Why Organic Foods are Better

Fred Liers PhDThere are just a few days remaining before the November 6th election that in California will decide the fate of Proposition 37, the GMO labeling act. With all the recent talk of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in foods, you might wonder where organic foods fit into the picture. GMO labeling laws will protect and enforce our right to know what is in our food in terms of GMOs only.

We should certainly be pleased about this possibility because for 18 years (since 1994) there has been no serious talk about labeling GMOs in the US. The agribusiness corporations ran amok unleashing their untested “products” and assumed labeling laws would never pass.

This is all about to change. Because whether or not Proposition 37 passes, it appears a critical mass of consumers have become well enough educated about the dangers of GMOs that they will eventually be on their way out. Consumers just don’t want GMOs.

Why Eat Organic?

Meanwhile, it makes me wonder about our organic standards that have become so weakened in recent years. That is, I wonder why there was never any talk about labeling requirements for other dangerous toxins, like pesticides. Because really, if we have a right to know what is in (or on) our foods, then shouldn’t we be told what pesticides, herbicides, etc. were used in growing foods or produce we consume?

Certainly, studies have shown that GMOs are incredibly dangerous in especially insidious ways far surpassing the dangers created by typical levels of pesticides and herbicides on fruits, vegetables, and grains.

In addition, for many individuals, the labeling of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals would matter less because they (like myself) might consume a diet of foods predominantly grown organically, locally, or homegrown. And organic foods aren’t supposed to involve any pesticides, herbicides, synthetic fertilizers, and other manmade chemical-based inputs, or GMOs.

In theory, if you consume a diet that is all organic, then you need not worry too much about the effects of any of those dangerous substances on one’s personal health. However, that is just one of many reasons to support organic agriculture. Other reasons include concern for public health, environmental health, and of course the desire to avoid dangerous effects GMOs. Here are a few reasons (in no particular order) to support organic agriculture:

 Minimize toxic exposures. The use of pesticides, herbicides, and other chemical inputs  invites toxic exposures. While this starts on the farm, it ends up on your plate and in your body. Our bodies must already must deal with daily toxicity due to polluted air and water, routine chemical and heavy metal exposures, etc. Our exposures to environmental toxins are bad enough without the additional burden of agrichemicals in foods.

Organic agriculture is one of the best ways to keep the food supply clean and to minimize toxic exposure from the fields to the table. In addition, it helps keep farm workers healthier, because they are the most vulnerable to toxic exposures where chemicals are sprayed. For them, it is an occupational hazard that can be entirely avoided by sustainable, organic production methods.

GMOs represent major toxic exposures in their own right. Not only are GMO crops the most heavily sprayed (after all they intended to be sprayed), but also certain GMO crops produce their own pesticides that are harmful to humans. For example, there is evidence to show that GMO corn (which is engineered to produce the toxin Bacillus thuringiensis) transfers the pesticide manufacturing genes into humans, who then create this toxin in their digestive tracts.

 Eliminate free-radical effects. Agricultural chemicals poison us partly by exerting adverse free-radical damage in our tissues. This leads to cascades that overwhelm our free radical defenses, especially if we are not optimally nourished with extra antioxidants. This leads to premature aging, low energy, poor quality of life, and a wide range of health conditions related to our inability to quench free radicals with adequate antioxidant defenses.

As for GMO crops, high levels of chemicals on these crops make them especially dangerous to consume from the perspective of free-radical damage. However, GMOs also exert powerful inflammatory effects in humans (especially in the digestive tract) that points to high levels of free-radical activity. Consuming GMOs essentially leads to increased free-radical activity in the body. The negative consequences can manifest as allergies, premature aging, and degenerative diseases of every type, including cancer.

Because GMOs are never found in nature, our bodies cannot be expected to process them as it would natural foods. This is why GMOs are often called “Frankenfoods.” In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the scientist Victor Frankenstein created his monster with good intentions, but his project ultimately backfired in a tragic way. GMOs are a similar failure of science. In the case of GMOs, millions of people are adversely affected with negative health consequences.

 Protect water and air quality. When large quantities of toxic inputs are used in agriculture, as they are today in the US, the air and the water supply become tainted. This creates mass poisoning among populations, especially in farming areas and areas subject to drift. However, water and air can travel long distances resulting in toxins found miles away from original sources. This is how even city dwellers become exposed to harmful levels of agrichemicals.

GMO crops are especially problematic because they are intended to be treated heavily with chemical inputs that harm the environment. Organic agriculture poisons neither air nor water and indeed can protect the quality of those resources.

 Preserve soil integrity. Just like air and water, the soil is poisoned by chemical inputs. This destroys the soil’s delicate balance of microorganisms, kills animals, and ensures long-term toxicity of the soil and the crops grown in it. The effects can last for many generations. Supporting organic farming methods means supporting soil health.

 Protect our children. Organic farming methods do not just protect our health, but also the health of children and future generations. it is well known that children are more vulnerable to pesticides (for example) because of their smaller size, faster metabolisms, and rapid growth. Like everyone else, children deserve healthy food and a healthy environment so they can thrive and live well.

It is especially notable that one of the unintended consequences of both so-called ‘conventional’ and genetically modified crops is that they require ever greater amounts of chemical inputs in order to deal with declining yields (e.g., due to increased insect resistance and other factors). This leads to increased spraying and greater poisoning of the land and people. Typically, farmers then shift to using a different pesticide and the cycle begins again.

One example is that reduced effectiveness of glyphosate (RoundUp) on GMO crops (engineered to resist it) has led to massive quantities of it being sprayed. Now there are plans to switch to using the chemical 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) on GMO crops. 2,4-D was one of the major ingredients used in Agent Orange (a defoliant widely used in the Vietnam war) that has hugely toxic effects on humans. It has been written that these are not actually “unintended” consequences, as the agrichemical companies find this pattern of increased use very profitable.

 Protect wildlife, domestic animals, and native plant species. Animals share our environment. If our environment is poisoned, then so is theirs. Wild animals usually have enough problems trying to stay alive (and off the endangered species list). Domesticated animals also share our environment. The more toxic they become, the more we must deal with it in our lives. If they are sick, susceptible to disease, and overloaded with poisons, then those quickly become our problems, too. Organic agriculture not only produces a healthier environment, but it also encourages more humane ways of treating people, animals, and the planet.

GMO crops present a new problem: genetic contamination of non-GMO plant species. This is not only GMO “pollution” of the environment, but its effects are irreversible. GMO contamination of natural crops reduces biodiversity, which is important for the health of ecosystems, and possibly critical when monoculture crops fail. Such contamination is also problematic when it introduces toxin-producing genes into plant populations.

 Avoid adverse hormonal (xenoestrogenic/androgenic) effects. Exposure to agricultural chemicals produces negative hormonal effects in humans and animals. Wherever these chemicals travel, whether into the air, soil, water, oceans, they enter the bodies of living organisms where they cause havoc with hormones, and create conditions of disease.

 Consume tastier foods. Organic foods just taste better. This is partly due to the fact that they contain more nutrients (vitamins, minerals) than conventional foods. Herbicides such as glyphosate actually inhibit uptake of minerals into plants, thereby making them less nutritious. (Depriving plants of minerals is actually how this herbicide works, and GMO crops “resistant” to it remain vulnerable to inhibited mineral uptake, making them less healthy to consume.)

 Consume high-quality foods (more minerals and other nutrients). Beyond the issue of taste is the fact that organic foods not only contain more nutrients, but lack the chemical residues (both inside and outside their tissues) that make them poisonous to consume. So, if you eat organic foods, you gain greater nutrition and avoid the chemicals that poison you, reduce your health, contribute to disease, and slowly kill your body.

GMO crops are dangerous because they either resist heavy applications of chemicals, or actually produce their own ‘internal’ pesticides. GMO crops therefore encourage the overuse of chemicals, which increases residues in foods.

As noted, certain GMO crops  produce internal pesticides. There is evidence that these GMOs implant genetic material in the human digestive tract, where they produce the toxins (e.g., Bt-toxin) that poison us from the inside-out. This is the ultimate poison because toxins are manufactured inside your body and create adverse health effects. When this happens (and it’s probably occurring in many people), it is important to detoxify on a regular basis, as well as be sure to consume high levels of antioxidants in order to counteract all the negative effects of GMOs on your body.

– Conserve energy. Chemical inputs used in conventional agriculture are expensive, especially in terms of energy usage. For example, it takes a lot of energy to fuel planes and other machinery to spray pesticides and herbicides. Organic farming uses less energy thereby leaving a smaller carbon footprint.

 Support small business. Conventional agriculture favors agribusiness and large-scale corporate farms. Organic agriculture is good for everyone and also supports smaller scale family farms.

– Support a caring network. Corporate agriculture and corporate-style farms are mostly about profits. That wouldn’t be so bad if they cared enough not to grow GMOs, spray far too many chemicals, and basically poison the food supply. On the other hand, organic farmers tend to care about the people and the land, and love what they do. Organic farming is good business because it is sustainable. It supports healthy living and a high quality of life now and for future generations. In fact, it is the way of the future.

 ‘Vote’ for chemical-free (and non-GMO) agriculture. Organic farming is all about creating greater health for ourselves and our families. However, at this time, support for organic agriculture also represents for a vote for sustainability. That is, it represents a ‘no’ vote against toxic chemicals, polluted air, water, and soil, as well as GMO contamination of natural crops.

These are just a few reasons to support organic agriculture. There are many other reasons, and all considered together, organic farming is the only way to extricate ourselves from the current system that poisons us and the earth, and creates disease.

Meanwhile, you can expect the agribusiness corporations to go down fighting. Their attempts to smear organic farming show up in fake studies, such as the recent review article from Stanford University. The actual data do not support the study’s conclusion that organics are no better than conventional foods. Moreover, the study was funded by industry groups.

The best way to support organic farming on a daily basis is to consume organic foods, as well as foods not produced by the industrial-chemical-agriculture complex. That is, foods grown organically, locally, and homegrown.

My Experience

I have been eating organic foods since 1985. Shortly after starting to eat these foods, I noticed I felt healthier. Then over the course of a decade, I steadily increased my consumption until it was nearly 100% organic. I now consume a diet primarily of organic, local (non-sprayed, non-GMO), and homegrown foods (often from the garden).

My mother played a major role in my ‘conversion’ to organic foods. During the early 1980s, she became chemically sensitive, as well as highly sensitive to many foods. It was at this time that our family began searching for foods that would heal her rather than leave her sick.

In addition to avoiding chemicals, it was her strict adherence to a diet of organic foods (mostly vegetarian) that had a major impact on her state of health. She became well. Moreover, she stayed well as long as she ate organic foods. She continues to consume an extremely pure diet of organic and garden-fresh foods.

When I saw how much her health improved, I realized that all of us (whether or not we are sick or display symptoms of toxicity) must process chemical toxins in our foods. Some of us do better than others at detoxifying such poisons. However, we cannot be at our best if our bodies are under constant assault.

Moreover, as we age, or when our immune systems are compromised, or when we have a health issue, we have less energy and fewer resources to devote to dealing with toxins. They continue to take their toll on us. It is only by consuming poison-free foods that we can give our bodies a permanent break and allow them to become truly healthy.

Consuming foods grown organically without the use of toxic chemicals remains one of our best choices for creating and maintaining health for ourselves and our loved ones.


Preventing Free Radical Damage Using Ultimate Protector™

In earlier blog posts we presented two articles that discussed new directions for preventing free radical damage and natural phytochemical Nrf2 activators for chemoprevention. We told you that HPDI was working on a new formula called Ultimate Protector™ that incorporates the ideas contained in these articles. The product will soon be available (mid-November), so we are taking this opportunity to provide you with the details of our design logic and product ingredients.






Ultimate Protector™ satisfies three distinct needs:

1) The need for a non-GMO Vitamin C product. That is, a Vitamin C fomula that avoids genetically modified sources such as corn, potatoes, or beets.



The ways Ultimate Protector™ satisfies these three needs are discussed below:


Cassava Root for Non-GMO Vitamin C - An Ingredient in Preventing Free Radical Damage

High-quality, USP grade Vitamin C has been obtained historically from corn, potatoes, and/or beets. Unfortunately, all of these sources have to a large extent gone to genetically modified (GMO) variants. While some non-GMO sources of ascorbic acid made from these plants still are available, it is nevertheless becoming increasingly difficult to ascertain whether a source is non-GMO. Recently, a new source of high-purity (>99%) USP-grade ascorbic acid has become available from cassava (tapioca). Our manufacturer uses this non-GMO material to make both calcium and magnesium ascorbates using a “water method” process. This method produces a Vitamin C product that is absorbed and retained in the body far better than Vitamin C produced by the traditional methods.

Ultimate Protector - nrf2 activator




Antioxidants function as a vital line of defense against free radicals by blocking their attack on DNA, vital proteins, lipids, and amino acids. Until now, efforts to identify the effect of antioxidants on all five types of free radicals were constrained by limited testing procedures. Historically,the ORAC assay, the industry-standard test, could measure only antioxidant activity of one of the five types of free radicals, i.e., the peroxyl radical. Based upon traditional ORAC testing methodology, six capsules of Ultimate Protector™ will provide a net ORAC value of greater than 5,000 units.

Recent technological developments have resulted in a comprehensive new testing method called the Total ORAC5.0™ assay. Because of the development of the Total ORAC5.0™ test, it is now possible to target and measure the effects of antioxidants on the five major types of free radicals found in the body.

We are currently in the process of testing Ultimate Protector™ using this new ORAC5.0™ assay. We are confident that our formula offers protection against these five major types of free-radicals because we combine a wide range of extremely high-ORAC fruit, vegetable, and herbal blends. As soon as the results are available (in early November), we will update this article with the findings.









Ultimate ProtectorUltimate Protector™ includes the following phytonutrients in its array of freeze-dried and concentrated fruits, vegetables, and herbs: Anthocyandins, Beta Carotene, Caffeic acid, Chlorogenic acid, Ellagic acid, Ferulic acid, Glucosinolates, Lutein, Lycopene, Phenolic acids, Polyphenols, Polysaccharides Proanthocyanidins, Ptero-Stilbene, Quercetin, Quinic acid, Sulforaphane, and Trans-Resveratrol.

The phytochemical ingredients in Ultimate Protector™ are discussed below:

1) AnthoComplete™:



AnthoComplete™ provides the following benefits:

• Supports Healthy Inflammatory Response

• Promotes Cardiovascular Health

• Promotes Healthy Brain Function

• Promotes Healthy Vision

2) CoffeeBerry® Forte:



Coffee polyphenols:

• Neutralize toxic free radicals

• Help protect against systemic oxidative stress

• Help reduce the incidence of oxidative pathologies such as coronary heart disease, inflammation and possibly even certain cancers


3) Curcumin:

We have included Sabinsa’s Curcumin C3 Complex® in ULTIMATE PROTECTOR. The name C3 Complex has reference to its three main chemical compounds – Curcumin, Demethoxycurcumin and Bisdemethoxycurcumin – collectively known as Curcuminoids and all derived from Turmeric. Curcumin has been shown to be an Nrf2 transcription factor activator. Studies have reported that curcumin and turmeric protect the liver against several toxicants both in vitro and in vivo. A number of reports showed the chemopreventive or curative action of turmeric and curcuminoids against cancer at various sites in the body. Curcumin is a potent scavenger of free radicals such as superoxide anion radicals, hydroxyl radicals, and nitrogen dioxide radicals. It exerts powerful antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.

4) Trans-Resveratrol (98% Polygonum cuspidatum from giant knotweed):


5) VitaBerry® Plus:


VitaBerry® Plus provides the following benefits:

• Superior source of natural antioxidants

• Helps prevent the effects of premature aging

• Promotes cardiovascular health

• Promotes healthy brain function and mental acuity

• Promotes healthy vision

• Promotes healthy blood sugar levels

• Excellent source of flavonoids and organic acids

• Promotes urinary tract health

• Promotes healthy skin

6) VitaVeggie®:



The vegetables in VitaVeggie® include:

• Finest and richest broccoli and the most perfect handpicked broccoli sprouts


• Fresh leafy spinach and ripe homegrown kale

• Tender baby California carrots glowing with color

• Brussels sprouts

• Highest-quality onions from the Pacific Northwest

 Other VitaVeggie® features and benefits:

• High-ORAC source of natural vegetable antioxidants

• Helps prevent effects of premature aging

• Promotes cardiovascular health

• Promotes healthy brain function and mental acuity • Promotes healthy vision

• Promotes healthy blood sugar levels

• Excellent source of flavonoids and organic acids

• Promotes urinary tract health• Promotes healthy skin

7) Bioperine®:


Ultimate Protector - nrf2 activator


COMPOSITION: Two veggie capsule provides the following percentages of the Daily Value:

Serving Size: 2 Veggie Capsules    Servings per Container: 90
Amount Per Serving Amounts % Daily Value
Vitamin C (as ascorbates made from 100% USP-grade, non-GMO tapioca ascorbic acid) 500 mg 833
Calcium (from calcium ascorbate) 23.5 mg 2.4
Magnesium (from magnesium ascorbate) 23.1 mg 5.8
VitaBerry® Plus† 30 mg *
VitaVeggie®† 30 mg *
CoffeBerry® Forte† 45 mg *
Trans-Resveratrol 98% 30 mg *
Bioperine®†††† 2.5 mg *
* Daily Value not established



ULTIMATE PROTECTOR Does Not Contain: wheat, rye, oats, barley, gluten, egg, dairy, yeast, sugar, shellfish, GMOs, wax, preservatives, colorings, or artificial flavorings.




†††† Bioperine® is a registered trademark of Sabinsa Corporation.


Ultimate Protector™

“Ultimate Protector and the Role of Foundational Supplements for Health”

“Ultimate Protector™ ORAC5.0™ Test Results”

“Description and Comparison of ORAC Tests for Well Known Plant Ingredients and Ultimate Protector™”

New Directions for Preventing Free-Radical Damage

Natural Phytochemical Nrf2 Activators for Chemoprevention

Ultimate Protector flyer (.pdf)


New Study Shows Lowered Cancer Risk with Multivitamins

A New Study Supports Multivitamin Use





HPDI’s High-Quality Multivitamins








Our Free Foundational Supplements Booklet



Please read The Need for Foundational Supplements. You can also access it from the Resources list (below), the link in the left hand column of this blog post, or directly from our website (www.IntegratedHealth.com) in the “Product Overviews” pulldown menu.


Health Products Distributors, Inc. website:





4) Main article about the new study:

Subscribe: http://www.orthomolecular.org/forms/omns_subscribe.shtml




Just Label It: How California’s GMO Labeling Act Supports Consumer Health

Fred Liers PhDThis fall is an exciting time for American consumers, who may soon be reading labels on foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). That is because on November 6th, California voters go the polls to vote on Proposition 37, the GMO labeling Act. This is historic because it is the first time any Americans have ever voted on their right to know about GMOs in foods.

Consumers have demanded labels for genetically modified foods (GMOs) for years. In fact, ever since 1994 when GMO crops were commercialized on a large scale. Yet, there is no regulation of GMOs to this day in the US despite millions of signatures on petitions, numerous attempts to pass state labeling laws, and the fact the majority of consumers support GMO labeling. Indeed, most other nations have GMO labeling laws.

This entire situation will change if Proposition 37 passes. California then will implement a labeling law that will have far reaching impacts on other states and the nation.

A new GMO study came from Europe this month, showing absolutely horrific effects of GMOs on rats. Previous studies have come to similar conclusions, but this time the climate is far less favorable to GMOs because consumers are more educated about the potential health problems associated with GMO crops. As the scientific evidence mounts, companies like Monsanto are finding it much harder to discredit studies than they did just a few years ago.

The GMO issue is inextricably linked to organic foods, but somewhat different. Organic foods cannot legally contain GMOs (except within tolerance levels established in the standards). So, theoretically if you consume a diet of all organic foods, GMOs aren’t a problem for you.

Of course, it is well known that organics are more nutritious than so-called conventional foods. Even the recent, flawed Stanford study showed that organics are more nutritious despite the study’s counterintuitive conclusions that organic foods are no better than conventional ones. (This study has since been discredited due to its methods and because it was sponsored by agribusiness interests.)

Just as importantly, conventional produce exhibits far higher pesticide residues than organics. That’s no surprise, of course. Even if one believes false arguments that organics are not significantly better from a nutritional standpoint, there is no justification for ever higher pesticide levels on foods. Pesticides are highly toxic, and exposure to them is associated with a wide range of poor health conditions and abnormal development. So, organic foods are simply better.

(I will discuss my personal experience with organic foods in a separate post. It is enough to say for now that I can taste the difference and feel the difference, and that I am healthliest when I consume a 100% organic foods diet.)

The deeper problems of GMOs lie in 1) long-term mass contamination of non-GMO crops by GMOs, 2) large-scale infusion of GMOs into foods (currently unlabeled) sold across the country, 3) fundamental toxicity and harmfulness of GMOs, and 4) No regulation of GMOs (since not only are there no labeling laws, but determination of GMO safety is left to companies that make them, with the Federal Government virtually absent from the process).

Whether or not Proposition 37 passes, the foregoing issues will not simply disappear overnight. For example, contamination of non-GMO crops by GMOs means resources will need to be directed to ensuring the purity (via testing) of non-GMO foods.

Compliance with labeling laws may also be an issue. The companies making GMOs never wanted to allow consumers to know whether their foods contained GMOs. Testing for compliance would fall on the shoulders of food companies, the government, and possibly food distributors, or a combination of these players.

Foodmakers would probably find it easier to drop GMO ingredients from foods (especially if they know consumer don’t want them) rather than label GMO ingredients, pay for testing, and then watch sales plummet. However, given the pervasiveness of GMOs in our food system, it would represent a massive undertaking to find suitable non-GMO alternatives. 70% of US corn is GMO, for example.

GMOs are so toxic and dangerous that few people would want to consume them, if they knew how harmful they are to human health. Labeling is just a start, but expect a mass movement away from GMO foods. This is why GMO food companies have resisted any attempts at introducing labeling laws. It is also why GMO labeling should have been insisted upon as a basic “right to know” issue from the beginning.

As people come to realize the magnitude of danger to health (and the mass poisoning that has occurred in America during the past 18 years), they will no longer trust their food is safe, and will avoid GMOs.

There is currently no regulation of GMOs in the US. If Proposition 37 passes, it will be the first law of its kind in the nation. This presents an interesting case because the GMO companies will likely attempt to sue the state of California. They may try to claim that no state law can preempt a federal regulation. However, no federal regulation exists, only an informal ruling.

So there is no Federal law to preempt a US state law. The irony is that GMO companies successfully have prevented Federal regulation (through lobbying and “regulatory capture” via revolving door politics). With no Federal regulation in place, the California legislation would be difficult to defeat legally. Also, there would be a high probability that any subsequent Federal regulation would be based on the California law.

If the Federal Government fails to enact a GMO labeling law of its own in a timely fashion after the passage of Proposition 37 (despite requests by foodmakers eager to avoid a patchwork quilt of state regulations that will no doubt be enacted after California’s example), then the California law may become a de facto standard.

As momentum would gather for a single Federal law, expect GMO companies (and other vested interests) to attempt to weaken requirements in any way possible. A similar thing happened when California organic standards became the basis for the USDA Organic Standards.

Since the adoption of Federal organic standards, there has been an erosion of these standards as large corporations become involved. Corporations lobby for changes, amendments, and exceptions. For example, they join standards-setting boards, resulting in the allowing of exceptions to the rules (e.g., the addition of synthetic substances) to the list of acceptable ingredients. They also push for the allowance of production methods for organic products that are similar to conventional foods.

Another instance of historic proportions was the passage of California’s Proposition 65, “The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986.” Under this law, any product sold in the state of California must be labeled if it contains materials deemed toxic or hazardous by the state’s office of environmental health.

Unlike the organic standards, no other state or the Federal Government has enacted a similar law to California Proposition 65. That is, industry lobbyists have successfully prevented passage of such laws in other jurisdictions.

However, due to the sheer size and economic power of California, makers of consumer products typically choose to reformulate their products using safer, non-toxic (or less toxic) ingredients to conform to the California Proposition 65 law rather than have their products labeled as containing materials known to the state to be hazardous for human health (e.g., cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm). These products are then sold nationally or internationally. This is how a California law makes products safer for people in other states and countries. In effect, this is legislative leadership.

The passage of Proposition 37 is not guaranteed. However, if it passes, it will be a great cause for celebration. The beauty of the California initiative system is that it has the potential to accomplish what our national agencies responsible for health have so far failed to do. That is, protect our health and defend our right to know what is in our food.

If you live in California, please vote “yes” on Proposition 37. If you do not live in California, see the resources below to see how you can volunteer, or otherwise help to support its passage.