Bill would require labeling of GMO foods

[IndyDave1776]

I almost fell out of my chair upon seeing that I agree with Barbara Boxer on anything, but I would argue that in order for the free market to work properly, it must be based on freely made choices made as informed decisions, not by duplicity or the withholding of pertinent information. To put it another way, I believe we are in fact entitled to know what we are eating.

New bill would require genetically modified food labeling in US ? RT USA

 

[mdm2272]

Should be a no brainer. Something like 30 coutries around the world have either GMO labeling or have banned GMO's. There was a bill up for vote in Cali last election that go voted down by the people there.

 

[BogWalker]

You ever eaten Plutos? Genetic cross between and apricot and a plum and tastes fantastic. Go ahead and label it, I'll still buy them. Doesn't seem any different than labeling something "may contain peanuts."

 

[$mooth]

You ever eaten Plutos? Genetic cross between and apricot and a plum and tastes fantastic. Go ahead and label it, I'll still buy them. Doesn't seem any different than labeling something "may contain peanuts."

Pluots are not necessarily genetically modified (there may be some that are, but they originated before GMOs existed). You can selectively breed traits in animals and plant qualities naturally without modifying their genetic code in a lab.

 

[steveh_131]

While I am opposed to the FDA in general, I do believe this would even the playing field for those who don't have the FDA in their back pocket.

 

[VERT]

Why pass a new law? If the food is organic or GMO free then let the company marketing it label it as such. Then if people want to pay more for a specialty product that is their decision. Otherwise just assume that what you are eating is either a) not "organic" or b) contains a "GMO". Really not an issue of informing the consumer that they buying a product that was produced using a GMO crop, since that encompasses most everything anyway.

 

[level.eleven]

Pluots are not necessarily genetically modified (there may be some that are, but they originated before GMOs existed). You can selectively breed traits in animals and plant qualities naturally without modifying their genetic code in a lab.

Pluots are genetically modified. Pluots are trademarked to Zaigers Genetics.

Hybridization, polyploidization, etc. are all modifications of genetic code done in a lab. I don't understand the distinction between this and "GMO" - a lost word in my opinion.

 

[steveh_131]

shut up. you had me at polyploidization

 

[BogWalker]

Pluots are genetically modified. Pluots are trademarked to Zaigers Genetics.

Hybridization, polyploidization, etc. are all modifications of genetic code done in a lab. I don't understand the distinction between this and "GMO" - a lost word in my opinion.

Ah pluots that's it. I thought it was plutos.

 

[dross]

I'm sure government involvement will fix all this right up. Because government involvement is okay when it supports my pet issues.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Ah pluots that's it. I thought it was plutos.

This just in, plutos are not fruits ....

Seriously though i also approve of this, there is no reason we shouldnt know what it is we are consuming.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm sure government involvement will fix all this right up. Because government involvement is okay when it supports my pet issues.

Truthful disclosure is one of the few things where I would accept government intervention, much in the same way I support enforcement of honesty with scales and pumps when I purchase merchandise sold by weight or volume. I feel I have a greater right to honest disclosure of the nature of the food I am expected to eat than a dishonest supplier has to the opportunity to sell me s**t and tell me it's gravy.

 

[beararms1776]

She put the gloves on with this one didn't she.

 

[CathyInBlue]

There is a profound difference between a GMO and a hybrid organism created via classic cross-breeding/cross-pollination.

GMO-containing food products should be labelled with specificity.

And for the record, plum + apricot = pluot ≠ pluto.

 

[level.eleven]

There is a profound difference between a GMO and a hybrid organism created via classic cross-breeding/cross-pollination.

GMO-containing food products should be labelled with specificity.

What is the difference? Why should they be labeled? Tansgenics is bad and needs a label but mutation breeding doesn't? That is completely arbitrary, and with regard too food, fear-mongering. They all go through the same approval process before they are allowed to be sold.

 

[IndyDave1776]

What is the difference? Why should they be labeled? Tansgenics is bad and needs a label but mutation breeding doesn't? That is completely arbitrary, and with regard too food, fear-mongering. They all go through the same approval process before they are allowed to be sold.

Are you telling us that what we may be eating is none of our business? Regardless of whether or not such distinctions are arbitrary, I see no reasonable argument for a lack of disclosure regarding anything intended for consumption.

 

[CathyInBlue]

The effects of hybridization follows established biological laws. Transgenics have completely unpredictable consequences. (See: Star-link corn)

 

[Jroe]

Considering the ex-vp of Monsanto is now running the FDA do you think it truly matters?

 

[level.eleven]

The effects of hybridization follows established biological laws. Transgenics have completely unpredictable consequences. (See: Star-link corn)

This statement is backwards. Hybridization relies on integration and recombination and is more likely to produce unpredictable pleiotropic results/expressions. Genetic engineering on the other hand, is much more precise. Tons of copies aren't being inserted from the other organism - single copies can be inserted into specific locations. It is simply better technology. New genes aren't being created out of this air..

Labeling wouldn't have done squat with Starlink. Animal feed got into some taco shells.

 

[level.eleven]

Are you telling us that what we may be eating is none of our business? Regardless of whether or not such distinctions are arbitrary, I see no reasonable argument for a lack of disclosure regarding anything intended for consumption.

Labeling has to serve a purpose or it becomes worthless. There is no health risk in consuming genetically engineered food. It is the current crusade of organic/enviro crowd that anti-vax/conspiracy crowd has latched on to. Fear and disinformation are driving the bus usually with some Monsanto hate sprinkled in. Those groups have convinced people that GMO=Bad. That is all this boils down to. Putting a GMO label on an ear of corn doesn't do anything to educate the consumer, but does wonders for reinforcing his current beliefs which likely lack empirical evidence. This isn't how decisions are made. If there is a demand for non-GMO food allow the producer of that food to label his product accordingly. The labeling is just a dishonest attack from a fringe group.