3 ms·
The proponents of Prop 37 sought to use rhetoric and language to sway against science. Not sure I understand this. Labeling is a fight about marketing, not sci
by 001sky 14y ago
The proponents of Prop 37 sought to use rhetoric and language to sway against science.
Not sure I understand this. Labeling is a fight about marketing, not science. I don't think this headline flatters scientists in anyway.The argument for labeling is that the products will be perhaps not purchased if the origin of the produce was revealed. That is actually how a market economy is supposed to work. It's un-economic for consumers to do the genetic testing themselves. This is the same logic on why we have nutrition labels, and country of origin labels, etc.
None of this has anything to do with the term 'science', in its common usage.
- byoung2 14y agoLabeling is a fight about marketing, not science. I think that's the point...the label will just say GMO, without a scientific explanation of what modifications were made. For example, soybeans can be modified to increase resistance to pesticides or fungal infection, increase production, which may be fine for consumers, but if it is modified to make it taste like a carrot, or to add vitamins, people may object.
- 001sky 14y agoThe anti GMO arguments include many that are agnostic to the details. That's not a flaw per-se. There are considerations beyond health and nutrition. For example, some may not want to financially support the patenting of nature, full stop. Again, a well-operating market would let such informed decisions be made. Again, the science angle is sort of irrelevant. The people who oppose labeling do so out of their financial interests, not the love of or respect for the idea of science.