Robyn O’Brien is the co-founder of rePlant Capital, an impact investment firm, deploying integrated capital from soil to shelf in order to build soil health and financial resiliency for farmers. She is also the founder of Do Good, a strategic advisory firm, and the AllergyKids Foundation. Random House published Robyn’s book, The Unhealthy Truth, in 2009, and her TEDx talks have been translated into dozens of languages and viewed by millions around the world.
This morning, I attended Summit 3.0, a business conference designed to inspire people and organizations to become the best version of themselves that they can be.
The day started with music. Michael Franti took the stage.
It was just Michael and his guitar. His bare feet resting gently on the stage. “I have a new song,” he said. “It’s not on any album….” And he began to sing…
“Everybody ought to hug somebody….at least once a day. Everybody needs to kiss somebody…..to love somebody at least once a day.”
It was 9am. No one cared. He had everyone singing.
Didn’t our days start with singing when we were little? It opened people up.
Love is a rocket fuel. It comes in all shapes and sizes, and the crowd loved it. I thought about all of the people that I love, and how love has seen so many of us through this work. His words rang so true.
When he finished, John Mackey, the co-CEO of Whole Foods, was introduced. It felt full circle. I remember two speakers from business school back in the 1990s: John Mackey and one of the founders of Compaq Computers.
Mackey’s talk was about the evolution of humanity, enlightenment, nothing to do with food. He shared personal anecdotes and a story about how his mother told him back in 1987 when she was dying that she wish he’d go back to school and get his college degree. He never did. She died never knowing the contribution he made to the world, to clean food, to the conversations we now have today. “She died thinking I was a failure,” he said.
And he spoke about the types of mindsets, people, “memes” was the word that he used.
I thought about how our lives unfold in chapters. We are such creative designs ourselves, each a very unique work of art in progress.
Mackey’s talk began with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: food, water, shelter, intimacy, and he took it up the pyramid from there. Each stage or “wave” of this evolution had a color to it…blue, purple, orange, green. What he got to was that in the end, there is no judgement of where anyone is in the process. There is just love-inspired work driving us to solutions that will serve humanity. Conscious integration.
It was big stuff, and I then I thought: How many people think about this? We get so busy, so caught up. The burden can be heavy. Maybe it’s self-imposed in some cases, the treadmill we put ourselves on because we think we don’t have the right house, car, clothes, that we are not “enough.” But in some cases, the burden is heavy just because it’s the hand we’ve been dealt. And if these anchors are tied around our feet, anchors like disease, joblessness, heartache, can we reach for the stars?
And I thought about the work we do every day to help people believe in their own unique abilities to create change. We are here because we are a unique design. No one else on the planet has the combination or heart, mind and skills that each one of us possess. No one else has our story. “What if we are not enough?” we think.
But what if, together, we are?
Towards his conclusion, Mackey said, “When fear leaves, love takes its place.” It hung in the air. I wrote it down.
I wish Franti would have taken the stage again.
Fear and love. It keeps coming back in my life, like a rhythm.
They don’t mix. Like oil and water. They don’t co-exist. And I thought about the struggles that we’ve seen, the fears, the “what-ifs”. I thought about the fear I felt, the intimidation, the hurdles.
In the end, I couldn’t wait for the fear to leave. There wasn’t time. So I chose to love. I was afraid that it would hurt, but love is more powerful than fear.
And when you love without hesitation, you will find that that is where your strength lies, and together, we will change the world.
I wrote a letter to a friend’s mom just before she died. I never met her and wanted to thank her.
I never got the chance. I hesitated on sending it, wondering if it would look stupid. She died just four days later.
I talk a lot about finding a friend as you step into this work. And this particular mom had given me a great one.
We met in 2010 when a friend introduced us to talk about food. It was an immediate friendship.
Flash forward about four and a half years, and there we were standing in front of a crowd of parents talking about our food, families and our fundamental human right to know what is going into the food we feed our loved ones. We were talking about a ballot initiative, #Yeson105, in Colorado to label genetically engineered ingredients in our food.
I couldn’t help but think of everything we’d seen in our work together. My heart gets too big for my chest sometimes, and it makes my eyes leak. I was told not to make it a kumbaya thing.
As we stood in front of the Colorado Moms for Labeling group, we discussed how as Americans we haven’t been told that our food now contains genetically engineered ingredients designed to withstand chemicals like the weedkiller Roundup. 64 countries around the world have been given this information. We haven’t. It is a fundamental human right, an American thing, a civil rights thing.
But it is also a love thing. The reason that it hurts so much to learn this—that ingredients have been hidden in our food while American companies label them for families in other countries—is because we are losing loved ones to conditions like cancer, diabetes or food allergies, and there is grief. You want to hit it away. But you can’t, because underneath the grief is love. It is a rocket fuel.
You could see it in the meeting. You could feel it. It was what had brought us together. It had been an invitation to moms that day, but dads were there, babies, little ones and others.
And again, as I listened to this friend talk, I looked out at those in front of us, knowing what they had been through, their courage and what brought us together—this love we have for our families and country.
And as we packed everything away that day, I thought of my friend’s mom.
What I’d wanted to tell her was “Thank you. Thank you for raising such an awesome son. Someone brilliant and strong who gives his heart and talent to this work to make the world a better place. Thank you for giving me such an incredible friend.”
As we do this work, all of us, in memory of those that we love—moms, friends who have lost little ones, and others that I never met like Emily, Giovanni, Roman, Debbie and so many more—it reminds me every day that love is more powerful than fear.
We see it here in Colorado, around the country and around the world, as we work to Vote Yes on 105, Yes on 92 and www.justlabelit.org.
Love is such a rocket fuel. We are only here once. Be brave. It will be our legacy.
About a month ago, I was asked if I would represent Colorado’s Right to Know campaign to label genetically engineered foods in a televised debate against the opposition.
I wanted to say no. This work pulls me out of my comfort zone, I do things I am afraid to do. I have never done a televised debate, despite being invited to debate Monsanto a few years ago at a conference in Chicago.
When I agreed to that one, I packed the kids’ lunches at 4am that morning to catch a flight to Chicago. When I got to the conference, the organizer informed me that Monsanto would not be coming. “You have a room full of commodity farmers who grow Monsanto’s crops and an hour and a half to fill,” I was told.
I took a breath and walked into the room, “Welcome to the Lion’s Den” one of the farmers said, and so that hour and half began (the story is told here).
The second time I was asked to debate the opposition was when my friend, Bettina Siegel, launched her petition to get “pink slime” out of our hamburger meat. I was contacted by CNBC to debate the National Cattleman’s Association. I wanted to say no, I had worked straight through spring break, and we were spending the last few days with my parents in Houston. CNBC pressed, others, too, so I borrowed a jacket from my mom and went to the studio. Ten minutes before we were supposed to go live, the producer called, apologizing, saying that the other side wouldn’t appear.
The most recent invitation came this summer, when I was asked if I would debate the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) on labeling genetically engineered foods. I said yes, committed to the date, only to learn a few days before the actual event that the GMA would not come.
I was not surprised. Disappointed? Yes. There are people inside of companies inside of the GMA who truly want to do the right thing. These conversations are critical. Not showing up is no longer in the best interest of their members.
So when I was asked to represent the pro-labeling campaign in Colorado on a televised debate, I wanted to say no, knowing they’d pull another fast one, but I couldn’t. This work pulls me out of my comfort zone, I do things I am afraid to do. Love is more powerful than fear, so I said yes.
I am not paid by the campaign to do this. I do the work as a mother of four. I volunteer my time for organizations working on this issue at the state level, the national level and the global level. It is my life’s work.
I was to debate Don Shawcroft, the head of the Colorado Farm Bureau and a Colorado rancher. He would represent the anti-labeling side.
I am named after a farmer. She is my godmother. She lost her husband when she was in her 40s, then turned around and battled cancer in one of her children and then breast cancer herself. I don’t care what side of the food aisle you are on. Farmers have fed our country since its inception. Colorado farmers have fed our state for generations. You honor that. I was looking forward to the dialogue.
Our debate was scheduled for Wednesday, September 24 in Colorado. A Colorado mom debating a Colorado farmer on a Colorado state initiative.
It didn’t happen.
When the opposition learned that I would be representing the campaign, they put the farmer in the corner and flew in an industry spokesperson name Dana Bieber from Seattle.
Nobody puts farmers in the corner. I don’t care what side of the food aisle you are on. We wouldn’t be here without them. It was a bad decision.
Ms. Bieber is a pro. It was obvious. The work that she did as the Campaign Communications Director in Seattle last year and the work that she is now doing as the spokesperson for the anti-labeling campaign in Oregon is that of a professional. She disclosed who was funding her work in Washington state on a call made to thousands of voters: “Monsanto Company, DuPont Pioneer, Dow Agrosciences, LLC and Bayer Crop Science” and the Grocery Manufacturers Association.” You can listen here….
Here in Colorado, the anti-labeling opposition has been funded, so far, by the Grocery Manufacturers Association, Monsanto, Pepsi, Smuckers. A slightly different list, disclosed by campaign finance reports.
Colorado state law requires that only one issue is addressed per amendment title which means not everything for human consumption can be written into this bill.
A spokesperson from another state who does not vote here may not know that.
Is that perfect? No. The state law would have to be changed.
It is a reasonable starting point. Just as 35 bills around the country in 20 states are reasonable starting points. In the absence of any meaningful legislation coming out of D.C., states around the country are taking this initiative into their own hands. It’s how democracy works.
It’s not the first time we’ve seen this.
A great example of states taking the initiative on legislation is the fact that states are largely responsible for seat belt legislation. The first seat belt law was introduced in New York in 1984. States around the country followed. We still don’t have a mandatory, national seat belt law. It’s regulated at the state level.
What these state labeling initiatives are doing is putting pressure on food manufactures to join the 21st century and 64 countries around the world and label genetically engineered ingredients in their products. American food companies provide this information to families in other countries but hide it from families here.
The fastest answer would be through the marketplace, and the agitation at the state level is creating activation in the food industry.
We could be waiting years for mandatory national labeling. Consumers know that. Nobody is holding his or her breath on much of anything out of D.C.
We label if our milk is pasteurized and if orange juice comes from concentrate. We label allergen content, fat, protein and sugar content. American companies label genetically engineered content in the foods that they sell overseas, so that families can make an informed choice about the fact that corn now found in our food supply is regulated by the EPA as a pesticide (EPA source).
But for a spokesperson to claim to Colorado voters, “Let them eat chemicals!” before jumping on a flight back home? I appreciate the spokesperson actually flying in and the person who approved, funded and accommodated the last minute request, but they can pack that up and take it home with them. It’s backward looking policy that would not only set Colorado back 20 years but also our country.
U.S. trading partners label genetically engineered ingredients. The cost to our farmers and to our global trade is too great to continue to pretend that 20 year old policy is in the best interest of farmers, families and food companies.
Anti-labeling policy is only in the best interest of the chemical companies who would have to be accountable to their products if they were labeled, and industry-funded spokesmen defending them.
Labeling genetically engineered ingredients has not caused economic ruin in other countries, nor for our own U.S. food companies labeling these ingredients overseas. It has not driven up food prices, nor caused economic collapse for farmers. It has simply given citizens the ability to make an informed choice about what they are feeding their families.
It is not only insulting for American food companies to label genetically engineered ingredients (now regulated as pesticides by the EPA) on their products in other countries for families overseas, while hiding that information from American families, it is a violation of a fundamental human right.
“Let them eat pesticides…..?”
Not on our watch.
Patriotism begins with the plate. It is time for American food companies to label these ingredients here.
Today, at General Mills shareholder meeting, something remarkable happened. And if it doesn’t speak to the changing food landscape in the U.S., I don’t know what does.
Shareholders were set to vote on an initiative calling for the removal of genetically engineered ingredients from all General Mills’ products. Even though General Mills announced that they would be removing genetically engineered ingredients from Cheerios earlier this year, the measure did not look likely to pass.
All eyes were on the vote, though, especially in the aftermath of the announcement that General Mills was acquiring Annie’s Homegrown.
So what happened? The great granddaughter of the co-founder of General Mills spoke up.
“As a proud stockholder, I am concerned about our reputation as a company that uses genetically modified organisms,” Harriett Crosby told the annual meeting crowd.
“I think we can do better and improve our brand and the value of General Mills by eliminating GMOs from our products.”
Crosby cited one irrefutable truth about GMOs: General Mills already produces GMO-free versions of its products in Europe and parts of Asia and already labels them in 63 countries around the world.
So, Crosby asked, “Why not here?”
Why not here?
American food companies already label genetically engineered ingredients or make their products without them in Europe, Asia and 64 countries around the world. They are doing it for all of our key U.S. trading partners and the families that live in those countries, but they are hiding these ingredients from families in the United States.
More than 100 scientific and public health institutions around the world support GMO labeling to track potential allergic reactions. The United Nation and the World Health Organizations’ food standards group and the American Medical Association have called for mandatory safety testing – a standard that the U.S. currently fails to meet.
General Mills already labels these ingredients in their products that they sell overseas.
For the company to continue to take an anti-labeling position on this changing landscape of health and consumer demand, while holding the opposite position overseas, is not in the best interest of shareholders. It’s a double standard.
Anti-labeling initiatives could significantly hinder the company for years, as well as stifle the expansion of jobs and the economy in Minneapolis and the U.S., as other companies and our trading partners seize the opportunity to meet this change in consumer demand. The anti-labeling initiatives would directly impact a family’s ability to make an informed choice when it comes to feeding their loved ones. It would continue to keep American farmers in the dark, withholding from them the data and insight that labeling these ingredients would provide.
As Ms. Crosby said, General Mills is already required to produce GMO-free varieties of its products in Europe and parts of Asia….
They already label these ingredients around the world. Why not here?
Her call to action would ensure that General Mills meets the needs of the 21st century consumer, consumers looking for products that are “free-from” artificial ingredients, artificial dyes and GMOs. If General Mills’ recent acquisition of Annie’s is any indication, they already know what those changing needs are.
Ms. Crosby’s concern is being echoed around the country, with 35 bills introduced in 20 states, asking for genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled. By failing to address it, General Mills runs the risk of being remembered as an iconic brand from the 20th century that failed to meet the changing needs of the 21st century consumer.
It is a risk too great for the co-founder’s great granddaughter to take, so she spoke out.
The landscape of food is changing, and the company that moves first will capture the hearts of families around the country. They need look no further than Chipotle to see how meeting the needs of 21st century families can reward shareholders and spoonholders alike.
The announcement that General Mills would acquire Annie’s Homegrown sent the food world spinning.
There was an allergic reaction, and within hours of sharing the news, Annie’s Facebook page had over 9,000 comments.
To consumers, it was an emotional grenade.
As I dug into the announcement, the first email that I sent was to Annie herself, the mother who started the company 25 years ago. She quickly replied.
When Annie started the company, genetically engineered ingredients were not even in our food supply. She simply formulated a mac and cheese product for her kids that wasn’t loaded with junk.
Could she have anticipated this? Not at all.
John Foraker, Annie’s CEO, the dad of four responsible for overseeing the growth of the company and for taking it public in 2012 with one of my all time favorite ticker symbols, BNNY, also responded:
And in one swift motion, the landscape of food had changed.
No one could have anticipated food ingredients designed by chemical companies that have been genetically engineered to produce their own insecticides. Nor could the industry have anticipated this food awakening, driven by the escalating rates of diseases and conditions like cancer, autism and food allergies and other conditions impacting the health of the people that we love.
Food allergies in our children are forcing us to read labels, as quickly as cancer diagnoses are forcing the same. No one would choose to be standing in the aisles of the grocery store, holding the hand of a child with food allergies or autism or managing a parent’s cancer diagnosis, yet that is where so many of us find ourselves today. We are being forced to read labels to protect the health of our loved ones, whether we want to read them or not. And sales of organic foods are soaring, as consumers try to eat a little bit better, a little bit cleaner and opt out of artificial ingredients. The U.S. branded organic and natural foods industry’s sales have been growing at a 12 percent compound rate over the last 10 years.
And while big food companies like General Mills might have fought this for some time, they also aren’t stupid, and their job is to drive shareholder return. Sales of processed foods and conventional products that are pumped full of artificial growth hormones, artificial dyes and other artificial ingredients like GMOs are lackluster at best. The industry watches companies like Kellogg entrench and refuse to address this change in demand. What happens? Sales slump, and Kellogg is laying off 7% of their workforce.
It’s a slow death by artificial ingredients.
One look at the share price of Kroger or Chipotle tells the story of what happens to a company that expands into this ‘free from’ category: shareholders are rewarded.
Why wouldn’t a company want to enter this space in a meaningful way?
Change is hypocritical.
General Mills has been part of the anti-labeling brigade. Led by the Grocery Manufacturers Association, they have been a core member of the team of companies that have spent millions to keep consumers in the dark. When I spoke with their company recently, they were fascinated by what I had to say, then stopped and said, “But there is something on your bio that is a problem.” “What is it?” I asked. “It’s your affiliation with “Just Label It” campaign.
That is their problem, as taking the position that a consumer does not have the right to know how her food is made, despite the fact that we are told if milk is pasteurized or if orange juice comes from concentrate, is undemocratic. It’s a freedom enjoyed by 60% of the world’s population.
Consumers got on it, and General Mills was quick to reply with their position. They told consumers that we already have a way of knowing if GMOs are not in our products, and it’s called “USDA Organic.” That’s fine for consumers who can afford it, but what about everyone? For those that want to know if GMOs are used, there is no mandatory labeling system in place. Why label one and not the other? The very costs that they are arguing against, they are happily paying when they label their organic products.
So the outrage over this new marriage stems from the the fact that General Mills has fought to keep consumers from knowing what is in their products, while Annie’s has led with transparency.
The reaction that consumers are having to the announcement is the fear that General Mills wrangles Annie’s into submission. And while General Mills can operate Annie’s with an expansive economy of scale and get their price to manufacture down, it’s not all altruistic. General Mills also knows that people are willing to pay more for Annie’s products. It’s a way to diversify their portfolio, get better, higher margin products to market and increase Annie’s availability in the marketplace. It’s good for business. They also see the writing on the wall, and it doesn’t contain the letters “G-M-O.”
The fear is that Annie’s will fold, but this is where leadership and personal stories step in. Annie’s CEO, a dad of four who comes from a farming family, holds a degree is in agricultural economics and has a background in banking, will be a pivotal leader in the organization. He knows the supply chain and knows the demands of the financial world. He also knows what it is like to see someone that you love face serious health challenges. He knows that families around the country are experiencing these challenges every day.
And like the CEO of Stonyfield did when he expanded the brand and the reach of the yogurt company through its Danone partnership, Annie’s CEO found a partner to expand and capture economies of scale that the company couldn’t on its own. Stonyfield’s founder never backed down.
General Mills buying into the organic movement through the purchase of Annie’s provides distribution and access to capital.
Is consolidation the best answer? “These big food companies aren’t going to let anything else happen,” said one of the portfolio managers that I used to work with when I spoke with him today.
And right now, our food system is currently structured in a way that the costs of production for organic ingredients are disproportionately higher. It is structured this way at the federal level. It is not a level playing field for the organic industry. And when a company goes public, the way that Annie’s did in 2012, it is opening itself for an acquisition.
Does it mean that it will always be this way? That policy will always be this way? Not at all. Policy follows the money, and right now, the organic industry is growing while conventional is stagnant. The landscape of the food industry is changing at every level. Amazon is entering the retail space, online distribution companies are entering, too. Farmers market and community supported agriculture are taking off. Why? Because the grocery retail structure makes it hard for smaller brands to compete. They either have to sell out or buy in. It requires capital.
To hit the scale and scope of distribution that makes a product accessible and affordable to all Americans, companies have repeatedly sold themselves to a larger company: Stonyfield to Danone, White Wave to Dean Foods, Happy Family again to Danone. The list goes on.
Have these brands sold out? Or have the bigger brands bought into the organic movement? Stonyfield didn’t sell out. Happy Family didn’t either. Both companies were founded by people who have personally known how autism or cancer can impact a family.
Do I wish there were other ways for these companies to scale? And that the food industry had a level playing field for organic companies? Absolutely. There is nothing that I would rather have seen then Annie’s, White Wave, Hain Celestial and other organic brands become the iconic brands of the 21st century. Our generation’s iterations of Kraft, General Mills and Pepsi.
Perhaps this is the first iteration towards that. But right now the cost structure is prohibitive. We haven’t financed a healthy food system at the federal level. If farmers want to grow organic crops, they lose the crop insurance protection programs, they lose subsidies and they lose marketing support. Is that financially viable?
The food movement is not going away. Demand for food that is ‘free from’ artificial ingredients like food dyes, GMOs, high fructose corn syrup and other ingredients is not a fad, because cancer, autism and food allergies are not fads. We are seeing a fundamental shift in the way that Americans buy food, because we are sick.
General Mills obviously recognizes that. They are hedging with this acquisition, balancing their portfolio. The key is to not compromise the integrity of the Annie’s brand in the process. Creative destruction is an economic term trumpeted by a man named Joseph Schumpeter. And change, in these early stages, often looks like hypocrisy. It often looks destructive. The question becomes: what is the long term objective here? Is it really to destroy a brand? No, it’s to capture its market share, its margins and expand into the category.
So how could this play out?
A look back at other historic acquisitions in the food industry gives us a feel for how this could play out, because if the share prices of White Wave and other organic companies are any indication today, this consolidation stage will continue.
In 1985, Philip Morris Cos. became a holding company and the parent of Philip Morris Inc. and bought General Foods. The acquisition of Kraft Foods came in 1988. In 2001, Kraft Foods spun out of Phillip Morris and launched an IPO for 11.1% of the company that raked in $8.7 billion, making it the 2nd largest IPO in American history at the time
If General Mills decides to grow the Annie’s brand and then spin it out again in a few years time, like Philip Morris did with Kraft or like Dean Foods did with White Wave, they would drive enormous shareholder value if they stay true to the brand.
If they don’t, there are plenty of examples of fallout in the food industry. From Kellogg’s, to the companies that made pink slime to those that put yoga mat material in their buns. Shareholders suffer if companies don’t response to the 21st century online consumer.
We live in a day and time where online bullying can take many forms. At the end of the day, no one misses a beat, and companies that think they can pull a fast one on the consumer are quickly proven wrong.
Refinance Food
We have financed a food system that gives food companies the incentive to use the cheaper ingredients. The cost of producing organic ingredients is disproportionately higher than producing conventional, genetically engineered crops. On top of that, farmers that choose to grow organic crops don’t get the crop insurance programs and marketing support programs. In other words, their entire cost of production is higher. That hammers all of us. It hammers food companies trying to do the right thing.
And as much as any of us want to romanticize food, right now, this is our current capitalist structure, and until we refinance the food system, this won’t be the first of these acquisitions.
What if the cost of production were the same? What if farmers, regardless of what they choose to plant on their farms, could receive crop insurance programs and marketing support? What if food companies, regardless of what they choose to use in their products, had to label their ingredients as genetically engineered or not.
Right now, there is economic discrimination. Costs are disproportionately higher for those who want organic food, from the farmers growing it to the food companies using it to the families eating it.
Does anyone want it this way? Does General Mills? Do our farmers? Do our families?
But we weren’t given a choice.
Right now, our taxpayer resources are used to support the food system dependent on GMOs and chemicals. What if at the voting booth, we got to check a box?
Do you want your taxpayer resources to support the food system? And if yes, which would you rather see support given to farmers growing organic ingredients? To food companies using them?
How do we want our tax dollars to work in the food system?
What would General Mills choose if price weren’t an issue? If there were an economic equilibrium, which ingredients would General Mills choose? Genetically engineered or organic? And why haven’t we structured our food system with this kind of pricing parity?
Right now, no one has been given the choice because of the financial structure executed at the federal level through the crop subsidy programs, the crop insurance programs and the marketing support programs. They only go one way.
Is this acquisition a symptom of that unhealthy financial structure?
Under terms of the agreement, General Mills will acquire Annie’s for $46.00 per share in cash. The proposed transaction has an aggregate value of approximately $820 million.
It’s not a hostile takeover. Annie’s entered into it as a way to grow to reach more consumers, just like Stonyfield did with Danone or White Wave did with Dean Foods.
The question is whose compass is stronger? What will consumers do to send the message to General Mills that being part of the anti-labeling campaign is detrimental to shareholders?
Annie’s has the wind at its back. General Mills know that. Consumers want “free from” food. Food that is “free from” artificial ingredients, artificial dyes, growth hormones and genetically engineered ingredients. One look at the share price of Chipotle tells that story.
As more and more companies enter the organic space, either through new products or through acquisitions, it again begs the question: is the Grocery Manufacturers Association a relic of the 20th century? If this organization is not working to meet the needs of its member companies, should it still exist in its current form? Or should a new organization, let’s call it the Food Production Association, be formed to meet the evolving needs of these brands in the 21st century?
Change at its very core begins with hypocrisy.
If General Mills chooses to make a strategic shift and follow Annie’s into an industry with a 12% compound annual growth rate, delivering a portfolio increasing full of “free from” foods, shareholders will be rewarded. The rates of cancer, autism, food allergies and other conditions aren’t declining. This food awakening isn’t a fad.
Annie’s has the potential to be a powerful compass for General Mills. If the companies are serious about their commitment to the 21st century consumer and their shareholders, they should step away from the Grocery Manufacturers Association’s anti-labeling campaign and join the consumer where she stands: in the grocery store aisles, reading food labels while holding the hand of a loved one with allergies, autism, EoE, cancer, diabetes or any one of the conditions impacting our families today and deliver exactly what she wants: food that is “free from” artificial ingredients and information about how she can protect the health of her family.
General Mills is already labeling genetically engineered ingredients in the products that they sell overseas, or they’re not using them altogether.
It’s up to them if they continue to operate with a 20th century mentality or if they will move into the 21st century with the consumer and Annie’s as a compass.
Kellogg has a story to tell. Chipotle does, too.
It’s up to General Mills which one will be theirs. And if their shareholders are paying attention, the writing is on the wall, and it doesn’t contain the letters “G-M-O.”
For the first time last night, I told my parents about the threats that I have received in this work.
It’s not a conversation that I’ve ever wanted to bring up with them, because a mother’s desire to protect her child doesn’t stop when she becomes a grandmother.
Mom’s face drew in as I spoke.
I started at the beginning, with the threats that I had received in the first years of the work, the defamation that I endured and the meeting with an allergist that gave me the courage to move on. He had testified in FDA subcommittee meetings. His face was as white as a ghost when I shared what had happened to me. “You don’t want to mess with this,” he said. Fear came out of his every pore. How could I not tell this story?
As we left his office that day, turning down the hallway to the elevators that led to the lobby of the children’s hospital in which he worked, there were children with cancer everywhere. They were being drawn in little red wagons with rods attached for their IV drips. Like little boats in an ocean. How could I not tell this story? I have to tell this story, I thought, so on I went. Never once, in the nine years since, forgetting the look on that doctor’s face. It was as if he had seen a ghost.
The defamation continued, but so did the downward spiral of the health of one of our boys, so I continued on, like a soldier or a marathon runner, one foot in front of the other, each day as it came, not knowing where the slander would come from next. In 2007, he was hospitalized, and my commitment to the work began at a level that was deeper than anything I had ever known.
Within a year, I was interviewed by a New York Times food writer who said, “You are their worst nightmare.” And the defamation began in earnest when Random House announced that I would be writing a book. Accusations flew from everywhere. I was a “PR whore”, in it for the celebrity, why would anyone listen to a mother?
My mail was tampered with. What were they looking for?
I had earned a full scholarship to business school and graduated as the top woman in my class before working on a team that managed billions in assets as an equity analyst. Just because someone hadn’t bothered to learn my background didn’t mean that it didn’t exist. Every case study in business school, every exam and time spent managing the a fund for the endowment committee still held. I’d done the work. Let them talk .
And then came the threats from Kraft and Burger King. I remember the day I learned of them, sitting in the office of a friend. It was in July 2010. I stared across at him, “They know who I am,” I said. He almost laughed. “Yes, they know who you are.”
Terrified didn’t even begin to describe the feeling.
A year later, I delivered a TEDx talk that sent a scientist working at an ag school funded by Monsanto into orbit. And the stalking, defamation and slander continued.
As I told my parents about all of it, I told them about what happens on social media, how I show the children the bullying and use it as a lesson. “Do I believe what these anonymous people say about me? People that may not even be using their real names? People who won’t disclose their background or who funds their work? Or do I believe what I know to be true about the work that I have done, and that for my entire life, I have done the work? As an analyst that covered the food industry, as a business school student and at everything I have ever thrown myself into?”
It’s not even a question.
I told my parents about the Arctic seed vault, the Svalbard Global Seed Vault, on a remote island in the Arctic Circle, that received inaugural shipments of 100 million seeds that originated in over 100 countries, and how it is there to protect seed diversity perhaps as a hedge against genetically engineered foods and the monoculture of soy and corn that it has produced, “with the deposits ranging from unique varieties of major African and Asian food staples such as maize, rice, wheat, cowpea, and sorghum to European and South American varieties of eggplant, lettuce, barley, and potato, the first deposits into the seed vault represent the most comprehensive and diverse collection of food crop seeds being held anywhere in the world.”
“Scary,” was all Mom could say. Here eyes were locked on me. I don’t know if she was talking about what had happened to me or the seed vault.
“Don’t you worry that these stalkers are doing anything they can for attention?” She was talking about me.
I paused, looking her in the eyes but feeling her in my heart.
“Mom, I couldn’t not do this. I learned too much, from scientists who were threatened, about studies that weren’t being done, about what countries around the world were doing to protect children. There was something in that doctor’s eyes back in the Children’s Hospital that first year that showed me what would happen if I turned my back. If I had done nothing, this would have become a cancer in me….
I found love, courage and faith to move through it.”
My grandfather had been a preacher, Mom’s dad, and for some reason in that moment, I thought about the quote from Martin Luther King, Jr.: “Take the first step in faith. You don’t have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step.”
I do this work because I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation…where they will have the right to know what is in the food that they are eating as children around the world do.
In order for that to happen, we must have the faith, courage and love to continue on.
This is written in memory of Mark Pittman, an investigative reporter at Bloomberg News, that I met with in 2009.
Demand for organic is growing like crazy in the U.S. with 45 % of shoppers actively looking to purchase it.
It’s happening across age groups (provided you are under the age of 65) and across income levels. A recent poll said that 42% of people with incomes of less than $30,000 are actively seeking organic food.
And it’s not just stopping at our borders. In the UK, there is increasing demand, too. Retailers are seeing the benefit, with some experiencing growth in demand for organics above 10%. The dairy category is seeing the fastest growth in grocery, but demand for health and beauty products, textiles, clothes and more are seeing huge increases, too.
People don’t want products laced with chemicals, artificial growth hormones and other ingredients for which no long-term human health and safety data exists.
The Soil Association in the UK released this data below. It’s worth the read. This isn’t a “trend” or a “fad”. It’s a food awakening and a shift that is happening as consumers search out and demand food that is free from junk, artificial additives and GMOs.
Stay tuned, as it’s just getting started, and many forecast that “non GMO” could be the new “no trans fat.”
When you know better, you do better.
Steady growth
Sales of organic products in the UK grew by 2.8% in 2013
The UK organic market is now worth £1.79billion in sales
The rate of growth was above the annual inflation rate of 2%
Growth has been particularly strong in the dairy sector (+4.4%): organic milk sales grew by 3.4% and yoghurt sales by 7%
Sales of organic vegetables increased by 3.4%, while meat, fish and poultry sales grew by 2.2%
Independent retailers
Sales through independent retailers increased by 6.9% to nearly £10million a week – their highest level since 2008
Sales through box-schemes, independent online shops and other home-delivery outlets increased by 11%
Multiple retailers
Supermarket sales grew by 1.2% – the first increase since 2009*
The strongest growth was seen by Ocado (+10.4%) and Waitrose (+6.5%). Sainsbury’s is the UK’s biggest organic retailer, with sales of its own-label organic range up 7%
Catering
Catering and restaurant sales rose by 10%, thanks to the success of the Soil Association’s Food for Life Catering Mark and demand from high-street chains, such as McDonald’s and Pret A Manger, for organic milk, tea and coffee
Health and beauty
Sales of organic health and beauty products grew by 17% in 2013 to £37.2 million
The number of Soil Association symbol holders increased by 12.5% to 135
Textiles
The UK’s leading certifier of organic products to Global Organic Textiles Standards (GOTS), saw the turnover of its 73 textile symbol holders increase by 36% in 2013
Much of this growth was export-led, but the UK market for organic cotton is estimated to have grown by around 10%
Farming
Defra reports that producer and livestock numbers and the UK’s organic land area decreased in the year to December 2012 – the most recent period for which UK-wide data are available
In July 2013 the UK’s organic land area was reported to be 606,000 hectares (based on Defra data to the end of 2012)
The area of land under organic management is greater than the combined areas of Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire, and constitutes 3.5% of the agricultural land area
Numbers of organic producers and processors fell by 6.3% to 6,487
Financial comparisons show that organic farm businesses were more stable and slightly more profitable than their comparable non-organic counterparts between 2006 and 2012.
Demand for organic is growing like crazy in the U.S. with 45 % of shoppers actively looking to purchase it.
It’s happening across age groups (provided you are under the age of 65) and across income levels. A recent poll said that 42% of people with incomes of less than $30,000 are actively seeking organic food.
And it’s not just stopping at our borders. In the UK, there is increasing demand, too. Retailers are seeing the benefit, with some experiencing growth in demand for organics above 10%. The dairy category is seeing the fastest growth in grocery, but demand for health and beauty products, textiles, clothes and more are seeing huge increases, too.
People don’t want products laced with chemicals, artificial growth hormones and other ingredients for which no long-term human health and safety data exists.
The Soil Association in the UK released this data below. It’s worth the read. This isn’t a “trend” or a “fad”. It’s a food awakening and a shift that is happening as consumers search out and demand food that is free from junk, artificial additives and GMOs.
Stay tuned, as it’s just getting started, and many forecast that “non GMO” could be the new “no trans fat.”
When you know better, you do better.
Steady growth
Sales of organic products in the UK grew by 2.8% in 2013
The UK organic market is now worth £1.79billion in sales
The rate of growth was above the annual inflation rate of 2%
Growth has been particularly strong in the dairy sector (+4.4%): organic milk sales grew by 3.4% and yoghurt sales by 7%
Sales of organic vegetables increased by 3.4%, while meat, fish and poultry sales grew by 2.2%
Independent retailers
Sales through independent retailers increased by 6.9% to nearly £10million a week – their highest level since 2008
Sales through box-schemes, independent online shops and other home-delivery outlets increased by 11%
Multiple retailers
Supermarket sales grew by 1.2% – the first increase since 2009*
The strongest growth was seen by Ocado (+10.4%) and Waitrose (+6.5%). Sainsbury’s is the UK’s biggest organic retailer, with sales of its own-label organic range up 7%
Catering
Catering and restaurant sales rose by 10%, thanks to the success of the Soil Association’s Food for Life Catering Mark and demand from high-street chains, such as McDonald’s and Pret A Manger, for organic milk, tea and coffee
Health and beauty
Sales of organic health and beauty products grew by 17% in 2013 to £37.2 million
The number of Soil Association symbol holders increased by 12.5% to 135
Textiles
The UK’s leading certifier of organic products to Global Organic Textiles Standards (GOTS), saw the turnover of its 73 textile symbol holders increase by 36% in 2013
Much of this growth was export-led, but the UK market for organic cotton is estimated to have grown by around 10%
Farming
Defra reports that producer and livestock numbers and the UK’s organic land area decreased in the year to December 2012 – the most recent period for which UK-wide data are available
In July 2013 the UK’s organic land area was reported to be 606,000 hectares (based on Defra data to the end of 2012)
The area of land under organic management is greater than the combined areas of Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire, and constitutes 3.5% of the agricultural land area
Numbers of organic producers and processors fell by 6.3% to 6,487
Financial comparisons show that organic farm businesses were more stable and slightly more profitable than their comparable non-organic counterparts between 2006 and 2012.
The reason that I do what I do is because I believe that clean and safe food should be affordable to all families.
This isn’t lifestyles of the rich and famous or some hippie thing. It is a fundamental human rights issue. Kroger gets it. Seventy percent of their shoppers are choosing organic or natural every time they enter the store. Wal Mart gets it: they are launching a private label organic line. Annie’s gets it, WhiteWave, Chipotle: just check out their share prices. They know that this shift in consumer demand is not a fad. It is not a trend. Cancer, autism, life threatening food allergies, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s are not fads or trends either. These conditions don’t care if we are Republican or Democrat or where we sit on the socioeconomic ladder. When these conditions and diseases hit our families, our hearts hurt the same way.
And when they hit, more and more families are cleaning out their pantries. Doctors at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center call it “the doorknob syndrome.” A patient has been diagnosed, is sitting in their office, hearing about the procedures and treatments that are going to be done, and as they turn to leave, with their hands on the doorknob, they turn back into the office, toward the doctor and ask: “Is there something I could be doing differently with my diet?”
The cancer doctors that have shared these stories with me call is “the doorknob syndrome” because of how often they have seen it. “We need to upstream this information, they also say.” Yes, we do.
I recently received this email from a dad of three who lost his health and then got it back. This is why I do what I do, as it has everything to do with how our families hold together and our country.
“Hello Robyn, It feels a bit strange for me to call you Robyn since we have never met however I have seen quite a lot of you in my living room so there is a familiarity there. My name is Joe and I am 52 years old. I have been a medic for the USNR, NYC*EMS, and a Volunteer Ambulance Corps in Commack Long Island. I have also been a computer geek since High School and an advertising sales representative. I play the guitar, piano and Bass and write music. I am a man of faith and hope to have my Pastoral Credentials shortly.
Most importantly I am a husband of 25 years to the most fantastic woman God ever blessed this earth with and together we have three fantastic kids. Our house even had a white picket fence on it at one point. Much of this picture changed drastically in 2009. My right knee was giving me problems. Not too much of a shock old high school football injury, which over the years I had had about seven prior surgeries on. I had been told that eventually I will need a new one, so when I was getting the pain I pretty much knew I had torn a cartilage again and needed a snip and sew. I was living in PA and my old knees surgeon was no longer practicing so I choose a new physician.
My new doctor, not knowing all the particulars of my knee, and the type of surgeon he is, didn’t jump right to the knife but had me go for some blood work and tests. These turned into more blood work and tests and then re-testing. I was frustrated! I’m out of work on short term disability, waiting for a half hour knee surgery that I have had three times before, because he is not happy with my blood work? It didn’t make sense. But I trusted him, and after the third set of blood tests I received a call from him. This call came directly from the Doctor, not his PA or a nurse, the doctor, this is generally not good. It turned out that one of my blood tests showed positive for Lupus. It turned out that I did not have Lupus, but after my knee surgery I was having a lot of shoulder pain, which everyone was attributing to my using the crutches and cane. I was assured that after I was off the crutches the pain would subside. But it actually became worse, it got to a point where I could not lift my hands over my head. I began to have lower back pain, pain in my hands a feet, my hips and was taking Ibuprophen and other NSAIDS like they were M&M’s.
This lead down a rather long road of further testing, steroid’s and three rheumatologists. I was diagnosed with Ankylosing spondylitis, with Fibromyalgia. There is no cure for AS and although there are quite a few drugs to treat it none of them worked for me. My Rheumatologist has tried all of the following in conjunction with pain medications and prednisone (at my highest I was taking 22mg a day): 1. Methotrexate 2. Remacaid 3. Humira 4. Voltaren 5. Celebrex 6. Cimbalta 7. Embrel
It got to a point where one morning standing in my kitchen dressed and ready for work my wife Mary looked at me and asked; “If a child jumped out in front of the car would you be able to react fast enough to avoid hitting that child?”. It was then I realized that I was no longer safe and needed to stop working. My condition worsened, and I developed side effects to some of the medications that were almost worse than the disease itself. At my worst point this was my daily medication regimine: • Prednisone 22mg • Celebrex • Remicaid (once a month) • Cimbalta 60mg • Oxycodone 7.5-325 (4x a day) or Hydrocodon 7.5 750 (4 x per day) • Tradzodone 50mg or Zolpidem Tartrate 10mg or Cyclobenzaprine 5mg (to help me sleep) • Fentanyl 100 MCG/Hour time release • leflunomide 10mg • Folic Acid 400mcg • Vitamin D3 3000iu I was a walking zombie and in truth don’t remember a whole lot from that time frame.
Mary decided that we needed to make a change in our diet. All the drugs I was on were so caustic and taxing my liver that she was going to get rid of everything she could to make it easier for my system. Now Mary was a coupon queen. She was one of those people that would go to the store, buy a cart full of stuff and they would owe her money. She began by taking everything that was highly processed out of my diet. The effect was very noticeable, I was able to sleep and stopped taking the medications for sleep. She then went further and removing all high fructose corn syrup, and MSG and went almost completely organic. The net effect is I am off ALL but one of my medications. I still take prednisone but I am down to 9mg per day. We have since gone all non-processed and organic.
We drink grass fed non-hormone raw milk, get our eggs locally (I am even thinking about raising my own chickens). We purchase our beef a half a cow at a time and it is pasture raised grass fed.
Our prayer life and faith have also played a huge roll. I am virtually pain free, have not used a cane in over a year and am selling my powered wheel chair. We have lost over 80 pounds collectively while eating and drinking full fat healthy foods. When I visited my regular doctor and she noticed the weight loss she asked what I was doing so I told her eating whole fat milk, cream half and half and gone non-processed etc. She scheduled a cholesterol blood work. My cholesterol was not only well within the norms it was lower than the previous test!
Robyn, you are one of the people that Mary found when she started her research on how to better take care of me. You are making a huge difference, my family has their Dad back and I can actually function and hope to one day reenter the work force.
Never stop, never give in. You are spot on and making a difference! Have a blessed day!”
Fifteen years ago, I covered Target as an equity analyst. I learned the business model.
I’ve learned the business model as a mom. So when someone inside of Target’s headquarters reached out, I responded.
She had just lost her dad to cancer and wasn’t sure where she wanted to go. How could she be? She had lost him too soon to an aggressive form of the disease, and she wanted to channel all of that into doing something.
We talked about options and what it would mean to do something on the inside of Target. “To truly make a change, stay inside,” I told her. It is where she could have a tremendous impact.
A few months later, we connected again. “I’m staying,” she said. “Would you come out and speak at our headquarters if we can make something happen?”
“Absolutely,” I said, but also shared that it may not be easy.
I’d been at this long enough and been told by people on the inside of different companies how hard it could be to start the dialogue. I understood. The information was disruptive, but my response was always the same: “I won’t let you down.”
So we developed the event and ways to communicate the invitation that did not threaten but invited.
I arrived into Minneapolis in time for a few meetings and walked the city to get a feel for it and the people that live there. It was absolutely beautiful, in only a way that a city that is buried under snow for half the year can be when the sunshine descends on it. It felt like the entire town was outside.
As I prepared for the presentation, I reviewed their recent earnings reports, press releases and other documents. No one wants to be part of the problem, but change takes courage. It is a lot like learning to ride a bike. You need support because it can be a bit scary at first, but once you get it, it is liberating.
At 11am, we were in the building. It felt like a college campus, a palpable energy, young team members everywhere, buzzing in the halls, meeting over coffee. Young. It was young.
Just before noon, our room began to fill. There is something so deeply respectful about people from the mid west, and it permeated the space. It was quiet, they knew that this was an area that has been controversial. The seats filled quietly, then the introductions began, and I spoke.
I covered Target when I was an equity analyst, I shopped at Target for diapers and baby supplies as a young mom. It was as much a part of my story as any company. To be there meant a lot.
I spoke for 45 minutes. They were quiet, leaning in. I could feel it. There is a responsibility in this work that is so real that every time I am in front of an audience, I feel the enormity of it. So many were moms, I could feel that, too, and I could understand the heartache of learning something after the fact. If American companies had formulated their products differently for moms, pregnant moms, families in other countries—without genetically engineered ingredients, artificial growth hormones or artificial dyes—why had they dumped that stuff into our food here?
Why? It hung in the air. You have to land that carefully, as it can break your heart.
So I spoke about the opportunity in front of all of us, to build a better food system, one that meets the needs of 21st century families, one that instead of using our taxpayer resources to build a food system dependent on chemicals, builds a food system for all of us, as we take on diabetes, obesity, cancer, food allergies and autism for the people that we love.
“There is nothing more patriotic that we could be doing,” I said. This is a fundamental human right, to be able to keep our families safe, especially given that food companies are already formulating their products without artificial ingredients for families in other countries. We are not asking them to reinvent the wheel, simply to place the same value on the lives of our families that they have already placed on the lives of families in other countries.”
Target has already committed to removing genetically engineered ingredients from their private label, Simply Balanced, by the end of 2014.
“We can do this,” I said. “The opportunity in front of us is enormous. The stock market is rewarding companies leading on this issue. One look at the share prices of Chipotle, White Wave or Kroger tells you what is happening, as these companies embrace a 21st century food system, one that is free from all of the junk.”
And I looked up. In the back of the room, a man, slowly, as if in a total daze, wiped his eyes. One side, then the other. And as I was finishing, he gently got up to leave, slipping out just before the end.
That is the moment I will remember from today. Because it doesn’t matter who we are or where we work, when someone we love is hurt by cancer, allergies or any of these diseases or conditions, our hearts hurt the same way. It is that force, that love, that will propel us to change this system, one family, one company, one product at a time.