The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download and review our 2019 Annual Report

Will GMO labeling deprive anti-GMO activists of their best ammunition?

This article or excerpt is included in the GLP’s daily curated selection of ideologically diverse news, opinion and analysis of biotechnology innovation.

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

It would appear that agri-industry is losing its two-decade-long battle to prevent labels on foods produced from genetically modified crops.

. . . .

Even as the pro-labellers successfully convinced legislators in Vermont to go with mandatory labelling, the industry took its fight to the U.S. government. There it has become mired in the dysfunction that defines U.S. policy-making these days.

In the end, it only took one state and then one company to start a landslide. Vermont passed its law. As federal legislation shutting that down failed to materialize, Campbell Soup decided to go with labelling, quickly followed by General Mills, Kellogg and Mars. The list continues to grow.

. . . .

In a roundabout way, losing this battle could help promoters of this new science win the war over those who don’t like it.

The science is pretty clear that although there are downsides to genetic engineering, food safety is not one of them.

Acknowledging consumers’ right to know how their food is produced removes the biggest weapon the anti-GMO campaign has in its arsenal — the notion that the industry opposes labelling because it has something to hide.

Chances are, once consumers are assured of their right to know, most will shrug and continue to buy the products they’ve always enjoyed.

Read full, original post: Editorial: The upside of losing
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend