Why Not Add ‘GMO’ To Labels?

GMO tomatoes look good, but at what cost? Photo from Bob Jones

You’ve been reading those pros/cons and inbetweens on the Star-Advertiser‘s op-ed pages about genetically modified foods known as GMOs – the O is for organisms. They resist crop disease, have longer shelf lives and can be reshaped and re-colored.

Many eaters and environmental organizations hate them. They say they haven’t been tested long enough to know if they do harm to humans or if their blowing seeds contaminate nearby non-GMO fields.

Most big farmers and supermarkets love them. We’d be lost to ring-spot papaya disease here without a genetic modification. We might have to offer supermarket tomatoes still green without a GMO variety. And now we’ll have an apple that doesn’t turn brown after it’s been cut.

But I agree with those who say we consumers should have a choice about what we eat. I don’t have a problem with any GMO product but maybe you do. So label them. The USDA keeps resisting that. GMO farmers too. They think it will frighten people.

We demand ingredients and fat and sodium content. Why not a GMO label? Or a “this has been irradiated” label? It’s just consumer information. Just saying no is not sensible in this instance.