Genetics

SACRAMENTO - It's time to stop vacillating. Election day is almost here. There are still a few loose ends to straighten out on the California ballot. Things such as auto insurance, sex slavery and food labeling. Also an obscure legislative redistricting measure. Here are some thoughts - mostly negative - on four measures, in numerical order: •Proposition 33: It's sponsored by one very narrow interest. Mercury Insurance founder George Joseph is bankrolling this initiative - with $16.4 million at last count - in an effort to steal customers from other insurers.

Re "In defense of modified foods," Oct. 25 Regardless of the safety and science behind genetically engineered foods, the unnatural growing process should be enough to necessitate proper labeling. Displaying such a label does not automatically insinuate that the product is dangerous and should not be consumed. The long-term health ramifications are debatable. Either way, this should not be the deciding factor in one's decision on Proposition 37. After all, if scientists widely concur that genetically modified crops are as safe as any and in some cases even make for improved environmental conditions, would not people then perhaps buy a product merely because it displays this label?

Should genetically engineered foods be labeled? Supporters of Proposition 37 say yes, but they seem to be losing ground to foes of the measure as the Nov. 6 election draws closer. Reporter Marc Lifsher writes today that the big lead in the polls that the Yes on 37 campaign had a month ago has shrunk to a statistical tie, according to a USC Dornsife/ Los Angeles Times poll.  In this video, Lifsher and Times columnist David Lazarus discuss the measure with No on 37 spokeswoman Kathy Fairbanks and with Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, which is supporting the Yes on 37 campaign.

SACRAMENTO --The campaign to pass Proposition 37 -- the genetically engineered food labeling initiative -- is locked in a tight fight with its agribusiness and food manufacturing opponents. A commanding lead with a more than two-to-one margin a month ago has shrunk to a 44% to 42% statistical tie, according to a USC Dornsife/ Los Angeles Times poll released Thursday. Read the story  here. LIVE VIDEO DISCUSSION: Join us at 2 p.m. today But Proposition 37 supporters, including the organic food industry and consumer advocates, say they're still in the battle and are ready to strike back.

SACRAMENTO - Once riding high, Proposition 37, the statewide ballot measure to label genetically engineered foods, has seen its voter support plummet during the last month, and a new poll shows the high-stakes battle now is a dead heat. After a barrage of negative television advertisements financed by a $41-million opposition war chest, a USC Dornsife / Los Angeles Times poll released Thursday showed 44% of surveyed voters backing the initiative and 42% opposing it. A substantial slice of the electorate, 14%, remains undecided or unwilling to take a position.

To the naked eye, the white puffs of cotton growing on shrubs, the yellow flowers on canola plants and the towering tassels on cornstalks look just like those on any other plants. But inside their cells, where their DNA contains instructions for how these crops should grow, there are a few genes that were put there not by Mother Nature but by scientists in a lab. Some of the genes are from a soil bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis that makes proteins lethal to flies, moths and other insects.

Though the balance of evidence supports the idea that genetically modified foods are safe to eat and don't harm the environment, a few reports have suggested otherwise. Here are three of them. •French scientists reported in September that rats fed a lifelong diet of Roundup-resistant corn developed more tumors and died earlier than rats fed conventional corn. The widely publicized study, published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, was conducted by Gilles-Eric Seralini, the scientific head of an independent institute opposed to genetically modified foods.

Proposition 37, the ballot measure mandating the labeling of genetically modified food that is also known as the "right to know" initiative, is narrowly running ahead of the opposition, according to the latest opinion polls. But even if the measure goes down - and it's the target of a $35-million publicity attack by agricultural and food industry interests - the campaign behind it will mark an important milestone in politics: the deployment of weapons-grade junk science. Of course, ignorance and anti-intellectualism are not new phenomena in our elections, nor in the political processes of other lands, dictatorships and democracies alike.

SACRAMENTO - An advertising blitz against Proposition 37 has slashed support for the genetically engineered food labeling initiative on next month's ballot and may endanger its prospects for voter approval, a new poll shows. Proposition 37, which once was ahead statewide by more than a 2-1 margin, still leads 48.3% to 40.2% in the poll released Thursday by the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy and the California Business Roundtable. Undecided voters accounted for 11.5%.

SACRAMENTO -- Support among likely voters has plummeted for Proposition 37, an initiative to require labels on foods with genetically engineered ingredients, a new poll shows. Poll results released Thursday by the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy and the California Business Roundtable show that 48.3% of respondents would vote yes for the measure on Nov. 6, while 40.2% would vote no. That's way down from a 66.9% to 22.3% margin from a similar poll two weeks ago. The drop in support for the measure parallels the unleashing by opponents of a multimillion-dollar television advertising campaign, said Chris Condon of M4 strategies, which conducted the online survey of 830 likely voters from Oct. 7 to Oct. 10. The poll had a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points.