Obama Signs Bill Mandating GMO Labeling

[PC2]

All of the modifying work is done by geneticists, molecular biologists, or biochemists? All of which are limited by the 23 or so amino acids?

The odds of randomly accidently ending up with the combination for pumping out stuff like ricin or strychnine by making a nutritional tweak seem astronomical.

[prwraith]

I want to know if any Unicorns were injured/killed in the making of my food. Can we get a label for that?

If you can get it through congress why not? Though I think you'd need to start with a baseline legal reference of what constitutes a unicorn.

- - - Updated - - -

You have entirely way too much faith in the general public if you trust them to make an informed decision.

Am I calling most people stupid? Yeah. Slightly more than half of the public has an IQ of less than 100 (it's not symmetric, there's slight skew).

You won't hear disagreement from me there.

- - - Updated - - -

Kind of like how even though there's nothing wrong with GMO crops, they still formed their uninformed opinion without doing a crap load of research. Or any.

I think the irrational fear of GMO crops is a bit entertaining. But I'd still like the ability to make a conscious choice. I'd like it if I knew where the food was sourced from, it's nutritional value etc on a sign above it. Not because I need it or couldn't look it up if I really wanted to, but it makes my life easier.

- - - Updated - - -

So is this everything with wheat in it?

It's basically everything in the U.S :P

[Osmeric]

The people who make Soylent are proudly proclaiming they are pro-GMO.

http://blog.soylent.com/post/1480000...made-with-gmos

[hrugner]

So is this everything with wheat in it?

I doubt dwarf wheat is going to be listed as a "GMO" by the board of agriculture, nor any other hybrid crops.

[Shadowferal]

I think the point about "wheat" are about all those labels that are mandated for those that need to be "gluten-free."

[satimy]

I doubt dwarf wheat is going to be listed as a "GMO" by the board of agriculture, nor any other hybrid crops.

But all wheat is a GMO isnt it?

[Celista]

The people who make Soylent are proudly proclaiming they are pro-GMO.

http://blog.soylent.com/post/1480000...made-with-gmos

I'm not surprised, the provocative name + the premise that you can replace food entirely with Soylent...seems fitting that they would be pro-GMO.

A friend of mine's brother lost 80 pounds on Soylent, but I'm not convinced of it's long-term safety as a complete food replacement. They've done studies on food replacement, tests subjects have done poorly on diets where vitamins and minerals were completely supplemented. Then again, those studies go back a few decades at this point and we've progressed forward in regards to nutritional science.

[Shadowferal]

A conscious choice about what? All of the GMO that's not harming you?

2nd part isn't relevant.

People should know what they're consuming.

You argue about people's ignorance about gmos, but continue to argue that people should continue to be ignorant...about what they're eating...

WTF?

[Speaker]

The GMO fanboys are out in force as usual I see. Love the misinformation on how genetic engineering and selective breeding is "essentially the same" since it changes the organism. I guess dying of old age and getting murdered in your teens is also the same then, since both leaves you dead...

Probably because it is impossible to know whether a certain crop was genetically modified versus selectively bred since they have virtually the same effect. Someone could take an "organic" type of corn and genetically modify the genes to be virtually the same as another piece of corn that was selectively bred. They would have the exact same genes, and no technology would be able to see the difference between the GMO and the selectively bred corn because there is no difference.

[Kaleredar]

Information is only good if it has meaning. I could give you astrology information regarding when a fruit was harvested, that doesn't mean it's worth cluttering up finite label space.

Yes I'm sure the labeling graphic designers are just positively shitting themselves over the prospect of having to add two or three words to a label.



There's nothing wrong with GMO foods (besides the generally skeevy business practices of the companies that produce them) but I really see no harm in labeling them. The "Oh but suddenly people won't buy them!" notion is pretty hollow, seeing as people are perfectly content to buy them now.

[Shadowferal]

If being a GMO has no impact on the safety of the food, then it's irrelevant information the consumer does not need..

No.NO!
You don't tell me what's relevant.
That's up to me, not you, or any other big business cheerleader.
This is about knowing what I'm eating. Period.

Seems to me that as usual that when a grand opportunity for educating people comes up, as this is now, it gets wasted.

[prwraith]

A conscious choice about what? All of the GMO that's not harming you?

Does it matter why people would like the information presentable if the cost is negligible ? If anything the most negative that would come of this is it would cause an increase in farmers market purchases which would support local economies which isn't really a bad thing.

The best thing is that the majority stays as they always were and people who have different beliefs can have a slightly easier life.

- - - Updated - - -

There is an infinite number of things that could potentially be known about what you're eating. You fixate on maybe half a dozen or so at most and they probably aren't even the most important things to know. Nobody is required to enable you to care about things that don't matter.

They sort of are though when those people lobby congress hard enough to enact a law

[PC2]

If anything the most negative that would come of this is it would cause an increase in farmers market purchases which would support local economies which isn't really a bad thing.

The negative is that it only works to stigmatize some food when there is no strong argument that it deserves a stigma.

[Themius]

Rather pay twice the price if i know it is done right and is good for both me and the earth. others that dont care can really eat that industrial junk and die 20 years early for all i care

There are some organic pesticides that are actually more toxic to humans than some of the "evil evil corporate genetic fake not off the earth" pesticides... so in some cases you're paying twice as much for something half as healthy.

[PC2]

Yep, but it helps local economies without using protectionist measures, it ain't a bad idea. The worst possible outcome of labelling the product that it is.

I think the argument there is eventually we need to find a way that local farms can access the most productive seeds. Though I agree that the corporations that invested in the research should get a reasonably long window to exclusively benefit from their investment.

[Selastan]

This is...interesting. On the surface, the anti-GMO crowd can claim that this is just displaying information. It isn't a warning label, it just displays information that allows consumers to make their own choice. However...



We have this. It didn't DO, anything. It just labeled the wearer as Jewish. You know, just information so you don't worry about accidentally becoming friends with them or help them out. Just like that label is there just in case you might accidentally buy a GMO product.

I mean, there is literally no right for the state to do this. It would be different if GMOs were bad, but they aren't. If they can't cause harm there is no reason for them to be labeled.

[Bollocks]

I think the argument there is eventually we need to find a way that local farms can access the most productive seeds. Though I agree that the corporations that invested in the research should get a reasonably long window to exclusively benefit from their investment.

Well yeah I agree, but I don't think it will generate the big stigma that people claim. People know what there is in a hot dog or other products(I'm looking at you sausage) and still eat it, so I have my doubts that it will stop the investemnt on bio technology.

- - - Updated - - -

1. It could, among other things, lead to a serious effort to ban GMOs, which will not help anyone.

2. I do not condone enabling stupidity.

I mean how many ways do I have to say it? The information is not useful. Continuing to push for it on the basis of "Well it doesn't hurt anyone" is just a cover for the fact that there's no rational reason for wanting it. If I want to know whether the person who grew it prefers Batman or Superman, what good reason is there to inflict additional cost on manufacturers by requiring them to change their labeling just so I can know stuff that doesn't matter? This legislation accomplishes nothing and unnecessarily adds another rule to our society. That is bad legislation, independent of the subject. Like I said in my first post, my hope is that this legislation ends up accomplishing nothing other than preemptively undermining attempts to introduce stricter legislation at the state level.

Well you know where the food comes from (country of origin) which technically is useless information given that it must have passed regulations before. So I suppose this is similar to GMOs. People won't suddenly stop consuming GMOs because it has a label on it.

[callipygoustp]

This is...interesting. On the surface, the anti-GMO crowd can claim that this is just displaying information. It isn't a warning label, it just displays information that allows consumers to make their own choice. However...



We have this. It didn't DO, anything. It just labeled the wearer as Jewish. You know, just information so you don't worry about accidentally becoming friends with them or help them out. Just like that label is there just in case you might accidentally buy a GMO product.

I mean, there is literally no right for the state to do this. It would be different if GMOs were bad, but they aren't. If they can't cause harm there is no reason for them to be labeled.

Wow! Someone compared the severity of labeling foods as GMO to the that of Nazis labeling Jewish people during WWII. A lot of crazy shit has been slung in this thread, but this takes the grand prize.

[Sunseeker]

Because clearly marking foods containing GMOs will make it easier for anti-science, anti-GMO people to push their idiotic platform that goes against all of the evidence.

So what? Clearly marking foods that use BvGH does the same thing. Clearly marking foods that contain gluten does the same thing. And so on and so forth.

They also let consumers make more informed choices about their foods. So they don't want to eat something a scientist played with in a lab as opposed to some farmer played with in their garden, who fucking cares? Who cares if they're not superbly educated about their choices? They think they're making the best choices for themselves, it doesn't hurt you, so fucking let them.

[prwraith]

1. It could, among other things, lead to a serious effort to ban GMOs, which will not help anyone.

2. I do not condone enabling stupidity.

I mean how many ways do I have to say it? The information is not useful. Continuing to push for it on the basis of "Well it doesn't hurt anyone" is just a cover for the fact that there's no rational reason for wanting it. If I want to know whether the person who grew it prefers Batman or Superman, what good reason is there to inflict additional cost on manufacturers by requiring them to change their labeling just so I can know stuff that doesn't matter? This legislation accomplishes nothing and unnecessarily adds another rule to our society. That is bad legislation, independent of the subject. Like I said in my first post, my hope is that this legislation ends up accomplishing nothing other than preemptively undermining attempts to introduce stricter legislation at the state level.

Now that is reasoning I can agree with. If labeling gmo's leads to an outright attempt to ban them I'd hate myself for having voted for it. To me I originally viewed them as a benign request for more information who's usefulness while dubious to me may be useful for others.