23 thoughts on “GMO Labeling Poll”

  1. It looks like we have a big task ahead of us if this small sampling is any example of what the public thinks of GMO labeling. Wake Up America! You have given up so many rights at this point, don’t give up the right to know what you are feeding your kids. Don’t depend on the government or the food companies to be square with you while they are working on getting more out of your pocket while keeping their cost down. Stockholders are only looking for a return. They did not invest to feed the world. Check out http://www.gmofreeusa.org and get informed, excited and involved.

  2. Says “Don’t depend on the government or the food companies to be square with you…”

    Then requests government mandating companies label … :-/

    1. She was making a point that we can not rely on them to do it themselves…

      She was saying we have to hold govt and these companies accountable and force their hand…

      It will not be done if we do not force them to do it.

      We must force the govt to correctly fight for the citizen and mandate this labeling just like the rest of the developed world has done.

  3. Even though I don’t think labeling is necessary, I hope it happens because I suspect it will have the exact opposite effect that the activists think it will have: Everyone would then see the millions of people eating the millions of GMO-based foods every hour of every day of the week and going on to lead healthy, productive lives. Jim I. above and his ilk, members of the new left wing tea party–paranoid, ignorant, testy–will become a squad of exploding heads..

  4. What planet are you living on Mike? North America leads the way in so many water marks: Obesity, infant deaths, coronary heart failure, diabetes, autism, cancer, and stroke. We are what we eat. It is your prerogative to determine whether these health issues have anything to do with GMOs in our food supply or not. You can choose to stay ignorant if you wish. But the fact remains that we as a planet have real health issues and the smarter we get trying to manipulate nature with putting a gene of a strawberry in a corn plant or a pig gene in a tomato gives us unpredictable results. For us nut jobs that think this is not good for our bodies not to mention the affects it has on the planet, think otherwise. Labeling the products gives me the choice of whether to feed it to my family. It is obvious that you are not concerned with the facts. Most recent studies reveal that there are long term consequences when ingesting GMOs. http://www.honeycolony.com/article/gmos-seeds-of-sickness-part-1/ Do you think that the FDA does independent studies? Do you think there are the same studies done to food that new drugs are subjected? If you do than you need to read up. Sixty countries agree with me who agrees with you Monsanto?

    1. This is a classic example of the correlation fallacy. North America “leads” in health issues X, Y, Z; North America allows GMOs in food; therefore, health issues X,Y, and Z are caused by GMOs in food.

      That you don’t understand what an egregious error in thinking this is is mind-boggling.

  5. Jim, your message is disingenuous. You claim you just want labeling, but then link to a site that proclaims its ultimate goal is to ban. You tell me that governments and food companies are “not being square” with us, but again point to a site that blatantly lies about GM issues. The “GMO Free map” they give there, for example, is clearly wrong and meant to intentionally mislead. Your second link above is no different, pointing to long discredited arguments and information, complete with emotionally charged imagery and statements. Why should I or anyone else listen to you and your sources when you refuse use a credible argument and “be square” with us? Is fear the only tactic you know for persuasion?

  6. I don’t get the logic of this. If the question is “If GM foods HAVE TO be labeled, WHICH… do you prefer?” How can one permissible answer then be “I don’t think labeling is necessary.”

  7. GMOs have not been proven safe & I think they should be banned until further testing can be done. I don’t want to be a guinea pig & I don’t want my child to be either. Labeling GMO products is important because its the first step in getting them banned because then they can be boycotted.

  8. I’m not quite sure I understand the venom here.

    It is worth pointing out that we can’t have something “proven safe”. We can only test for limited problems and, for the most part, GMOs give every appearance of being safe.

    At the same time, we certainly wouldn’t want to claim that every possible GMO is safe to eat. For example, I wouldn’t want to eat those cute, little glow-in-the-dark fish.

    There’s no reason to get particularly upset if someone says safety hasn’t been proven. One could, for example, point out that Roundup Ready soy may have unsafe levels of glyphosate and AMPA. It’s there in GM soy and not in non-GMO soy. Those substances have been claimed to be genotoxins and to potentially cause blood disorders. Should we require that every seed company (OK, both of them) should always test for glyphosate and AMPA? Always? Which other things should they test for? The list could get long.

    As you know, there is no real requirement for safety testing. Experimental design is really hard for testing food safety and would likely take years. What would you do? Gorge unsuspecting victims with a particular product? Given that difficulty, we simply must wait and see if problems arise. One might think of themselves as a guinea pig. Isn’t that how it worked with cow’s milk? That worked out OK.

    However, given a choice of random genetic modification or none, I’d go for none. You’d probably have to go some way to proving that Glofish sushi was safe before I’d break out the black light for dinner but that’s kind of a frivolous mod.

    Given a choice of genetic modification to enhance vitamins, say, I’d probably go for that (e.g., golden rice). Given a chance to grow a 45 day tomato with wonderful flavor, I’d probably go with that. I say probably, though, because, I’m being asked to trust someone with no real accountability if it’s found to be problematic. I think a lot of people are concerned with this lack of accountability.

    The question that started this could possibly add “should GMO seed houses be held accountable if their product is determined to be unhealthy”. I’d say no. Taxpayers who are likely to foot the bill for problems may disagree.

  9. One of the most important FACTS that anti GMO advocates conveniently disregard is that if current regulations for GM foods, if applied to non-GM products, would ban the sale of potatoes and tomatoes, which can contain poisonous glycoalkaloids; celery, which contains carcinogenic psoralens; rhubarb and spinach (oxalic acid); and cassava, which feeds about 500 million people but contains toxic cyanogenic alkaloids. Foodstuffs like soy, wheat, milk, eggs, mollusks, crustaceans, fish, sesame, nuts, peanuts, and kiwi would likewise be banned, because they can cause food allergies. Good thing they are grandfathered in huh? Every kind of food we eat has the possibility to harm someone in some way. My suggestion is for the anti GMO advocates to do some research on everything they eat, anything that has a food allergy or adverse effects of any kind they should not eat!! After they all starve off then we can go back to life as usual. By the way you can die from drinking too much water, we should definitely label it as hazardous material and not allow children to get ahold of it. Just because something is natural does not mean it is safe! Oh and everything on earth is technically “organic”. Saying GMO is not organic is a lie.

  10. I am not anti-GMO but I’m also not of the opinion that just because something is genetically modified, that doesn’t mean it’s good to eat. The moral panic on the ANTI-side and the red herrings and strawmen on the PRO-side arguments are equally problematic. Please. Stop thinking that you are making good points when you are obviously interested only in the political, to the exclusion of the scientific, issues.

    Could foods raised with GMO protocols be unhealthful? Yes. They could. Get over it. It’s possible that foods raised using Round Up related compounds are problematic. The only thing really being tested in these compounds is glyphosate for the Round-Up related chemicals. So, what about the POE-15? Tests seem to indicate that POE-15 could cause health problems in humans and,given that POE-15 is present in the formulations and doesn’t break down as quickly as glyphosate, it could be present in these foods. Is it present in the food you eat? Would you want to know? Should other people be allowed to know?

    That said, would a GMO label tell you that there is POE-15 in your food? No. Not all GMOs use Round-Up related chemicals and ti may not even be present in all glyphosate compounds (although I believe it is in most, if not all, on the market today). .

    Don’t go on about oxalic acid in food and don’t say that these things are “grandfathered in”. There are lots of things in food. There’s arsenic in apples! Oh my. Always been there, no grandfathering (a formal legal process) involved. Of course, it’s mostly in the seeds and you’d have to eat a lot of them. I tend to feed my kids rice from Asia when we have rice because a lot of US fields used to be planted in cotton and there are reports of significant levels of arsenic (used on cotton crops). I’ll use source as a heuristic for arsenic presence until I’m given a better source of information. I’d prefer to buy American but, right now, there are few sources I trust. That sort of thing matters, whether you like it or not.

    This argument seems to have degenerated into the “more heat than light” discussions we had about cigarettes back in the 60s and 70s (They are good for you! No, they are not!) or the climate change arguments we’re having today (It’s happening! No it’s not!, or more recently It’s caused by humans! No, it’s not!). Such arguments tend to be unhelpful and often make both sides look bad.

    I still enjoy an occasional smoke (they taste and feel good) and I own and drive a pre-smogged car (it’s fast and fun). I understand I can’t do either of these things all the time if I care about my health and environment but that’s OK. Hell, I used to use Round Up (now my wife won’t let me). I didn’t use it on food but I do like it as an herbicide. It’s much friendlier than Agent Orange (insert smiley face emoticon about here).

    I’m making informed (and legal) decisions and I like have the information necessary to make them. I also happen to understand why I would like to avoid some GMOs and think that a label would go some way toward helping me do that. However, I want some GMOs, too. I’m not anti-GMO but I do have a low tolerance for dumb-ass aggression and anti-science lashing out.

    The way I see it, information about what I am eating is a good thing. Banning GMOs, however, isn’t. Some GMOs could be seriously great. I believe the science really is on the side of GMOs but not all of them. Maybe if liability laws were to make providers accountable for long term health risks associated with confidential chemicals in formulations (like POEs) everyone could rest more easily.

    As Daniel Moynihan said: “You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.”

  11. I have to say that I can not agree with you more on most of the topics that you replied to. I too believe that there are many good things that have and will continue to come from GMO technology. I also agree that there have been bad things that have come from them as well. I am a farmer, so I am admittedly biased in my post as you could tell. The “grandfather” statement was not meant to be taken in terms of law but only to prove the point that if a GMO food that was altered today had the exact same health risks that a peanut does anti GMO advocates would scream bloody murder. Please explain how that is wrong. Organic farming is the biggest hoax of my time in the farming world. It is not sustainable. Are current traditional practices the answer? Absolutely not. The world is very different than it was 100 years ago, so is our food, that is why both must evolve.
    Anti GMO advocates have themselves to blame for the size and growth of Monsanto. Anti GMO folks have all but eliminated the independent seed companies in the country because they cannot afford to go through the ringer every time a new breed of plant is developed. Should there be independent testing? Absolutely! Should we label? Possibly. But if we label we also should label any and all foods that pose any kind of a health risk. Show me documented cases where conventional food has killed someone. I am sure you are well aware that organic food has. Also I would like to see labels that have information on any trace amounts of pesticides that plants naturally secrete to protect themselves, just so you are aware it is much higher than the levels of man made pesticides and just as carcinogenic. Think about that while drinking your morning cup of Starbucks that has more carcinogens than you would ingest in a year from conventional food.
    I use GMO technology in the sugar beets that I raise. I pay every year to be able to use that technology. I spray FAR FEWER AND MUCH SAFER chemicals on my crops now than I ever have. Why? Because weak and sick plants attract insects to feed on them. Certain weeds release toxins that choke out the plants around them, causing them to be weak and sick. Weeds are also breeding grounds for insects. If farmers use good practices they can eliminate weeds, which reduces sick plants which reduces insects, which can in turn reduce insecticides, increase yields and have a HEALTHIER plant.
    There are a few organic farmers in my area and it is a disgrace the way the land is not utilized to anywhere close to its potential. One of these organic growers last year said that he was all but ready to give it up on the whole organic practice after having his hay crop destroyed by aphids last year. There was a decent hail storm in the area which weakened all of the crops not just organic. See above for what happens to weak plants. I have never seen hay fields so black. You copy and paste information you read on your Sierra club web pages. I live this stuff. You my friend are full of the same unsafe manure that is spread on my neighbors crops instead of using properly turned and aged compost. Enjoy eating your slave labor rice that can be shipped in and sold cheaper than local because it is not held to the same regulations as what is raised here. Not all conventional farmers are good. But we are not willing to compromise for something that is not sustainable or honest. Please look at who owns the majority of all organic companies. You will thank us in the future. Best wishes.

  12. You, my friend, have to lose the anger. Like I said in my first posting, what I do not understand is the venom in this discussion. Ad hominem attacks are a poor substitute for discussion.

    Since you have expressed a concern:

    “You copy and paste information you read on your Sierra club web pages. I live this stuff. You my friend are full of the same unsafe manure that is spread on my neighbors crops instead of using properly turned and aged compost. Enjoy eating your slave labor rice that can be shipped in and sold cheaper than local because it is not held to the same regulations as what is raised here. ”

    I don’t read Sierra Club web pages. I don’t believe I ever have. I didn’t need to cut and paste anything to write what I wrote.

    I am not a farmer but I have relatives and friends who are. I make my own compost and mix my own fertilizers, too, and feed my family vegetables that I grow (perhaps less than I could).

    I choose to buy the rice that I buy for reasons that I explained. I buy a lot of my food from people I know and some from farmer centric co-ops. I think about what I do and I like having the information to make good decisions. I believe that others should think about what they do and have information to make those decisions.

    I brought up glyphosate and POE-15 to suggest that the “GMO Right or Wrong” crowd can’t simply dismiss out of hand that anyone’s concerns with GMOs are scientifically invalid. That is as wrongheaded as the belief that GMOs are are necessarily unhealthy. Remember, I said that the problem was more heat than light on BOTH sides.

    Why bring up glyphosate and POE-15 (ingredients in Round Up style herbicides)? Some say that glyphosate is a problem. I doubt that it is and, as has been mentioned, glyphosate (alone) has been tested. Some say that POE-15 is a problem. I believe that it could be and it has NOT been tested for safety despite the fact that it is in use. Many substances are in use that are listed as inert or presented as used for compounding. Is it reasonable to be concerned about these non-tested substances, especially the ones that are known health risks? I haven’t seen an argument that doesn’t simply rely on politics or ad hominem attacks to make its point. That doesn’t mean that GMOs should be avoided but it does suggest that ignorance of the science is suboptimal.

    Your personal attack on me suggests that you have no answer for whether POE-15 is safe to eat and, similarly, you will have no way to address whether it’s combination with glyphosate during application is safe for the farmers who apply it. Many substances applied at farms are harmful to workers. Farm workers still have a shorter life span than non-farm workers and this is something that should be of concern to us all.

    I do tend to buy organics when I don’t know who grew it. This is more out of respect for the farmers than about whether there are trace elements of anything on the food. You might consider me a “dumb-ass” for that but I have back up for my opinions and I’ve shared that.

    I’m trying to encourage people to discuss this as rational adults who have a respect for science.

Comments are closed.