• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

President signs GMO labeling bill

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,204
Reaction score
50,576
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I say 'Good!'. People have a basic human right to know what they're ingesting. Whether they make good or bad choices is on them.

GMOs aren't poison or anything, but they should be labeled. More things should be labeled. In fact, not too long ago I think manufactures found a way to hide the amount of high-fructose corn syrup is in stuff...that needs to be done away with too. If there's high fructose corn syrup in the product, it needs to be labeled.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
This falls under a category of things I call "Stupid, but whatever".
 

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,555
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I say 'Good!'. People have a basic human right to know what they're ingesting. Whether they make good or bad choices is on them.

My feeling about this is people don't even have basic knowledge about GMOs in the first place so it just reinforces their belief that they shouldn't be ingesting them, if a food is labelled like that. BTW, the notion that a label called GMO educates consumers about what is in their food is a false narrative because all GMO label does, is say GMO! :lamo
 

jimbo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
19,078
Reaction score
6,745
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I say 'Good!'. People have a basic human right to know what they're ingesting. Whether they make good or bad choices is on them.

In my view, if government has any roll past protecting the borders, providing for the common defense, and facilitating interstate commerce, its providing information to the public. I do read labels, and GMO's is as much a part of food information as food grading and inspection.
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
My feeling about this is people don't even have basic knowledge about GMOs in the first place so it just reinforces their belief that they shouldn't be ingesting them, if a food is labelled like that. BTW, the notion that a label called GMO educates consumers about what is in their food is a false narrative because all GMO label does, is say GMO! :lamo
Probably correct. So what?

Those that do can be clued in to do some more research.

The only logical way a person can be against labeling GMOs is to be against ALL labeling, and that's illogical.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
50,498
Reaction score
34,824
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I say 'Good!'. People have a basic human right to know what they're ingesting. Whether they make good or bad choices is on them.

Labels should reveal things that are scientifically relevant to the contents of the package. GMO foods have been proven perfectly safe to eat; the only real debate is on whether there's a point in using them when they don't seem to meaningfully impact crop yields (similarly, debates on the volume and types of fertilizers and other chemicals used on GMO and non-GMO crops respectively). People will irrationally respond to "GMO" labels by not buying the foods because it's bad for them, but that's only because they don't actually know the truth. It's one of the instances where more information actually distorts markets, rather than makes them more efficient (as is usually the case).

This is somewhat similar to responding to anti-vaxxers by requiring doctors to distribute pamphlets to patients stating that vaccines contain mercury and listing why mercury is bad to ingest. Factually true, but irrelevant, because vaccines do not cause autism (or other problems) via mercury.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I say 'Good!'. People have a basic human right to know what they're ingesting. Whether they make good or bad choices is on them.

Yep. They have a right to know. But why not allow the poor cheaper food and let the people that want expensive stuff label the higher standards. That would have the advantage that those selling bio foods would have to state clearly, what it meant and face fraud charges , if they misrepresent their product.
Besides, almost every food contains genetically improved organisms at one level of the production chain or another. So labeling just increases costs of most products.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Probably correct. So what?

Those that do can be clued in to do some more research.

The only logical way a person can be against labeling GMOs is to be against ALL labeling, and that's illogical.

Nope. It would be smarter to label the produce that promises to not have gmo content. The reason to do it the other way is poorly ideological.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,006
Reaction score
9,886
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The only logical way a person can be against labeling GMOs is to be against ALL labeling, and that's illogical.

No. Someone can be against labeling things for the sole purpose of fear mongering.

But as long as the label can be on the back of the product and normal sized I don't care. I just don't want a huge "GMO" stamp on the front, as it would scare stupid people into making silly decisions.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,204
Reaction score
50,576
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Yep. They have a right to know. But why not allow the poor cheaper food and let the people that want expensive stuff label the higher standards.

Labeling things as GMO isn't going to change any of that. The label isn't going to hurt GMO production, it won't end it. People who can afford differently or care can avoid it, others won't.
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Yep. They have a right to know. But why not allow the poor cheaper food and let the people that want expensive stuff label the higher standards. That would have the advantage that those selling bio foods would have to state clearly, what it meant and face fraud charges , if they misrepresent their product.
Besides, almost every food contains genetically improved organisms at one level of the production chain or another. So labeling just increases costs of most products.
I find the increased cost argument to be nothing but a red herring. Companies relabel all the time for multitudes of reasons. Maybe for a limited time promotional offer, or to add a pink ribbon to show how socially cool they are, or to change the size to a lower amount so they can raise the price without raising the price, or just because they want a new look, and so many more.
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
No. Someone can be against labeling things for the sole purpose of fear mongering.

But as long as the label can be on the back of the product and normal sized I don't care. I just don't want a huge "GMO" stamp on the front, as it would scare stupid people into making silly decisions.
Doesn't have to be on the front. People make stupid AND smart decisions all the time.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
More government regulations that will cost private companies more money to do business. Its stupid to pass regulations that make good more expensive.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
127,795
Reaction score
39,038
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
My feeling about this is people don't even have basic knowledge about GMOs in the first place so it just reinforces their belief that they shouldn't be ingesting them, if a food is labelled like that. BTW, the notion that a label called GMO educates consumers about what is in their food is a false narrative because all GMO label does, is say GMO! :lamo

You mean tell them about antibiotic use and affects on non-target organisms, genetic drift, superweeds, genetic monoculture and chemical treadmills?
 

Anagram

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
8,858
Reaction score
5,411
Location
St. Louis MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I guess I don't really care as the cost of labeling something isn't prohibitive, but this doesn't seem like something that is necessary.
 

PirateMk1

Resident Martian ;)
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
17,544
Reaction score
8,347
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Labels should reveal things that are scientifically relevant to the contents of the package. GMO foods have been proven perfectly safe to eat; the only real debate is on whether there's a point in using them when they don't seem to meaningfully impact crop yields (similarly, debates on the volume and types of fertilizers and other chemicals used on GMO and non-GMO crops respectively). People will irrationally respond to "GMO" labels by not buying the foods because it's bad for them, but that's only because they don't actually know the truth. It's one of the instances where more information actually distorts markets, rather than makes them more efficient (as is usually the case).

This is somewhat similar to responding to anti-vaxxers by requiring doctors to distribute pamphlets to patients stating that vaccines contain mercury and listing why mercury is bad to ingest. Factually true, but irrelevant, because vaccines do not cause autism (or other problems) via mercury.

So why is it when you break a fluorescent bulb that has mercury in it that you technically have to call a hazmat team to do the clean up, if mercury was harmless in small doses.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Labeling things as GMO isn't going to change any of that. The label isn't going to hurt GMO production, it won't end it. People who can afford differently or care can avoid it, others won't.

That is why the labeling is so stupid. The only difference will be a higher price tag on ordinary food for the logistics of proper labeling.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
127,795
Reaction score
39,038
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So why is it when you break a fluorescent bulb that has mercury in it that you technically have to call a hazmat team to do the clean up, if mercury was harmless in small doses.

The mercury in a bulb is not bio-available. Mercury doesn't become dangerous until it is digested by micro-organisms. It's hazardous waste, but it's not a mutagen/teratogen in industrial form. When it's linked with carbon, in micro-organism poop, it's an individual risk.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
My feeling about this is people don't even have basic knowledge about GMOs in the first place so it just reinforces their belief that they shouldn't be ingesting them, if a food is labelled like that. BTW, the notion that a label called GMO educates consumers about what is in their food is a false narrative because all GMO label does, is say GMO! :lamo

The same argument was used against nutrition labels, too...yet a lot of people DO read the labels and use them to make better choices - I know I do.

What you're basically doing is arguing for less education, instead of more. But then, it's your vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence who believed that "smoking doesn't kill". I guess he would have been against labels on cigarette packs that warns people that yeah, smoking DOES kill.

Yeah, according to y'all, less education is better. Orwell would've loved y'all.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I find the increased cost argument to be nothing but a red herring. Companies relabel all the time for multitudes of reasons. Maybe for a limited time promotional offer, or to add a pink ribbon to show how socially cool they are, or to change the size to a lower amount so they can raise the price without raising the price, or just because they want a new look, and so many more.

It is not only the label. Behind it there is required a chain of logistics including legally robust guarantees all the way back to the small farm that sold the corn to a small farm raising cows for breeding up through separate storage in separate buildings etc. Red herrings look differently.
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
It is not only the label. Behind it there is required a chain of logistics including legally robust guarantees all the way back to the small farm that sold the corn to a small farm raising cows for breeding up through separate storage in separate buildings etc. Red herrings look differently.
Your point is "ignorance is bliss"?

That's all I can conclude.
 

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,555
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Probably correct. So what?

Those that do can be clued in to do some more research.

The only logical way a person can be against labeling GMOs is to be against ALL labeling, and that's illogical.

I'm not against "labeling" per se and I quite like the QR code idea, because it can fit more information. However, putting a big fat GMO sticker on everything is just going to lead people to pro-GMO labeling sites that are full of fear-mongering and not much else. Through my research on this subject I have not been able to find that many truly unbiased sources on the topic. Maybe a few articles here and there.
 
Last edited:

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,524
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I guess I don't really care as the cost of labeling something isn't prohibitive, but this doesn't seem like something that is necessary.

That is why the labeling is so stupid. The only difference will be a higher price tag on ordinary food for the logistics of proper labeling.

The cost of labelling is exactly $0.00

The producers are putting the product in a package either way. They aren't getting charged more for the packaging because it has a warning printed on it. The costs of printing the packaging depends on how many colors aren't printed. How much of the packaging is printed on does not affect the cost
 

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,555
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The same argument was used against nutrition labels, too...yet a lot of people DO read the labels and use them to make better choices - I know I do.

What you're basically doing is arguing for less education, instead of more. But then, it's your vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence who believed that "smoking doesn't kill". I guess he would have been against labels on cigarette packs that warns people that yeah, smoking DOES kill.

Yeah, according to y'all, less education is better. Orwell would've loved y'all.

Nutrition labels are fine. I have to read them myself, because I am allergic to a very specific ingredient in baking goods and salad dressing. But a label that says GMO, is just silly in my opinion. It's not very specific...
BTW, this has nothing to do with my politics, because I don't like Mike Pence either :2wave:
 
Top Bottom