The Denver Post editorial on July 22, “Unintended consequences of GMO labeling initiative,” outlined some concerns about Initiative 48, the mandatory GMO labeling initiative. The Farmers Alliance for Integrated Resources (FAIR) has identified a significant number of additional unintended consequences of this measure, as it relates to farming.
The initiative is vague and does not address the nexus between growth and production of food. For example, relative to Roundup-Ready sugar beets, the final product (sugar) after processing has no trace of GMO DNA, but would still need to be labeled. Meanwhile, all the exceptions, that very well could contain GMOs, would not be labeled, thereby misinforming the consumer, who only relies on a label to inform them if the products they are consuming have been genetically engineered.
It adds an unnecessary fear factor to food. Some people are allergic to nuts, or have gluten intolerance, or need to know sugar content for their diabetes, for example, and it makes sense to put that information on a label. However, labeling a food for its food production process that has been studied in over 1,700 independent scientific studies that have shown no negative health benefits is disingenuous.
Read the full, original article: GMO initiative is misguided