Until the government creates mandates for issuing labels on foods that contain genetically modified ingredients, there are measures that can be taken by common citizens and supporters of GMO labeling in order to keep Americans safe in the meantime. Since “study after study points to potential health risks” (“Whole Foods Market”), supporters need to raise awareness amongst the rest of society in order to generate a large group that can begin to press the government to create a law to handle the issue. It is in “the state’s interest [to] protect consumers from false or potentially misleading communication or prevent consumers from suffering unwitting harms” (Adler). Moreover, the government must be the one to put an official end to the lack of …show more content…
labels on genetically modified foods. Yet, the producers of safe, natural foods can take action as well that will help consumers fight against foods containing GMO ingredients. The “mission of offering food in its most natural and unadulterated state” (“Whole Foods Market”) falls on the companies that do not genetically modify their foods because they have the ability to provide, and label, the most genuine food for the consumers so that they do not have to wonder what is in their foods. Step 1 It is imperative to begin the battle against GMOs by raising “awareness about the presence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the food supply” (“Whole Foods Market”), and ensuring people know what GMOs actually are.
Step 2
Next, companies that refuse the use of genetic modifications on their foods must begin to label foods that do not contain GMOs so that consumers can be sure of their safety, even if others that contain GMOs do not label. Due to this labeling, there will be an exposure to which foods are natural because the foods that are the most appealing will have “the ‘Non-GMO Project Verified’ seal [in order] to help shoppers recognize which products meet rigorous GMO avoidance practices” (“Whole Foods Market”).
Step 3
Following the labeling of foods that do not contain GM ingredients, customers and safe producers must promote these organic foods that can only be labeled safe and natural because they are not genetically modified. Consumers will, thus, be informed about their choices in the markets and will be able to make the decision to buy the purest foods.
Step
…show more content…
4 The last step relies on the government to create, pass, and enforce mandates on requiring labels on foods that contain GMOs; however, supporters of GMO labeling can aid in making this an urgent issue by raising awareness and pressing the government to create laws for the labeling of genetically modified foods. The costs for food production would rise if the government began mandating labels. The behaviors of manufacturers would change, which would result in a change in the behavior of consumers. Companies would spend more money on ingredients and production, which is assumed to pass the costs along to the consumers rather than being absorbed by the companies or markets. In a study by Cornell University, they “found that if GMO labeling is required in New York, a family of four would pay $500 more each year” (Lee). They credited the large increase in spending to the competition amongst producers who would begin to use non-GMO ingredients in order to sell their products. However, a conflicting study by “Consumers Union, which supports mandatory labeling, estimates the median cost of designing and labeling a product as containing GMOs would be just $2.30 per person per year” (Lee). The retail price differences are not seen as a significant change, and some companies may decide to absorb the added costs instead of projecting these costs onto the consumers; therefore, the prices should remain constant for consumers while producers must only spend additional costs on their packaging to contain a label for GMO or non-GMO ingredients. If, or when, America finally decides to mandate labels, the country will have a more natural food supply, which leads to healthier and happier lives of the consumers.
With American citizens eating more natural food, their mental and physical health will be more at ease and the danger of consuming foods with possible allergens will no longer exist. If producers of natural foods begin to label their foods as non-GMOs, the issue will be resolved in a matter of weeks; however, waiting on the government to create a mandate for foods containing GMOs could take anywhere from three to ten years, depending on the importance of the topic, which would be a result of how popular the issue becomes among American citizens. Not only will America become healthier if GMO foods become labeled, but the long term effects of GMOs will no longer be an issue, and the planet will be cleaner with a decrease in the pollution of glyphosate and other sprays that are used to modify the foods when production of genetically modified foods goes down with their sales. Thus, consumer satisfaction will not be the only benefit from the labeling of
GMOs.
A trip to any supermarket in Canada will reveal nothing out of ordinary, just the usual of array of fresh and packaged goods displayed in an inviting manner to attract customers. Everything appear familiar and reassuring, right? Think again. A closer microscopic inspection discloses something novel, a fundamental revolution in food technology. The technology is genetic engineering (GE), also known as biotechnology. Blue prints (DNA) of agricultural crops are altered and “spliced” with foreign genes to produce transgenic crops. Foods harvested from these agricultural plants are called, genetically modified (GM). Presently, Canada has no consumer notification; GM foods are being slipped to Canada’s foods without any labels or adequate risk assessments. This essay argues that GM foods should be rigorously and independently tested for safety; and, consumers be given the right to choose or reject GM foods through mandatory labels. What is the need for impartial examination of safety of transgenic foods? And why label them? GM foods are not “substantially equivalent” to conventional foods, genetic engineering of agricultural crops is not a mere extension of traditional plant breeding, and finally, there are human health implications associated with it.
Food is an essential part of everyday life without it one could not survive. Every day we make choices on what we put in to our bodies. There are countless varieties of food to choose from to meet the diverse tastes of the increasing population. Almost all food requires a label explaining the ingredients and the nutritional value allowing consumers to make informed decisions on what they are consuming. However, many may not be considering where that food is coming from or how it has been produced. Unfortunately, there is more to food than meets the eye. Since 1992, “ the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ruled, based on woefully limited data, that genetically modified foods were ‘substantially equivalent’ to their non-GM counterparts” (Why to Support Labeling). GM food advocates have promised to create more nutritious food that will be able to grow in harsh climate conditions and eventually put an end to world hunger in anticipation of the growing population. There is very little evidence to support these claims and study after study has proven just the opposite. GM crops are not only unsafe to consume, but their growing practices are harmful to the environment, and multinational corporations are putting farmers out of business.
A very valid point brought up by Clause (Say ‘no’), Hemphill, and Banerjee (both G.M.O. and the U.S.), is that consumers already have an easy and effective option to steer clear from GMOs: buying organic products. Through Hemphill’s and Banerjee’s article, we are informed that United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) “presently offers an organic certification for crops and processed food products, which by definition prohibits the use of GMO ingredients” (Page 455-466). This is certainly a label that has the ability to help concerned customers know exactly what they are eating. The co-authors call this solution the “Voluntary Labeling Strategy.” There is, however, one issue with this: not all products that don't contain GMOs qualify as organic. The resolution lies in an upcoming proposal from the U.S. Food and Drug administration (FDA). It's called “Voluntary Guidelines” and it allows, but doesn't force, GMO-free products to display a label of their own. I believe that this is a much smarter option than labeling every item containing GMOs because it is not binding by law, which would provide consumers with all of the benefits they need to choose the right foods for their preferences, while saving on all of the unnecessary extra costs discussed
The technological advances are increasing each year, and electronics are not the only things upgraded. The food eaten in the United States has also been touched by science in the form of GMOs. Although GMOs have been in the US food industry for almost twenty years, consumers should have the right to know what is in our food with mandatory GMO labeling.
According to an article titled “Genetically Modified Foods Eaten” regularly by Linda A. Johnson today, essentially 40% of the foods we eat are genetically modified, unless you eat organic foods and/or you grow your own. Most products containing corn, soil, canola oil, or cottonseed oil contain genetic modification. One of the biggest genetic modification company is Monsanto (Johnson). She goes on to say many Americans don’t even know they are consuming genetically engineered foods. In “Genetically Modified Foods Confuse Consumers” by Mary Clare Jalonick writing in the Washington Times, has talked about how this is because the FDA does not require them to be labeled. Jalonick has said, “Genetically modified foods are plants or animals that have
Our attitudes toward GMO foods range from hostility to indifference. GMO foods, like pesticide-resistant Roundup Ready soybeans and fast-growing salmon, seem to exist primarily to pad corporate pockets. Most people are not aware that they are eating GMO foods. The greater percentage of the population is just looking at the price tag instead of what is in the food product. This technology has the potential to provide sustainable nutrient rich food sources throughout the ages if the science is not abused for the food industry’s
The term GM foods or GMO (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques (Whitman, 2000). These plants have been modified in the laboratory to offer desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. Also, genetic engineering techniques have been applied to create plants with the exact desired trait very rapidly and accurately. For example, this is done by the geneticist isolating the gene responsible for drought tolerance and inserts it into another plant. The new genetically-modified plant will now have gained drought tolerance as well.
GMOs can also bear consequences in terms of genetic pollution and alteration, from contamination and mutation to adaptation to evolution to species extinction. Indeed, some claims are not well supported and may require testing, like genetic alteration through consumption or the validity of correlating animal health deficits with GM feeds. However, overall, GM foods clearly affect the world negatively in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem impacts. With all of the controversy surrounding GMO foods: health versus biodiversity; benefits versus dangers; pros versus cons, a topic that always arises is the subject of labeling. Labeling has been a matter of discussion for years and surprisingly, it is a hot debate that is still full of life.
It is common today, to relate our health to the foods we eat. If you’ve ever heard the saying, “You are what you eat”, then you must ask yourself a very important question- How do you know what you are, if you do not know what is in your food? With the skyrocketing concern about genetically modified foods (GMO’s), consumers are wanting food that has been genetically modified to be labeled. According to dictionary.com a GMO is, “an organism whose genome has been altered by the techniques of genetic engineering, so that its DNA contains one or more genes not normally found there”. In her article, “Genetically Modified Food: A Modern Term for Old-Fashioned Husbandry”, Tiffany Snider claims that the cost of labeling genetically modified foods outweighs
If crops were affected by droughts, disease and insects, having destroyed many acres across America’s Midwest region, the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) would not be beneficial in regenerating new crops. Genetically modifying foods (GMOs) “are plants or animals that have been genetically engineered with DNA from bacteria, viruses or other plants and animals that cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding” (nongmoproject.org). Most research done has concluded no positive benefits in using GMOs. There are serious health risks associated with eating GM foods based on scientific research done around the world. The purpose of GMOs are to increase production of crop yield and reduce pesticide use but research says otherwise. If farmers wanted to continue using GMOs to produce crops, labeling should be mandatory to allow consumers to have a conscious choice whether or not to eat GM food. Through research it has been proven that the use of GMOs to increased production of crops during a time of drought or disease have no benefits, just risks.
I believe that GMO products should be labeled. If I was going to consume something that has been fiddled with, I would want to know. I wouldn't´ really care what it is, I would just want to know what it has. Especially if I was eating certain foods with certain things in them.
The Scientist make Gmos or genetically modified organisms for short. Scientist change the genetic makeup of seeds and animals. There are a few benefits and many risks to genetically modified organisms. Genetically modified organisms can help ecologically but harm the environment. Some people are for genetically modified organisms and others are against it.
GMO labeling is important because there is uncertainty in the safety of GMOs, which indicates a need for long term monitoring, therefore labels are needed to facilitate monitoring by the scientific community and diagnosis by healthcare professionals. The point being made here is that, while the technology of GMO appears to be safe and has been in use commercially for nearly 20 years, it is nonetheless prudent to watch for problems (Dahl). In their scholarly article titled “’Does Contain’ vs. ‘Does Not Contain’; Does it Matter which GMO Label is Used?”, John Crespi and Stephan Marette quote statistics showing that “…21% of Americans feel that GM foods pose ‘serious safety risks’…”, and that the percentages for European nations range from 30%
Genetically changed foods (GMOs) were around for 2 decades, however currently, they’re the topic of intense discussion concerning whether or not they’re sensible for America and our planet. Labeling isn’t however mandated, however the National Bioengineered Food Law would require federal labeling laws by the center of 2018. Within the in the meantime, we’re going to allow you to discover a trick for determining if that food has been genetically changed. It involves the certain care of David Friedman, MD, doctor of treatment and board certified in the practice of alternate medicine and integrative medicine. The secret You’ll notice on a sticker on all food products turned out, Dr. economist tells Reader’s Digest. The sticker is understood as a “PLU.” Here’s the way to understand its number code: Organic turn out incorporates a five-digit number starting with “9.” Conventionally big turnout incorporates a four-digit number.
In 1935, Russian scientist Andrei Nikolaevitch Belozersky isolated DNA for the first time in human history. Naturally, this opened up a broad range of possibilities that scientists were eager to explore. Consequently, one of the most promising, albeit controversial, products emerged in 1994, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration allowed for the sale and consumption of the Flavr Savr tomato, the first GMO. Since then, GMOs have received mixed reviews, and public sentiment is usually focused on individual studies magnified by the media. In response to large scale disagreement, the United Nations acting in coordination with the World Trade Organization, introduced the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2003. In regard to GMOs, the protocol calls for producers of GMOs to indicate the use of said GMO and that the product is safe for consumption. However, the current model for transparency remains a bit opaque. The protocol solely requires labeling of GMO crops, ignoring the large number of goods produced using GMOs.