GMOs Are Good for Us
The activists who say otherwise are wrong on the costs and wrong on the science.

Activists have convinced Americans that "organic" food is better—healthier, better-tasting, life-extending.
As a result, poor parents feel guilty if they can't afford to pay $7 for organic eggs.
This misinformation is spread by people like Alexis Baden-Mayer, political director of the Organic Consumers Association. She says organic food is clearly better: "The nutrition is a huge difference."
But it isn't. Studies find little difference.
If you still want to pay more for what's called "organic," that's your right. But what's outrageous is that this group of scientifically illiterate people convinced the government to force all of us to pay more.
Congress has ruled that GMOs (genetically modified food) must be labeled. Busybodies from both parties supported the idea.
Politicians like Rep. Jim McGovern (D–Mass.) said, "It doesn't cost any more. This idea that…this…will raise food prices is ridiculous."
It's McGovern who is ridiculous. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) says the GMO labelling will cost from $598 million to $3.5 billion.
"But the public wants GMOs labelled," say advocates. "Surveys show that."
Of course they do.
Ask people if DNA in food should be labelled, and most say yes. Yet DNA is in everything.
Polling is a stupid way to make policy.
The idea of modifying a plant's DNA may sound creepy, but people have cross-bred plants and animals for years.
"The corn we have today, there's nothing natural about that," I say to Baden-Mayer in my new video. "What native people ate, we'd find inedible."
Baden-Mayer laughs at that.
"You're saying indigenous corn is somehow inferior because you've seen it dried and it has tiny little kernels?" she asks.
"Yes," I reply. I've tried to eat it.
"That's another myth of the industry," she responds. "People like you believe that."
I sure do. I also believe it's good that genetic modification lets us alter nature more precisely, gene by gene. That's better and safer than the more haphazard crossbreeding that's been done for years.
This new precision lets scientists make plants that save lives.
In poor parts of the world, half a million people per year go blind due to lack of vitamin A in their diets. Many die.
Scientists have created a new genetically modified rice that contains vitamin A. This "golden rice" could save those people.
"I've heard of golden rice," sneers Baden-Mayer. "That was a project that all of the chemical companies invested in."
I sneer right back.
"Golden rice hasn't succeeded partly because scientifically ignorant fools like you convinced the world that it's harmful!"
"I knew at a certain point you would resort to name-calling," she replies. "But it doesn't change the science on this."
Sadly, in some countries, people listen to advocates like her and believe that Americans want to poison them. One group of GMO fearful protesters invaded a golden rice field in the Philippines, ripping up all the plants.
Thousands will die or go blind, needlessly, because the organic cult spreads misinformation.
At least educated skeptics now understand that they were wrong about GMOs.
The New York Times points out that many "quietly walked back their opposition" to GMOs. "The science is clear," says a former opponent in The Wall Street Journal. "They're perfectly safe."
The Philippines recently approved golden rice.
But the hardcore zealots will never be convinced.
Baden-Mayer claims GMOs cause cancer.
"We're using more GMOs than ever," I point out. "There's less cancer now. Life spans keep increasing."
"Compared to when, 100 years ago?" she scoffs.
Absolutely, yes. We live about 25 years longer than Americans did 100 years ago. Even compared to 10 or 20 years ago, we live longer.
The National Academy of Sciences calls GMOs safe. So do the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the USDA.
But no amount of science will convince people like Baden-Mayer. "The GMO issue just has not been investigated enough," she says.
Organic promoters are wrong on the costs and wrong on the science.
Sadly, they've won the battle of public opinion.
COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Billions of people took a shot without long term analysis. I would agree GMO's should not be a complaint to the majority of the population anymore.
Yeah, no mention if the vaccines were organic.
I eat GMO and took two Pfizer shots, and took the Pfizer booster!
Now that's what I call ANARCHY! 🙂
Well, long-term risks now are coming in and it's pretty shitty.
Even the Walgreens vax tracker is showing unjabbed are the least likely to catch Covid now.
And we're still only at like 2/3 and 3/4 vaccinated. It was inevitable that, at some point, the vaccinated were going to die in greater numbers than the unvaccinated through sheer probability, but this is like a tail-end herd immunity. It really does go to show how herd immunity as a concept makes sense but, practically, is just and arbitrary correction factor in order to fudge the numbers.
The same people that rail against GMOs, also scream "Science!" at you when you question the effacacy of the Pfizer jab.
Is that Jen Psaki's sister?
Baden-Mayer is lying with a straight face because she's a true believer that doesn't realize she's lying.
Psaki is lying with a straight face because she's a trained spokesperson who knows she's lying.
I'd genetically modify Psaki.
hotter.
Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.
If You Drink, You Die by Barton and Sweeney
GMOs Are Good for Us
Not only that, but that's all the food that exists, whether by Natural Selection, domestication and selective breeding or genetic modification in a Petri Dish or test tube.
Oh, and if you didn't gather it, hunt it, fish it or trap it, or if you eat in the floor of the den, everything is "Farm-To-Table."
And unless there is alcohol in the tails of comets, pay no heed to Purell. All alcohol, whether ethyl, methyl, or isopropyl is "Plant-Based Alcohol."
None of this is about the "science". It is about the Left's war on big business.
The Gov-Gun POWER to STEAL from big business.
Who are you going to believe, science or The Science?
That's The Science! (tm), to you.
Science™
Alt+0153
Science®
Alt+0174
You're welcome.
On iPad ™️
Windows™ for me. I'm not sure what it is on other things.
Linux? Oh, wait...
I sure hope someone is working on GMOing the Cavendish banana which is susceptible to extinction from disease. The Gros Michel (not to be confused with gross Michelle) was the main variety exported until it was almost destoyed by Panama disease.
I sure hope someone is working on GMOing the Cavendish banana which is susceptible to extinction from disease.
I don't really care, but I hope not. This is a FUD 'myth' like the "(Bee) Colony collapse disorder will cause food shortages." It's a bit like hoping someone is working on GMOing people named Henry to avoid the catastrophic extinction of people named Henry.
Yes, there is only one species of Banana, but there is only one species of lots and lots of crops (organisms) with many, many variants and cultivars. Further, having many species is no guarantee against eradication from catastrophic disease and only compounds the problem categorically . Any hypothetical disease that would/could obliterate Cavendishes (like Panama disease) likely wouldn't affect other banana variants (like Snow Bananas) and almost certainly wouldn't affect plantains (like Panama disease didn't) and absolutely would not affect similarly productive and more energy-dense and nutritious crops (like kiwifruit, which also consists of one species, several variants, and multiple cultivars).
Full disclosure: It's probably been a couple decade since I've eaten an actual banana. No hate, but I don't think humanity would miss the bananas foster, banana bread, and banana splits when they're gone. Especially if you could just use plantains and artificial isoamyl acetate/banana ester.
You’re an idiot. Don’t mess with my nanner puddin
You’re an idiot.
I used to love peanut butter and banana sandwiches, then I got older and stopped hanging out with Nellie out at the pawpaw patch.
Well, that's more for Elvis...of both peanut butter-'n'-nanner sammiches and Nellie. 😉
I eat a lot of bananas. I love 'em.
Gwen Stefani's song would lose all meaning if B A N A N A S were to go extinct.
"Yes We Have No Bananas" was inspired by the Panama disease shortage in 1923. It's also an example of early "Cheseborger, Cheesborger" humor originating with Greeks.
It may be for the better, since according to Harry Belafonte, "the beautiful bunch of ripe bananas hides the deadly black tarantula"
DAAAAAAY-O! DAAAAAAAAAY-O!...
Or Harry Chapin 30000 pounds of bananas
Mashed bananas...heading to Scranton, Pennsylvania...As sang by The Mormon Tubercular Choir.
"I like-a tha jus! Jus is very good!" 🙂
That checks out, her earlier song "I'm just a girl" now has no meaning
No Doubt about that.
Banana flavored runts haven't had meaning for as long as I can remember so we're half way there.
laffy taffy flavor was bananaeqsue
Whats worse. Banana runts or grape jelly?
Charles Nelson Reilly taught me to spell it when I was little. Too bad he'd be lynched by Q-Anon if he were a schoolteacher:
Charles Nelson Reilly High Quality BIC Banana Commercial
https://www.vidoevo.com/video/d3R3bENPcWuRpT2Z2ZXM/charles-nelson-reilly-high-quality-bic-banana
Bic Banana Markers Commercial 1970's Charles Nelson Reilly
https://youtu.be/RNdERG8kcXk
Fond memories! 🙂
" I don't think humanity would miss the bananas foster,"
Now, suh, I believe you have gone too fah. You forget yourself!
++
Bananas Foster, Oysters Rockefeller, and Lobsters Newberg. What's with naming dishes proper last names? Were these the creators of the dishes?
>>>It's probably been a couple decade since I've eaten an actual banana.
this disqualifies you as an expert.
Are you a phytologist?
this disqualifies you as an expert
Again, I don't actually know anyone personally who goes by the name of Hank either. My expertise, or lack thereof, in 'Hank' is immaterial to the notion that the world would not miss the name Hank if it were to disappear into history.
You know who else would hate a Hank who talks against National Socialist Positive Christianity and Prohibitionism and The Corn Laws?
The Williams family would be devastated.
As a fan of Senior and Junior, I stand by what I said.
But bananas have Potassium, for strength and sanity and Male get-up-and-go. And the banana famously made Apologist Ray Comfort look like a dumbass.
Oh well, more for me. 🙂
Wait, you mean the GMO lobby had people decorating their houses and dinner tables with "Indian Corn" or flint corn since before Watson and Crick discovered the double helix? That's a pretty powerful lobby! With history-altering, time-travel narrative abilities like that, they must be affiliated with Trump.
I know someone ate a "GMO" once and they're dead now.
I know someone who died in a GMO. Coulda been a GM or GTO. At this point, the details are a little fuzzy.
That reminds me of the song "Little GMO" by Ronny and the Daytonas.
Eventually, of course.
Perhaps if Baden-Mayer was concerned about her two-month old baby except as a badge of privilege, she wouldn't be taking part in illegal activities. AWFL...
Baden-Mayer claims GMOs cause cancer.
By her logic, GMO's cured smallpox and polio.
People actually think eating GMOs alters your DNA.
Somehow though, eating salmon doesn’t make you grow gills, and eating potatoes doesn’t make you need to cover yourself in dirt
No, but epigenetic theory suggests that genes can be turned on/off by chemical exposure without altering the underlying DNA.
Is that how they turn the fricken frogs gay?
Actually, it is. The increase in estrogen (which is highest downstream from college towns) in the water supply has been linked to multiple development abnormalities in fish and amphibians.
So if you want to save amphibians, you have to get an abortion because birth control is destroying the environment.
Ackshuyally, the chemical Alex Jones cited is a chemical castrator that was really used in the past for failed attempts at "converting" Homosexuals. So Alex Jones really doesn't know what the Hell he's talking about.
What chemical?
"Careful wearing that dress in the garden, Granny! You know them 'taters got eyes!" 😉
"That was a project that all of the chemical companies invested in."
I know someone who partook in chemicals. They were dead within a 30-50 years after that.
The funniest thing about this is the chemical companies actually make more money on mutagenesis, which the organic activists actually allow to be labeled organic and have no problems with. Before GMOs the chemical and seed companies would induce mutations in seeds through radiation or harsh chemicals, and hope that one of the mutations induced a profitable trait. It was a lot slower, a lot more costly and produced far more misses than hits.
"It was a lot slower, a lot more costly and produced far more misses than hits."
The nice thing about it is that it's random and the results are unpredictable. John Laroche used to put orchid seeds in the microwave to try to get interesting results. You can read about in in Susan Orlean's The Orchid Thief.
http://library.lol/main/6C19381CFC95CBC7B409229A65346677
(Trigger Warning: the book was based on an article published in New Yorker magazine, and a Hollywood movie starring Meryl Streep was adapted from the book.)
I know of a whole Maternity Ward of children who were born covered in chemicals! Oh, it was horrid!
In poor parts of the world, half a million people per year go blind due to lack of vitamin A in their diets.
You know what else makes you go blind?
Hitler.
Baden?
No, tell me. My vision is getting so bad I can't safely shave the hair that keeps growing on my palms.
"That's another myth of the industry," she responds. "People like you believe that."
Trofim would be proud.
Spoken like a true Flat Earther
Spherical Earth is just a social construct.
The funny thing is that the idea that people used to think that the earth was flat, is a myth and a modern historical misconception.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
Eratosthenes calculated the actual circumference of Earth around 240 BC and this became common knowledge. It wasn't until the 17th century, as part of desultory propaganda by Protestants to make Catholics look dumb, that it was claimed that they believed the world was flat.
For example, Columbus wasn't unique in thinking the world was round, everyone did. But Columbus erroneously believed that the circumference calculations were wrong and that the world was much smaller than the ancients had calculated. Thus he could travel west from Europe to China because it wasn't an impossible distance.
but the album cover for Point of No Return wouldn't have been so awesome
Kansas, Yes, Little Feat and Hawkwind had great album art.
absolutely agreed. also, there's a fat man in the bathtub lookin' blue.
With the blues. Only if the fat man went like Lowell George would he have been blue.
you are correct! I swear to you the two Feat shows I have from the '70s Lowell says "lookin' blue"
Well, the 60s and 70s had a lot of misheard lyrics, partially from intoxication of the singer, the listener, or both. See kissthisguy.com
Had the americas not been there he would have died
Fell right off the side
Columbus wouldn't have sought a quicker path to the East in the first place if Islamic powers didn't control The Silk Route. So, really, both Islam and Christendom share blame for Manifest Destiny.
Speaking of, just so you know I'm not picking on Canada exclusively:
US finds 500 Native American boarding school deaths so far
https://apnews.com/article/religion-education-native-americans-cbd724ae4e423c788089ef98cec4315a
Once again, DeSantis and all Governors should have passed a "Don't Say Or Do Compulsory Schooling Act," officially called The End Conformity Factories Act or The Separation of Religion and Education From State Act.
I know someone who picked up a GMO at a grocery store before putting it back and buying Rice-A-Roni instead. They were then carjacked and made to taste the curb.
I know someone who say he ate a GMO and was just fine. We had him committed.
That just means that the GMO was already inside him and had twisted his mind.
Driving a Suburban will do that to a person.
I hope the GMO version of 'Invasion Of The Body Snatchers' is better than either 'The Day After Tomorrow' or 'The Invasion'.
They should at least remake one for the trannies, 'Invasion Of The Snatch Snatchers'
No need to snatch the snatch. That can be crafted. Only the schlong is snatched, unless the Trans says: "stop before the chop."
At first I read that as "made to taste the carb". Still made sense.
""I've heard of golden rice," sneers Baden-Mayer. "That was a project that all of the chemical companies invested in.""
This is such an ignorant statement. "Chemical companies" have nothing to do with it. She is confusing Golden Rice with various pesticide/herbicide-resistant crops which chemical companies like, because it allows farmers to spray their chemicals without killing the crop.
But even IF the chemical companies were investing in Golden Rice. So fucking what? I'm sick of hyphenated children of privilege like Baden-Mayer constantly sneering on productive enterprise. Those evil chemical companies have done more to keep humanity from being choked off by the nasty bugs and nettles of nature than she could dream of. Do these life saving and improving technologies come with costs such as pollution and side effects? Sure. But rather than thinking of solutions to these problems, these "Political Directors" can do nothing more than BAN BAN BAN and sneering as they do it.
Please fuck right off, slaver.
She is confusing Golden Rice with various pesticide/herbicide-resistant crops which chemical companies like, because it allows farmers to spray their chemicals without killing the crop.
This is an ignorant statement that feels like you're trying to feed into her bullshit. It's not like the farmers would still be out their spraying fields with chemicals that killed crops, that they're just chemical sprayers who happen to produce a little food on the side, so we call them farmers. If they could get maximal yields without spraying a single drop or increasing labor hours, they would.
Pesticides cost money. Fuel to apply them costs money. In crop application, even if the pesticides don't harm the plants, damages the plants when you drive on them. Air application costs a whole lot of money (and often misses areas). Yeah, so most farmers use them only if and when they need to.
What are you so worried about, Jimmy? Kimmel leads liberal freak out after Elon Musk confirmed that Donald Trump would be allowed back on Twitter once his $44bn takeover is complete
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10806095/Jimmy-Kimmel-leads-liberal-freak-Elon-Musk-said-Donald-Trump-allowed-Twitter.html
Pop the fucking corn.
I feel so divorced from this. Twitter just means so little to me. I don't get it.
Beats Colin Capernick's bullshit any day of the week though.
Ukrainian counter-attack drives Russian troops back to their own border near Kharkiv as Kyiv shuts off pipeline carrying up to a THIRD of Russia's gas into Europe
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10804963/Ukraine-war-Kharkiv-counter-attack-drives-Russia-border.html
I did not know that mortars made that big of a bang.
Looks like a mortar in the 80mm range.
Don't just shut off the pipeline. Destroy it.
Pretty much all food crops are genetically modified. Corn (maize) was just a native grass not that long ago.
The advantage of organic produce isn't taste or nutrition, it's avoiding chemical residues from pesticides.
I like to go into Trader Joe's and ask for the inorganic food isle.
*aisle* fucking autocorrect
same effect.
And the extra protein from the pests.
Organic farms still use chemicals and pesticides
Actually there are lots of pesticides used in organic, many of them far less safe than modern pesticides.
Additionally, organic cant use no till, because the pesticides they use aren't very effective so they have to till to control disease and weeds. This destroys soil structure, soil microbes, and increases erosion.
Funny, in more desert climates that tilling is how we actually farm in a sand and claypit. Buries the remainder of the crop to enrich or breaks the hard crust to allow water penetration before sun and rain strip everything.
We do make sure to add mycorhyzal slurry periodically to help boost the network, no getting around that damage.
If I use RF to pasteurize grain is that organic or is it still 'industrial farming'? Because, to me, nothing says 'industrial' and '*in*organic' more absolutely and completely than microwaves.
Considering many of the same activists are against irradiating meat and grains to kill pathogens (and increase shelf life), I'm betting it's not. Even though it's completely safe. It has to be on the label, and there was enough pushback that many don't even bother. Hey, what is a little e. coli and increased food waste, if we can feel good that our food isn't exposed to radiation, in a controlled environment, in a well researched (30+ years research) method. Because everyone knows radiation is bad.
Don't tell them that you are exposed to more radiation every day from natural sources.
"Considering many of the same activists are against irradiating meat and grains to kill pathogens (and increase shelf life), I'm betting it's not. "
The desire of Americans to eat older and older food is something I find strange. Then again, the Chinese like 100 year old eggs, though they never get to be that old, the eggs that is. Japan is a culture where freshness is most prized. I remember eating in a sushi restaurant shortly after arriving in Japan. Something caught my eye, something was moving on the plate of the customer sitting beside me at the bar. I turned out to be the fish, prepared, as I learned later, in the 'ikizukuri' style where the fish is carved up by the chef for consumption but somehow left alive. It's worth noting here that a sushi chef trains for 5 years, longer than it takes to obtain an undergrad degree. The first year, the trainee works exclusively on making the perfect rice.
OT. In today's everything old is new again and everything not-so-old continues topic, Bongbong Marcos and Sara Duterte win presidency and vice-presidency in the Philippines. By a landslide.
https://news.yahoo.com/marcos-duterte-philippines-president-vice-104644883.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall
how do you *not* vote for Bongbong?
The most Libertarian question asked today.
By passing to the Leftleft.
Correct, now do Climate Change John.
Organic increases GHG emissions, because it produces less per acre, requires more field work (more fuel burned), releases carbon into the environment from the soil through constant tillage. Organic grass fed beef takes longer to reach maturity, which increases lifetime GHG emissions. Organic dairy produces less milk per cows, and thus increases GHG emissions per liter of milk produced. Any study that shows otherwise is usually based on GHG emissions per acre, but ignores that organic produces 30-70% less yield per acre, so you have to plant 30-70% more acres to meet the same production. When this is factored in (by using the far more scientific measure of GHG emissions/unit of production) organic is far worse than conventional farming and ranching.
Organic practices are primarily beneficial to the soil, not the product. While I agree on yield, etc., can you link info on your statement about net-GHG emissions? You don't mention the reliance on fossil fuels for non-organic farming, or the necessity of phosphate mining, another non-renewable resource in commercial fertilizers.
By the way, I ran a small farm for 15 years that was primarily a cow/calf operation (30 mothers) but I also planted rye every winter and once did 4 acres of sweet potatoes. None of it was organic though I tried to use practices that were soil building including a harrow and no plowing ("trash farming"). I have no illusions.
Was this before or after you retired from the LAPD to become an award-winning architect and builder?
Chronology of BS always trips me up.
It was after I was Mr Universe and a Navy Seal.
Why do you think being a small farmer must be a likely boast? Is your life that dreary and undistinguished??
A normal sized farmer is more plausible.
The holy grail of farming would be making annual grains into perennials. This would require much less pesticides. Save fuel. Sequester more carbon. Improve soil health. Cut down on erosion. Make crops much more drought resistant (perennials are less damaged by drought because they have deeper roots). The best way to do this would be to use GMO techniques to introduce perennial genes from closely related perennials into modern grain varieties, to maintain yield while having to plant once every four or five years (generally, that's about the length before you have an increase in other problems that require you to start over). Unfortunately, seed companies aren't interested in it. And the anti GMO activists have reduced any research into this by the land grant universities. So most of the research into this has been focused on traditional breeding. It's been decades without a lot of success yet, and still looks decades away from fruition.
The holy grail of farming would be making annual grains into perennials.
To be fair in pissing on everyone's parade equally; nutrients in, nutrients out and the part of the plant generally harvested is the part by which it would normally be more perennial-like. That's not to say that there are no benefits to be had, but at 30,000 ft. it sounds an awful lot like the genetic engineers that were promising apple trees as tall as oaks.
Maybe the non-religious use of the term 'Holy Grail' outside of actual technologies that would redeem us all is personally triggering. And not in any religious sense, unclear on whether I, if living at the time, would presume Christ himself to have a savior complex or not.
No, you don't have that correct. Perennial grasses have lower meristems, because they've evolved to be grazed and grow back, so it wouldn't be removed by harvesting. And all of the benefits I've listed have been shown in the few low yielding varieties currently available; they are actually wheat grasses not true wheat (same tribe different genus), so they aren't actually perennial wheat and their current yield is pretty low, but they have other benefits. By holy grail, I mean it's something farmers and researchers have wanted for years.
I should mention that perennial crops such as grass hay and alfalfa take much less inputs too than annual grain crops grown for hay.
I'm not saying there's no horse trading to be done. I've just been around for enough genetic grail quests, read enough Lysenko, and spent too much time replacing my incandescent bulbs with CFL, only to have them out done by LEDs to think that engineering zone 9 perennials to be perennials in zones 3-4 will be the way to go. Especially if, in the time it takes to engineer them, zones 3-4 will have turned into zones 5-6 anyway. The unstated presumption in the grail mythos is that the grail exists and isn't just a cup and, intentionally or not, the majority of the grail legends are "It's not the destination, it's persevering the journey." metaphors.
I'm not sure that would be a net benefit. You'd still need to turn and replenish soils, and perennials have lower production compared to all-in-output annuals.
"Polling is a stupid way to make policy."
So is most democracy. Stupid is as stupid does.
Golden rice? No problem.
Corn modified so it can survive being sprayed with glyphosate (Roundup)? Problem...not with the corn itself, but that it will come to the grocery having been soaked in glyphosate. Eschewing all GMOs does't make sense, but avoiding specific ones makes all the sense in the world.
Several years ago California required labeling and inspections to make sure ORGANIC, was in fact organic. Costco started using green price signs. Same products, higher prices. Smaller companies complained that their product was organic and always has been because there was no other way to produce it, but they were paying fees to CA for the privilege of saying it. Like a lot of regulation, big companies can afford it because it drives smaller companies into the ground.
I don't have a problem with labeling GMO products. If GMOs are good for us, their manufacturers shouldn't have a problem, either. If they do it's down to them to fix it, not me.
GMO labeling should not cost more, most products have a label anyway. Many producers label non-GMO on their label now so labeling is not that expensive. I am guessing the increased cost is due to government regulations for labeling, not the labeling itself.
GMO labeling is pointless and a win for anti-science anti-GMO propagandist. It stigmatizes an advanced scientific process as an ingredient of dubious to negative effect. Should the use of hybrid varieties be required labeling?
Labeling doesn't stigmatize a product. It informs potential buyers. Manufacturers, for that reason, label their products with information like vitamin C supplemented or fluoride added etc. If GMO is stigmatized, it shows that manufacturers haven't done enough to inform potential buyers.