It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Are you being woefully ignorant or just obtuse?
My question is this. With the added expense and legal risk involved, isn't the simplest solution for the producer to simply put the "May contain GMO" label on everything? It seems that is the only way to avoid legal risk (and increased costs).
Originally posted by Daedalus
reply to post by Kody27
which would also have the added benefit of gradually making GMO obsolete...
it would be phased out of the market, because as more people stopped buying products, the companies who make them would realize what the customers want. they'd be forced to change up the sources for their raw materials, and start picking up non-GMO materials....
as this happens, the demand for non-GMO raw materials for foodstuffs rises, and eventually, nobody will grow GMO crap anymore, because there will be no demand for it...
I know fresh produce is tracked. I don't know if grain, especially processed grain is though. Does the corn meal the tortilla factory in California uses all come from a single source. Does the owner of the factory know where it all came from? All it would take one mistake in the chain and that tortilla factory is forced out of business.
Well, they should know... else the owner of that factory would be in big trouble if his product was contaminated by anything really, not even necessarily GMOs.
if you believe GMO is fine, then go ahead and eat up, and stop trying to convince other people that your opinion is correct, and the only truth on the subject...
Originally posted by Phage
How does labeling everything tell that something doesn't have GMO material?
"This product may contain GMO material". Very informative.
Originally posted by alfa1
As a simple example, many people have mentioned in many threads, a problem they have with the idea of consuming the Bt toxin used with some GMO crops. But only a small percentage of GMO foods use this
Originally posted by instigatah
In a way i hate to admit it but im kinda with Phage on this.....asking for MORE government involvement and regulation really isnt what im interested in.
That's the idea, exactly.
If we pass labeling laws, and allow them to just generically place " may contain GMO products" like they do with peanuts for example, than the entire conversation and legislative debate is a waste of time.
The measure also requires that processed foods produced entirely or in part through genetic engineering be labeled with the words “Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering” or “May be Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering.”
Retailers (such as grocery stores) would be primarily responsible for complying with the measure by ensuring that their food products are correctly labeled. Products that are labeled as GE would be in compliance. For each product that is not labeled as GE, a retailer generally must be able to document why that product is exempt from labeling.
That is the only solution. It is virtually the same idea as labeling organic products as organic.
A simple solution would be to allow non-GMO producers to label their products as such. The fact that they're not allowed to do so goes to show where our government's priorities lie.
I've never argued against labeling (I bet some would argue that) if the majority want it, do it. In the case of GMOs, I don't care. I don't think they are particularly harmful and there are far worse things in the food chain.
I'd like something that made food labeling a requirement down to every ingredient, with the pressure put on those who create those products. To be hones the increase in cost for me is worth it to know what's in my food.
Originally posted by Phage
Does the corn meal the tortilla factory in California uses all come from a single source. Do the owner of the factory know where it all came from?
Originally posted by Phage
The only logical thing for the factory to do is put the "may contain GMO" label on the package.
We know GMO materials are pervasive. Doesn't a voluntary, "non-GMO" labeling idea make a lot more sense?
There has always been resistance in science to "going against the grain". (Isn't that what the phrase implies?)
Then again, science these days seems like a money racket. Nobody wants to go against the grain anymore.