The Health Risks Of Gmos

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 Federal Government should require labeling of GMO’s on genetically modified foods. The people deserve to know what they put in their bodies. Some of the food is very unhealthy and some people are completely unaware of that fact. Many food companies do not put out all the information about what goes into the food in which we consume, if the Federal government were to require labeling of all GMO foods then the people could be well educated about what they put inside their bodies, and know if it is good for them or not. GMO stands for genetically modified foods, a genetically modified food 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 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

Fortunately according to Whole Foods, all GMOs will be required to be labeled by 2018. Besides consumers being left untold about which products contain GMOs, the environment is also suffering from the overuse of Roundup made by the Monsanto Company. Plants have been genetically engineered for herbicide resistance. So herbicides can be applied on GMO crops without causing any harm to them. Stronger and newer weeds are developing as they are becoming more resistant to the chemicals, which will needs ever higher doses of herbicides such as Roundup. According to “Herbicide Resistant Crops,” a company in northern California which deals in herbicidal studies, “Herbicides cannot tell the difference between plants that are crops and plants that are weeds. As a result, excessive weed growth forces crops to compete with sunlight and nutrients, which can cause significant losses. Some people feel that it’ll be a waste of money to label products containing genetically modified ingredients.” According to “Hysteria over GMOs…” the author feels it’ll be a waste of money because the FDA has approved GM crops so they must be safe for consumption. The author also mentions that GMOs occurred on almost 400 million acres and no one has ever experienced any problems (Hysteria Over GMOs Web). Even though the FDA approved GMOs, there are many underlying factors that can still cause harm. One example is the studies since the FDA

Around 93 percents believe Genetically Modified Food should be labelled. GMOs are still not required In the U.S and Canada, which bring us to a debate over the years whether Genetic Modified Food should be label or not In America and Canada, Until today this argument continues. Therefore If you are looking to buy healthier food avoid eating food that contains GMOs, look for label that specify that are “Organic” or “USDA Organic “ while GMOs benefits many farming industry, It also brings controversial negatives.

There are roughly sixty countries that require GMO labeling and they do not have the problem that the United States have. Some countries even go as far to ban GMOs and only let some in. They have to go through many processes and tests to examine the effects and quality of the plant and/or product. These countries have lower rates of GMO food purchases and their environment is much cleaner than the United States. Monsanto has always tried its hardest to prevent any law from passing to regulate and label their products. They have spent millions of dollars. They have also threatened to sue the states that have brought up the idea or bill the label. The public has protested and demanded labeling, they believe they have a right to know

Gary Hirshberg (2013), Chairman of Stonyfield Farm, stated that GMOs are genetically modified organism that have been altered with other species that wouldn 't be found in nature. The U.S. Commerce Department and the U.S. Patent Office, both see this to be a new, unique organism, can be equivalent to a non-GMO products. FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) declared that GMOs can be modified to have the same amount of calories, carbohydrates, fiber, and protein, therefore they do not need a label to warning costumers (para. 3). GMOs were first discovered in 1996, and are very common now, most of our soy and corn produces are roughly 90% GMOs in all of US markets. USA is one of the few nations that don 't need to label on GMOs, 64 other countries need an approval label and have not risen food prices (para. 6). Hirshberg announced, as of right now its too early to see the impact that GMOs have on our generation, so no one can yet claim if this is a safe or harmful product to use (para. 7). Hirshberg firmly stated,

Some health groups say there are unanswered questions regarding the potential long-term impact on human health from food derived from GMOs, and propose mandatory labeling[150][151] or a moratorium on such products.[152][153][154] Concerns include contamination of the non-genetically modified food supply,[155][156] effects of GMOs on the environment and nature,[152][154] the rigor of the regulatory process,[153][157] and consolidation of control of the food supply in companies that make and sell GMOs,[152] or concerns over the use of herbicides with

One of the biggest issues in the ongoing debate over GM foods is whether they should be labeled to protect the public’s right-to-know privileges. Mandatory labeling regulations in European nations and several other countries are making a deeper examination of this issue in the United States (Ross). Even though some countries have mandated GMO labeling, the US should not mandate such law.

My own view is that whether or not GMOs are bad for human health, they should still be labeled. To this date, GMOs Mandatory labeling remains optional which has led to deceptive advertising. This kind of deception prevents consumer from knowing the exact ingredients of their foods, prevents scientists from identifying the effects of the consumption of GMOs and causes consumer’s mistrust of the Food and Drug Administration agency. In other words, Optional labeling of GMOs allows deceptive marketing, prevents people from recognizing GMOs side Effects, and causes mistrust towards the FDA.

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

Abhorrently, today's consumers are faced with discomfort regarding food safety. For the past 20 years millions of people around the world have been eating plants genetically modified by scientists. Genetically modified crops are tweaked to resist the harsh herbicides. In a recent article titled Labels for GMOs are bad the author argues that GMOs are safe for human consumption. In fact,Suspected culprit in devastating 'fiber disease' statistics show that “Around 70 percent of processed foods in the U.S contain genetically modified ingredients.” ( The Editors 1 ) I strongly oppose The Editors point of view towards GMO labeling because consumers want to know what they are eating. GMOs should indeed be labeled to inform what's in the product

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

This article is about the Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) labeling law that President Obama signed, the law allows companies to label their products in anyway they want to indicate the presence of GMO products. This article discusses the controversy between both sides of the GMO labeling debate, the pro labeling side desiring to know what they are consuming and the against labeling side expressing their fear that the label of GMO on a product would make consumers turn away unnecessarily. This law was a compromise to both sides as it requires a form of labeling that makes it possible for inquiring consumers to find what is in their food but also does not require companies to clearly state the presence of GMO.

The use of GMO’s in our everyday foods has been a big debate these last few years. Many people disagree, and think that GMO labelling should be used when we sell modified foods in our stores; but, others agree with the use of GMO’s, and think that they are harmless to our health. With many protests, speeches, and riots around the streets of common ‘GMO cities’, some states have made it a law to label genetically modified foods. Today, only a few states have the law passed, but environmentalists still fight for the rights of labelling or to stop using GMOs in our foods.