What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

What is everyone's thoughts on Genetically Engineered foods? (1 Viewer)

Do you believe the US should label Genetically Engineered foods?

  • Yes

    Votes: 82 66.1%

  • No

    Votes: 42 33.9%
  • Total voters
    124
biju

biju

Footballguy
I received an email today warning me about this Pompeo 1599 bill. Since all of that text looks like complete gibberish to me I searched for additional information just by GS'ing "1599 pompeo". What that led to was a ton of articles (written by folks ranging from nobodies to real doctors) who were slamming this bill for basically being a corporate bill designed legally to eliminate labeling Genetically Engineered foods.

What do you think? I'd love to get some weigh-in from the non-US FG'ers.

 
I'm not concerned about GMO's but what's the reason for not labeling the products people are going to ingest? Might cost companies a few bucks? Meh.

 
Don't really care about the issue one way or the other. However, if it would ensure that a certain group of people would #### about it, then I support the bill.

 
Scoresman said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Neil Degrasse Tyson put it better than I can.
Click to expand...
I love NDT but he's making a mistake comparing artificial selection to genetic modification that has unknown consequences. I haven't seen any negatives so far but scientists are modifying the genetics of food to get their desired result but without testing the possible side effects of their gene modification.

 
Scoresman said:
cstu said:
joffer said:
no
Click to expand...
For the 'no' people - what's your issue with allowing consumers to know what they are buying?
Click to expand...
How much money does it cost?
Click to expand...
The only estimate I could find is this:

GE Foods Labeling Cost Study Findings. Consumers Union. Study conducted by the economic consulting firm ECONorthwest found that requiring GMO food labels would cost a mere $2.30 per person per year, or less than a penny a day.
Click to expand...
 
NutterButter said:
Scoresman said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Neil Degrasse Tyson put it better than I can.
Click to expand...
According to the USDA, anything labeled as organic can't contain gmos. I'd say there's a decent amount of organic options out there if you really wanted to go the non-gmo route.

http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/05/17/organic-101-can-gmos-be-used-in-organic-products/
Click to expand...
What if I don't want to pay more for organic but want to be able to choose products that don't have GMO's?

 
Companies are free to label their products now. They can highlight that none of the ingredients they use have GMOs in them. There is clearly a market for this, so they could do so if they chose and people could select products based on it. They don't need to require it.

GMOs are perfectly fine to consume. It's possible there could be some negative effects, such as modified versions taking over the entire populations of some species. But that doesn't make them bad to eat.

 
cstu said:
NutterButter said:
Scoresman said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Neil Degrasse Tyson put it better than I can.
Click to expand...
According to the USDA, anything labeled as organic can't contain gmos. I'd say there's a decent amount of organic options out there if you really wanted to go the non-gmo route.

http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/05/17/organic-101-can-gmos-be-used-in-organic-products/
Click to expand...
What if I don't want to pay more for organic but want to be able to choose products that don't have GMO's?
Click to expand...
Yeah, then you'd need labeling. I'm for labeling. I was just kind of refuting the point that "just about everything" contains gmo's. I think you'd probably have to pay more for non-gmo food label or no label b/c I'd imagine that the attractiveness of the gmo route is that it reduces cost. That's just me spitballing though.

 
cstu said:
Scoresman said:
cstu said:
joffer said:
no
Click to expand...
For the 'no' people - what's your issue with allowing consumers to know what they are buying?
Click to expand...
How much money does it cost?
Click to expand...
The only estimate I could find is this:

GE Foods Labeling Cost Study Findings. Consumers Union. Study conducted by the economic consulting firm ECONorthwest found that requiring GMO food labels would cost a mere $2.30 per person per year, or less than a penny a day.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
wow. US population is 318M, so that puts a price tag of $731 million.

That's a lot of money for labels.

 
The anti-GMO movement is basically the anti-vaccine (because it causes autism) all over again. Both railing against big companies/industries and point to a study that has been thoroughly disproven as their evidence.

 
Rayderr said:
The anti-GMO movement is basically the anti-vaccine (because it causes autism) all over again. Both railing against big companies/industries and point to a study that has been thoroughly disproven as their evidence.
Click to expand...
Big difference is the public is skeptical of gmo's as well.

 
Rayderr said:
NutterButter said:
Rayderr said:
The anti-GMO movement is basically the anti-vaccine (because it causes autism) all over again. Both railing against big companies/industries and point to a study that has been thoroughly disproven as their evidence.
Click to expand...
Big difference is the public is skeptical of gmo's as well.
Click to expand...
The public was skeptical of vaccines for a while too.
Click to expand...
True

Eta: I actual don't know if that's true. I find it a little peculiar that the public would be skeptical of a vaccine that prevented a disease that afflicted a lot of the people as was the case with polio.

And to be honest, I thought you were referring to the current state of both movements.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rayderr said:
The anti-GMO movement is basically the anti-vaccine (because it causes autism) all over again. Both railing against big companies/industries and point to a study that has been thoroughly disproven as their evidence.
Click to expand...
Not the same thing at all. Vaccines go through rigorous testing before being given to the public, but companies can create any genetically modified food put it on shelves to buy without testing.

 
cstu said:
joffer said:
no
Click to expand...
For the 'no' people - what's your issue with allowing consumers to know what they are buying?
Click to expand...
The same issue I would have for requiring manufacturers to label exactly what variety of tomato is in their sauce or blueberry that's in their muffin. Since can always do it voluntarily if they want to highlight it, and since there's no reason to think there's any difference to health, requiring it seems silly.

 
cstu said:
NutterButter said:
Scoresman said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Neil Degrasse Tyson put it better than I can.
Click to expand...
According to the USDA, anything labeled as organic can't contain gmos. I'd say there's a decent amount of organic options out there if you really wanted to go the non-gmo route.

http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/05/17/organic-101-can-gmos-be-used-in-organic-products/
Click to expand...
What if I don't want to pay more for organic but want to be able to choose products that don't have GMO's?
Click to expand...
Look for products that say something like, "Non GMO Project Verified" or "No GMOs"??

 
cstu said:
Rayderr said:
The anti-GMO movement is basically the anti-vaccine (because it causes autism) all over again. Both railing against big companies/industries and point to a study that has been thoroughly disproven as their evidence.
Click to expand...
Not the same thing at all. Vaccines go through rigorous testing before being given to the public, but companies can create any genetically modified food put it on shelves to buy without testing.
Click to expand...
bull####. And you know it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sam Quentin said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
I believe his point is that artificial selection is modification of DNA, just not through in vitro gene splicing, which is what the bill the OP points to is aimed at.

Both achieve basically the same end, just we're being told to fear the latter for some reason when we're fine with the former.

 
bcdjr1 said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
Having said that, I think that GMOs should be labelled. People have the right to know and make their own decisions about what they eat regardless of what I think about said decisions.

If someone wants to spend more money on an inferior, more expensive food item, who am I to deny them?

 
FUBAR said:
I'll assumed anything not labeled gmo-free or organic has GMOs.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: We don't require all the non-organic food to be labeled "Non-organic." Let the companies that make non-gmo food to proudly label that they are gmo-free.

 
bcdjr1 said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
Collecting the seeds of an apple tree that produces larger fruit than normal and using only those seeds to grow a new orchard is a far cry from altering the genetics of a plant in a lab to make it resistant to insects, or to produce a more vibrant color of red on the apple.

 
SkyRattlers said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
How so?

In selective breeding you're modifying the genetics, but much at a much slower pace. You only allow the genes you want to be passed along to be passed along, and the other genes are phased out.

Altering it in a genetics lab, you just turn off the ones you don't want and turn on the ones you do. You could eventually selectively breed an apple that is more resistant to insects or produced a more vibrant color of red on the apple, it'll just take longer.

 
bcdjr1 said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
The only options that selective breeding offers are natural ones though. You literally would have to observe they traits you wish to keep.

Whereas I'm sure that lab alterations could make an apple taste like a banana if they wanted.

 
SkyRattlers said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
Again, given enough time, you can create an apple that tastes like a banana over time using selective breeding, it'd just take a long time. In the video of NDT above, he talks about how people have been using selective breeding to modify the taste of foods for a long time already.

Maybe you should tell me what you mean by "natural" options versus "unnatural" ones. I don't know what an "unnatural" option would be. Flavorings of food that already exist in other "natural" foods doesn't sound unnatural to me.

 
bcdjr1 said:
Just about everything we're buying already is genetically modified. It seems like a huge waste of money for the government to spend resources on this.

Click to expand...
Just how are they "turning on" and "turning off" the genes in a lab? Because I know how they are doing it in SkyRattlers' example.

 
We shop at Whole foods 100% of the time now so I think I am safe. Why wouldn't you want to label something. Head in the sand?

 
Rayderr said:
FUBAR said:
I'll assumed anything not labeled gmo-free or organic has GMOs.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: We don't require all the non-organic food to be labeled "Non-organic." Let the companies that make non-gmo food to proudly label that they are gmo-free.
Click to expand...
I think the bill as it stands right now would actually make it illegal to label foods as organic without going through some sort of certification process. In other words, this bill prevents people from knowing what is and is not organic until they devise a system and foods go through the process.

(Honest question) Do you feel this is in the public's best interest?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
778
Joe Summer
J
LawFitz
COVID UPDATE: What is the truth?
5 6 7
Replies
307
Views
9K
LawFitz
LawFitz

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top