Battle Brewing Over Labeling of Genetically Modified Food

[cigaretteman]

On a recent sunny morning at the Big Y grocery here, Cynthia LaPier parked her cart in the cereal aisle. With a glance over her shoulder and a quick check of the ingredients, she plastered several boxes with hand-designed stickers from a roll in her purse. “Warning,” they read. “May Contain GMO’s (Genetically Modified Organisms).”

For more than a decade, almost all processed foods in the United States — cereals, snack foods, salad dressings — have contained ingredients from plants whose DNA was manipulated in a laboratory. Regulators and many scientists say these pose no danger. But as Americans ask more pointed questions about what they are eating, popular suspicions about the health and environmental effects of biotechnology are fueling a movement to require that food from genetically modified crops be labeled, if not eliminated.
Labeling bills have been proposed in more than a dozen states over the last year, and an appeal to the Food and Drug Administration last fall to mandate labels nationally drew more than a million signatures. There is an iPhone app: ShopNoGMO.
The most closely watched labeling effort is a proposed ballot initiative in California that cleared a crucial hurdle this month, setting the stage for a probable November vote that could influence not just food packaging but the future of American agriculture.
Tens of millions of dollars are expected to be spent on the election showdown. It pits consumer groups and the organic food industry, both of which support mandatory labeling, against more conventional farmers, agricultural biotechnology companies like Monsanto and many of the nation’s best-known food brands like Kellogg’s and Kraft.
The heightened stakes have added fuel to a long-simmering debate over the merits of genetically engineered crops, which many scientists and farmers believe could be useful in meeting the world’s rapidly expanding food needs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/sc...-food.html?hpw

[bringmagicback]

I am interested to know your thoughts on this marlboro man.

[cigaretteman]

I am interested to know your thoughts on this marlboro man.

It reminds me a lot of the "pink slime" flap. I would have no problem with labelling if people were actually educated about the scientific facts, both pro and con. I'm all for transparency.

[ThatllDoCy]

Postings like this make u wonder. I don't know the poster, but PR Firms and lobbying groups will plant stories etc. to sway opinion on issues like GMO foods. The poster could be a PR person that is trying to start discussion and sway people's opinions towards whomever has hired the firm. They will have multiple accounts on newspaper sites etc. and use them to push their agenda. I don't read comments on newspaper or other sites, because you never know who is actually posting the comments. Completely worthless manipulation of online media.

That said, maybe the poster is just interested in the subject. I am and appreciate the post.

[Trainer]

Food Allergies are getting ridiculously high. Correlation is not causation, but it always makes you wonder.

[HFCS]

The one area I know a lot about here is the cost of packaging changes.

If you require companies to change all their packaging immediately that's a major expense.

If you require new products to comply immediately and give 1-2 years to comply for existing products on the market the cost is virtually nothing. It's being used as a straw man unless we're talking about an immediate change with only a few months of turnaround.

If a company has 4 years worth of packaging on backstock that's not wise or efficient because any number of things could change, not a good practice regardless of anyone's opinion on GMOs.

[cigaretteman]

Postings like this make u wonder. I don't know the poster, but PR Firms and lobbying groups will plant stories etc. to sway opinion on issues like GMO foods. The poster could be a PR person that is trying to start discussion and sway people's opinions towards whomever has hired the firm. They will have multiple accounts on newspaper sites etc. and use them to push their agenda. I don't read comments on newspaper or other sites, because you never know who is actually posting the comments. Completely worthless manipulation of online media.

That said, maybe the poster is just interested in the subject. I am and appreciate the post.

I'm just interested and wanted to get some input. I know that many on this forum are involved in agriculture and the food industry. I understand the arguments on both sides of this issue, and hope to learn more about it.

[Bigman38]

Postings like this make u wonder. I don't know the poster, but PR Firms and lobbying groups will plant stories etc. to sway opinion on issues like GMO foods. The poster could be a PR person that is trying to start discussion and sway people's opinions towards whomever has hired the firm. They will have multiple accounts on newspaper sites etc. and use them to push their agenda. I don't read comments on newspaper or other sites, because you never know who is actually posting the comments. Completely worthless manipulation of online media.

That said, maybe the poster is just interested in the subject. I am and appreciate the post.

[Clonehomer]

So what do they consider as genetically modified? Wouldn't all roundup ready crops be genetically modified? Does selective breeding of livestock fall under this also? What's the difference if the modification happened in a lab or by a producer trying to get a hog with certain traits?

[cigaretteman]

So what do they consider as genetically modified? Wouldn't all roundup ready crops be genetically modified? Does selective breeding of livestock fall under this also? What's the difference if the modification happened in a lab or by a producer trying to get a hog with certain traits?

As the article states, the request for labelling is being directed toward organisms that have had genetic materials from other organisms artificially inserted rather than the manipulation of an organism's natural gene frequency that occurs during selective breeding.

[CLONECONES]

I'm just interested and wanted to get some input. I know that many on this forum are involved in agriculture and the food industry. I understand the arguments on both sides of this issue, and hope to learn more about it.

you must be interested in a ton of things to make 8.29 threads/day (on average) exactly like this

[Trainer]

So what do they consider as genetically modified? Wouldn't all roundup ready crops be genetically modified? Does selective breeding of livestock fall under this also? What's the difference if the modification happened in a lab or by a producer trying to get a hog with certain traits?

As I understand it (and this is extreme laymen terms), basically a Genetically modified organism is one that has had parts of its original, naturally occuring DNA removed and had foreign DNA added. This may increase the organisms hardiness which in turn means a higher yield for farmers.

I do not think that this includes natural breeding practices because those two pigs could choose to breed on their own, you are just making it happen to produce the best traits.

Again like I said, I am by no means an expert.

[cigaretteman]

you must be interested in a ton of things to make 8.29 threads/day (on average) exactly like this

Yes, I am. Does that bother you for some reason?

[CyberJJJ]

At core issue is your choice of frame of reference of "substantial equivalence" used by the US or "the precautionary principle" used more in Europe. The first is founded on the believe that if the standards of science show there is no relevant difference in nutrional make-up of the product, it requires no special labelling. The second is founded on the belief that until there is concrete proof of no possible harmful effects, it should not be on the market. I would say that labelling is likely not the issue, just the current battleground between the two points of view.

[RayShimley]

Why is the food industry always on the opposite side of transparency to consumers? People have a right to know what is in their food. When the average person buys corn, they assume it is corn, not corn with bacterial DNA inserted into its genome.

I have no problem with GMOs that have been properly vetted by the FDA, I eat them every day. If the food industry wasn't so insistent on hiding this fact, most people wouldn't have a problem with it either. Their resistance is what implies something more sinister around GMOs.