Posted In: Genetically modified food
Publish Date: March 18, 2013
We don’t often agree with The New York Times editorial board — but they were spot-on Friday with an editorial questioning why genetically engineered food should be labeled.
“Any private company has the right to require its suppliers to meet labeling standards it chooses to set, and consumers have a right to know what’s in the food they are buying,” the Times wrote. “But there is no reliable evidence that genetically modified foods now on the market pose any risk to consumers.”
The Times acknowledges that while there are efforts to mandate labeling pending in several states, “there seems little reason to make labeling compulsory.”
ACSH’s Dr. Gilbert Ross says the editorial seems like a rebuke to the Times columnist Mark Bittman, who has frequently opined against GMOs and was an advocate for the defeated Proposition 37 bill in California. Dr. Ross agrees, of course, with the Times editorial board when he says, “GM foods pose no danger to consumers or the environment.”
And ACSH’s Dr. Josh Bloom adds, “it’s a free country. People who choose the “organic” option in order to avoid GM foods should be able to cheerfully waste their money in any way they see fit.”…This Appeared Here….
My Take - So the question that is obvious to the most casual observer should be; why are the activists so hot to have these labeling regulations imposed on the nation? Because this then gives them a platform to attack those who produce these foods, those who sell these foods, and scare the beejeebers out of the consumers of these foods with false claims of potential health or environmental disasters. Their goal is to then bankrupt those who are striving to feed the world’s hungry and force everyone into prehistoric farming practices that will starve most of the world’s population to death. The green movement is irrational, misanthropic and morally defective. Everything they promote is incredibly destructive to humanity. Why can’t everyone get that?
No comments:
Post a Comment