We already have food labels that tell us how many calories, vitamins, etc per serving in our food.
And get this: Labeling opponents in the House have called this bill "an infringement of the public's right to know what's in their food." You really can't make this shit up!
The battle, until now, has gone state by state. California refused to pass a labeling initiative, but Maine, Connecticut and Vermont have now passed laws in favor of GMO labeling.
Opponents of GMO labeling, including some of the biggest food manufacturers, have turned to Congress, and this week they achieved their first notable success.
A solid majority of the House of Representatives on Thursday voted in favor of a law that would block states from mandating GMO labels.
I specifically look for the label on the foods I buy as well as massage oils. The company's that have done this on their own, I fully support and will continue to.
My criteria
Gluten free (food allergies)
NON GMO
Organic
I'm more than happy and willing to spend a bit more for a CHOICE.
Problem is, once these products are labeled, sales will fall. Lost revenue, it's all about the money, no matter how many times Politicians talk about Freedom, Democracy, We The People are treated not the way we deserve. Both parties are guilty.
Just my my 2 cents from a consumer of Non GMO products
Aloha
although I think it's a bunch of hype about nothing, but if people want to market food as "Non GMO" I don't have any more argument against it than I am "gluten free" or "organic"
I will add that except for the relatively small percentage of people who need gluten free, I think it's simply a marketing scam aimed at stupid people, the same people who don't mind spending triple the price for "organic" fruits and vegetables. but hey, if you want to pay extra for snake oil, who am I to stop you?
What purpose would it serve?
Some will argue the science says it's (GMO food) is healthy as others dispute the science.
Every day more and more companies are doing this on their own, labeling, and those are the products I buy.
IMVHO, this isn't about being a nanny state yet about giving the consumer the freedom to choose.
My question is Why Not?
What are these companies afraid of? If these companies really believe in their products, believe in the science, then why not advertise made with Genetically Modified?
In this case, there is no scientific reason to label whatsoever. There isn't any debate on this topic in the scientific community.
This all came from the far Left and hatred for Monsanto. Its political, anti-business, fear mongering, nothing more.
The World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the National Academy of Sciences, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have all said there is ZERO evidence that GMO's are unsafe.
So let companies decide what to do, the public can buy or not buy products based on labeling or lack of same and leave the govt mandates out of it.
...GMO is perfectly safe. Yet you're also with the 3% of climate change denying nutjobs who say the cause of climate change has not been positively determined to be man made.
88% of scientists says GMO is safe. You're with the 88%. 3% of scientists say there is no climate change and even if there is, man is not responsible for it. You're with the 3%. Why are you with the overwhelming majority of scientists on one issue but with the fringe kooks in another? Could it be that you're a hypocrite who doesn't care about science, only politics
Why the need to lie about my position? I never said GMO's are "perfectly safe." I said there is ZERO evidence that GMO's are unsafe. I know you don't understand the difference between those two thoughts but that's on you.
GMO research is not about a long term prediction. It is based on science about the here and now.
With regards to AGW, I have said time and again the science is NOT settled as liberals go WAY beyond the point you are making to tell us we are doomed if we don't cut CO2 immediately.
Yes, the climate is changing, it is ALWAYS changing.
I guess you missed the news last week where scientists have stated that solar activity will drop and that will usher in a cooling world????
Yep! Sounds like settled science to me! 
:
...yet you're with the 3% of scientists vs. the 97% of scientists on another issue. The only reason is that big business is on the same side of the issues as you're on. You can dance and obfuscate all you want but there it is - you only agree with science when it helps big business.
Here's a suggestion for your tombstone: "What's good for General Motors is good for America"
I don't have a problem with GMO food. But I do think GMO should be identified so we know what is in our food. Food in Europe already has to have GMO products identified, so it can be done with very little impact on the companies that are marketing these foods.
Again, my opinion yet the argument goes both ways.
I'm not here to argue Science, my decision to buy NON GMO has nothing to do with the arguments you mentioned above.
Again, you've listed all these agencies in support of GMO, so why not label, Proudly made with Genetically Modified? Just like Proudly made in USA.
If you (the company) truly believes in its products (GMO ' S), why not advertise the fact? I don't understand why any company would not want to, especially if they say the science backs them. Would you not want to use this as an advertising marketing tool to promote your products?
It really is going to come down to the consumer. Just as I do, I look and read labels and so do many others. Give the consumer the freedom to choose, label Proudly made with Genetically Modified instead. I don't see how any of these companies would be against that, especially if they fully agree that it's Safe and Healthy.
The reason is obvious why they don't. It isn't in their financial interest to do so.
If you increase the cost on the businesses, they will pass that along to consumers. Even the OP points out how many times the feds have made mandatory label changes, (even though he botched the last sentence of his OP. LOL)
Those costs ad up. We have a bad economy. The cost would be shifted to the public and yet another burden would fall on the very people who are the poorest among us with a rising food bill.
THATS why we shouldn't force labeling based on junk science
I don't believe I have weighed in. I'm for letting the consumer, like myself, decide. All the products I buy are already labeled by the Choice of the Companies. Why wait around for our do nothing elected officials when you can be proactive, target your advertising and get ahead of the curve.
I read labels, have to due to food allergies. For over a couple years, I've noticed companies including in their list of ingredients, made with Genetically Modified corn, wheat, etc. These products are always on sale.
In my first post, I buy NON GMO Verified Project, not due to the reasons you stated previously. My reasons are my own. These companies do so , label, Freely and Willingly. This is advertising to a target market, me.
So, why not companies do the same yet with GMO? I highly doubt a jar of Proudly made with Genetically Modified peanut butter is going to cost $ 7 like my NON GMO.
It's really going to come down to the consumer and how we spend our money. I don't need some Government agency to tell me what I buy is NON GMO or Genetically Modified, the products I buy are already labeled as such and more and more companies are following suit.
So yes, I would love to see companies be proactive and not have some agency tell them what to
Just my opinion. I don't expect you or anyone else to agree or disagree, just as I can Respectfully Disagree with others opinions.
-- Modified on 7/24/2015 2:03:37 PM
I think it's good marketing to notify consumers of what they are purchasing/consuming,
People will eat anything, I don't think Monsanto wants to publicize it's manufacturing process.
I don't think there are credible research papers showing GMO itself is harmful. One of the studies linked by does show some reason to do more research, but the methodology of the paper uses modeled pathways (meaning you guess that this and that interact with each other, almost like social networking, based on some data), something which can be insightful but is not considered conclusive. This may indeed prove to pan out but it will not be readily accepted in the scientific community without additional evidence. Now that the paper is out, no doubt someone will start testing actual samples to see if what the paper predicts is true. Additionally, that paper raises the question for GMO soy; GMO corn may or may not be different.
Eating a plant that has a genetic modification in principle is probably safe. When the technology came out to do GMO, many people thought great, we can modify plants to be more resistant to disease/pests, more drought tolerant, have additional nutrition (like golden rice) etc, and maybe even reduce the use of all the crap that is sprayed on crops. How naïve! Of course, mostly GMO has been implemented to practically require *increased* use of herbicides. Once that happened, it was predicted that weeds would develop resistance as resistance is almost something you can count on, and the weeds did not disappoint, so even more herbicide is needed!
Personally, I want labeling even though I am not worried from a health standpoint (even if that paper pans out, you'd probably have to eat a crap-ton of soy to have health effects), but I don't think Monsanto should be rewarded for creating a new crop of super-resistant weeds and I avoid based on that alone. I'd eat Golden Rice though without a second thought. Obviously, I think transparency is best so I can make an informed decision.
If you want labeling, demand it from the companies. Write letters, emails, join in on there social media sites.
But let's NOT mandate it through government. This whole "we should know what's in our food" nonsense is just that.
As I am sure you know, there is a certain amount of "bug parts" that is allowable in our food. Should labels say how many rodent hairs and spider legs are contained within? Lol
If the science changes on the subject down the road, then we should revisit this.
But with all the organizations I listed that state that there is no evidence that GMO's are any less safe than non, we would be raising food costs on the middle class and poor based on junk science that is politically motivated.
Never a good thing, imo.
Nice post though and very informative. Good read
until they're against state's rights!