The U.S Government should force Companies to label Genetically Modified Foods

On July 29, 2016, President Obama signed into law a bill known as the GMO “labeling” law, which was intended to protect consumers' right to recognize what they eat. Many firms who work in GMO products, including Monsanto, fought the regulation, calling it derogatory (Fedoroff 7). However, the so-called universal labeling of genetically modified foods is a long-overdue policy. For example, most northern states have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods. The argument for genetic food labeling is primarily focused on increasing safety issues and knowledge among customers who are self-conscious about what they eat. The reason why GMO needs to be labeled is very clear, consumers are self-conscious, and they want to know the content of whatever they are buying from the market.

In a research conducted in 2016 about 88 percent of the corn, 94 percent of soy, 95 percent of sugar beets and 90 percent of Canola oil sold in the United States is GMO. According to the estimates by the Grocery consumers Association about 70 -80 percent of the conventional food sold in many supermarkets in the United States was GMO, and the percentage of such foods could increase in number because of the secret blending of GMO is non-GMO foods. Everything displayed on the supermarket shelves is suspect because companies are not willing to disclose this fact to their consumers because of the fear of reducing their profits (Clare 3). Biotech companies have for long taken advantage of the lack of a consistent law that compels them to label all the ingredients that are genetically modified, and it might be possible that consumers might be buying products laced with GMOs without their consent. Consumers have the right to know what is on the GMO products so that they make an informed decision based on the information provided. It should be the consumers who should make the decision of whether to eat GMO good or not.

Over the years, a lot of debate has been ongoing about the safety of GMOs which has been the major concern among the scientific and scholarly communities. Research about the safety of GMOs has been an ongoing ad there are concerns if the foods are safe for human consumptions, research on the issue has never been concluded (Arthur 12). The concern has been rising because the processed GMO foods have become more popular among children talk of the cereals, snacks, cookies and other processed foods they contain high amounts of GMO-based ingredients. Although there is no proven proof, there is evidence that the rate of child obesity in the 21st century has increased by threefold and there are reasons to ink the rising trend to the processed GMO foods that the children are actively taking. It is hypocritical for the scientific community to purport that GMOs are safe whereas the effect of such foods is evident (Arthur 10). Clearly, the scientific community has not done enough to convince the consumers that GMOs are safe and there is a likelihood that the foods can be the silent killer in developed nations. As such, labeling of such foods should be mandatory so that consumers make a conscious decision.

Research has revealed that some genes contain harmful and toxic traits, for example, some genetically modified products like BT corn have been engineered to be toxic to pests. However, it is not known with scientific certainty how GMOs engineered for human consumption can be totally safe and how such products will behave with future. Scientists have conducted minimal risk assessments which cannot be used to substantiate the safety of the products for human use (Arthur 7). In addition the risk assessment process of such food in not well coordinated, making the outcomes of such assessments questionable. In most cases the health and safety information about GMOs is supplied by the companies developing the products with limited or no government input and such companies can lie about the safety of the products because of the conflict of interest (Arthur 16). Due to the inefficiency of the risk assessment process, it is necessary that companies be compelled to label GMO products for consumer’s safety assurance.

In conclusion, consumers have the right to information as enshrined in the constitution and also GMO companies have the right to free speech in the form of labeling their products. It is by labeling the GMO foods that consumers would choose whether to eat GMO foods or not. The majority of consumers support the idea of mandatory labeling of GMO foods because they have the constitutional right to know what they are eating (Fedoroff 1). People want the freedom to choose and are even willing to pay the premium prices for non-GMO products. Therefore, the companies imposing GMO ingredients to products should be considered fraudulent. Consumers have the right to know what they are feeding their families with so that they make informed decisions and truthful labeling is the key to ensuring consumer’s rights are protected.

References

Arthur, Caplan. "GMO foods should be labeled, but not for safety: Bioethicist." NBC news (2015).

Clare, Mary. "House passes bill t prevent mandatory GMO food labeling." PBS news (2015).

Fedoroff, R. "Should Companies Be required to label Genetically modified Foods." Wall street Journal (2010).