Cass Sunstein: Don’t mandate labeling of genetically-altered food

The following is an edited excerpt.

In the abstract, the argument for compulsory labeling seems exceedingly powerful. But there is a risk that a compulsory label for GM food would confuse, mislead and alarm consumers, potentially causing economic harm, not least to consumers themselves.

To see the problem, we need to step back a bit. The World Health Organization defines GMOs as “organisms in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally.”

As a result of the underlying technology, sometimes called “recombinant DNA technology” or “genetic engineering,” certain individual genes are transferred into one organism from another.

GM food can potentially grow faster, taste better, resist diseases, lower reliance on pesticides, cost less and prove more nutritious.

Read the original article in its entirety here: Don’t mandate labeling of genetically-altered food.

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Infographic: What are mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and how do they work?

Infographic: What are mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and how do they work?

As of 1 December 2020, thirteen vaccines have reached the final stage of testing: where they are being given to ...
favicon

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend