We label sugar and sodium content in food. Why not GMOs?
To the editor: Every day, thousands of perfectly rational consumers make their purchase decisions based on the amount of sugar or sodium that a product contains, decisions enabled by national food labeling standards. (“Vermont’s newest export is bad GMO policy,” editorial, July 7)
Why should identifying and labeling foods containing genetically engineered ingredients be any different? Because, as The Times so eloquently describes them, those who would want the information to be available are “fear mongers pushing junk science”?
Regardless of the merits or risks associated with GMOs, consumers should be able to know what a product contains and be free to make an informed purchase decision. That The Times and the industry have become hysterical opponents of this disclosure is troubling.
Henry DuBois, Fountain Valley
To the editor: I do not fault those who challenged global warming, vaccines or GMOs. However, when they continue their assault on truth even after extensive scientific studies show they are wrong, they need to be ignored especially with regard to proposed laws that acknowledge their point of view.
GMOs coming on the market have been thoroughly tested and shown to be completely safe. They will result in expanded food availability and be able to economically feed millions of people in developing countries.
John C. McKinney, Cerritos
To the editor: Once again, The Times publishes a short-sighted editorial about GMOs.
Opposition to GMOs is not defined exclusively by human health issues. There are significant environmental concerns, notably the increased use of herbicides, such as Monsanto Co.’s Round-up product on GMO crops.
These reasons alone are enough to require foods to be “stigmatized” by GMO labeling.
Christine Goodreau, Los Angeles
A cure for the common opinion
Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.