Biotechnology: The Labeling Requirement Debate

On one hand you hear Senator Tom Hayden saying, "I want to know what I'm putting into my stomach. My primary concern would be the preservation of the democratic process against manipulation and invisibility." (Wall Street Journal, 12/22/99) On the flip side you have the California Farm Bureau Federation’s Cynthia Cory, director of marketing and labor for the 85,000-member state farming organization, saying, “We're not against consumer information if it tells you something. But we are against warning labels when we think they're warning you about something that's not a threat." (Wall Street Journal, 12/22/99)

This paper will give a brief explanation of why I do not believe that mandatory labeling should be required.

What is meant by genetically engineered food crops? (Other terms that you might hear, and which are often used interchangeably, include

Traditional breeding methods involve crossbreeding plants in order to produce desired changes in that particular crop. These changes might be increased hardiness, more productivity or enhanced color. “The traditional method is quite imprecise because the farmer is shuffling thousands of genes in the offspring, causing them to have some of the characteristics of each parent plant. They then look for the plants with the most desirable new trait,” states Dr. Jane Henney, US Food and Drug Administration Commissioner (FDA Consumer, January-February 2000).

Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA will not approve a crop if it poses unacceptable risk to human health, wildlife or the environment. The crops are tested for allergenicity and other possible effects. Since 1996, biotech crops have been used in foods and feeds consumed by millions with absolutely no adverse effect.

Voluntary labeling is always an option. It should be possible to market foods made, or not made, with agricultural biotechnology in ways that do not mislead consumers. Examples of such accommodations to consumer desires include labeling for

FDA’s policy requiring label for significant changes, such as changes in nutrients or the introduction of allergens, should be maintained to inform the public about any material change in nutrition or any increased risk. The use of biotechnology itself does not necessarily cause a significant or material change in the plant variety. The public has been well served by th

Some topics in this essay:
Drug Administration, Street Journal, Consumer January-February, Organisms” Conference, , Information Council, Agency EPA, Agriculture USDA, Nenon USDA, Laurate Canola, genetically modified, labeling policy, conference 26 1999, genetically modified organisms”, consultation process, fda labeling, current fda, plant varieties, consumer january-february, fda consumer, modified organisms” conference, organisms” conference 26, modified organisms”, labeling genetically modified, labeling genetically,