General Discussion

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)

192. What is available? GMO or "organic" labeling?

Sun Mar 15, 2015, 08:16 PM

Mar 2015

Yes, we have the latter, done by both food producers and paid for by consumers who care about their health. But WHY should they have to pay for something that no one used to have to pay for before GMO pollution of our food products have been introduced to our food supply without letting us know how they are changing it. And we've had food labeling requirements for just the components of food in our products for a long time now to serve us consumers.

WHY can't we have GMO labeling, and WHY can't those that are putting that in to the marketplace, and complaining that their food prices will be higher pay for this labeling when crap they've put in food causes others to have to label that their products don't have this crap in it.

THE WRONG PEOPLE ARE HAVING TO PAY FOR PRODUCT LABELING TODAY!

And they rationalize that them having to label their food will raise food prices. Well, that should be the cost of their doing business and THEIR putting this crap in to our food. If they introduce changes in to the marketplace, THEY should have to pay for the costs of this. Not the rest of the marketplace!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

366 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If GMOs Are So Great, Then Label Them. [View all] sabrina 1 Mar 2015 OP

100% agree with OP, any rejection of OP is a gmo lackey..nt StopTheNeoCons Mar 2015 #1

I want a label that says, "fertilized with cow shit" Major Nikon Mar 2015 #166

cow shit Agony Mar 2015 #172

No, it's still cow shit after that Major Nikon Mar 2015 #175

... Agony Mar 2015 #214

Sure, they just sprinkle it around for shits and giggles Major Nikon Mar 2015 #218

Organic cowshit Jim Beard Mar 2015 #360

And it does work most of the time Major Nikon Mar 2015 #363

Agreed, 100%; It's a slam-dunk nikto Mar 2015 #225

Excellent and mine.. which should say "None of your Damn Business".. Cha Mar 2015 #248

Mislabeled father founding Mar 2015 #281

Agreed nikto Mar 2015 #365

I agree completely. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #2

Good post. greatlaurel Mar 2015 #3

Just a guess. Prepping the public... Trillo Mar 2015 #4

Good post, it's always the poorest people who end up with few choices. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #9

Pushing back against ridiculous misinformation is not the same as pushing GMOs. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #13

Such as? No one is telling pro-GMOers what to eat, they are free to eat GMOs if they wish. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #19

Bright boy, Dan Quayle. Enthusiast Mar 2015 #29

I wonder if he ever learned how to spell 'tomato' the American way? After all, wasn't it he who sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #93

Yeah. The Republicans were united in their desire to keep consumers completely in the dark Enthusiast Mar 2015 #157

And they're still working on it, it seems. And now with the help of sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #163

Oh, yes. The miscreants had to gain control of both parties. Enthusiast Mar 2015 #164

"But now we are being told what to eat" NuclearDem Mar 2015 #89

We ARE being told what to eat and we are being to just 'shut up' and eat it. Sorry, Dems don't take sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #99

So wrong. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #108

Mad Cow disease demonstrated how untrustworthy corporations are and how much regulation is needed. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #116

You clearly have no idea of the history of BSE. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #140

Yes we do have an idea of what some of the cause of BSE are. Animal feed has been identified as one sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #142

The cause is unknown, the transmission has been identified Major Nikon Mar 2015 #206

Wrong? bvar22 Mar 2015 #188

Well this is odd. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #196

LOL! At the 46 second mark! WOW. So you just don't like hearing him say that or Rex Mar 2015 #228

Notice how I didn't mention anything of the sort in the post he replied to. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #231

Try watching it again. And Europe isn't the only place where GMOs have been banned. In fact sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #233

Ho boy. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #236

Then label THEM. If they are so wonderful, what are they afraid of? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #239

Because first of all, the organic foods industry has very successfully NuclearDem Mar 2015 #240

BS. Most people who oppose GMOs are opposed to them for good reasons, and it has nothing to do sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #243

Still waiting on those citations. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #246

Still waiting on the labels Generic Other Mar 2015 #294

Not what I was talking about. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #303

"Well let folks know whether their foods been genetically modified because Americans should know Rex Mar 2015 #229

Thanks for that. So sad, so many promises, offshore drilling, mandated insurance, GMOs sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #234

Few of which can be published without the permission of Monsanto et al eridani Mar 2015 #230

I'm going to need a citation for that claim. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #232

Well, if Scientific American is "scientidic" enough for you-- eridani Mar 2015 #261

That was a slam dunk. blackspade Mar 2015 #295

No, it wasn't. HuckleB Mar 2015 #300

I read it. blackspade Mar 2015 #302

So you haven't read the articles. HuckleB Mar 2015 #311

Nice dodge. blackspade Mar 2015 #326

So, not only did you not read them, you are offering up an ad hominem attack. HuckleB Mar 2015 #330

What are you blathering about? blackspade Mar 2015 #331

That's so cute. HuckleB Mar 2015 #332

Keep digging blackspade Mar 2015 #333

It's a good thing there's no GMO popcorn, or you'd be breaking out in hives! HuckleB Mar 2015 #334

Six year old stories tend to need updating. HuckleB Mar 2015 #299

"they cannot examine whether the genetically modified crops lead to unintended environmental side suffragette Mar 2015 #306

And very out of date information (see post 299) that also ignores that entities like the EU have ... HuckleB Mar 2015 #313

Not a word in that article about superweeds or the possible extinction of Monarch butterflies eridani Mar 2015 #320

You can't stay on topic. You put up one BS argument, and it gets slapped down, and then... HuckleB Mar 2015 #322

So GMO encouragement of far more glyphosphate use doesn't count? eridani Mar 2015 #335

So you didn't bother to read the links? HuckleB Mar 2015 #340

The links said that herbicide resistance was linked to more glyphosphate, but not eridani Mar 2015 #345

So you really didn't read the links. HuckleB Mar 2015 #362

The links said that gene transfer from GMOS was NOT an issue-- eridani Mar 2015 #364

"Only in Third World countries AND America, it appears," KamaAina Mar 2015 #312

Labeling costs a lot of money. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #75

Take everything off the label then. roody Mar 2015 #82

Careful, someone will call you a Libertarian with that line of logic. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #90

The bans on GMOs in Europe are based on something very important, they are based on what sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #216

You'd be singing a different tune if the GOP managed to ban abortion in a state in the US. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #217

I thought we were talking food. Second time someone introduced an entirely different sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #219

Actually, you did. You brought up the subject 'democracy'. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #220

Actually it is NOT a flaw in Democracy if the majority disagrees with me. That IS Democracy. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #226

Then LABEL it, and let the consumer make the choice. bvar22 Mar 2015 #317

Get that damn calorie count off my ice cream too. roody Mar 2015 #126

There is a significant cost delta in determining the caloric value of a food, versus AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #132

Cut the Corporate salaries, the bonuses, and RAISE THEIR TAXES. We are talking about sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #251

Do you understand how corporate finance works? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #277

lolol you know what is too "uncomfortable to bear" - TBF Mar 2015 #266

Yes it does, and big companies pushing GMOS FORCED more costs on to us needing "organic" labeling... cascadiance Mar 2015 #150

More than that, labeling serves a particular purpose Major Nikon Mar 2015 #208

Monsanto Announces $1.48 Billion Profit Amid 'Monsanto Protection Act' Controversy Cha Mar 2015 #259

And every little pressure on their profitability raises their prices. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #275

Please tell me how it is going to cost much more money? Jim Beard Mar 2015 #342

That's a hell of a lot less than I was told. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #343

Doesn't it make sense? Jim Beard Mar 2015 #353

I care about what I feed my family, ergo, I grow my own produce and meats. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #5

Yes, that is what we do. We live in a farming community so can exchange products we grow sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #7

I don't have to label. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #8

If you're not selling your products to other people, you don't have to label them. We do not sell sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #12

No, I do not sell, I am morethan happy to give to the older generation who isn't Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #15

I grow a bit of my own food, but I live in a city in which land is extremely expensive. JDPriestly Mar 2015 #69

You realize most people can't do that, correct? nt Logical Mar 2015 #115

Can't or just chose not to, it isn't easy work. I make the sacrifice for my family. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #117

So the person living paycheck to paycheck, a week behind on the rent, is choosing not to buy ScreamingMeemie Mar 2015 #122

Sacrifices can be made, there are community gardens, I am not rich by any means. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #141

I live in an apartment JonLP24 Mar 2015 #201

If I lived in an apartment i would also be buying from the grocery store unless i Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #204

Excellent point! KT2000 Mar 2015 #6

Let's label all foods.. X_Digger Mar 2015 #10

That's fine with me. We grow our own. We do not use insecticides, it's not necessary. Companion sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #14

You think the food you grow isn't produced by mutagenesis? X_Digger Mar 2015 #17

Don't worry. We use our own seeds from last year. Don't tell Monsanto, they don't believe in sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #20

Lol, and the ultimate source of those seeds? (Likely mutagenesis or forced hybridization.) X_Digger Mar 2015 #44

Read Post #23 from Erich Bloodaxe BSN. You will find the answer in both of his/her posts. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #53

Ridiculous. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #68

I'm not following you. I know that nearly everything HAS been contaminated sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #74

What was in your soil when you started? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #77

I have passed blind taste tests. It's easy when you are accustomed to eating natural food. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #79

Who administered these tests? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #83

I'm not worried about the water. We have lived in areas where the well water was contaminated sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #92

your ridiculous questions laundry_queen Mar 2015 #346

They're not ridiculous questions and it matters precisely because I am trying to highlight the ridic AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #350

People who like to grow their own Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #23

Thank you. And yes, the taste is totally different. But Monsanto wants to take away your sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #27

Animals would agree Oilwellian Mar 2015 #86

Yeah, I believe that. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #91

Lol, I can definitely relate to the animals. They 'know things' a lot of people don't know. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #96

If I did that test in my yard, both would be stripped clean in an hour. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #106

I've done it with people. Only one was stripped clean once they had a choice. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #131

If you don't know what a double-blind test is, this is a meaningless anecdote. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #134

I don't need to know to see that when given a choice between naturally grown corn, which is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #145

Why would the GMO corn be "dried up" again? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #155

Have you ever tasted corn grown naturally? I have, and by comparison, commercially grown corn is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #237

Special tires are required for vehicles that work on GMO Corn nationalize the fed Mar 2015 #242

I cannot prove but I suspect AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #272

I don't think you need to use double blind tests on squirrels. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #263

Placement? Size? Freshness? AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #276

Heritage doesn't mean it's not hybrid. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #70

Well sure. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #87

This have nothing to do with BeanMusical Mar 2015 #94

Not true. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #95

I prefer the old blind groping in the dark method right now. It tastes better. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #104

I do not. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #105

Except we don't know how much harm they are doing. And the natural way tastes a whole lot better. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #110

You keep saying it tastes better, with zero proof to back that claim up. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #118

What we grow most definitely tastes better than store bought vegetables. We are not growing food for sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #123

Yeah, I'm sure that in the 16th century they were able to BeanMusical Mar 2015 #109

Actually, I acknowledged that AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #114

Lol! BeanMusical Mar 2015 #129

I hate it when I'm wrong too. No worries. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #135

Then I'm sad to learn that you're in hating mode 24/7/365. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #151

Still waiting for you to add anything interesting to this discussion. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #153

I found his/her comments as interesting as yours. I guess you should add 'interesting to ME' since sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #221

Well, it's good you found both comments interesting, because his or hers was just an echo of mine. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #222

I generally find most comments interesting, in one way or another. I learn from what people sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #223

I don't understand why people cannot simply acknowledge that nature knows best and that sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #119

"Mass production = more money." BeanMusical Mar 2015 #125

Nature naturally creates things that are fully lethal to humans, all the time. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #128

Yes, and smart humans educate themselves so they know the purpose of those natural sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #136

Purpose implies design. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #138

You don't know 'in what sense I meant it' sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #162

It doesn't work beautifully if we don't interfere. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #170

How many species are disappearing SINCE we began 'tinkering' with nature? Honey Bees eg. And we know sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #241

Insecticides are one cause. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #274

And every time a cause is found, such as the insecticides causing the disappearance of honey bees sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #287

On that, we agree. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #291

Of course there is natural hybridization BUT Jim Beard Mar 2015 #359

I love the taste of radiated, cancer causing tomatoes. More profits. Lower quality... immoderate Mar 2015 #35

Are you talking about grafting apples? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #21

Depends on what you graft. Just shoots? Same dna (think roses at HD w/ wild rose roots). X_Digger Mar 2015 #41

You have no idea how GMO's work. AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #65

Hehe, no worries. n/t X_Digger Mar 2015 #97

Yes. As I understand it, apples need to be grafted or otherwise tampered with. JDPriestly Mar 2015 #72

Well, heck, you don't NEED to wash anything you grow... Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #158

Can you believe it? But my story is true. JDPriestly Mar 2015 #227

good idea roody Mar 2015 #130

Absolutely. If makers of GMO, God Move Over food are proud, then label the products! Easy. appalachiablue Mar 2015 #11

Just stick "may contain GMOs" on every product. Nye Bevan Mar 2015 #16

Where I come from, people do care, enough to grow their own products. In the EU an sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #22

That wouldn't satisfy the many people who HAVE voted yes on labeling laws. pnwmom Mar 2015 #33

Oh, Shush! We can trust Monanto to do the right thing. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2015 #18

I just look at the word 'monsanto' and it translates to 'BEWARE' to me. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #24

They gave us wonderful poisons like DDT. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #121

As a recent, not so brilliant 'philosopher' once said 'fool me once, don't fool me again' or words sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #127

I totally agree. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #133

Actually, they didn't. Lancero Mar 2015 #199

Thet didn't what? BeanMusical Mar 2015 #235

Kicked and recommended a whole bunch! Enthusiast Mar 2015 #25

Yes, let the market decide. -nt CrispyQ Mar 2015 #26

Lol, what happened to the invisible hand? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #28

It's being manipulated. CrispyQ Mar 2015 #32

Yes, so the claim that the 'invisible hand' would take care of the market, was just as delusional sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #250

It's all such a disgusting scam. CrispyQ Mar 2015 #270

A good tangent, I agree with every word you said. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #316

The market depends on information to make correct decisions. n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #34

Before giving vaccines, doctors should be forced to say that some people believe they cause autism. Orrex Mar 2015 #30

Not the same. Unlabelled vaccines aren't given to people. pnwmom Mar 2015 #36

They are already labelled Orrex Mar 2015 #39

They aren't labeled with GMO content.Just because their genetic differences aren't visible to the eye pnwmom Mar 2015 #43

Who's talking about "differences visible to the eye?" Not me. Orrex Mar 2015 #47

We told you. We want GMO ingredients, as defined by science pnwmom Mar 2015 #57

They are already labelled, as defined by science. Orrex Mar 2015 #62

I want GMO's, as defined by science, to be included in ingredient lists. pnwmom Mar 2015 #148

Studies have been carried out for decades Orrex Mar 2015 #176

How can scientists prove a real risk exists when the GMO producers pnwmom Mar 2015 #203

Every tree? JonLP24 Mar 2015 #210

Dude! That's totally science! SCIENCE! Orrex Mar 2015 #213

What is the problem here? We have a RIGHT to know what our food supply consists of. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #252

Let me tell you what desperation actually is: Orrex Mar 2015 #265

A long post filled with personal attacks. I wouldn't call that science, only sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #279

You don't have a leg to stand on with any of that. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #305

I stated my experience with Progmos going back years. I never met Republican who didn't argue FOR sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #308

Still waiting on those citations. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #309

I love it when I don't have to go searching for examples of what I just described. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #314

Spare me. Orrex Mar 2015 #307

I, did NOT accuse you of anything. If you have a problem with someone who did, do not sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #310

This is why it's madness to try to discuss the issue with anti-GMO types Orrex Mar 2015 #315

You eat food that has been sprayed with insecticides and you don't think that's a problem? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #168

Again with the red herrings Orrex Mar 2015 #182

Again, "visible to the eye" is your standard, not mine. Orrex Mar 2015 #146

The difference is in the DNA. roody Mar 2015 #137

I know this, before accepting any medication from a doctor, I want to know what the side effects sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #38

"Bg Parma" is irrelevant to this discussion. Orrex Mar 2015 #46

You mentioned it. I was thinking, 'why are vaccines relevant to this thread' myself? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #49

Anti-vaccine foolishness is directly relevant to anti-GMO foolishness Orrex Mar 2015 #50

I was just describing all the ads we are getting on TV. Are we forbidden from mentioning sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #52

Who do you think is forbidding anything? Orrex Mar 2015 #55

Does anyone recommend not telling people if a shot is a vaccine so that anti-vaxxers don't avoid it? Chathamization Mar 2015 #76

That would be medically unethical, and it's a false analogy Orrex Mar 2015 #78

Yes, I agree your analogy was poor; maybe GMO-boosters will refrain from comparing GMOs to vaccines Chathamization Mar 2015 #113

You actually went with the "I know you are, but what am I?" gambit? Orrex Mar 2015 #144

No, you compared GMOs to vaccines then followed up saying they were nothing alike; which, I agree Chathamization Mar 2015 #147

Less than 7% of the population is anti-vax and less than 7% is against GMO labeling GreatGazoo Mar 2015 #296

How do you know what a GMO is in the first place? alp227 Mar 2015 #31

The standard definition will do. Or we could use that already used in pnwmom Mar 2015 #37

And most of them taste terrible. Another reason we grow our own. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #42

It would be hard for Monsanto. They'd lose sales. pnwmom Mar 2015 #45

Not much to know. Either the food is 'altered' genetically, in which case I don't want it, or it sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #40

I don't know, because they are not labeled. I would know, if they were. So my standard for judging a sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #51

If you only want to eat food labelled as "GM free", that's entirely your right. Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2015 #48

I don't care if the label them or not. Not my product. But I won't BUY unlabeled food. I absolutely sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #56

What pathetic and vacuous comparison: "mark the religion of the grower" GoneFishin Mar 2015 #58

Lol, I noticed that. Decided it was too way out there to even try to understand. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #64

It sounds like you are saying American's have no right to know what is in our food. bvar22 Mar 2015 #193

You didn't just misunderstand me, you misunderstood genetic modification. Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2015 #258

It seems like a mostly meaningless label Bradical79 Mar 2015 #54

Europeans label them. An overwhelming number of people in those countries demanded it. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #60

Europeans label them? abelenkpe Mar 2015 #161

I'm in agreement with you customerserviceguy Mar 2015 #59

True, regarding how much attention people pay to cigarette warnings. But food is a different thing. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #63

You're right about the better foods customerserviceguy Mar 2015 #67

This message was self-deleted by its author namastea42 Mar 2015 #61

"Stop asking what's in it. Just STFU and eat it!". An immoral and dishonest business GoneFishin Mar 2015 #66

Exactly. Americans are treated like children by their own government, viewed as too 'stupid to know sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #84

Absolutely! eom whereisjustice Mar 2015 #71

I've seen the excuse people won't buy anything with long scary looking words Rex Mar 2015 #73

Because the public is too stupid. Signed, Monsanto roody Mar 2015 #80

When that is your argument you bet your ass you are dealing with crooks and villains TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #149

I would rec this 60,000 if DU would allow me. Yes, if Gmos are so fabulous, label them! Dont call me Shirley Mar 2015 #81

This 2012 PSA by Food and Water Watch remains as relevant and funny as ever, IMO. proverbialwisdom Mar 2015 #85

Perfect n/t Oilwellian Mar 2015 #98

Brilliant! +1 Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2015 #101

FYI, the public is "moving the market" even without labels. Vote with every dollar you spend. proverbialwisdom Mar 2015 #88

Ah ha! Cha Mar 2015 #286

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #100

Welcome to DU. Yes, you can post. Now what? Tell us about yourself, please. uppityperson Mar 2015 #102

Testing for what? Finals GP6971 Mar 2015 #111

Labeling is a scare tactic with no rational or scientific basis. NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #103

I don't agree. Labeling is more akin to 'Beware of Vicious Dog' so long as there is a vicious dog on sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #107

What nonsense - do you really believe this, or are you being paid to post it here? closeupready Mar 2015 #124

... Major Nikon Mar 2015 #167

Shills do exist. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #179

So do 4 leaf clovers Major Nikon Mar 2015 #183

I don't know about the traffic here. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #185

Here's what you have to ask yourself Major Nikon Mar 2015 #186

Yes of course. Someone disagrees with you so they must be paid. NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #180

How come the fat and calories in a pint of Ben and Jerrys roody Mar 2015 #139

Nutrition labels need to be removed; consumers can't be trusted to decide for themselves what they Chathamization Mar 2015 #143

I will actually admit that seeing calorie counts on menus has scared me out of eating Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #159

That information is quite useful in making informed decisions Major Nikon Mar 2015 #187

Because fat and calories have not been turned into scare words NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #181

Imagine if "big agra" financed an effort to label food that's been fertilized with cow shit Major Nikon Mar 2015 #169

The wonderful benefit of GMO corn is that it can be sprayed with extra glyphosate GreatGazoo Mar 2015 #267

Simple solution, don't buy un-labeled products. Like corn from the farmers market. Might be GMO. nt Logical Mar 2015 #112

I have a solution. Have some GMO company execs consume completely unlabeled food we prepare... cascadiance Mar 2015 #152

I don't, we grow our own! And we know the farmers we buy from. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #165

I'm good with that. I would happily consume GMO foods, anway. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #120

And you have to pay extra for "organic" labeling and validation processes too, cascadiance Mar 2015 #154

If you have irrational fear, the burden is on you Major Nikon Mar 2015 #171

YOU and the GMO people have to prove that our fears are "irrational"... cascadiance Mar 2015 #174

Already been done. That's why it's irrational Major Nikon Mar 2015 #177

I think I'd trust "nonsense" that supports my argument published in Scientific American... cascadiance Mar 2015 #190

"The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American." Major Nikon Mar 2015 #198

But you are only quoting YOURSELF... cascadiance Mar 2015 #200

Just so you know, as someone who has not yet delved as deeply into this sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #293

there is no GMO research not vetted for publication by Monsanto et al n/t eridani Mar 2015 #238

I just don't see how promoting nonsense helps the anti-GMO case Major Nikon Mar 2015 #278

There is no research on GMOs that is not controlled by Monsanto, et al eridani Mar 2015 #318

Perhaps not Major Nikon Mar 2015 #323

Say what? HuckleB Mar 2015 #324

They have to get the seeds from Monsanto. Monsanto has final say over publication n/t eridani Mar 2015 #337

Who else would give them the seeds? And wrong. Very wrong. HuckleB Mar 2015 #338

"only studies that the seed companies have approved ever see the light of a peer-reviewed journal" eridani Mar 2015 #344

Seralini. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #347

They are available. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #189

What is available? GMO or "organic" labeling? cascadiance Mar 2015 #192

Organic labelilng is the current state of GMO free. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #195

But Organic food producers should be sending GMO food producers the bill! cascadiance Mar 2015 #197

I'm noticed that while those GMO free labels are popping up in a variety of places around the store Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #160

There is no uniform law except with organic. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #191

Just saw this, FYI. proverbialwisdom Mar 2015 #224

How interesting! djean111 Mar 2015 #253

Thanks, I got several useful links off that article. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #262

The products you're seeing with GMO free labels must be 10 times as expensive, since I've been told Chathamization Mar 2015 #271

So far, most of them seem to be maybe Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #280

I agree, it would be a "selling" point, greatly sought after, perfectly fine & dandy. mother earth Mar 2015 #156

Labeling GMOs would mean we're a government ''of the people.'' DeSwiss Mar 2015 #173

Pretty soon Monsanto will be bragging about helping with population control in India! cascadiance Mar 2015 #194

It's just a blip on Monsatan's radar. DeSwiss Mar 2015 #205

Oh, Vandana Shiva. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #215

Brilliant! C Moon Mar 2015 #178

Simple enough blm Mar 2015 #184

kick. midnight Mar 2015 #202

I suspect that we wont see a labeling law passed until something cstanleytech Mar 2015 #207

And if it passes, it would get overturned by TPP corporate courts if that passes! cascadiance Mar 2015 #209

Probably more than I will ever see in a lifetime even if I was lucky cstanleytech Mar 2015 #211

Almost everything we eat has been genetically modified by man, through selective breeding. cpwm17 Mar 2015 #212

Ah.... BULLSHIT. DeSwiss Mar 2015 #245

This, ladies and gentlemen, is what is called the appeal to nature fallacy. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #247

It makes so much sense. What problem do you have with it? sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #255

Still waiting on that citation. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #268

Clearly you're not a fan of science and the scientific method. cpwm17 Mar 2015 #298

What I find ironic is your choice of avatar. DeSwiss Mar 2015 #357

Every single argument on this thread that is against labeling GMO's Zorra Mar 2015 #244

It's in the water..... DeSwiss Mar 2015 #249

I don't care what anyone else eats at all but I've been caring what I eat for a long time now Cha Mar 2015 #254

I completely agree with you, Cha. I don't get it. Why the desperate resistance to simply sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #256

Yes, a very serious threat to our environment.. like the Bees.. Cha Mar 2015 #257

K&R Scuba Mar 2015 #260

Agreed KansDem Mar 2015 #264

The irony is that people put incredible amounts of crap and 'non-food' in their bodies every day. randome Mar 2015 #269

just label the products that don't have them greymattermom Mar 2015 #273

That's an excellent idea. I wonder why it hasn't been done? I just read that Hershey is sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #285

According to a post upthread. NCTraveler Mar 2015 #290

I didn't know that. Now I do so will add it to the ever growing list of products/food sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #304

That label already exists. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #288

Exactly right. blackspade Mar 2015 #282

Bingo. You ask the right question. mmonk Mar 2015 #283

K & R Petrushka Mar 2015 #284

Presidents eat organic privately but kowtow to agribusiness publicly lofty1 Mar 2015 #289

My thoughts exactly laundry_queen Mar 2015 #349

The Organic People go out of their way HoosierCowboy Mar 2015 #292

Sorry if they've been asked and answered up-thread, but my questions are whatchamacallit Mar 2015 #297

I was an art director katsy Mar 2015 #328

this should be a no brainer G_j Mar 2015 #301

Exactly. Anyone producing food with GMOs ought be be proud to label them. Vinca Mar 2015 #319

A PRINCIPLED CASE AGAINST MANDATORY GMO LABELS HuckleB Mar 2015 #321

I cannot think of a single 'principled' reason for denying the public the right to know what is in sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #325

There is no justification for labeling one seed development technology, but not all of them. HuckleB Mar 2015 #329

Let me ask you something There appears to be little doubt anymore that the disappearance of honey sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #336

You're going on and on about things that you can't support with a consensus of science. HuckleB Mar 2015 #339

Well, I gave you a chance and you blew it. I take Monsanto is ignoring the threat to our sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #341

You are spreading baseless fear mongering. HuckleB Mar 2015 #361

The labeling isn't about informing people. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #348

Yes, it is! And the people have a right to have that label, as Europeans do. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #351

Ah, I see what's going on here now. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #352

Tactic # 22. When all attempts to defend the indefensible fail, post moronic animated emoticon. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #356

That's awfully specific to be as far high on the list as 22. NuclearDem Mar 2015 #358

Interesting collection, thanks for posting! (nt) petronius Mar 2015 #354

Thanks for posting these! zappaman Mar 2015 #355

K&R Cleita Mar 2015 #327

Don't fear science behind either vaccines or GMOs HuckleB Mar 2015 #366