Colorado Proposition to Label GMOs

Colorado voters will determine whether to “mandate labeling of genetically modified food products that are sold in the state.” Those who favor the proposition believe it is needed to protect consumers. As one advocate wrote in a letter to the editors of the Denver Post, “Because GMOs are not natural, we simply don’t know what the long-term health consequences might be, and therefore consumers should have the right to know where their food comes from, so that they can decide whether they want to accept those risks.” Another supporter writes, “The GMO debate boils down to freedom—the freedom to chose what I eat. That freedom simply does not exist if food producers are allowed to deny me the information I need to make my choices.”

Those opinions are in opposition to an editorial by Don Ament, former Commissioner of the Colorado Department of Agriculture. He writes that approval of the proposal would “…give Colorado consumers inaccurate, unreliable and misleading information.” What sways my opinion so far is his further statements that “Consumers already have reliable options to choose foods made without GE (Genetically Engineered) ingredients. They can select from thousands of food products labeled ‘organic’ or ‘non-GMO’ under existing federal labeling standards.” Continue reading

GMOs, Food Safety, and Golden Rice

We have written about the positives and negatives of Genetically Modified Foods (GMOs), and the debate continues. An article titled “Eating Dangerously” by Jennifer Brown and Michael Booth in the March 12, 2014 Denver Post describes “…how 50 million Americans will get food poisoning this year…More than 100,000 will go to the hospital; 3,000 will die.” Federal authorities do not ban the sale of chicken contaminated with bacteria such as salmonella. They instead rely on consumers to cook the chicken to at least 165 degrees, which would kill the bacteria. However, there was a “Foster Farms chicken scare (in) 2013” that involved chicken contaminated with an antibiotic-resistant strain of salmonella that wasn’t killed by cooking to 165 degrees. Dozens of consumers were hospitalized.

The article focuses on the Colorado case of salmonella-contaminated cantaloupes that killed 33 people in 2011. Federal inspectors had never visited the farm that was the source of the cantaloupes prior to the outbreak. Continue reading

Avoiding Genetically Modified Organisms

I intend this to be the final commentary about Generically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Of course I reserve the right to do more if I feel new information warrants.

Activists who want GMOs to be excluded from human foods are quite upset that the US Department of Agriculture has approved them for human consumption and are protesting and campaigning in several states to require foods derived from GMOs to be clearly labeled. In the interim, people can take the simple step of buying foods labeled as organic. The US and Canadian governments do not allow manufacturers to label something 100% organic if it has been genetically modified or is from an animal that has been fed genetically modified feeds. There is a web site that provides a discussion about the foods most likely to be GMOs. It also says that foods labeled with a four digit PLU number are conventionally produced, those with five digits beginning with 8 are GMOs, and those with a five digit number beginning with 9 are organic. Continue reading

GMOs, Science, and Morality

RF_alum has written an informative string of postings on GMOs.  Here’s my two cents.

The GMOs that cause controversy are foods.  No one seems to want to stop producing insulin or vaccines using GMOs, or to ban oil-eating bacteria used to clean up spills in the environment.  Furthermore, I read negative opinions mostly about food crops farmed on an industrial scale, (especially corn, wheat, and soy beans), GMOs that resist Roundup or incorporate biocides, and anything produced by Monsanto.

Since we all agree that healthy food and sustainable production are good things and starvation and high prices are bad things, what causes the public policy controversy?

Many people hold moral and spiritual objections to GMO foods.  They draw on one of humanity’s six moral foundations (see book reviewed here):

Sanctity: People know that some things are noble and pure while others are degrading and base. These sacred values bind groups together.

People also show a practical skepticism about any new or unfamiliar risk.  Both views are important to the debate.  Public policies must consider moral values, and no one should get away with lying about the science. Continue reading

Genetically Modified Food Risks

I published a previous commentary to introduce the conflict between those who view Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) as a danger to the environment and people and supporters who see them as the solution in how to feed an expanding human population. There are several wonderful web sites that discuss the issues in detail, and one of my favorites is one titled “Genetically Modified Foods:  Harmful or Helpful?” by Deborah B. Whitman. I intend to summarize what she and others say about why they may be harmful in this commentary and save the positive side as future material. Continue reading