As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, we depend almost entirely on donations from people like you.
We really need your help to continue this work! Please consider making a donation.
Subscribe here and join over 13,000 subscribers to our free weekly newsletter

TV ad against food labeling initiative Proposition 37 is pulled
Key Excerpts from Article on Website of Los Angeles Times

Los Angeles Times, October 4, 2012
Posted: October 16th, 2012

A television spot opposing Proposition 37, the genetically engineered food labeling initiative, was pulled briefly this week to better identify a think-tank researcher attacking the ballot issue. The controversy came as the opponents of the ballot measure, with $35 million in contributions from the food industry and biochemical firms, expanded a week-old television advertising blitz. [The] No on 37 spot ... featured an academic, identified on screen as Dr. Henry I. Miller M.D., Stanford University, founding dir. FDA Office of Technology. He is standing in an ornately vaulted campus walkway. Lawyers for the Proposition 37 campaign complained to Stanfords general counsel, noting that the Stanford ID on the screen appeared to violate the universitys policy against use of the Stanford name by consultants. Whats more, Miller is not a Stanford professor but, rather, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, a conservative think tank housed on the Stanford campus, the letter said. Stanford agreed. The university, spokeswoman Lisa Lapin said, doesnt take any positions on candidates or ballot measures, and we do not allow political filming on campus. The filmmakers also are removing the campus from the background of the video," she said. Stanfords request to edit the Miller video "is proof positive of the lack of credibility and lack of integrity of the No on 37 campaign, said Yes on 37 spokeswoman Stacy Malkan.

Note: This Henry Miller is the same scientist who, according to Forbes, stated that some people could benefit from the low levels of radiation released by the Fukushima meltdowns, and has argued strongly for the reintroduction of DDT. Do you think he might be a little biased towards big business? For lots more questionable behavior by this supposed expert, click here.

Latest News

Key News Articles from Years Past