As far as end results, how is a GMO product different from the organic pluots sold in WF, for example?

Label. Let the consumers have the choice whether to purchase any and all products.

perhaps manufacturers should have the option to indicate that their product is organic and/or non-GMO unless of course, the goal is to obfuscate

Quote:

Hundreds of millions of people in poor countries would starve to death every year? Oh wait...

Quote:

Fifteen years may as well be fifteen seconds in terms observing potential long term impacts on human, animal, and plant life. We simply cannot know all the possible effects to look for?and even if we did?we would be faced with the nearly impossible task of isolating them.

Realistically, the same concern should apply to the countless new ?things? that we have artificially introduced into the environment, including plant strains that have already been improved upon through centuries of traditional selective breeding. The most significant difference with respect GMOs appears to public perception, but we?re still tampering with a system that worked just fine before we became too intelligent and self-aware for the Earth?s own good, and that obviously entails a certain risk.

There is one short-term effect that?s clear however, and that?s the increasing power of companies that develop and patent new plant strains through modern genetic engineering, and the decreasing power of the men and women who labor to grow our food. Unlike traditional selective breeding techniques, these new methods are, and will remain, inaccessible to anyone who doesn?t have billions of dollars to spend. That puts us all at the mercy of fewer and larger corporations, and it?s not hard to understand what could go wrong with a monopoly over our food supply.

Quote:

It's the same mindset that opposes food irradiation. My dad worked with the guys who developed the gamma radiation method for the Army. My eldest sister also worked on improving the process while working on her PhD.

If if was more widely accepted, food poisoning incidents, like the spinach salmonella outbreak a few years ago, would be history. Plus, you would have far less spoilage. The researchers had packs of unrefrigerated beef that you could open and it would be as good as the day it was packed.... 3+ years earlier.

I hear people rail against GMOs like they are the worst thing ever, but I've yet to hear one person explain what is so bad about them. Just because something is artificial does not mean it is harmful for you.

Also, the tremendously excessive amount of sugar that is in most of our food is much more harmful for you than GMOs seem like they ever could.

Quote:

Because having to separate GMO from non GMO (a vast majority of your grains and soy is GMO) would add cost to the production of food. This will be especially egregious if a producer has to deal with a patchwork of laws that vary state to state.

A pretty thorough explanation of the costs from the farm end here.

If you want to pay the cost of GMO free food, go to Whole Foods as they label stuff on their own. You will pay a premium though.

How does this help the people on, say, Ocean Avenue? How about the Council not waste the taxpayer dimes on this and leave it to the Feds, as they should, and do something constructive with their time?

if there no concerns, then there is nothing to fear from better labelling

but have not been tested for long-term environmental and human health effects, Food & Water Watch says.

--------------------------

After 15+ years you think we have had enough time to see at least some ill effects?

Both the USDA and the FDA have a hand in GMO regulation.

I have never understood these anti-GMO Luddites. Opposition to yellow rice which helps poor kids from going blind was one of the most egregious examples.

The latest one has been the jihad against GMO salmon. Aquabounty developed an Atlantic salmon that grows twice as fast. This means you can raise salmon in tanks to market in 18 months vs. three years. It would be wonderful to have farmed salmon as cheap as tilapia (which is really easy to raise in tanks).

Jersey City City Council to vote on resolution in support of GMO labeling

By Wilson Conde/The Jersey Journal
June 10, 2014

The Jersey City City Council is expected to pass a resolution tomorrow that calls on New Jersey to join three others states in passing legislation requiring the labeling of genetically modified organisms in foods.

A dozen local residents and safe food activists, as well as leaders Food & Water Watch and Sustainable Jersey City, plan on attending the City Council meeting at 6 p.m. at City Hall.

State Sens. Robert Singer and Joseph Vitale, as well as Assemblywoman Linda Stender and Assemblyman Timothy Eustace have introduced a bill that would require labels for GMO foods.

GMO foods were first introduced in 1996, and have since made up 94 percent of soy crops and 88 percent of corn crops, but have not been tested for long-term environmental and human health effects, Food & Water Watch says.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... g_in_june_11_meeting.html