When Will We Wake Up?

 Tagged In:
Andrea Fabry

Andrea Fabry › Andrea is a former journalist, a radio host, and the mother of nine children. She is ...

gmo-labeling-toxicity-article
 

I live in Arizona, and while there are some interesting local issues presented in this year’s election, I’m keeping my eye on one of my neighboring states. California voters will be answering the question, “Do consumers have the right to know if their food contains genetically modified organisms?” The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act, or “Prop 37,” is right in line with the 50 countries already requiring GMO labeling. This law, however, would be the first of its kind in the United States.

It’s a simple concept, really. Let people know what they’re eating. Give consumers a choice. Require that companies let us know what they’re using to create our food.

Our nation’s ability to create food is quite recent, of course. Only when synthetic chemicals took center stage during World War II did we decide that we can control our agricultural destiny by using them. Our mastery over nature allowed us to kill not only people, but also the insects that hampered our farming efforts. Sir Albert Howard, an English agronomist, warned against the use of synthetic fertilizers (artificial manures) in his 1940 treatise, An Agricultural Testament:

Artificial manures lead inevitably to artificial nutrition, artificial food, artificial animals, and finally to artificial men and women.

How prophetic. 72 years later, most of our affordable and accessible nutrition comes in a box or a can. Seeds designed to either emit or withstand harsh chemicals are created in laboratories. We have invented our very own neon fish, and we have begun to create babies using the controversial cytoplasmic transfer technique. What once seemed like science fiction has become stark reality.

Some say genetic modification shows progress and will help us solve world hunger. Others say that the rise in chronic illness is right in line with the introduction of GMO foods. No one can dispute the fact that we really don’t know how these innovations will affect future generations.

One has to wonder, if genetically engineered foods are not naturally occurring, how is it that we expect our bodies to treat them favorably? Can’t we intuitively assume that such foreign substances might lead to disruptions that are toxic and damaging?

I’m no stranger to toxicity. Our family survived a massive toxic mold exposure. The hidden toxins were slowly debilitating us in the form of autoimmune illness, migraines, abdominal pain, vertigo, and a host of other illnesses, including impaired brain function.

Thanks to a radical lifestyle change, including a return to real food, we turned the corner on our health. As my cognitive abilities returned, I found myself connecting the dots between our toxic home and the onset of our illnesses. Suddenly things became clear. My brain “woke up” to the reality of our trauma.

During one of my brain rehabilitation sessions, I mentioned my awakening and corresponding despair.

“When the brain wakes up from an injury, oftentimes it doesn’t like what it sees,” our specialist explained.

He assured me that my awakening was a good sign. A very good sign.

Genetically engineered foods have slowly made their way into our food supply. Have they too been slowly eroding our nation’s health? Have we blindly accepted something that warrants reevaluation?

What will happen if future generations are forced to bear the unfortunate consequences of a technology introduced with more regard to profitability than to health?

Waking up marked a turning point in my recovery. Perhaps Prop 37 will do the same for our nation.

Do you think we’ll see similar ballot measures to Prop 37 from other states in the future?

Photo Credit: Andrea Fabry