The Legislatures Public Health Committee this week gave favorable approval to a measure that would require labeling of all food products containing genetically modified organisms (GMO) products where the genetic makeup has been altered through genetic engineering. On the surface, it sounds like a no-brainer. Who wouldnt want to know what were eating? The problem, however, is that the bill, if enacted, would only be effective within the borders of Connecticut. Several other states are considering similar legislation, but those measures would have no impact here, and our legislation would have no impact anywhere else. Stan Sorkin, president of the Connecticut Food Association, contends that if such labeling were necessary and he and others contend it isnt that such a mandate should be issued by the Federal Food and Drug Administration on a national scale, not piecemeal by individual states. The FDA, however, has denied requests to mandate GMO labeling, saying there is no evidence of the GMO products being unsafe. If there is no public threat, then clearly there is no need for the mandate. But where also is the harm in labeling it as such? Sorkin is correct in that Connecticuts large supermarkets, small groceries and other food-related businesses would be unfairly and unnecessarily harmed with higher costs of doing business if such mandates were applied only to them. Paul Pescatello, president and CEO of Connecticut United for Research Excellence (CURE), also contends that labeling GMO sends the wrong message to the very bio-science industry that Connecticut is hoping to attract to the state. Labeling, he contends, unfairly implies to the public that there is something to be concerned about when if fact there is overwhelming scientific evidence proving otherwise. Unfortunately, in todays society, mistrust of government and corporate America is the bigger threat than any genetically altered product. Such staunch opposition to labeling only feeds into that distrust. Capitalizing on the scientific evidence, and voluntary labeling, would seem the more appropriate course of action. Thats our opinion. Wed like to hear yours. Email us your thoughts at letters@norwichbulletin.com

The rest is here:
Our View: GMO labeling is better if voluntary

Comments are closed.