proposition thirty seven in california it's about g_m_ all labeling basically
uh... those who vote yes for proposition thirty seven
wide uh... before is food companies to label their food uh... if it has any
genetically modified organisms in an so um... it's for its standard it's very
clear cut
uh... however it turns out that proposition thirty seven is actually lou
using a new up also there was one poll done by the california business
roundtable and pepper nine university and they found out that thirty nine
point one percent support the measure fifty point five percent oppose the
labeling and ten point five percent are undecided now there's a margin of error
of a about three percent so does results are pretty devastating for proposition
thirty seven
now here here's what i want to risk is that if you know in california most of
us over for dinner
it is a symbolic of what's wrong with our politics overall
when the polling began on this
it was winning trudeau wat
why was a way to do what exactly is the cost any money to taxpayers it's a no
brainer
it's not so you can eat the g_m_ mohit eniku genetically modified foods just
says hey we have to call you when it's right that is one of those categories as
in this one doesn't and other cost you anything that's like to know what it was
what you know what happened
the food companies
uh... softer temperatures biotech companies
and food processors ported
forty-four million dollars
against this proposition inadvertently has amazing the no campaign forty four
million dollars the yes campaign
at seven million dollars so i mean there's no competition there forty four
million dollars in so much more than the yes campaign
and pastors every it's interesting because
we have no control over the advertisers on our youtube videos you know sometimes
you'll see ads before the video starts
i'd just heard from one of our fans that a lot of the adds that they see is no
i'm thirty-seven cell which is kind of ironic right because i mean fat would
vote yes i am waiver yes i'm thirty seven and the reason why did he do that
is because there are no long-term peer-reviewed studies indicating that
genetically modified food is safe now counter that there are no long-term
studies indicating that they are unsafe however i think consumers have the right
to know
whether or not the food they're eating has been genetically modified
they're good arguments for genetically modified food but however i think that
you know there are two negative sides of it as well that a lot of people are just
completely ignoring that look and listen had to law conference on the bell says a
genetically modified food
and enough might not be careful about the careful enough about it
and all it is doing is giving information
soap but that's a fake
really doesn't matter anymore
it it
information doesn't matter anymore money matters
and on that seven million on the uh... sign they barely got started in or most
of it in the last week
so that the no side was running basically unopposed for all this time
they trick people into thinking all my god this is going to cost you a lot of
money and its over intrusive government and so they were on all these deceptive
ads
and then people
what i'm saying walked by i guess i'm against it
that's how you by election so i thought about money in politics that's what i'm
talking about
where you can have the best siren on the wall unit b incredibly logical you could
be absolutely right
and it's not going to matter
if people never hear your side of the story all day here as forty four million
dollars worth of ads
corporate side
total issues issue so u accidentally book the wrong way and there's
definitely misinformation on the corporate side uh... in fact add that
people who back
are are the no vote no campaign
uh... are being investigated because apparently the use of fake at dcr
in one of their press releases ok space handed out this information that said
the u_s_ food and drug administration says the labeling policy like property
seven would be
inherently misleading then wanted that u_s_ food and drug administration and
use that c_e_o_ lacked the foreign journalist rations and make that
statement
so that statement ironically is inherently misleading
but that's exactly what happens
it all these props
then the ads that are the exact opposite over the processor which by the way
indicates the know they're wrong
right yet so if you or try to treat people in the bulletin
for you
bite make you know
people believe in the opposition's
point of view
well then obviously you think your own right united states and canada are the
only two countries that have absolutely no regulations when it comes to
genetically modified food
uh... and when it comes to labeling their no rules no regulations when it
comes to labeling and artistic and consumers have the right to know whether
or not they're eating genetically modified food
what's the harm in that i don't know why people are against the information in
this case and by the way people who are very pro science ida and i'm pro sites
right back that you know polje amal experimentation and inputting gml food
out there
and i understand that there is a good side of it right
but i think that it's a little naive to make the assumption that scientists
won't get corrupted by money no sciences obviously have an incentive to support
g_m_ models
okay so
let's not be naive about that and also when it comes to labeling like i said
united states can that the only two countries and that will not be only two
countries but you know the two industrialized countries that don't have
any regulations on labeling then as well in two thousand four decided you know
what we want labeling columbia twenty twelve decided we want lately
perot presented a
uh... the european union back in nineteen ninety eight
uh... so when you see all these countries that see that it's a good idea
to let the consumers know what their can consuming but here in the united
it's only of course the corporations when everything monsanto has donated
seven point one two million dollars to the no campaign no i'm sure the monsanto
has a vested customer