Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Eko
Eko's Journal
Eko's Journal
March 30, 2016
"If youre the kind of person who frets over Americans lack of scientific literacy, this accommodationist position may send you into a sputtering rage. A persons right to know, you might contend, should be in balance with his or her right to avoid unnecessary panic. The mere presence of a label has dire implications. It tells consumers that there is a meaningful distinction to be drawn between GMO and non-GMO ingredientsa material difference in the language of the Food and Drug Administrationand one that should be taken seriously. Yet genetic modification describes a process, not an end result, and theres no evidence that this process leads to special risks. Some bioengineered options on the supermarket shelf could be better for your health than other products. Some could be better for independent farmers and their families. And some could be worse. The scarlet GMO blankets all this variation and replaces it with dread."
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2016/03/the_gmo_labeling_movement_is_about_faith_not_facts.html
Good article on GMO labeling.
Label Thumpers the GMO movement is about faith, not facts."If youre the kind of person who frets over Americans lack of scientific literacy, this accommodationist position may send you into a sputtering rage. A persons right to know, you might contend, should be in balance with his or her right to avoid unnecessary panic. The mere presence of a label has dire implications. It tells consumers that there is a meaningful distinction to be drawn between GMO and non-GMO ingredientsa material difference in the language of the Food and Drug Administrationand one that should be taken seriously. Yet genetic modification describes a process, not an end result, and theres no evidence that this process leads to special risks. Some bioengineered options on the supermarket shelf could be better for your health than other products. Some could be better for independent farmers and their families. And some could be worse. The scarlet GMO blankets all this variation and replaces it with dread."
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2016/03/the_gmo_labeling_movement_is_about_faith_not_facts.html
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Mar 8, 2011, 10:08 PMNumber of posts: 7,281