Gmo Product Labeling

GMO Labeling

Fries, Andrew J.

Baker College

        Food is a precious resource. There is a vast variety of food that exist in many different areas around the world. Fruits, vegetables, meats, dairy, and nuts are some of the many different types of food available. Food exist as a natural resource that has the ability to replenish people’s energy and also be a part of their very survival. People depend on food, and without food, they cannot survive. It is not an issue of world hunger or starvation that is being proposed in this paper, but a proposal on the importance of labeling food fully. Food labeling is vital because there are genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and other chemicals that can be found in food in order to increase the growth rate and even the size of the food. Food labeling is also important as it lists the various ingredients in a product that can be beneficial or destructive to a person’s well-being. Although these have not been proven to be harmful beyond a shadow of a doubt, organic and non-GMO products have exploded in popularity, and people have the right to know what they are possibly putting into their bodies. Labeling could be the easiest solution to the problem with GMOs and chemically modified foods. The FDA should pass regulations mandating GMO product labeling.

        There is opposition to every argument or it would not be called an argument. Some say that cataloging food products would not be a good thing on an economic and social level. Rhonda Brooks, a writer for Farm Journal says that “[the FDA] would establish federal standards for companies that want to voluntarily label their products for the presence or non-presence of GMO ingredients so consumers clearly understand their choices in the marketplace” (as cited in Ag Web, 2014, para. 4). This is an idea that a company would not be required to do so, but that they would have the option to label their food products based on the companies’ principles or moral compass. As of 2015 the House of Representatives passed the Safe and Affordable Food Labeling Act to regulate the labeling of genetically modified organisms in food. “The legislation will prevent states and other localities from enacting mandatory labeling of food that contains GMOs, while at the same time setting up a voluntary non-GMO certification to be run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.” (House Passes, 2015, para. 1). Labeling could also affect the economy and the food industry in a negative way with decreased profits, because people who believe GMO’s are bad would not buy GMO listed products. This argument is given credit by European resistance to GMO containing foods. “Increasing caution of scientific organizations like the British Medical Association, efficient networking of environmental groups, and public distrust have resulted in substantial rejection of agricultural products of the new technology.”, (Haslberger, 2016, para. 1). Without passing regulations here in the US, there is just is no way to know for certain if it would affect the industry.

Another solution may not be to actually label products as GMO containing products, but to inform the public that GMOs and certain chemicals may not be as harmful as some people make them out to be. On the other hand, Brooks also says that, “different laws and requirements would devastate the efficiency of our nation’s food and animal feed production and marketing system, and dramatically increase costs to consumers” (as cited in Ag Web, 2014, para. 8). That could be argued on both sides of the debate. In an article posted by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, “Cost-benefit analyses of previous food labeling reforms show that the costs of changing food labels is greatly outweighed by the health benefits of providing consumers with better label information.” (Center for Science, n.d., para. 8), the benefits are shown to outweigh the costs. Generally, all of the different opinions remain in the grey area for food labeling.

On the pro labeling side, labeling food wont destroy the food industry, it only exhibits a sense of trust and honesty with the consumers and companies around the world. The State of Massachusetts has a program circulating called the “Right to Know: Label GMO Foods”, which supports the idea that food companies should always be labeling their foods as GMOs or with whatever other preservatives were added in the process of creating the product. An article in MA, publicizes the various steps that must be taken in order to ensure that foods should be labeled. It expresses concern that not enough studies into the effects of GMOs are being done: “unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the US Food and Drug Administration does not require safety studies for genetically engineered foods” (MA Right, 2012, para. 4). In opposition to arguments stating that food labeling will affect the economy in negative ways, this movement believes that labeling will not even increase the cost to the consumers or producers of various food products.

        Arthur Caplan, a writer for NBC news has an entirely different viewpoint on GMOs, and how they should be labeled not just for safety, but for many other different reasons. Caplan says that, “Companies selling GMOs don't want their products labeled for fear of stigmatizing their products and losing customers. Organic food companies want labeling to provoke safety concerns that drive consumers toward their 'natural' products” (Caplan, 2015, para. 4). He says that both sides are not looking at the bigger picture: the solution. Instead, the two sides are looking at the negatives and the reasoning behind why the other is bad and why their ideas are better. Caplan even agrees with the idea that foods should be labeled not because of being chemically enhanced but because, “The reason GMO food should be voluntarily labeled by the food industry is that it is clear some consumers want to know what they are eating and they have a right to know what is in their food” (Caplan, 2015, para. 6). It is not an argument that GMOs are bad, but that there are many unidentified variables to their studies that make them questionable.

        There is also an organization known as “Just Label It!” which has issued a campaign for labeling GMOs on a large scale. Most eastern world countries already have GMO labeling, and it has not affected their economies or markets in any way. Just Label It points out, “unlike most other developed countries – including 28 nations in the European Union, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Russia and China – the U.S. has no national law requiring labeling of genetically modified food” (“Just Label It!”, 2016, para. 1). The Commission of the European Communities, recommends a system of labeling: “there should not only be a traceability and labelling system that functions properly, but also an agricultural sector that can provide the different types of goods.” (The Commission, 2003, Introduction section, para. 2). This shows that the U.S. is falling behind the rest of the world by not requiring the use of labeling for various GMO or chemically enhanced products. This is a big problem, and it must not be taken lightly as American citizens will want to have their various food products labeled as either organic or GMO. This system of labeling, if it can become established, will create a better sense of trust between consumer and producer as both become more knowledgeable in the origins of various food products.