http://youtu.be/YZGueeao0tE
Printable View
And just for backup info, here's some deeper info on it. If you go to the link, it'll show you who the lobbyists are, and who the sponsors are in Congress and some good insight on what the bill is about. A handy link for just about any congressional bill.
BKB
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015...-gmo-labeling/
Three times as much agribusiness money, on average, for House members voting to bar GMO labeling
by Alex Lazar on July 24, 2015
(AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)
(AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)
Thursday’s House passage of a bill that would keep states from requiring genetically modified foods to be labeled was a big — and not at all close — win for agribusiness and food and beverage interests.
The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015, known to its critics as the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, sailed through by a vote of 275 to 150. While the bulk of its support came from the GOP and most of its opponents hailed from Democratic districts, the vote didn’t break cleanly along party lines. Among its 107 sponsors were 92 Republicans and 15 Democrats.
But a more telling predictor of where lawmakers came down was the amount of support they’d received from interests with a stake in the legislation.
For example, the campaigns of Reps. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), Rodney Davis (R-Ill.), Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.), all cosponsors of the legislation (most of whom also sit on the House Agriculture Committee), received six-figure dollar amounts from providers of agricultural services and products — one segment of the agribusiness sector — during the 2014 election cycle. That put them high among the top 20 recipients of funds from the industry.
Cosponsors such as Reps. David Valadao (R-Calif.), Steve Fincher (R-Tenn.), Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) aren’t on the Agriculture Committee, but nevertheless pulled in six-figure dollar amounts from the crop production and basic processing industry (another part of agribusiness; think Cargill Inc. and the National Corn Growers Association) during the midterm cycle — landing them among the 20 members who received the most from that industry.
Reps. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), two original sponsors of the legislation, were the top two current House members receiving the most money from the Grocery Manufacturers Association in 2014. The grocery manufacturers — who have spent $4.1 million lobbying on all issues so far this year, almost as much as they spent in all of 2014 — have lobbied on the bill more than any other organization, mentioning the measure on 14 lobbying reports this year.
After the Grocery Manufacturers Association, PepsiCo Inc ($2.5 million in overall lobbying this year) and Monsanto Co ($2.6 million) have mentioned the bill most frequently.
All told, the 230 Republicans and 45 Democrats who voted to pass the bill collectively received over $29.9 million from the agribusiness sector and food and beverage industry during the 2014 cycle, or about $108,900 per member. That’s nearly three times as much as the average $38,977 per lawmaker drawn by the 138 Democrats and 12 Republicans voting nay. Their cumulative contributions from the interests came to $5.8 million.
For all the election cycles since 1990, more than $115.1 million has gone to those who voted for the legislation this week (with an average of $418,644 per member), compared to almost $25.8 million for those who voted against it ($171,785 per member).
With numbers like those, anti-labeling advocates may be giving a whole new meaning to the term “cash crop.”
Doug Weber contributed research to this post.
Categories: Congress Influence & Lobbying Issues and Legislation Politicians & Elections
Tags: agricultural services and products, alex lazar, Collin Peterson, crop production and basic processing, dark act, david valadao, Devin Nunes, Frank Lucas, G.K. Butterfield, gmo, Grocery Manufacturers Association, House Agriculture Committee, Kevin Cramer, Kurt Schrader, Mike Conaway, Mike Pompeo, monsanto, pepsico, rodney davis, safe and accurate food labeling act, Steve FIncher
Alex LazarAlex Lazar is the summer 2015 reporting intern for OpenSecrets Blog. He is a graduate of George Washington University. His previous articles have been published by various news organizations including The Hill, ABCNews.com and The Huffington Post.
Follow Alex | Read all of Alex's posts
Comments (Comment Guidelines)
Lot of uneducated hickory-nut cliche's in that video .
A lot of the anti GMO stuff is that way. Considering the millions spent on lobbying by the industry, I'll accept that. Regardless, I still think there is some validity in the issues.
If GMOs are as safe as they say, then why is there hesitancy to simply label food that is genetically modified? Why is less information better for the grower and/or the consumer?
BkB
I think some of it is for the same reason it's ridiculous for MacDonald's to be forced to pay for printing, "Caution - Contents Are Hot" on their coffee cups.
I have a couple concerns about GMO's specifically and big agri businesses in general. First, I think where GMOs are concerned, the jury won't be in on them for some time to come. I don't trust what the people with the most money at stake would tell me about them and the other side is oftem big on emotion and short on facts. I think I am in the majority in saying I don't know whether GMOs are a godsend or a curse. That partly why I asked the question. But it nags at me that there are tens of millions of dollars being spent to simply sway the congress to make GMOs less visible. I can't find the motivation for that. There's no really huge anti GMO movement or lobby. Where there's money, you quite often find assholes.
On huge agribusiness, my main issue is our monoculture approach to agriculture is raping our farmland. There's a lot of scientific fact behind that and we need to be pushing towards a better approach. I'm no environmentalist or anti, I'm just saying we are fucking up our farmland at great speed and we are setting ourselves up for a potato famine like event that will change the way we view food and agriculture completely. Our vulnerability to agri science and sabatage by other countries is wide open.
And that's what I think about that.
BKb
You still didn't tell me what you're eating that is so healthy ?
We're not fucking any farm ground up, that is a totally stupid misconception. Our soils and conservation practices are at a all time high ! We as farmers, can not take the chance of not protecting our investment, which is our soils and water.
The only vulnerability we have in agriculture is not being able to keep new technologies coming at a pace that is needed for new chemicals and new diseases. Which can only be solved by creating new GMO's.....
I never said I was eating anything that was healthy. I'm not sure what the damn question even is.
And I understand the sensitivity completly. I am not attacking farmers at all and I really do have a pretty good level of understanding what is going on in agriculture. Certainly not anything near what you know, given your experience and life in it. Again, thats why I asked for opinion. If your opinion is that everything is peachy then I value that opinion. If I disagree with it doesn't make me a dumbass, it just makes me unconvinced since I really havent heard what you specifically think of the topic of GMOs and Monsanto's agressive litigious way of eliminating competition and spending lots of money to influence our congress.
BKB
There's a lot of scientific fact behind that and we need to be pushing towards a better approach. I'm no environmentalist or anti, I'm just saying we are fucking up our farmland at great speed and we are setting ourselves up for a potato famine like event that will change the way we view food and agriculture completely.
What a wild-assed assertion. Exactly what on earth are you basing that on? I don't know who YOUR "we" is, but OUR "we" is doing just the opposite to "our" farmland.
I really havent heard what you specifically think of the topic of GMOs and Monsanto's agressive litigious way of eliminating competition and spending lots of money to influence our congress.
"aggressive". You're welcome. And what is Verizon doing to eliminate competition and spending money to influence Congress??
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s
Verizon is in the Top 15, Monsanto isn't. Pick on the right guys.
As to what I think about GMO? I have no idea. I trust my wonderful US Government through their USDA arm to tell me what is right and wrong for me to eat. After all, Government bureaus such as this exist to help us, right?
Well help me understand what you mean by safe. Do you mean nutritionally safe or do you mean safe from killing me or making me sick due to some difference between the real McCoy and what I'm eating?
BKB
I wanna go back to this, Why should I be for labeling of food, when thee no price incentive for me ? Right now, I'm getting the same prices for my commodities as they did 50 years ago. If you wanna add more stipulations to my game, then add value/subsidies accordingly.
Sounds like a bit of a sore spot has been hit here NTB. Personally, I don't worry too much about this sort of stuff in this country. I think we do a pretty good job of policing ourselves and I'm not much of an alarmist. Barry Bob, I can understand where you're coming from, but think of it this way ... how many cigarettes did you smoke that came out of a package with the Surgeon General's warning printed on the side? Is the fine print on that package what made you quit?
It's like this, we don't ever get thanks for growing the safest,cheapest and the most abundance food in the world. But everytime there is a news event about food saftey, agriculture (which is already regulated to hell) has to stop and do damaged control. Agriculture is not in the habit or the bussiness of killing it's customers.
It's funny how no-one thinks a thing about putting someone else's genitals in their mouth, yet they're concerend about their foods labeling ......
I worked in the telecom industry for forty friggin years. Nobody ever told me thanks for providing a way to call grandma,or the police, or go to an ATM. If you're looking for gratitude rrom Americans for doing something that you make your living at, you will be, like you apparently are, disappointed.
And for the record, asking for someone's opinion about something is not an attack. Sure, I recognize the 'anti' make life hard with theor blather. But this isn't anti GMO blather. What I asked about was two simple acts by congress to do basically two things in agriculture: remove the requirement to label foods that contain GMO organisms, and the other is to remove country of origin labeling for chicken pork and beef products.
But since you brought it up agriculture has not always produced the safest food possible. Not the safest for people to eat, not the safest for the environment, and not the safest for the overall health of the financial markets that drive the whole industry. Granted, agricultural practices have improved greatly as we have learned, most times the hard way, but don't give me the apple pie farmer story and try to bluff me away with a bunch of defensive bullshit. Farmers are some of the hardest working people in our country. They do produce the goods we need to survive, not only as a nation, but as a human species. For that reason, we need to protect farming not only as a business but as a way of life in our country. Again, if you think protecting the Monsantos and Archer Daniels Midlands of the world and that they will do those things then that is a very valid opinion. After all, you are one of those farmers I am talking about. But just because I don't share your opinion doesn't mean I should just go away. As a consumer of your products, I deserve the chance to make the choices that I believe are the safest for me. If I want to avoid products from countries that don't have Bucky's beloved USDA ensuring they don't feed animal parts or that conduct agricultural practices that are not sustainable, then no matter what you thinkabout those practices, I should have the information about that product that I need to make the decision based on my criteria. If I want to avoid GMOs, i need that information available. Is GMO labelling costing you money in your business? I'd like to hear your answer on that. All I've gotten is some semi insulting blather about putting someone's genitals in my mouth. If that's what you intended, then I'm not the one that's the cocksucker here. i'd also really like to know what you meant by that remark.
But back to the topic. Thumper, GMO labelling is not a warning like on cigarette packs. Its simply information. You, who couldn't or wouldn't cook yourself a hamburger, probably don't pay attention to labels. I'll bet five bucks Lynn sure as hell does. it may not worry you to buy and food that somehow got here from a country thousands of miles away where it was grown in human shit as fertilizer. It may not bother you but I will avoid it.
Finally, farmers are important but true farmers are getting more and more scarce. We're already seeing super weeds that are a result of roundup ready GMO crops. Those weeds now potentially threaten native species. Is that what you mean by 'safe'? Is the answer always better chemistry? I, admittedly don't know the answer to that question. But getting defensive about a discussion about it doesn't provide any answers.
BKB
Sunshine, We've tried to buy meat and produce that we know comes from farms in our region vs from another coast or another country. Removing labelling that prevents us from doing that takes that choice away, IMO.
BKB
I call bullshit on this too !
But since you brought it up agriculture has not always produced the safest food possible. Not the safest for people to eat, not the safest for the environment, and not the safest for the overall health of the financial markets that drive the whole industry.
I guess you never heard of the Dust Bowl, where agricultural practices were a big contributor in the total collapse of agriculture and farming. Or the big Chicago meatpacking scandals that were leading to big outbreaks of illness and death, or of the listeria outbreak from canteloupes grown right here in the USA, or any of several other food safety issues. And that's just the US. If you look abroad its even worse.
Again, you avoid answering a direct question. What are the current labelling practices doing to hurt your business? Why is less information about the food we eat better? Why so much money poured into it and are these lobbyist for these big corporations representing you, the real farmer? Are these things you want or they want?
bKB
Another horseshit assumption !
Finally, farmers are important but true farmers are getting more and more scarce. We're already seeing super weeds that are a result of roundup ready GMO crops. Those weeds now potentially threaten native species. Is that what you mean by 'safe'? Is the answer always better chemistry? I, admittedly don't know the answer to that question. But getting defensive about a discussion about it doesn't provide any answers.
Farmers are getting better and better, the bad one's don't make, very few poor farmers still exist and won't very long.
Nothing in being threatened, that's more media hype. There is always going to be "super" weeds, roundup was created for a reason, we had super weeds that needed new technology. And there will be need technology again, and again after the life cycle of that product, you'll hear the same sky-is-falling bullshit that has been spewed since the media was created .
The dust bowl was created by weather changes, but after that, almost a 100 years ago now, things were put into place to make sure that never happens again. I think given the weather over west Texas and other mid west states that is was a huge success .
The cantaloupe thing happened on 1 farm, sure it was bad, but they still found the source and made the proper steps to make sure it never happens again.
You're the one not answering questions......and you know why !
I see. Its all media hype.
Thanks, that's the answer I was looking for!
BKB
HAHAHAHA
That was blatant sarcasm, directed at the ugly redhead who has spent 15+ years telling me at ever possible turn, how great all those government agencies are, and how beneficial to our lives they are, and how we need them, and how my attitude of "government sucks" is bad, and how I'm not smart enough to see the real picture.........
And now, here's a perfect example of my concern over a government agency, the USDA, and the same ugly redhead can't for the life of him admit that they're letting food go down his gullet that is bad for him (his concern, not mine).
I laugh at all this.
But........I happen to own a farm. SO........while I hear that ugly redhead saying he isn't attacking, I see through that, and know that he is. I even called him on it, many posts ago.
But........I am so happy. SO HAPPY! There is someone else that will argue with same ugly redhead udder dan me!!! I'm so happy I'm going to read the last paper I'm willing to pay for.........and watch the Cardinals!
Now, back to your regularly scheduled argument.
No, I'm all done. and I'm not sure where you get any of that. I guess you're a poor reader. I have no reason to be critical of farmers. I AM critical of farming and where it is going in the United States. But we can't discuss that dcause y'all gentleman farmers get your panties in a wad and make claims like the ones in this thread.
Be happy!
I am!
And put up anpther mailbox! You'll make twice the money with two govern,ent checks!
BKB
You're funny.
A) I get no government checks.
B) Here's some things you said. YOU and THEM (you know, THEM) can decide if you think these words are 'attack' words or not:
raping our farmland
we are fucking up our farmland at great speed
setting ourselves up for a potato famine like event
Clearly, I think those are pretty much attacking somebody.........
C) You also said:
If I disagree with it doesn't make me a dumbass
BUT, apparently your mirror is a one way mirror! Cause if we disagree with YOU, then you say this:
But we can't discuss that dcause y'all gentleman farmers get your panties in a wad and make claims like the ones in this thread.
SO............. you read this post and tell me where I am off base, wontcha?
Go ahead. When you 'win', he just disappears.
Been fighting it for years. He never loses an argument.
Course, he's never right, so.............um..............
But, back to the original question..........I think if you believe in evolution, you believe that YOU are a genetically enhance organism. No? If you don't want to eat one, don't. If you don't care, eat away. If you can't figure out which they are, start your own farm. Do it however you want. But this ain't Frankenstein stuff, and I think Posty thinks it is..........at least his words here say he thinks that.
So, my direct answers to his original questions are:
* I eat whatever I can find. I eat mostly organic, carbon based items. I eat a LOT of them. If they smell bad, I don't eat them.
* I think the REAL bug in his saddle is another hammer thrown at Archer Daniel Midlands and Monsanto (his REAL enemies, for many years, along with Halliburton).......and this was a way to get that done. I pointed out that he's a hypocrite, to a small degree, for singling them out when his employer is far worse......but..........oh well.
I find it odd how people fire a shot and never even try to understand what they're talking about. Broccoli is widely considered one of the most healthiest of sides, offered in almost every restaurant I've ever been in. Yet, in the beginning of time, they was no broccoli, it's a genetically modified food. Oh yeah, most vegetable and fruits are too, without DNA help over the years, most would disappear because of diseases and such.
I will say this, one place where people flock to, to buy what is presumed to be healthy is Farmers Markets. What people DON"T understand, is this is some of the ONLY food you will put in your mouth that is NOT regulated. You question what I produce, which takes years and years to ever bring to market, but you stand in line to buy that big pretty stuff that has no regulations on it. Ever hear the phase, if it looks to good to be true it probably is ? If there is money involved, someone is cheating, and its the same with food. So eat that big yellow squash from the road side stand......lol
Nah, I'll pass. I might throw up the good stuff I just ate.
I don't really have a dog in this fight and I have to admit, I don't get too carried away with worrying about what I stuff into my pie-hole (that does NOT include MALE genitalia BTW!). I "should" be more concerned probably because I'm as big as a house, but one of the only passions I have these days is enjoying good (tasting) food. If it tastes good, I don't worry too much about how healthy it is ... otherwise I'd have to give up cherry pie and ice cream, something I'm not willing to do. I ate healthy food for two straight months in the hospital. NO THANKS! If that's what I need to eat to be "healthy" ... sorry, I think I'd rather die. This argument has no end ... you can eat healthy, but if that diet includes meat, you're poisoning yourself as far as a vegetarian is concerned. So, you become a vegetarian and the vegans tell you you're poisoning yourself! Sorry, there's some poison I really enjoy ... let me enjoy it.
As for the labeling? Personally, I could give a rat's ass ... if it looks good, smells good and tastes good ... I'll most likely eat it. No, I'd better retract a portion of that statement ... with my history of food choices, I'll take that back and simply say if it TASTES good, I'll eat it! But even that is subjective, oysters gag me, I can't stand Brussels sprouts and IMO, anybody who can drink buttermilk right out of the carton like my grandfather did, needs to be institutionalized. That said, many people love what I hate and vice versa. Back to labeling ... where do we draw the line with this stuff? I rely on the FDA and the USDA to do a reasonable job of protecting me. (I KNOW that'll bring up an argument, but you have to live within reason). I don't want to read 187 pages of bullshit to decide whether or not I want to eat an egg from Cal-Maine Foods ... I just want to fry a frigging egg or two to go with my cholesterol laden bacon and highly buttered toast!
Anyway, this post DID force me to try to better understand what the issue is here. Me? I think it's much like the people who refuse to vaccinate their kids. The world is a MUCH better place due to genetic engineering IMHO and GM crops.
I did find a very interesting article that pretty much hits on both sides of the issue. You guys can argue about it if you want, but like I mentioned previously, I could give a rat's ass! :D
This link leads to an interesting article I think:
http://12.000.scripts.mit.edu/missio...modified-crops
Well, as long as you butter your toast AFTER it's browned, we are amazingly on the same page.
I should worry more than you. A L.A.D. M.I. should wake me up. All it did was make me try to see the bottom of my bucket and read the whole list.
Just ate some homemade ice cream. It would have been MUCH better if my lovely wife would have remembered the paddle! But some of the top was edible, and the grandson loved it. But hey, I used Eggland Eggs!!! Look at me go!
I still think the underlying issue is not GMO, but certain lobbyists. But either way, my rat is not wearing diapers either.
Quackwatch
www.quackwatch.com/
Ha ha ha! Really Sunny, for someone who is overly paranoid by something as simple as being quoted here, it's hard to take you seriously sometimes when the whole subject is, for the most part IMO, based on paranoia.
I clicked on your video and within the first two seconds, I stopped it (besides, it's a frigging hour and 20 minutes!). Why did I give up so fast? The FIRST thing I saw on my screen was "Produced by Gary Null"! That fruitcake is a nutbag to begin with, so you're not furthering your cause much.
From wiki:
Gary Michael Null (born 1945) is an American talk radio host and author who advocates for alternative medicine and naturopathy and who produces a line of dietary supplements.
His views on health and nutrition are at odds with scientific consensus; psychiatrist Stephen Barrett, co-founder of the National Council Against Health Fraud and webmaster of Quackwatch, described Null as "one of the nation's leading promoters of dubious treatment for serious disease".
On his radio show, and in books and self-produced movies, Null criticizes the medical community, promotes a range of alternative cancer treatments, denies that HIV causes AIDS, and promotes dietary supplements which he produces.
In 2010, Null reported that he and six other consumers had been hospitalized from vitamin D poisoning, after ingesting a nutritional supplement carrying his name and endorsement. Null sued a contractor involved in producing the product, alleging that each contained more than 1,000 times the dose of vitamin D reported on the label.
Null was raised in Parkersburg, West Virginia, with his two brothers. He holds an associate's degree in business administration from the 2-year, for-profit Mountain State College in Parkersburg, West Virginia and a Bachelor's degree from Thomas Edison State College in Trenton, New Jersey.
Null holds a Ph.D. in human nutrition and public health sciences from Union Institute & University, a private distance-learning college headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. Null's doctoral thesis was entitled "A Study of Psychological and Physiological Effects of Caffeine on Human Health".
His credentials, including the degree-granting practices at Edison State and the rigor of the Ph.D. program at Union Institute, have been questioned by Stephen Barrett on his Quackwatch website, who labeled Null as "one of the nation's leading promoters of dubious treatment for serious disease" and a fraud.
Null attacks many facets of mainstream medicine, arguing that physicians and pharmaceutical companies have an economic interest in promoting rather than preventing sickness. In the 1979-80, he co-authored a series of articles on cancer research for Penthouse, entitled The Politics of Cancer beginning with one entitled "The Great Cancer Fraud." Null's writings in Penthouse accused the medical community of "suppressing alternative cancer treatments to protect the medical establishment's solid-gold cancer train." In place of standard medical therapy, Null advocated alternative cancer treatments such as hydrazine sulfate. A series of three articles co-authored by Null in Penthouse is credited by David Gorski with bringing the Burzynski clinic to prominence. In 1985, Null began writing a lengthy series of reports for Penthouse entitled "Medical Genocide". In 1999 TIME wrote of Null: "From a young reporter this is to be expected. But two decades later, Null, 54, is still warning of a variety of medical bogeymen out to gull a trusting public."
Null was the keynote speaker at a rally opposing mandatory H1N1 influenza vaccination during the 2009 flu pandemic, leading the New York State Department of Health to dismiss Null's claims about the vaccine as "not scientifically credible." The New York State Health Commissioner held a conference at the time of the rally to discuss the clinical trials which were used to demonstrate its safety.
In addition to his promotion of alternative cancer treatments and condemnation of the medical establishment, Null has argued that HIV is harmless and does not cause AIDS.[3] In his book AIDS: A Second Opinion, Null advocated a range of dietary supplements for HIV-positive individuals instead of antiretroviral medication. In 2002, Salon.com described the book as "massive, irresponsible and nearly unreadable."
Seth Kalichman, professor of social psychology at the University of Connecticut, has decried Null's role as a prominent proponent of AIDS denialism and has accused him of cashing in on HIV/AIDS; in Kalichman's 2009 book, Denying AIDS, he compared Null's activities to Holocaust denial and described Null as an example of a dangerous entrepreneur who "obviously breached" the balance between free speech and protecting public health.
Null began broadcasting a syndicated radio talk show, Natural Living with Gary Null in 1980. His show was broadcast first on WBAI, then on the VoiceAmerica Network and over the internet. Null's show subsequently returned to WBAI, leading to protests from ACT-UP New York and other AIDS activist groups concerned by Null's promotion of AIDS denialism. He continues to host The Gary Null Show through the Progressive Radio Network, which he established in 2005.
Null has made several self-funded and self-produced documentary films on public policy issues, personal health, and development. His videos have been aired by PBS during pledge drives, but have since been banned, which in 1999, led to a surge in sales of Null's books and for record fundraising for the stations.
Concern arose within PBS over the videos' sensational claims with the Seattle affiliate cancelling a planned rebroadcast and Ervin Duggan, the president of PBS, expressing concern that by showing Null's videos, the network was "open[ing] the door to quacks and charlatans. "Null received a "best director" nomination for his documentary Chew on This: Dangers of the American Diet Exposed at the 2014 Red Dirt International Film Festival.
In 2010, Null reported that he and six other consumers had been hospitalized for vitamin D poisoning after ingesting a nutritional supplement manufactured for his line of supplements by a contractor. In a lawsuit against the company, he alleged that the supplement erroneously contained more than 1,000 times the dose of vitamin D reported on the label.
The Los Angeles Times wrote that Null's experience "should give pause to anyone lured by the extravagant claims of many supplements makers", and said that it was common for dietary supplements to contain doses "wildly different than those indicated on their label" as a result of weak regulation.
Ha! I see NTB already posted the quackwatch site. (great minds think alike) ;)
I didn't read through it, but I'm assuming Null is included in there somewhere.
Explanation reference, I guess my demographic audience was too old.
I said, it's funny that most have no worries about having oral sex, but you need a label to put a piece of america's fine home grown produce in your mouth . How y'all got the homo reference out of that is by me.
Sunny, there is a good chance you can't buy anything that hasn't been modified. If you'd like to list your favorites foods, I'll be glad to point them out for you.