GMO’s. Competition has always been an effect of changing an aspect of business, and this would just be another scenario where that happened. Competition stems from customers making choices based on what they know. Without labeling GMO ingredients, the food industry is losing out on some valuable competition.
Again, in the past, ingredients that seemed undesirable were not labeled. Nutrition facts including things like fats and cholesterol may not have once been labeled because companies did not want consumers to know that their products contained some less than desirable ingredients, however, consumers prevailed. Artificial flavors and colors were not labeled at one point, but now they are Allergens also were not labeled at some point. As …show more content…
We can look at how labeling impacted these other countries and see that nothing bad happened. The laws about labeling are still in place, so nothing too terrible could have happened. In fact, many people are happy with the labeling. There is still some controversy on exactly how GMO’s should be labeled and whether or not there should be a global standard. Currently, the majority of labeling laws in the world require that products with more than one percent of GMO ingredients must be labeled. Some other strategies to labeling could be to define a global standard or use some sort of symbol to represent a product contains GMO’s. There are some concerns that without global labeling standards, trading could be more difficult. However, before thinking of global standards, the entire world has to be on board with labeling their GMO products, “The debate is no longer about whether or not to develop a labeling system for GM foods but rather how to develop a system that provides real consumer choice without unduly interrupting international trade in agri-food products” (Phillips and McNeill). As they are, labeling regulations work well. Consumers ended up being happier and it created a better relationship between consumers, companies, and the
Again, in the past, ingredients that seemed undesirable were not labeled. Nutrition facts including things like fats and cholesterol may not have once been labeled because companies did not want consumers to know that their products contained some less than desirable ingredients, however, consumers prevailed. Artificial flavors and colors were not labeled at one point, but now they are Allergens also were not labeled at some point. As …show more content…
We can look at how labeling impacted these other countries and see that nothing bad happened. The laws about labeling are still in place, so nothing too terrible could have happened. In fact, many people are happy with the labeling. There is still some controversy on exactly how GMO’s should be labeled and whether or not there should be a global standard. Currently, the majority of labeling laws in the world require that products with more than one percent of GMO ingredients must be labeled. Some other strategies to labeling could be to define a global standard or use some sort of symbol to represent a product contains GMO’s. There are some concerns that without global labeling standards, trading could be more difficult. However, before thinking of global standards, the entire world has to be on board with labeling their GMO products, “The debate is no longer about whether or not to develop a labeling system for GM foods but rather how to develop a system that provides real consumer choice without unduly interrupting international trade in agri-food products” (Phillips and McNeill). As they are, labeling regulations work well. Consumers ended up being happier and it created a better relationship between consumers, companies, and the