Guidelines For Gmo Labeling Policy

The battle over whether food with GMOs should be labeled as such or not, continuez in The Battle Over GMOs by Alessandra Potenza illustrates what a GMO is and why they need to be labeled. First of all GMO stands for genetically modified organism, meaning GMOs are organisms that have been genetically modified to include a gene from another species to produce a certain trait. The reason that some people are very upset at the whole GMO thing is because some companies that include GMOs in their products are refusing to label the fact that they use GMOs. Outrage has sparked everywhere over this and people are demanding that companies using GMOs in their products must label them. The companies on the other hand are claiming that they have a right to privacy and are claiming that the FDA, which stands for Food and Drug Administration, have approved the GMO usage in their products.. This reader believes that we the people have a right to know what is in our food and decide if we still want to consume it.

The new GMO Labeling bill S. 764, that was passed July 2016 after being tacked onto the National Sea Grant College Program Act, requires companies to disclose their inclusion of GMOs in their products directly on the label. This legislation panders to consumers that are already against GMOs while creating more economic strain on consumers who cannot choose to eat non-GMO due to budgetary restrictions. This bill will have serious implications not only in our economy and agricultural industry, but many economies and agricultural industries worldwide. Recent studies of how extensive the effect of this bill will be on the consumers of the United States are estimating upwards of $1,050 annual increase in our grocery spending to accommodate. The damage occurs when food producers that use GMOs inevitably follow the trend of agricultural industries before them and switch to non-GMO ingredients if they believe that it could potentially save public relations and customer loyalty. These switches have grievous implications, including triggering a setback on technology currently being developed and technology that could be developed in the future. 70% of products consumed in the U.S. have genetically engineered materials in them. These labeling laws do not just affect some consumers. In fact, those who are advocating strongly for this labeling system are likely not going to be impacted to the same degree as lower income Americans. This is due to lower income Americans not having the

There are varied arguments that favor or are against compulsory labeling of genetically engineered food products. Those who argue for the labeling of such products argue that consumers have a right to know what is contained in their food, particularly food products for which there have been health and environmental concerns (Caswell 26). Compulsory labeling will permit consumers to identify and avoid those food products that may cause them problems. On the contrary, those who argue against mandatory labeling point out that

The debate over genetically modified foods continues to haunt producers and consumers alike. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are foods that have been modified through bioengineering to possess certain characteristics. These plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or increased nutritional content (Whitman, 2000). The debate continues to grow as to whether these genetically altered foodstuffs are the answer to hunger in the coming years, or whether we are simply children playing with something that we do not have the capacity to understand. One of the biggest debates in the GMO issue is whether producers need to use labeling of

Ever since their entrance onto the consumer market in the last two decades of the twentieth century, genetically modified organisms (often referred to as GMOs) have been getting mixed reviews from the public. Genetically modified consumer products (primarily food) have pushed the barriers of some people's comfort levels. Born out of either a lack of knowledge or a sincere concern for public health or the environment, a consumer rights movement has been planted around the world pushing for labeling of genetically modified food products. This movement has matured in many places to a degree where interest groups have successfully lobbied governments into adopting criteria for labeling transgenic food

Sixty four countries around the world have banned the use of GMOs, otherwise known as Genetically Modified Organisms, within farms and supermarkets. However, the United States, a usually technologically advanced country, has yet to invest much time or effort into this endeavour, one that would make food healthier for people and protect the environment. The US government has taken a step back in this effort for healthier food options, as in the country, companies that use GMOs are not required to label their food as such. Some companies and businesses, however, are working to make a change in the case for GMOs in the US, by advocating minimized GMO usage, menu transparency, or the complete ban of the usage.

After presenting the arguments of proponents and opponents of the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act. This paper will now analyze each issue to determine the strengths and weakness of each side’s argument. One argument that proponents make about genetically modified food is that they are no different than natural foods. An argument that opponents make is that genetically modified organisms have not been tested enough because they are fairly new and some scientist truly don’t have an understanding of how it will affect humans bodies differently than natural foods. Proponents argue that genetically engineered foods have no needs for labeling; it would lead to consumer confusion. Opponents argue that consumers have the right to know what is in the foods they are eating and supporting.

Food is everywhere. It is an integral part of society and is a major part of everyday life. We plan our days around mealtimes, pack snacks for work and school, and visit the grocery store at least once a week. However, even our best, well thought out efforts to achieve a healthy lifestyle leave us mostly in the dark about what we are really putting into our bodies. GMOs, Genetically Modified Organisms, are organisms that have been bioengineered, planted, and sold to the public as food. These organisms are unnatural and have proven to be harmful. Unfortunately, the labeling of foods containing GMOs is not government mandated. Monsanto, the largest GMO producing conglomerate, will go to all lengths to convince the public that their product is safe and does not need to be labeled for consumers, despite the fact that countries around the world have stood up and refused to sell their products to their citizens. Unfortunately, the United States is not only not among these countries, but the government has shown little care for the global issue. Everyone has the right to know exactly what they are putting into their bodies and feeding their loved ones. For this reason I will be exploring how, with the existing research, GMOs are FDA approved, as well as how this relates to Monsanto’s fight against GMO labeling.

Recently, Monsanto, a GMO company, made an effort to remove GMO labeling protests. GMO labeling is a process that labels, whether a crop has GMOs or not. The consumers have a right to know what they are eating while Monsanto wants to remove that right. Ostrander writes, “The anti-GMO activists were vastly outspent: Monsanto alone invests $8 million in efforts to defeat the measure” (Ostrander). From Monsanto’s action alone, it seems that they do not want consumers to know what they are eating. They used $8 million alone to eliminate GMO labeling protests. Even though GMO companies claim to help provide more for the world, Monsanto’s activities show that the consumer’s rights are not of concern. Not long ago, Vermont state legislation planned to enforce GMO labeling. This did not last too long because the state was sued as a result of this enforcement. Fraser and Mittal write, “the Grocery Manufacturers Association (supported by corporations including Monsanto...) is now suing the state, alleging that the law would violate the U.S Constitution in various ways” (Fraser and Anuradha). Monsanto appears again in a battle against GMO labeling. Whenever a protest appear against GMOs or for GMO labeling, Monsanto will continue to find any opportunity to reject GMO labeling. In general, companies are formed to make a profit, although GMO companies claim to

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are genetic materials; which have been altered through biotechnology. Many crops sold around the world are genetically modified. GMOs undergo changes to fit a specific purpose such as pest-resistant crops. Despite the fact that GMOs are commonly used, there has been many disagreements regarding whether or not they should be labeled. Although GMOs have been deemed safe by the FDA they concluded that labeling GMOs are unnecessary, citizens disagree and suggest GMOs should be labeled because labels provide benefits and also allow people to have positive attitudes regarding GMOs; also not labeling GMOs infringes on an American citizen’s freedom and the labels could start a governmental public campaign

The desire for GMO labeling stems from the fear of their effects. Many people do not have a complete understanding of the science behind GMOs. In a 2013 study by the American Society for Nutrition, 600 American consumers were questioned about their knowledge of GMOs, and 25% said they had never heard of GMOs (Wunderlich and Gatto 3). Additionally, 54% knew little to nothing about GMOs (5). In other words, American consumers are poorly educated about GMOs. Contrary to what some may believe, genetic modification does not include the insertion of chemicals into an organism, instead, it means modifying an organism's DNA so that it can express desired traits. (“Genetically modified organism” 1). Genetic modification is commonly confused with genetic

An issue that is hotly debated is whether food that contains Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) should be labeled to let consumers know that the food they are purchasing contains GMOs. Research shows that there is no clear evidence whether GMOs have a positive or negative effect on the human body. Consumers should know that they are buying GMO’s because farmers use more pesticides. Furthermore, the scientific community has no consensus on GMOs. Finally, GMOs have proven to have adverse side effects in animal testing. This shows how GMOs should be labeled.

Non mandatory labeling of food containing GMOs allows GMOs marketers to engage in misleading food advertisement. Buyers often rely on labels to get a description of what they are buying. Leaving out the fact that a product contains GMOs is misleading. It is almost the same as avoiding to mention a specific ingredient in the food. For instance, many foods sold as “all natural” have indeed great amounts of GMOs. Consumers have no way of knowing that because GMOs are not labeled on the package. Many people assume that foods labeled as “all natural” are minimally processed, are healthier and contain no modified organisms. In other words, when buyers read the “all natural” statement, they usually think that natural means the product of mother earth. However, GMOs are not natural in any sense of the word. Therefore, selling a product that is “all natural” without mentioning that it contains GM ingredients is completely contradictory and misleading. Nevertheless, biotech food corporations suggests otherwise and argue that labeling GMOs is what will lead consumers to deceptive marketing practices. Indeed, the Monsanto Company, a pioneer of

Non mandatory labeling of food containing GMOs is allowing food marketers to mislead consumers. Buyers often rely on labels to get a description of what they are buying. Leaving out the fact that a product contains GMOs is misleading. It is almost the same as avoiding to mention a specific ingredient of the food. For instance, many foods sold as “all natural” have indeed great amounts of GMOs. Consumers have no way of knowing that because GMOs are not labeled on the package. Many people assume that foods labeled as “all natural” are minimally process, are healthier and contain no modified organisms. In other words, when buyers read the “all natural” stamen, they usually think natural means the product of mother earth. However, GMOs are not natural in any sense of the word. Therefore, selling a product that is “all natural” without mentioning that it contains GM ingredients is completely contradictory and misleading. Nevertheless, biotech food corporations suggests otherwise and argue that labeling GMOs is what will lead consumers to deceptive marketing practices. Indeed, the Monsanto Company, a pioneer of

To initiate action towards requiring GMO labels on all food packaging, the audience we aim to target is families with kids and young adults with the overall interest in cautious eating. More specifically, within our audience, it is aimed to target those who stand in the higher income percentage because, organic foods tend to be higher in sales price and, therefore, it would be easier for the wealthy to indulged in these organic foods. If our audience is able to spend extra money on food that doesn’t contain GMOs, then, we believe that this will start to affect the companies distributing the GMO food and untimely get them to change their food production practices from GMO use to organic farming. Once enough of an impact has been made on