June, 25 2012, 10:15am EDT
Organic Consumers Association Challenges Logic of American Medical Association's Position on GMO Labeling
AMA votes in favor of pre-market testing for GMOs, but against mandatory GMO labeling
WASHINGTON
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) today challenged the American Medical Association (AMA) on its failure to support mandatory labeling of foods containing genetically engineered ingredients.
At a meeting last week, the AMA called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy, but the AMA did not call for mandatory labeling of GMOs.
"The AMA's new policy on GMOs does not go far enough," said Ronnie Cummins, Executive Director of the OCA. "We are disappointed, and frankly confused. On the one hand, the AMA is telling consumers that GMOs should be tested for any potential health hazards, before food manufacturers are allowed to sell them to the public. On the other hand, they're effectively saying that it's OK that products containing GMOs are not labeled. It makes no sense to acknowledge enough doubt about the safety of genetically engineered ingredients to recommend pre-market testing, but disagree that consumers should have the right to know which foods contain GMOs. Shouldn't consumers be able to avoid GMOs unless they have first been proven safe?"
Between 75% - 80% of all processed foods in supermarkets contain GMOs, Cummins said. Yet there is no way for consumers to make informed choices about these foods, because food manufacturers are not required to label GMO ingredients. "Without labeling laws, biotech and food companies can continue to test GMOs on unknowing, unwilling human beings."
The AMA's failure to recommend GMO labeling came on the heels of yet another new report earlier in the week on the health hazards of GMOs. The report, "GMO Myths and Truths", presents a large body of peer-reviewed scientific and other authoritative evidence of the hazards to health and the environment posed by genetically engineered crops and organisms (GMOs).
American Public Health Association, the American Nurses Association, the Illinois Public Health Association, and the California State Medical Association have passed resolutions calling for labeling of genetically engineered food, according to the Truth in Labeling Coalition.
The OCA is a strong supporter of the upcoming Nov. 6 California Ballot Initiative that will require labels on genetically engineered foods and ban the routine industry practice of marketing GMO-tainted foods as "natural."
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots non-profit 501(c)3 public interest organization campaigning for health, justice, and sustainability. The Organic Consumers Fund is a 501(c)4 allied organization of the Organic Consumers Association, focused on grassroots lobbying and legislative action.
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots 501(c)3 nonprofit public interest organization, and the only organization in the U.S. focused exclusively on promoting the views and interests of the nation's estimated 50 million consumers of organically and socially responsibly produced food and other products. OCA educates and advocates on behalf of organic consumers, engages consumers in marketplace pressure campaigns, and works to advance sound food and farming policy through grassroots lobbying. We address crucial issues around food safety, industrial agriculture, genetic engineering, children's health, corporate accountability, Fair Trade, environmental sustainability, including pesticide use, and other food- and agriculture-related topics.
LATEST NEWS
'The Behavior of Rogue States': Global Revulsion as US and Israel Launch War on Iran
"The attacks on Iran by Israel and the United States are illegal, unprovoked, and unjustifiable," said Jeremy Corbyn, an independent member of the UK Parliament.
Feb 28, 2026
Elected officials, activists, and experts around the world voiced horror and outrage Saturday as US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu jointly launched an illegal war on Iran with the explicit goal of toppling the nation's government, sparking chaos throughout the Middle East.
The wave of bombings, expected to mark the beginning of a wider assault, spurred airspace closures and flight cancellations across the region as countries braced for the fallout. While European leaders offered milquetoast responses to the unlawful military attack and Canadian and Australian officials openly endorsed it, leftist politicians and others unequivocally condemned the US and Israel as the aggressors.
"The attacks on Iran by Israel and the United States are illegal, unprovoked, and unjustifiable," said Jeremy Corbyn, an independent member of the British Parliament and former leader of the UK Labour Party. "Peace and diplomacy was possible. Instead, Israel and the United States chose war."
"This is the behavior of rogue states—and they have jeopardized the safety of humankind around the world with this catastrophic act of aggression," Corbyn added. "Our government must condemn this flagrant breach of international law, and urgently pursue a foreign policy based on justice, sovereignty, and peace."
Progressive International co-founder Yanis Varoufakis, the former finance minister of Greece, echoed Corbyn's criticism of the US and Israel as "rogue states."
"Israel and the USA," he wrote on social media, "have started a war not against Iran but against the whole world. We stand with Iranians, with humanity, against the notion that Israel and the US can bomb anyone their fancy takes them to bomb."
Badr Albusaidi, the foreign minister of Oman and the mediator of recent US-Iran talks, said he was "dismayed" by news of the US-Israel attacks on Iran, which were quickly followed by reports of horrific atrocities. Albusaidi said hours before the bombs started falling on Iran that a diplomatic resolution was within reach.
"Active and serious negotiations have yet again been undermined," Albusaidi lamented on Saturday. "Neither the interests of the United States nor the cause of global peace are well served by this. And I pray for the innocents who will suffer. I urge the United States not to get sucked in further."
Leftist Colombian President Gustavo Petro said he believes "President Donald Trump has made a mistake today" and implored the "helpless United Nations" to "convene immediately" in response to the US-Israel attacks and retaliation by Iran and allied groups in the region.
Iran vowed a "crushing" response to the US-Israeli onslaught, firing drones and missiles at Israel and pledging to hit US military installations in the region.
Al Jazeera reported that "Iran has targeted United States assets across the Gulf Arab states in retaliation for a huge joint attack on Iran by the US and Israel, as the region’s worst fears of being ignited in the flames of a sustained war loom."
"The Iranian government on Saturday confirmed its attacks on several targets, according to the Fars news agency, including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, where US airbases are hosted," the outlet noted.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Oman's Foreign Minister Said US-Iran Deal Was 'Within Our Reach.' Then Trump Started Bombing
"The Omani FM decided to go public," suggested one observer, "so that the American people knew that peace was within reach when Trump instead opted for war."
Feb 28, 2026
Hours before President Donald Trump announced his decision to bomb Iran and pursue the overthrow of its government, the foreign minister of Oman appeared, in person, on one of the most prominent US television news programs to declare that a diplomatic breakthrough was possible.
"I can see that the peace deal is within our reach," Badr Albusaidi, the mediator of recent talks between the US and Iran, told "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan on Friday. "I'm asking to continue this process because we have already achieved quite a substantial progress in the direction of a deal. And the heart of this deal is very important, and I think we have captured that heart."
Pressed for specifics, Albusaidi said that Iran committed during the talks to renounce the possibility of amassing "nuclear material that will create a bomb"—a pledge that Trump claimed Iran refused to make as part of his justification for Saturday's strikes.
"This is something that is not in the old deal that was negotiated during President Obama's time," Albusaidi said, referring to the 2015 nuclear accord that Trump ditched during his first term in the White House. "This is something completely new. It really makes the enrichment argument less relevant, because now we are talking about zero stockpiling. And that is very, very important, because if you cannot stockpile material that is enriched, then there is no way you can actually create a bomb, whether you enrich or don't enrich. And I think this is really something that has been missed a lot by the media, and I want to clarify that from the standpoint of a mediator."
"There is no accumulation, so there would be zero accumulation, zero stockpiling, and full verification," the Omani foreign minister continued. "Full and comprehensive verification by the [International Atomic Energy Agency]."
In a social media post following the interview, Albusaidi reiterated that a deal "is now within reach" and implored all parties to "support the negotiators in closing the deal." Prior to Saturday's attacks, additional US-Iran talks were scheduled for next week.
Watch the full segment, which critics highlighted as evidence that the US-Israeli attacks on Saturday were aimed at forestalling a diplomatic resolution:
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the US-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote in response to Albusaidi's remarks that "the Omanis are famously cautious."
"The Omani FM going on CBS to reveal what has actually been achieved in the negotiations is quite unprecedented. And what has been achieved is significant—Trump can indeed declare victory. Listen to this segment—it goes way beyond what Obama achieved," Parsi wrote. "But everything indicates that Trump won't take yes for an answer. That he will start a war of choice very soon."
"Which is probably why the Omani FM decided to go public," Parsi added. "So that the American people knew that peace was within reach when Trump instead opted for war."
According to one survey released earlier this month, just 21% of Americans support "the United States initiating an attack on Iran under the current circumstances."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Iran Demands Emergency United Nations Action Amid 'Criminal Aggression' by US, Israel
"Just as we were ready for negotiations, we are more ready than ever for defense," said the Iranian Foreign Ministry.
Feb 28, 2026
Update:
The United Nations Security Council is set to hold an emergency meeting at 4:00 pm ET on Saturday to discuss the US-Israeli attacks against Iran.
Earlier:
As US and Israeli bombs fell on Tehran, the Iranian Foreign Ministry on Saturday vowed that the country would defend itself against "criminal aggression" and implored the United Nations Security Council to take emergency action.
The ministry said in a lengthy statement that Saturday's attacks, which US President Donald Trump characterized as the start of a massive military operation aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government, represent "a violation of Article 2, Paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter and a clear armed aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran."
"The Islamic Republic of Iran notes the grave duty of the United Nations and its Security Council to take immediate action to confront the violation of international peace and security," reads the ministry's statement, which noted that the US and Israeli assault began "in the midst of a diplomatic process."
"The Iranian people are now proud that they did everything they could to prevent war," the statement continues. "Now is the time to defend the homeland and confront the enemy's military aggression. Just as we were ready for negotiations, we are more ready than ever for defense. The armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will respond to the aggressors with authority."
Ben Saul, the UN special rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism, condemned US-Israeli "aggression against Iran" in a social media post, calling the assault a "violation of the most fundamental rule of international law—the ban on the use of force."
"All responsible governments should condemn this lawlessness from two countries who excel in shredding the international order," Saul added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


