> And you're confusing an argument about my right to know about what I'm eating Honestly, you don't necessarily know what you're eating with non-GMO crops, eit

> And you're confusing an argument about my right to know about what I'm eating Honestly, you don't necessarily know what you're eating with non-GMO crops, either. As a previous poster mentioned, we've been selecting for certain characteristics for hundreds of years, which is just a slower way to modify genetics. If the innovators in this sector would have avoided using the word "genetic", nobody would care. But just like "Nuclear" there are certain words that the uneducated Fox News-consuming public froths at. Being someone with no shortage of empathy (despite my obvious abundance of sarcasm), I like to try to understand people that I disagree with. But what's all this about pesticides? That's a separate matter entirely, and isn't specific to GMO crops. You are wanting to specifically avoid GMOs, which is your right to do, but you shouldn't expect everyone to add a warning label for something that science has conclusively stated is fine. Hell, some GMOs are engineered such that less pesticides are necessary. That's a big win to me, personally. It'd be like asking for warning labels on faucets because some people think the government puts mind controlling agents in the water supply. Some fringe nutjobs have 100% unfounded theories, therefore everyone else should have to humor them? Nah. You can avoid GMOs and stick to products that are clearly labeled, but that's not a realistic expectation for everyone else. Those non-GMO labels are just taking advantage of this poorly informed minority, kind of like the Gluten-free craze.