Is It A Good Idea To Label Genetically Modified Foods?

A new bill in California would force food producers to disclose if any genetically engineered ingredients were in what you eat. Is the law commonsense or simply trying to hold back the future of food?

July 1, 2012 | Source: Co. Exist | by Ariel Schwartz

For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Genetic Engineering page, Millions Against Monsanto page, and our California News page.

In 1983, scientists created the first genetically modified plant.
Fast forward a mere 29 years later and approximately 80% of all packaged
food in the U.S.
contains genetically engineered (GE) ingredients. But there’s no way
for you to tell–producers aren’t required to use any labeling that
indicates the use
of GE crops.

That may soon change in California, where Proposition 37 (AKA the
California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act) will be placed
on voter ballots
in the upcoming November election. If passed, the proposition will
require most foods containing GE ingredients (with the exception of
alcoholic beverages,
dairy, meat, and poultry) to come with special labeling.

“The initiative really just requires adding a little bit of extra ink to existing labels.”

This attempt at transparency has riled up pesticide and
biotechnology industries, which have–along with other groups that
oppose the law–created a
website entitled Stop the Costly Food Labeling Proposition to
convince voters that it’s a bad idea to have products containing GE
crops labeled as such. We
decided to delve into some of their claims.

The law would hurt California family farmers, food companies and grocers.

The site claims that the law will require these groups to keep
records on every product they sell, tracking whether they contain GE
ingredients and force
them to place “scary-sounding labels” on their products, putting
them at a competitive disadvantage. They would also have to spend cash
to ensure that that
they keep entirely separate facilities for GE and non-GE crops.