Thursday, May 2, 2013

GMO Food Debate in the National Spotlight


http://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelhennessey/2012/11/03/gmo-food-debate-in-the-national-spotlight/
 

 
  • Under the California's Proposition 37, food companies were required to put warning labels on domestically produced foods that contain GM ingredients.
  • "Unfortunately, not all Americans are confident that food companies will act with public health in mind without greater legal enforcement from the FDA. If the proposition passes in California, as it is projected to, the current 70% of food items in your average grocery store containing GMOs would have to be relabeled. And because California is historically a leader in American legislative action, it’s likely that national reform would soon follow."
  • "In addition to the visual perfection that GMOs boast, proponents claim that they have more profound advantages as well:
-GM crops can be made resistant to viruses, fungi and bacterial growth.
-GM crops can be engineered to grow faster.
-GM crops can be engineered to be naturally pest-resistant, undermining the need for pesticide chemicals.
-GM crops can be engineered to tolerate extreme weather conditions, such as cold fronts or droughts, allowing for a geographically diverse range of growth sites.
-GM crops can be engineered with added vitamins and minerals, which is especially beneficial in third world countries dealing with malnutrition.
Sounds great! So what’s with all of the fuss about GMOs in America?"

  • GM doubters believe that the federal government placed too much trust in the hands of food companies as the FDA are currently shielding themselves from "interfering with GM foods as much as possible."
  • People fear it might pose health risks to humans since scientific research has not proven "significant ill effects" toward humans.

    •  
    Posted by at

    18 comments:

    1. AkshayMay 2, 2013 at 5:49 AM

      This is a very interesting article. I agree with the fact that if these reforms do make it through California, they rest of the nation will soon follow.

      ReplyDelete
    2. UnknownMay 2, 2013 at 5:52 AM

      May I point out that this proposition was made a few years ago and already failed. A combination of aggresive marketing by monsanto and blatant lies from the pro-label group that were exposed caused the bill to kick the bucket last year, so this is already old news.

      ReplyDelete
    3. UnknownMay 2, 2013 at 6:01 AM

      ALso, the picture with the needle is rather ovverrated. It doesn't really work like that, I try to avoid those kinds of pictures in my posts.

      ReplyDelete
    4. triplekrizMay 3, 2013 at 11:24 AM

      I too think the needle is not necessary since most fruits don't need injections but rather the insecticide sprayings that no longer kill hte plant. I personally think we all should know what we are eating since not everyone has access to internet to look up information on websites, but the process of changing the stores should be slow and everything shipped from a certain point should have what they did to the food.

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. NKoreaMay 10, 2013 at 5:37 AM

        you have to take into account that the people that dont have "access to internet to look up information" are probably not going to be able to afford organic and non-genetically modified food. If GMOs were banned, theres a good chance those people wouldnt be able to afford fruits and vegetables. If the needle was removed, the prices would become highly inflated and thats not something the govenment can control, it's based on economics

        KMP

        Delete
    5. UnknownMay 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM

      GMO foods I think are ok, They just need to be more regulated and tested so that noone gets any diorders or diseases

      ReplyDelete
    6. AnonymousMay 7, 2013 at 11:33 AM

      regulations need to happen and maybe supermarkets should have signs in their section with nutritional facts and what chemicals and stuff is in it

      ReplyDelete
    7. UnknownMay 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

      I feel that Genetically Modified food is a helpful advancement in agriculture and that GMO food distributors should be overseen and given regulations by the FDA to ensure that general consumer recieves the safest food to feed himself and his family.

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. Joshua Jonathan SomrahMay 13, 2013 at 11:25 AM

        I agree. The FDA will see that the food is healthy and safe because that is basically what they are paid to do.

        Delete
    8. NKoreaMay 10, 2013 at 5:33 AM

      There seems to be nothing wrong with genetically modified food as long as its been properly labled. It's a free market and there is a possibility to have organic foods that consumers can opt to buy. If the FDA approves of the genetically modified food there should be no controversy if a family choosed to buy it.

      KMP

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. Happily Ever After?May 21, 2013 at 11:08 AM

        I agree because as long as we know what we are eating and all genetically modified food is labeled it is your personal choice whether or not you eat genetically modified foods.

        Delete
    9. UnknownMay 10, 2013 at 5:34 AM

      Robert, they attempted to cereate a labeling system as shown in this post. It failed, however, due to a combination of various reasons

      ReplyDelete
    10. UnknownMay 10, 2013 at 5:35 AM

      Nkorea, that is the problem. They are not being labeled, so consumers are not able to make a decision because they do not know.

      ReplyDelete
    11. Joshua Jonathan SomrahMay 13, 2013 at 11:35 AM

      I think you guys should put some political cartoons on this blog to give people a better understanding of the BIAS in this topic.

      ReplyDelete

    Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)