4 ms·
If it's GMO put a label in it. What's the big deal? The way companies try to skirt that law is pretty mind blowing. Companies number 1 priority is shareholder v
by brooklyndude 10y ago
If it's GMO put a label in it. What's the big deal? The way companies try to skirt that law is pretty mind blowing. Companies number 1 priority is shareholder value, consumer safety is a distant 2nd place.
Take it slow, what's the rush? 40% of food now goes to wast. People seem to forget that farmers that don't use GMO crops are probably far more conscience about other aspects of the food chain than Monsanto, that's just common sense.
- dogma1138 10y agoLet's put warnings on vaccines then? There's just as much (or lack there of) "evidence" that vaccines cause autism as GMO's being harmful.
- brooklyndude 10y agoThey do. It's a big read too. This reminds me of talks with my dentist. Me: What about mercury fillings, could they really harm you, or is that just a bunch of BS. Dentist: That's crazy. There is nothing wrong with mercury fillings. Nothing. Me: Would you use them for your children? Dentist: What! Never, composites only. The science is really not out yet on that. An interesting talk for sure. :-)
- mrep 10y agoHe's talking about labels, not warnings.
- largote 10y agoBut if you label it, why wouldn't you start labeling all other sorts of ridiculous things? GMO vs not-GMO is irrelevant information for the consumer outside of marketing and ignorance-based paranoia.
- conistonwater 10y agoIt goes against the idea that labels should be helpful and contain useful information. For example, compare with a similar idea: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/01/17/over-80-percent-of-americans-support-mandatory-labels-on-foods-containing-dna/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...