GMO Labeling

[seedcorn]

There is another way to go about it which doesn't involve politics or politicians. Food products can carry the Non GMO Project label voluntarily. They are very strict about who gets to use the label. That allows consumers to choose voluntarily to support non GMO products with their dollars.
Remember it was not laws but consumer demand that effectively stopped the use of growth hormones in dairy products. When consumer demand forced Wal Mart to announce they would no longer carry dairy products that were produced with the hormone that pretty much made it obsolete.
Just look for this label on the products you buy. The difference in price is usually quite small and, in my estimation, well worth it.
This is the logo you want to look for. It will usually be found on the front of the label.
http://www.theeasygarden.com/forum/uploads/6858_non_gmo.jpg

This makes more sense. So probably won't happen.

 

[897tgigvib]

SeedCorn, I personally desire all those consequences you list as dire things. Yes!

Poor lawyers! They need work too ya know.

And those grocery prices! Let them skyrocket entirely out of hand. That way, folks can do more gardening and farming even if it is with vegetables contaminated accidentally with someone elses patented genes. Hahaha... gotta keep more lawyers busy ya know.

Dontcha know? When they threaten, tell them to bring it on twice as bad as what they threaten! This way the scars will be worn with pride.

Bring it on!!! (This tooth right here. Can you get it just right for me? Thanks.) A left cross oughta do it.

 

[Jared77]

What does the extra mark on the cereal box do for Average Joe Consumer? I mean do people really think that Cheerios are GMO free? Or that their box of raisin bran is are GMO free? This doesn't force them to stock any new products either. It just says that they'll label the products.

What about if you go out for dinner? Are they going to put GMO labels on the menu items listed? I've been places that advertise their beef as free range, or the chicken as free range, or the fish as from a sustainable farm. That's their choice and are encouraging people who are looking for those opportunities. However what good is free range beef if the asparagus next to it is GMO? Or the potatoes? I don't know if they were and unless the owners of the place actually ordered from GMO free sources who knows? Not that we go out to eat much but to me its like they make a law that placates rather than actually makes a change.

It would be different if they were to say that if you sell ____ amount of bread then ____% has to be of GMO free bread. But instead its just like "hey we stock all this stuff and its got GMOs". I don't think that's Govt's place though either to tell business what to sell provided its legal and safe. (And until the FDA says GMOs are bad they are legally considered safe despite what some of you may think about them so its not up to Govt to regulate that). Instead of making a big stink about Walmart selling GMOs, why not open a GMO free grocery store of your own and let the consumer decide with their money?

As Hoodat pointed out when people stopped buying milk from cows pumped up on hormones there was an actual financial hit. So what are now supposed to boycott these places that sell GMOs? Heck an educated consumer who's trying to avoid GMOs would already do that. Buy local at the farmers market, by free range meats, and growing their own food to suppliment.

I've noticed that they've started posting how much nutritional value things have in big bold letters. It doesn't stop anybody from buying anything or consuming it like its going out of style. There are ___ amount of calories per serving, and ___ amount of fat in a jelly doughnut. People will still eat jelly doughnuts. People still smoke and we all know how bad that is for you. People still drink and drive even though its killed how many people?

Until people are willing to spend the money or NOT spend the money on those products its not going to change anything.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I agree with most of what you said. Some I may not have totally followed all of it but Im slow today and I only read it once.

Let the free market decide. Thats the only way it will really work.

Im in favor of labeling. It gives people a choice. There will be a cost to all of us through tax dollars to enforce these laws (if they are actually enforced) not just the people that choose to eat non-GMO, but Im OK with that. The non-GMO people will wind up bearing most of the costs, wherever the free market sets them. Its not until you try to actually implement something that you find out what is really involved. Before that it is speculation and guesses, some better than others, usually based on experience.

A couple of other comments. The certification is only as good as the integrity of the person signing the certification certificate. I was in an industry where we relied on certified materials and equipment. We had a lot of our own inspectors watching the certifiers. That cost us money but we had confidence that certification meant something. Im talking about DnV or Lloyds of London type certifiers, the best in the business. Most of them realize their word is what they are selling but you are dealing with people.

The other is that when a legislature gets in that doesnt support this, all they have to do is stop funding the department that does the inspecting and enforcing. Some will in the name of reducing government, getting rid of government waste, or taking the constraints off business. Just because it becomes a law doesnt mean its going to have any effect. Its a journey. You never really reach the destination where you can sit down, take your shoes off, and soak those corns.

 

[seedcorn]

IF you want something produced a certain way, buy those products, support those producers. The more people buy, the stronger that market will become. Do you really need everything else marked? IF it isn't marked as you want, should you not assume that it is not what you want?

Most of us don't care, and don't want more government laws, codes, expenses, taxes, etc to tell us something we don't care about. Just more government interference.

If you have a better product, then advertise, label it as such. Want to label it that way, I support you entirely. Just don't make me label my product as to where everything comes from. If I go out of business because of my lack of labeling, I should be put out of business. As a good businessmen, I will change my product to meet the demands of the consumers. I really get the feeling that some of you want to force your thoughts on many of us.

 

[Jared77]

IF it isn't marked as you want, should you not assume that it is not what you want?

EXACTLY!!!!

 

[bj taylor]

at the risk of sounding wishy washy, I agree that consumer driven is better than legislated. many people will not pay any attention to labeling, but those who need to know or want to know - are going to be willing to look for those labels & willing to pay the price - just like organics charge higher prices & people pay those prices if it matters enough to them.

I have not yet seen any gmo labeling (voluntary) in my shopping. I will sure be hoping to see it.

 

[seedcorn]

Why would you expect GMO to be on label? They don't suggest it's better, they feel no different. In 20+ years if feeding it, no genetic problems in poultry, swine or bovines.

As the plant matures the GMO part becomes ineffective. It's still there just dead or extremely dilute. Can the same be said about Bt that is broadcast on by organic? It is incorporated into the plant. How long is it still in plant? I don't know-no one has done the work. Organic growers say its organic, therefore good-even tho it is used as poison. What does it do to the different types of bees and wasps?

 

[catjac1975]

My husband accidentally ordered treated corn seed. It came in today. We were both disgusted with the corn and our error in ordering it. I have seen captan treated, slightly pink seed before. This seed was almost purple it was so imbibed with 5 different chemicals that I would never plant in my garden. I'm sure the corn would be the tallest and sweetest, with every seed germinating. The package was labeled with the chemicals in which it was soaked. The chemicals were bright pink as a warning to not eat the seed nor feed it to any feed animals. My point is that it was labeled. No doubt the labeling was government mandated, as I'm sure the color is too. Some poor guy probably gave his life for this labeling to be done.

 

[seedcorn]

Labeling is government mandated. The color is whatever dye the company elected to use. Some use pink, red, green, purple, others use almost no dye. There many reasons for the dye.

The seeds were never soaked in chemicals. Since companies charge for the treatment, it is placed on label so you know that you got what you paid for.