The Debate Of Labeling Genetically Modified Organisms Essay

“By 1999, to avoid labels that might drive customers away, most major European retailers had removed genetically modified ingredients from products bearing their brand.” (Chayka 1). Today most people seem to be more concerned about what is in their food. The author shows his concerns about GMOs and uses statistics to help his argument. All of the author’s reasoning makes me concerned and worried about our food and the safety of everyone else. People’s health is important for this world to survive and live a healthy lifestyle. GMO labels should be honest about their food no matter what issue they may face. People trust these brands and most likely stick with it for most of their lives. The important part of food companies is being honest with their ingredients, not interfering or harming other food companies, and ensuring the safety of its consumers.

There are varied arguments that favor or are against compulsory labeling of genetically engineered food products. Those who argue for the labeling of such products argue that consumers have a right to know what is contained in their food, particularly food products for which there have been health and environmental concerns (Caswell 26). Compulsory labeling will permit consumers to identify and avoid those food products that may cause them problems. On the contrary, those who argue against mandatory labeling point out that

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

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

Do you find the labels on your favorite snacks to be helpful to most consumers? Many would answer this question yes, and argue that labels contain important information that all buyers should know for health or safety reasons. While this is true, this argument should not apply to GMO labeling. GMOs, of genetically modified organisms, are foods with altered genes from biotechnological techniques. They are used to help foods to be preserved, or prevent certain pests from eating or infecting them, or even to have other desired and beneficial traits. While many may disagree, including use of these GMOs on food labels is completely ineffective. They make GMOs appear to be foreign and dangerous. There are already organic foods for those who are suspicious of genetically altered foods that cause harm. These labels would also make buyers spend more money down the road. A bill to label GMOs would cause multiple issues for producers and buyers everywhere.

In this research project, the question that initially guided my ideas was “How safe are Genetically Modified Organisms?" Beyond further investigation of the topic, I took the route of GM Feed to assess the animals that are being prepared for our consumption. Therefore whether there is some sort of GM contamination in the body of the animals with a GM diet, it allows me to make my own stance on the potential risks and safety of GMOs for animals and humans. With conductive research on scholarly articles and journals that investigate the study of animals fed GM Crops, I plan to explain to my audience that GM foods have more benefits

When it comes to the topic of whether Genetic Modified Organisms (GMO) are safe or not, most of us will readily agree that it has become an issue. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of is it really safe to consume them. Whereas some are convinced that GMOs are safe and improve the production of crops, others maintain that GMOs are not safe and should be eradicated. I disagree that GMOs are safe for human consumption because as a recent research has shown they can cause severe organ damage and fatal diseases. GMOs should be banned and remove from all food sources until they are proved safe for consumption.

While these are valid concerns, they are entirely wrong. According to the World Health Organization in 2005, “GM foods currently traded on the international market have passed risk assessments in several countries and are not likely to present risks for human health” (Novella). Many of those who are anti-GMO claim that GMOs are not safe because they do not know enough about them or they have heard far too many conflicting reports. While there are many reports that claim that GMOs are detrimental to the environment, the three agencies that oversee GM crops, the FDA, USDA, and EDA, have ruled that these crops do not pose any real threat. Since the beginning of the GM crop in 1996, there have been 2,497 approvals of the safety of GMOs in the environment and 1,129 of these approvals have been for the food safety of the products (Monsanto). This further disproves the claim that GMOs are unsafe for humans and the environment and reassures that there is no risk involved in either the consumption or the planting of GM

“In a sweeping 400-page report, the country’s top scientific group found there was not evidence to support claims that genetically modified organisms are dangerous for either the environment or human health” (Heikkinen, 2016). Even Europe, a country that does not use this technology has proven that GMOs are a safe food source. “There is a scientific consensus, even in Europe, that the GMO foods and crops currently on the market have brought no documented new risks either to human health or to the environment” (Paarlberg, 2010). The biggest argument against GMOs would be that they are not safe to humans or the environment, but there has not yet been any documented evidence that approved GMOs have brought on new risks either to humans, animals or the environment (Paarlberg, 2010). Along with being scientifically proven numerous times to be a safe food source, there is also no confirmation that GMOs pose any risk to humans, animals, or the environment. “The central issue with GM crops is that because there are no concrete adverse effects for people to quantify, they can only focus on theoretical and largely unquantifiable ones” (Buiatti, Christou, & Pastore, 2013). Hundreds of experts have all concluded that GMOs have not presented any new risks to humans. “The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris organized a conference with 400 expert

An interest statement: I think this topic will keep me engaged because I did my last essay on the use of GMOs and now I am curious to see why people are opposed to the labeling of them and how they will impact the farmers if the labeling laws pass in certain states. I know families typically prefer organic food, however, it appears that this is the case because the word “organic” sounds pleasing. Most people seem very uneducated on what GMOs really are and just assume from the media that they are horrible technological advances. This topic seems like a very current issue which will allow me to find an abundance of useful information.

“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.

One of the biggest issues in the ongoing debate over GM foods is whether they should be labeled to protect the public’s right-to-know privileges. Mandatory labeling regulations in European nations and several other countries are making a deeper examination of this issue in the United States (Ross). Even though some countries have mandated GMO labeling, the US should not mandate such law.

Abhorrently, today's consumers are faced with discomfort regarding food safety. For the past 20 years millions of people around the world have been eating plants genetically modified by scientists. Genetically modified crops are tweaked to resist the harsh herbicides. In a recent article titled Labels for GMOs are bad the author argues that GMOs are safe for human consumption. In fact,Suspected culprit in devastating 'fiber disease' statistics show that “Around 70 percent of processed foods in the U.S contain genetically modified ingredients.” ( The Editors 1 ) I strongly oppose The Editors point of view towards GMO labeling because consumers want to know what they are eating. GMOs should indeed be labeled to inform what's in the product

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

Much of the public concern surrounding the safety of GMOs stems from the process of actually creating them. This is admittedly not a natural process, which is a surefire way to raise critic’s eyebrows in doubting their safety. However, there is no evidence that supports these myths. The Committee on Genetically Engineered Crops, The National Academy of Science, and the Board on Agriculture and Natural Recourses all agree after extensive testing and observation that there is no additional harm in the consumption of GMO food. The research conducted in animal studies, as well as chemical analysis of the crops, show no indication that GMOs are negatively affecting human health. The next allegation hurled at GMOs is that they may have