GMO Title
As we sit down to eat our lunch, we pause and consider the contents of our meal. In 1990, the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act passed to include the nutritional value of our food. Yet, when examining the label there is no information on whether the ingredients have been genetically engineered. GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) have been integrated in our foods for over 20 years (McLure). Since the sale of genetically modified tomatoes which were approved by the FDA in 1994, the usage of GMOs has expedited to the point where over 70 % of our food is, or has, a GMO (Smith).
There is a large debate today circulating around genetically engineered foods which consists the fight to label GMOs or not. Proposition 37, was introduced …show more content…
The average American is already consuming products containing GMO’s whether knowingly or not.. Rick Weiss the staff writer for science and medicine for the Washington Post wrote that by “2002, genetically modified (GM) crops represented 26 percent of corn, 68 percent of soybeans and 69 percent of cotton planted in the United States.” Only four years later, 61 percent of corn, 89 percent of soybeans and 83 percent of cotton had been genetically modified (Rick). The statistics show the rise of usage of genetically modified crops which are presently the major share and the primary seed for farmers to sow. We consume the byproduct from corn, soybeans, and cotton which are utilized to make corn syrup soy lecithin, and cottonseed, which are in most of our processed foods. The statistic how prominent GM products are in our foods, and without GMO labeling, many people would not have enough information to make a decision.
Consumers want to pass prop 37 which requires GMOs to be labeled because it gives them the right to know about what they are eating and allows them to make conscious food decisions while producers don’t want prop 37 to pass as they argue that labeling GMOs would misrepresent foods and would prevent them from purchasing their products while …show more content…
The example of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream is a prime example of the customer demand changing policy to use only non-GMO products. Ben and Jerry’s felt so strongly, that the additional cost of the non-GMO products are absorbed by the company. Michelle Lee a staff fact checker for the Washington Post points to a study by the “Consumers Union, which supports mandatory labeling, estimates the median cost of designing and labeling a product as containing GMOs would be just $2.30 per person per year”(Lee). Michelle explains that the redesigning of product packaging is a common occurrence and if a simple label, or black lettering is added the cost is minimal and may not even be passed down to the customer. Michelle also describes “’price stickiness’” from another study appointed by Just Label it. “’Price stickiness’” describes the consistency of retail price despite the changes of supply and demand(Lee). This principle explains why it is more disruptive to adjust the price when the raw materials have fluctuating prices. It would be careless to believe that every company would absorb the cost of labeling, but some would point to the absorbent dollar amount in the Washington Research Council and other studies as scare
As we sit down to eat our lunch, we pause and consider the contents of our meal. In 1990, the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act passed to include the nutritional value of our food. Yet, when examining the label there is no information on whether the ingredients have been genetically engineered. GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) have been integrated in our foods for over 20 years (McLure). Since the sale of genetically modified tomatoes which were approved by the FDA in 1994, the usage of GMOs has expedited to the point where over 70 % of our food is, or has, a GMO (Smith).
There is a large debate today circulating around genetically engineered foods which consists the fight to label GMOs or not. Proposition 37, was introduced …show more content…
The average American is already consuming products containing GMO’s whether knowingly or not.. Rick Weiss the staff writer for science and medicine for the Washington Post wrote that by “2002, genetically modified (GM) crops represented 26 percent of corn, 68 percent of soybeans and 69 percent of cotton planted in the United States.” Only four years later, 61 percent of corn, 89 percent of soybeans and 83 percent of cotton had been genetically modified (Rick). The statistics show the rise of usage of genetically modified crops which are presently the major share and the primary seed for farmers to sow. We consume the byproduct from corn, soybeans, and cotton which are utilized to make corn syrup soy lecithin, and cottonseed, which are in most of our processed foods. The statistic how prominent GM products are in our foods, and without GMO labeling, many people would not have enough information to make a decision.
Consumers want to pass prop 37 which requires GMOs to be labeled because it gives them the right to know about what they are eating and allows them to make conscious food decisions while producers don’t want prop 37 to pass as they argue that labeling GMOs would misrepresent foods and would prevent them from purchasing their products while …show more content…
The example of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream is a prime example of the customer demand changing policy to use only non-GMO products. Ben and Jerry’s felt so strongly, that the additional cost of the non-GMO products are absorbed by the company. Michelle Lee a staff fact checker for the Washington Post points to a study by the “Consumers Union, which supports mandatory labeling, estimates the median cost of designing and labeling a product as containing GMOs would be just $2.30 per person per year”(Lee). Michelle explains that the redesigning of product packaging is a common occurrence and if a simple label, or black lettering is added the cost is minimal and may not even be passed down to the customer. Michelle also describes “’price stickiness’” from another study appointed by Just Label it. “’Price stickiness’” describes the consistency of retail price despite the changes of supply and demand(Lee). This principle explains why it is more disruptive to adjust the price when the raw materials have fluctuating prices. It would be careless to believe that every company would absorb the cost of labeling, but some would point to the absorbent dollar amount in the Washington Research Council and other studies as scare