Nationwide mandatory GMO labeling bill won’t reduce food costs or address global farming challenges

An attempt to pass a new law preempting efforts in several states to mandate GMO labeling is not only doomed to failure, it’s exactly the wrong strategy industry needs to prevail.

Last week, the House of Representatives voted 275-150 in favor of the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015, which would block states from passing mandatory GMO labeling laws. But this proposed law won’t deal with the fundamental issue here, and that isn’t consumer demand for labeling, but rather a deep distrust of genetic engineering as a science and its application as a complex technology. All that H.R. 1599 would do is further polarize the controversy and further alienate consumers suspicious of the entire rationale underlying genetic modification.

No doubt, there are credible, scientifically sound arguments in favor of deploying biotechnology in agriculture. The Coalition for Safe and Affordable Food, a group of food-industry trade groups, has done a solid job of detailing those benefits. What the coalition hasn’t been so successful in selling is the claim that biotech will reduce food costs and help alleviate world hunger. Those benefits may indeed be realized someday, but as of now, whatever favorable economics are associated with the cultivation of GE crops are going to growers and processors, not consumers.

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. Read full, original post: Meat of the Matter: Wrong move, wrong reasons

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Nigeriacotton

Video: We can ‘finally’ grow GMOs—Nigerian farmer explains why developing countries need biotech crops

Nigerian farmer Patience Koku discusses the GMO crop trials she is conducting on her farm, and why growers can "rise ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...
gmo corn field x

Do GMO Bt (insect-resistant) crops pose a threat to human health or the environment?

Bt is a bacterium found organically in the soil. It is extremely effective in repelling or killing target insects but ...
favicon

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

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

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

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend