The Pros And Cons Of GMO Labeling
I think that there is legitimacy to the labeling of GMOs. GMOs have become a necessary evil for us to try and find innovative solutions to our growing demand for food production due to the continued increase of our global population. If you think about it we have been genetically modifying food and animals for centuries since the birth of modern agriculture and animal husbandry. We have cross breed crops and animals to accentuate their most desirable traits. The only difference is that we were doing so in a process that took a long time with the utilization of species that were able to breed with one another. Genetic modification is a whole new ballgame with creating a product that has the desirable traits, by introducing genes into an organism
…show more content…
from another organism that would not naturally be able to be compatible in a laboratory environment. This brings on a slew of new concerns that were not so much an issue in the past. This could be that new allergic reactions could occur in humans from the consumption of the foods, or what could happen if a GMO species is able to integrate and breed with wild populations that do not have these modifications present (Lallanilla, 2012). The development of GMOs has also been linked to adverse effects such as the sterilization or death of livestock, and sickness and damage to organs of lab animals that are utilized in testing (Lallanilla, 2016). Risks such as these make consumers wary of their consumer of GMO products.
I feel that it is ethically sound to be labeling GMOs for consumer choice.
We talk about individual freedoms and it comes down to that humans have the right to be able to choose what they are putting into their bodies. Out of our cash crops such as soy, corn, sugar beets, and canola, 90% of them are genetically modified for production (Lanllanilla, 2016). That is a huge portion of our food products that we are producing and consuming on a daily basis. Nine out of ten American consumers support the labeling of GMOs (Parker, 2014). Multiple states are passing and considering laws making the labeling of GMOs mandatory as well as the continued public outcry to make legislative changes. Some companies, like General Mills are using this movement to their advantage, they see that consumers are concerned and are either eliminating GMOs from their products or at least labeling their products. The food industry has already spent over $70 million dollars to combat labeling, but wouldn't it be easier to just start labeling products and use that money to find better solutions towards our food crises? (Parker, 2014) Blanket legislation would translate easily across the country and make it much easier for companies to comply with standards as opposed to having to develop different methods to cater to different
legislation.
Again, it comes down to that the right thing to do is to label GMO products. Let consumers choose how they want to choose, people have a right to know what is happening to their food products before they reach their pantry shelves and meals at home. It would be far simpler to create a legislation that can be a standard that makes compliance simple, saving companies money, and the food industry money from trying to combat a movement that is not going away anytime soon.
from another organism that would not naturally be able to be compatible in a laboratory environment. This brings on a slew of new concerns that were not so much an issue in the past. This could be that new allergic reactions could occur in humans from the consumption of the foods, or what could happen if a GMO species is able to integrate and breed with wild populations that do not have these modifications present (Lallanilla, 2012). The development of GMOs has also been linked to adverse effects such as the sterilization or death of livestock, and sickness and damage to organs of lab animals that are utilized in testing (Lallanilla, 2016). Risks such as these make consumers wary of their consumer of GMO products.
I feel that it is ethically sound to be labeling GMOs for consumer choice.
We talk about individual freedoms and it comes down to that humans have the right to be able to choose what they are putting into their bodies. Out of our cash crops such as soy, corn, sugar beets, and canola, 90% of them are genetically modified for production (Lanllanilla, 2016). That is a huge portion of our food products that we are producing and consuming on a daily basis. Nine out of ten American consumers support the labeling of GMOs (Parker, 2014). Multiple states are passing and considering laws making the labeling of GMOs mandatory as well as the continued public outcry to make legislative changes. Some companies, like General Mills are using this movement to their advantage, they see that consumers are concerned and are either eliminating GMOs from their products or at least labeling their products. The food industry has already spent over $70 million dollars to combat labeling, but wouldn't it be easier to just start labeling products and use that money to find better solutions towards our food crises? (Parker, 2014) Blanket legislation would translate easily across the country and make it much easier for companies to comply with standards as opposed to having to develop different methods to cater to different
legislation.
Again, it comes down to that the right thing to do is to label GMO products. Let consumers choose how they want to choose, people have a right to know what is happening to their food products before they reach their pantry shelves and meals at home. It would be far simpler to create a legislation that can be a standard that makes compliance simple, saving companies money, and the food industry money from trying to combat a movement that is not going away anytime soon.