The article “Health law to put calorie info on vending machines” [News, Dec. 29] presents an incomplete picture of the effectiveness of calorie labeling.
Our study in King County was the first long-term look at the impact on customers’ choices of including calorie information in menus. We found that at 18 months post-regulation, calories purchased decreased. (Previous studies including the New York City study cited and our study show that 6 months after requiring labeling, calories purchased did not change).
Restrict the use of unnecessary drugs
Guest columnists David Ramenofsky and Paul Pottinger gave a good accounting of the dangers of antibiotics in livestock and the food chain [“Label meat and dairy from livestock treated with antibiotics,” Opinion, Nov. 25].
We should also be reminded that the deadly bacteria that grows from these animals spread well beyond the feedlot and slaughterhouse.
On top of the food poisoning incidents tied to wholesale and retail meats are the cross-contaminated vegetables and fruit. For instance, cantaloupes, spinach and bean sprouts have been contaminated from a water table infected from nearby livestock operations.
Split the food stamps and the farm program
I agree with Froma Harrop, “let’s split the food stamps and the farm program” [“The last farm bill? Opinion, Nov. 17].
Debate over GMOs involves many untruths by large corporations Your editorial repeated a factually untrue statement from Scientific American that “the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has tested all the GMOs on the market” to determine safety [“Voters don’t buy GMO labels,” Opinion, Nov. 6]. It’s true, the FDA conducts no scientific tests on any GMOs….More
Farm bill is crucial to direct our agriculture and nutrition policy for hungry Americans Right now Congress is debating a farm bill that will direct our agriculture and nutrition policy for the next several years [“Congress must compromise on farm bill,” Online, Oct. 29]. The House and Senate passed two very different bills. SNAP is…More
Initiative 522 is a waste of taxpayers’ dollars [“Food-label vote may have D.C. impact,” page one, Oct. 30]. Don’t get me wrong, I am completely pro-organic and pro local food, but labeling which food is genetically modified is not going to change anything — other than the amount of money in our pockets. People who are already…More
Cost of labeling is not the real issue Editor, The Times: The opponents of I-522 would have us believe that it would require separate, costly labeling specific to GMO products sold in Washington state [“Growing debate over genetically engineered food,” page one, Oct. 29]. The simple solution is to follow the example set in California for products…More
Accept the scientific facts The I-522 debate is a religion versus science debate, especially when likened to kosher labeling [“Food-label vote may have D.C. impact,” page one, Oct. 30]. Paranoia over GMOs illustrates the growing scientific illiteracy in society. GMO organisms are made through a process. The benefits are numerous, but each product needs to be evaluated…More
Don’t let the greed of companies dictate what you eat In response to the letter by Ryland Bydalek [“I-522: draw conclusions from evidence,” Opinion, Oct. 30], this controversy over GMOs is still in its infancy. Present knowledge is still too incomplete to make a definitive decision about the true effects of it on the human system. I’m…More
Ballard High School students share their thougths Various points of I-522 have been highly debated [“Growing debate over genetically engineered food,” page one, Oct. 29]. Personally, I think if the initiative passed, the Washington state consumer wouldn’t care and would buy the food product anyway. This is the same reason why people might still buy fast food…More