The most visible and contentious debate in our food supply is undoubtedly over labeling of genetically modified organisms.
In the spirit of Unearthed, I’ll tell you where I stand: I support it, but I didn’t always.
My opposition hinged on the scientific consensus that GMOs aren’t harmful to eat, but it’s clear that, while true, that’s not sufficient. The primary argument in favor is that people are entitled to know what they’re eating, and the history of food labeling in this country supports that idea. There’s no unifying principle for what goes on a label.
We label trans fats, which are bad for you, and fiber, which is good for you. We have ingredient lists that simply tell you what you’re eating, and country-of-origin labels, which let you make decisions based on whatever ideas you have about domestic and foreign foods. Safety is only one of many concerns that drive labeling.
Share this article
But, just as GMO safety doesn’t lock up the position that we shouldn’t label, a right to know doesn’t single-handedly justify the position that we should.
Read the full, original article: GMO labeling: Is the fight worth it?
