Is GMO labeling a scare tactic?

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

To be considered organic, among other things, products must be free of genetically engineered ingredients. After recognizing the threat this new technology posed to its industry, organic product manufacturers began to insinuate GMOs were somehow dangerous and demand labeling.

Ronnie Cummins, director of the Organic Consumers Association, admitted that scaring consumers into buying organic food was a marketing ploy, saying the first step to growing organic market share is to change labeling laws.

Other leaders in the organic industry believe the same, and they put their money where their mouths are. GMO labeling organization, Just Label It, was initially funded by a “who’s who” of organic product companies. . .The head of the group is Gary Hirshberg, the chairman of Stonyfield Organic, who regularly implies that there is a link between GMOs and cancer or birth defects (there isn’t). . . .

There’s no scare tactic too dirty for the organic industry seeking new customers. The Organic Consumers Association recently claimed that it was pesticides, not the Zika virus, causing birth defects in South American children. (That’s false.) . . . .

Besides the marketing, the organic industry has funded anti-GMO scientists who regularly perform poorly designed experiments that they claim “prove” GMOs are somehow problematic. . . .

. . . .

The congressional failure to pass the Roberts amendment (S.3450) providing federal guidance on GMOs shows these scare tactics have worked. The organic industry has taken a safe, effective technology and scared people into thinking it needs to be labeled. A better label for those worried about GMOs would be for organic packages, saying “I’m with stupid.”

Read full, original post: The organic industry’s GMO hoax

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-11_27_01-AM-2
AI likely to improve health care, research shows—but not for blacks and ethnic minorities
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-01_23_27-PM-2
Viewpoint: Will AI democratize personalized cancer treatment or fuel medical misinformation?
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.