Posted in: Green News

No GMOs Girl Scouts Cookie Petition Goes Viral

Monsanto Protection Act

Girl Scout Cookies and GMO ingredients should not go together, according to a viral Change.org petition. The highly anticipated sweet treats have been used as a scouting fundraiser for more than 100 years. The “NO GMO” petition was organized by a California Girl Scout unhappy about GM beet sugar and other processed ingredients inside the colorful little boxes.

Orange County Girl Scout Alicia Serratos sat down with her mom to talk about reformulating the cookies with non-GMO ingredients. Mother and daughter had a long discussion about GMO ingredients and what could be done to influence the baking choices of the Girl Scouts. Serratos initially considered just sending a letter to Girl Scout officials but ultimately opted to start a No GMO petition online instead.

The “Girl Scouts: Please make cookies without GMOs” petition features a photo of the adorable little Daisy Girl Scout who is very concerned about the use of ingredients which comprise the ultra-popular treats. Alicia said, “GMOs aren’t safe and we want the cookies to be safe.”

Many of the comments beneath the petition echo the commitment to healthy food choices. The Monsanto Protection Act signed into law by President Barack Obama has also made headlines recently. Food Democracy Now and farmers from across America protested the use of GMO seeds, and other mandates inside the recently passed legislation, during a gathering in front of the White House last week.

An excerpt from the No GMOs Girl Scouts petition reads:

“GMOs studies in animals have linked them to infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system.”

The Girl Scouts organization is in no way bound to comply with the no GMO cookies request regardless of how many signatures the online petition garners. Many GMO opponents consider the online petition a success because it has helped raise awareness about ingredients and the need for GMO labeling policies. A Girl Scout troop in Missouri recently hosted a non-GMO bake sale. Institute for Responsible Technology and GMO Inside Steering Committee member Jeffrey Smith helped with the fundraising and awareness event.

The Girl Scout organization facts page addresses the use of GMO ingredients in the cookies. The text states that the baking staff has the ability to determine whether to use genetically modified agricultural crops in Girl Scout Cookies. The decision is reportedly based on “a range of market-related factors.” The Girl Scout release also notes that the group feels that everything that goes into the cookies are safe – including the GMO ingredients.

How do you feel about GMO ingredients in Girl Scouts Cookies and the Monsanto Protection Act?

[Image Via: Shutterstock.com]

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

14 Responses to “No GMOs Girl Scouts Cookie Petition Goes Viral”

  1. Brian V. Sitterley

    Personally I like the Girl Scout Cookies they way they are. We have been "genetically modifying" crops since our distant ancestors starting selecting wheat that would not shatter the grains onto the ground during harvest thousands of years ago. We can now use modern science to effect desirable changes more deliberately and more rapidly than we could in the past.

  2. Teresa Sampson Setterlund

    The way they're genetically modifying crops now days are not the same as the way they were doing it in the past. They're injecting a pesticide into the crop so that bugs won't eat them (put simply). It's the pesticides that are causing all sorts of health problems, not just the fact that they are "GMO's". It's the specific type of GMO that is concerning.

  3. Dawn Gifford

    This is a myth. GMO technology is not like traditional seed breeding at all. Never before have we been able to genetically cross species that could not naturally breed together, like putting fish genes into tomatoes, or producing cows that make human breast milk. Yet that is exactly what GMO technology does.

  4. Kevin Folta

    They are not 'injecting" anything. That is the image that the liars in the anti-GMO world use all the time. It is not the way the technology is performed or how it works. Pesticides are a problem, that's why you should appreciate the GMO anti-pest proteins used (Bt). Bt selectively targets the larvae of specific insects. What works on one insect does not work on all insects, let alone mammals! The mechanism is elegant and involves binding to a receptor in the digestive tract that animals don't have. The same protein has been used in organic cultivation forever. I'm teaching about this topic today in class and you've got me started thinking about the bad information out there. Sorry for your misunderstanding.

  5. Kevin Folta

    Once again the scientifically bankrupt anti-science zealots perpetuate the lies of their anti-GM religion to scare people. There is no real science that supports these claims of harm. Jeffrey Smith, cited in the article, is not a scientist. He's a credulous author, documentarian and speaker that needs to keep you frightened to sell his stuff. Science is his wet blanket. If you want to know facts, look in the peer-reviewed literature, not on some website meant to deceive you.

  6. Mary Thomas

    Maybe you should pay attention to Dr. Don Huber's research and that of his colleagues. And why not watch best-selling author Jeffrey Smith's movie Genetic Roulette? You receive some funding from the American Society of Plant Biologists, which supports genetic engineering. At least Jeffrey Smith doesn't hide what he represents.

  7. Mary Thomas

    Bullshit! How do you explain that the Bt toxin was found in fetal cord blood and the blood of pregnant women in a study in Canada? I have original Bt for my garden, but I would never eat it, but, by all means, you go ahead.

  8. Mary Thomas

    Yes, and I wonder if Brian has tried mating with rice.

  9. Mary Thomas

    The USDA's Michael Taylor used to work for Monsanto. Why would farmers trust the USDA to protect them? When a farmer signs a contract with Monsanto, they practically give up all their rights as farmers. The huge economic impacts are the collapse of bees, autism, infertility, you name it. Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dupont, BASF just want to make a profit and are in cahoots to control the world's food supply (thus farmers), including Girl Scout Cookies. Kevin, Monsanto must be funding you for something.

  10. George Campbell

    Nobody can guarantee that the GMO food is safe. Just as Exxon fails to maintain its pipelines, Monsanto dos not study the long term effect on the environment of dumping genetically modified plants into the wild. The tragedy of our generation is that we didn't put a stop to this when we could.

  11. George Campbell

    You are confusing the selection of crops with current day genetic rewrites and mixing with animal DNA, which is far more dangerous. Why are you apologizing for this industry anyway? You sound like a P.R. flak by making unsupported broad statements claiming things are safe that you don't even understand. That is ignorant.

  12. George Campbell

    As soon as Monsanto finds a genetic modification that works and can sell, that is the end of the study. You are deluding yourself if you think they actually consider the long term effect of introducing GMO into the environment. They COULD CARE LESS. Pleasing the stockholders the next quarter is all that a corporation like monsanto cares about. They aren't policing themselves. They aren't seriously studying the long term implications of GMO. They have no profit motication to do so, and the shareholders would punish them for wasting money on it. They are playing genetic roulette with the environment, and you are naive to think otherwise.