Thursday, April 25, 2013

GMO Labeling or How To Best Protect The Right To Misinform Consumers.


It's been a while since I posted, so I thought I would dust off blogger and add another 1AM missive.  It get's harder to write about this stuff because it's already been said before and also there are now a respectable number of subject matter experts who are finally starting to write about food and ag issues.

What follows is a story about proposed GMO labeling legislation, one person's intro to that story on G+, and my comment on both.  It is not necessary to read the story.  You could even skip the intro to the story, but you may lose some of the context of my comments...

From +Malthus John 


The bipartisan legislation would require clear labels for genetically engineered whole foods and processed foods, including fish and seafood. The measure would direct the FDA to write new labeling standards that are consistent with U.S. labeling standards and international standards.

Sixty-four countries around the world already require the labeling of GE foods, including all the member nations of the European Union, Russia, Japan, China, Australia and New Zealand.

“This legislation is supported by a broad coalition of consumer groups, businesses, farmers, fishermen and parents who all agree that consumers deserve more – not less – information about the food they buy.”

According to surveys, more than 90 percent of Americans support the labeling of genetically engineered foods. In fact, many consumers are surprised to learn that GE foods are not already labeled.

Thanks +Bernie Sanders & Barbara Boxer!

Here is the story about the bill that Bernie Sanders(whom I like) and Barbara Boxer(whom I also like) have cosponsored

And here are my comments on the whole matter from my g+ acct:


 It's not because you want to know or that you want a choice, it's that you think there's a difference.  People who already made up their mind based on whatever misinformation they've bought into, probably already buy organic anyway.  This isn't for them.  This proposed legislation is for the minds of the uninformed consumers that the anti-gmo activists want to pollute with unjustified fear and misinformation.
The fact of the matter is that for all intents and purposes, there is no difference between, for instance, corn that is gmo and non-gmo.  For the consumer, there is no difference, but you want to scare them into thinking there might be.  
Anything approved to be on the market has already had allergenicity and toxicology studies validating it's safety, but no amount of studies will ever be enough for the anti-science, anti-gmo activist.  
It's the same as the conspiracy theorist who believes Sandy Hook was faked or the creationist that can never see enough evidence to convince them that evolution is real.  

You are just like them.




















No comments:

Post a Comment

Put your comment here, kind sir/madame. Try to cite sources when stating facts and refrain from off topic comments or hateful/nasty rhetoric.