addition, some of Sara Lee's other bread ingredients, such as soy oil and soy lecithin,
are grown and processed using genetic engineering and chemical extraction with
the toxic solvent hexane, both technologies that are banned in organic
production.
In
online marketing materials, Sara Lee even claims that farming methods used to
produce its "100% Natural" bread "have some advantages over
organic farming." They cite only one ecological advantage, claiming
that organic farmers require more land than conventional growers.
"This
claim does not hold up against recent scientific data," said Alison
Grantham, Research Manager at the Rodale Institute in Kutztown, Pennsylvania,
an agricultural research, education and outreach group. "Long-term
trials, such as our nearly 30-year-old Farming Systems Trial, show long-term
average organic farming systems' crop yields match conventional farming
system yields, and that the improvements in soil health achieved by organic
management actually support higher yields during droughts."
"I
just can't believe that Sara Lee would claim to be more sustainable than
organic bakers like me," affirms Daniel Leader, a certified organic bread
baker and owner of Bread Alone Bakery in the Hudson Valley, New York.
"In deference to my customers, I've made an investment in real
sustainability by going organic, and for Sara Lee to tarnish the good name of
organics, and even claim to be superior to organic bread, is simply
unacceptable." Bread Alone Bakery is certified by the Northeast
Organic Farmers Association, a certifier accredited by the USDA.
Sara
Lee's longtime ad jingle campaign doesn't seem to be ringing true for
organic farmers, bakers and consumers-"Everybody doesn't like
something, but nobody doesn't like Sara Lee." It will remain
to be seen whether spending more money on marketing and advertising than on
Eco-Grain itself will pay off for the agribusiness giant.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
LATEST NEWS
Biden 'Moving the Goal Post' With Threat to Withhold Bombs From Israel
"Now Israel has a green light to destroy Rafah in slow motion," said one critic.
May 08, 2024
While some Palestine defenders on Wednesday welcomed U.S. President Joe Biden's threat to withhold bombs and artillery shells from Israel if it launches a major invasion of Rafah, critics noted that an invasion is already underway and accused the American leader of walking back a previous "red line" warning against an Israeli assault on the southern Gaza city.
Biden said for the first time that he'll stop sending bombs, artillery shells, and other arms to Israel if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu orders a major invasion of Rafah, where more than a million Palestinians forcibly displaced from other parts of the embattled Gaza Strip are sheltering alongside around 280,000 local residents.
Referring to Israel's use of U.S.-supplied 2,000-pound bombs—which can destroy an entire city block and have been used in some of the war's worst atrocities—Biden toldCNN's Erin Burnett that "civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers."
Even the U.S. military—which has killed more foreign civilians than any other armed force on the planet since the end of World War II—won't use 2,000-pound bombs in urban areas. But Israel does, including when it launched a strike to assassinate a single Hamas commander by dropping the munitions on the Jabalia refugee camp last October, killing more than 120 civilians.
"If they go into Rafah, I'm not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities," Biden said Wednesday.
Israeli forces have already gone into Rafah, and it was reported Tuesday that Biden was taking the unusual step of delaying shipments of two types of Boeing-made bombs to Israel to send a message to the country's far-right government. It was, however, a mixed message, as the president also earlier in the day reaffirmed his support for Israel's war on Gaza, which the International Court of Justice said is "plausibly" genocidal in a preliminary ruling in January.
Critics noted the shifting and subjective language used by Biden—who previously said that any Israeli invasion of Rafah would constitute a "red line" resulting in unspecified consequences.
"He said invading Rafah was a red line. Israel invaded Rafah anyway, bombing buildings, burning and crushing children to death," political analyst Omar Baddar said on social media. "Biden is now moving the goal post by adding a completely subjective descriptor: 'Major.' Now Israel has a green light to destroy Rafah in slow motion."
During the course of the seven-month Israeli assault on Gaza—which has killed, maimed, or left missing more than 124,000 Palestinians—Biden has said Israel has killed "too many civilians" with its "indiscriminate bombing," even as he's pushed for more and more military aid for the key ally.
Wednesday's interview came on the heels of Biden's approval of a $14.3 billion emergency military aid package to Israel, multiple moves to sidestep Congress to fast-track armed assistance, nearly $4 billion in previously authorized annual military aid, and diplomatic cover in the form of several United Nations Security Council vetoes.
Reporting that the Biden administration will delay a highly anticipated report on whether Israel is using U.S. military aid in compliance with international law also drew backlash Tuesday from human rights advocates.
Referring to Israel's U.S.-funded anti-missile system, Biden continued his supportive rhetoric during Wednesday's CNN interview, telling Burnett that "we're going to continue to make sure Israel is secure in terms of Iron Dome and their ability to respond to attacks."
But the president added that Israel's use of devastating weaponry against civilians is "just wrong," and that "we're not going to supply the weapons and artillery shells."
Some peace groups welcomed Biden's threat to withhold bombs and artillery shells from Israel, even while urging him to do more to stop his ally's genocidal onslaught.
"Biden's statement is as necessary as it is over overdue," Jewish Voice for Peace executive director Stefanie Fox said in a statement. "The U.S. already bears responsibility for months of catastrophic devastation: The nearly 40,000 Palestinians that the Israeli military has killed, the two million Palestinians being intentionally brought to the brink of famine, the decimation of all universities and almost every hospital in Gaza."
"Today's statement shows that Biden can no longer ignore the will of the majority of Americans who want a permanent cease-fire, release of all hostages, and an end to U.S. complicity in Israeli war crimes," Fox added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Save 'MAGA Mike' Johnson From Marjorie Taylor Greene Ouster
"The GOP chaos caucus continues to do nothing for the American people and instead waste time infighting," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who did not support saving the far-right leader.
May 08, 2024
The majority of Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday saved far-right Speaker Mike Johnson from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's attempt to oust him after less than seven months in the leadership position.
Johnson's (R-La.) election to the role in October—following the ouster of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who then left Congress early—was seen as a signal of the MAGA flank's hold on the Republican Party. However, since then he has faced criticism from Greene (R-Ga.) and others for, among other things, not shutting down the government.
Greene delivered on her threatened motion to vacate—provoking boos from fellow lawmakers—after meeting with Johnson for hours on Monday and Tuesday. The final vote to table her resolution was 359-43, with 196 Republicans and 163 Democrats backing the far-right speaker. Seven Democrats voted present and 21 lawmakers did not vote.
Ten Republicans joined Greene in trying to give Johnson the boot: Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Eric Burlison (Mo.), Eli Crane (Ariz.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Thomas Massie (Ky.), Alex Mooney (W.Va.), Barry Moore (Ala.), Chip Roy (Texas), and Victoria Spartz (Ind.).
Addressing the position of most Democrats, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) said in a statement:
Our decision to stop Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from plunging the House of Representatives and the country into further chaos is rooted in our commitment to solving problems for everyday Americans in a bipartisan manner. We need more common sense and less chaos in Washington, D.C.
Marjorie Taylor Greene and the extreme MAGA Republicans are chaos agents. House Democrats are change agents. We will continue to govern in a reasonable, responsible, and results-oriented manner and to put people over politics all day and every day.
Some of the 32 Democrats who supported ousting Johnson framed the vote as proof that—in the words of Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (Fla.)—the "GOP really can't govern" and the "chaos caucus is on display."
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) similarly declared on social media that "the GOP chaos caucus continues to do nothing for the American people and instead waste time infighting."
"Speaker Johnson organized an amicus brief effort to overturn the 2020 election. He opposes abortion rights, trans rights, and voting rights," Jayapal also said. "That's why I did not vote to save his speakership."
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) also explained his vote on social media, saying: "Mike Johnson is the most ideological, right-wing speaker since the 1830s. His views and values are directly antithetical to mine. He stands for everything we, as freedom-loving Democrats, proudly stand against. I will never vote to keep him in that chair."
Congressman Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) was one of the members who voted present, which does not count for or against passage.
"Did I vote with the extremist white Christian nationalist who called a motion to vacate the speakership or did I vote to save the extremist homophobic Christian nationalist speaker to keep him in office?" Pocan said. "Neither. I voted 'present' on this sideshow."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Add $4.6 Trillion to Deficit: CBO
"We can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and corporations and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy," said the head of Groundwork Collaborative. "This tax law should expire."
May 08, 2024
As former U.S. President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans campaign on extending their 2017 tax cuts if elected in November, a government analysis revealed Wednesday that doing so would add $4.6 trillion to the national deficit.
When Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act during his first term, the initial estimated cost was $1.9 trillion. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that extending policies set to expire next year would cost $3.5 trillion through 2033.
The new CBO report—sought by U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—says continuing the income, business, and estate tax cuts will now cost $4.6 trillion through 2034.
"The Republican tax plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to corporations and the wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere, and make it impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help families with the cost of living in America."
Responding in a statement Wednesday, the senators cited an Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimate that "extending the Trump tax cuts would create a $112.6 billion windfall for the top 5% of income earners in the first year alone."
They also slammed their GOP colleagues, who Whitehouse said "are awfully eager to shield their megadonors from paying taxes."
He recalled that just last year, "Republicans held our entire economy hostage," refusing to raise the debt ceiling and risking the first-ever U.S. default, because they didn't want the Internal Revenue Service to get more funding to "go after wealthy tax cheats."
"Remember the Trump tax scam cutting taxes for billionaires and big corporations," Whitehouse continued. "Now they're set on extending those tax cuts, even though it would blow up the deficit. The Trump tax cuts were a gift to the ultrarich and a rotten deal for American families and small businesses. With their impending expiration, we have a chance to undo the damage, fix our corrupted tax code, and have big corporations and the ultrawealthy begin to pay their fair share."
Wyden similarly took aim at the GOP, warning that "the Republican tax plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to corporations and the wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere, and make it impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help families with the cost of living in America."
"Republicans have planned all along on making Trump's tax handouts to the rich permanent, but they hid the true cost with timing gimmicks and a 2025 deadline that threatens the middle class with an automatic tax hike if they don't get what they want," he argued. "In short, they're focused on helping the rich get richer, and everybody else can go pound sand. Democrats are going to stand by our commitment to protect the middle class while ensuring that corporations and the wealthy pay a fair share."
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens also responded critically to the CBO report, saying Wednesday that "extending Trump's tax law and effectively subsidizing corporate profiteering and billionaire wealth is a nonstarter."
"This tax law, on top of decades of failed trickle-down cuts, has come at the expense of workers and families," Owens stressed. "We can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and corporations and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy. This tax law should expire."
While some of the tax cuts in the 2017 law are temporary—unless they get extended—the legislation permanently slashed the statutory corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. As Common Dreamsreported last week, a new ITEP analysis shows that tax rates paid by big and consistently profitable corporations dropped from 22% to 12.8% after the law's enactment.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular