Essay about Labeling Genetically Modified Products

Even if a technology was developed that would bring the cost of production down to or below that of existing production cost, there is the issue of consumer preference. The increasing debate over genetic engineering has created a substantial difference in perception of the risks and benefits involved with GE food. Governments around the world, most notably members of the European Union have places restrictions and bans on many GMO products. Many of these countries are considering putting labels on products with GMO ingredients. Considering that many developing countries' economies are highly dependant on agricultural export,

The new GMO Labeling bill S. 764, that was passed July 2016 after being tacked onto the National Sea Grant College Program Act, requires companies to disclose their inclusion of GMOs in their products directly on the label. This legislation panders to consumers that are already against GMOs while creating more economic strain on consumers who cannot choose to eat non-GMO due to budgetary restrictions. This bill will have serious implications not only in our economy and agricultural industry, but many economies and agricultural industries worldwide. Recent studies of how extensive the effect of this bill will be on the consumers of the United States are estimating upwards of $1,050 annual increase in our grocery spending to accommodate. The damage occurs when food producers that use GMOs inevitably follow the trend of agricultural industries before them and switch to non-GMO ingredients if they believe that it could potentially save public relations and customer loyalty. These switches have grievous implications, including triggering a setback on technology currently being developed and technology that could be developed in the future. 70% of products consumed in the U.S. have genetically engineered materials in them. These labeling laws do not just affect some consumers. In fact, those who are advocating strongly for this labeling system are likely not going to be impacted to the same degree as lower income Americans. This is due to lower income Americans not having the

The debate over genetically modified foods continues to haunt producers and consumers alike. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are foods that have been modified through bioengineering to possess certain characteristics. These plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or increased nutritional content (Whitman, 2000). The debate continues to grow as to whether these genetically altered foodstuffs are the answer to hunger in the coming years, or whether we are simply children playing with something that we do not have the capacity to understand. One of the biggest debates in the GMO issue is whether producers need to use labeling of

The advancement of technology has allowed our generation to genetically modify food for what is believed to be beneficial to consumers. The environmental and health effects of genetically modified foods have generated controversy about whether these foods are safe. With such advances, the use of genetically modified food is expanding, even though they 're unlabeled. Genetically modified foods should be labeled because of the possible health, environmental, and economic risks. Once a consumer knows what they are paying for, it is fair to produce and market such foods.

Ever since their entrance onto the consumer market in the last two decades of the twentieth century, genetically modified organisms (often referred to as GMOs) have been getting mixed reviews from the public. Genetically modified consumer products (primarily food) have pushed the barriers of some people's comfort levels. Born out of either a lack of knowledge or a sincere concern for public health or the environment, a consumer rights movement has been planted around the world pushing for labeling of genetically modified food products. This movement has matured in many places to a degree where interest groups have successfully lobbied governments into adopting criteria for labeling transgenic food

Importantly, there is a current controversy concerning whether genetically modified foods should be labeled as such or if it is an unnecessary extra expense. Indeed, some individuals believe that if a product is genetically modified then it is potentially dangerous to a consumer’s health causing birth defects, increased risk of cancer, Parkinson’s, and Alzheimer’s disease (Greenpeace, n.d.). Therefore, based upon this predisposition they believe that a label should be placed on every product that is genetically modified, since it is the consumers right to know if a product has been exposed to harmful chemicals and pesticides. Contrariwise, others believe that labeling genetically modified foods is not needed, since there is presently no viable

“Our primary health care should begin on the farm and in our hearts, and not in some laboratory of the biotech and pharmaceutical companies” (Gary Hopkins). The sun was hot and they sky was clear when I walked into the grocery store that smoldering summer day. I walked in expecting to pick up things for a barbecue; burgers, hotdogs, salad, buns, corn on the cob, condiments and of course chips and snacks. Strolling down the fresh produce aisle I began to wonder, what if all of my food isn’t fresh, clean, no preservatives or pesticides or even GMO’s for that matter? Why shouldn’t every food be labeled with exactly what went into making it? Even if that means it needs to be traced all the way back down to the DNA. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) should be labeled because the health risks are still unknown, consumers want to know what they are eating and there is a growing rate of people developing allergies to them.

It was decided almost 20 years about by the Food and Drug Administration that GMOs do not need to be labeled, despite the consumers’ desire for GMO labeling. Consumers’ demanding to know what is in their food has lead to the proposed legislation of GMO labeling from more than twenty states. Health safety is a large part of the proponents’ argument for GMO labeling (Murray 2016). The consumers right to know, right to choose, and ethical rights are also all reasons for GMO labeling policy. The oppositions’ arguments against mandatory GMO labeling are that it could falsely alarm consumers, impose extra costs on consumers and lead to restricts on consumer choice (Hemphill 2015). There would be more harm than good to come from

The debate for labeling genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the food supply has been an ongoing battle for years. Both sides have valid points and believe passionately in their stance. One side states they are safe for the consumer to eat and do not need to be labeled. The other side argues not enough long term studies have been done to validate this claim and labeling should be mandatory to protect the consumer. While both supporters and non-supports of labeling GMO foods may not seem to have much in common, they can both agree that there is a need for a plentiful and nutritious food supply.

Should genetically modified foods be labeled? Some think GMOs are completely safe and labeling the food would prove unnecessary and will make food increase in price, while others believe we have a right to know everything in the food the population consume. Nearly all processed food sold in the United States were genetically modified in a lab. GMOs are often used to achieve a certain trait, such as drought tolerance, enhanced nutritional content, insect resistance, and reduced food waste. More than 15 countries have stated labeling genetically modified foods, starting with the Europe Union in 1997. While GMOs can be used for positive reasons, but can have a negative effect (list negative effects of GMOs). This paper will explain side with

In his article “Labeling for Better or Worse” (2014), Jim Kling informs readers of the benefits of labeling genetically modified foods, while also discussing a few disadvantages. Kling discusses laws proposed for this issue, the response to these laws, and the difficulties they may face on a national scale, while also educating readers on why labeling these foods has become an issue. The purpose of this article is to enlighten readers as to why this has recently become a hot topic. Directed towards anyone who is interested, the author uses an informative tone to educate

Genetically Modified Organisms are organisms in which the genetic material or DNA has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally. This is done in order to get traits such as longer shelf life and pesticide resistance. They were developed because the perceived advantage is meant to translate into a product with a lower price, greater benefit, such as the durability and the nutritional value, or both. GMOs have not been proven to be safe as of yet. The long-term consequences of them on our health and environment have not been adequately investigated. There is a contentious debate today whether or not GMO labelling should be mandatory. There are arguments both for and against mandatory labelling across the world. Consumers have the right to know what is in their food. They should also be able to identify foods they wish to steer clear of. Some may also want to steer clear of GM foods for ethical or religious reasons. Consumers may be against mandatory labelling because those who wish to buy foods without GMOs already have the option to purchase them; organic of GMO-free. There is also debate stating if there were a nutritional difference or allergic characteristic in the GM foods, it would have to be labelled no matter what.

Genetically modified organisms (GMO) has created a name for itself by making it a wide spread issue in the food industry. GMO’s are organisms that have genetic material that was artificially edited in laboratories through genetic engineering. This semi new way of making food has shown to have both positives and negatives, creating a huge conversation around genetically modified organisms. This big conversation is whether or not products that are affiliated with GMO’s should be labeled. This has been an on going debate, where the public seems to have split decisions on the topic. People that disagree with the mandatory labeling of these products main argument around the subject seems to be that the labels would imply that the foods are not safe.

Goldman's essay focuses on the regulations governing genetically modified (GM) foods, and in particular looks at the FDA's standards for GM foods in order to see if the regulations remain relevant and applicable to the current state of GM foods. She concludes by suggesting that for various reasons, the FDA's labeling requirements are not sufficient, because they do not apply to GM foods. Although the essay focuses on food labels more than the controversy surrounding GM foods, Goldman includes a number of useful statistics and insights into the spread of GM foods and their share of the overall market, and the research that went into Goldman's essay provided a good background for this study. Furthermore, her essay implicitly helps make the case that GM foods, though widely discussed, are not considered appropriately because many of those engaging in the discourse surrounding GM foods have outdated, irrelevant, or otherwise unhelpful data.

Out of the 61 countries of the world 40% consist of the world’s population have turned to labeling GMO products. United States and Canada are one of the few who do not have labeling mandatory. Genetically modified organisms are on the rise and countries are rapidly starting to make labeling mandatory. The reason being why Hawaii should make labeling mandatory is one GMO’s unsafe past in Hawaii and around the world. Two, GMO’s does not only stand as a risk to humans but threatens our environment. Lastly, we the people of Hawaii and United States of America have the right to know what is in our food that we are consuming. Due to the up rise of genetically modified organisms in Hawaii, the government should start taking action and make labeling GMO foods mandatory.