“On our way to testify before Seattle City Council about why we’re calling for GMO food labeling and food system transparency on behalf of our 12,000 active owners and eaters everywhere! #yeson522 #GMOs” — Central Co-op via Instagram
In November, Washington voters will have the chance to enable a “right to know” food labeling initiative requiring genetically engineered products to be clearly labeled. Monday afternoon, the Seattle City Council is holding a vote on Resolution 31484 to support I-522:
Initiative 522, called “The People’s Right To Know Genetically Engineered Food Act,” would require most raw agricultural commodities, processed foods, and seeds and seed stocks, if produced using genetic engineering as defined, to be labeled as genetically engineered when offered for retail sale. Chris McManus is I-522’s main sponsor. The initiative sponsors brought in more than 350,000 signatures.”
Last year California voters rejected a “right to know” food labeling initiative. Since then, several other states have put up proposals to require GMO food labels. In January KUOW did a brief but interesting interview with former anti-GMO crusader Mark Lynas about why he would vote against the labeling measure. Lynas was once known for destroying GMO crops but later apologized for his actions and now says he supports the use of GMOs as a solution to nutritional and environmental issues. GMO labeling supporters say the measure is about consumer choice.
Capitol Hill Mayors Forum
You can also mark your calendar for Thursday, October 3, 7-9 PM for the one and only Capitol Hill-focused mayoral candidate forum at 10th/Pike’s Barboza. More details soon but we can tell you that CHS will be part of the show ensuring that event includes a satisfying level of neighborhood geekery. More soon.
UPDATE: The City Council voted 8 to 1 to support I-522. Jean Godden cast the lone vote against the symbolic resolution.
GMO labelling is a bad idea:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=labels-for-gmo-foods-are-a-bad-idea
Personally, I agree that delaying Golden Rice was not just unwise, but also morally questionable considering the real human cost. However, if GMO food can be produced so cheaply and with vastly higher yields, shouldn’t we be clearly on the way to dramatic reductions in global hunger? Labeling GMO food here isn’t going to make all GMO food suddenly disappear from shelves across the country, nor create a disincentive for companies to develop other seeds that can be beneficial to reducing hunger. But keep in mind that the primary reason for GMO seeds is to make them resistant to pesticides and herbicides produced by the companies making the seeds. And because the crops are resistant to those pesticides and herbicides, as a result the yields increase. However, this reduction in production cost doesn’t factor in the environmental cost of having more pesticides and herbicides in our soil and groundwater. Personally, this issue to me is similar to organic labeling as organic food doesn’t inherently have a higher nutritional value or better taste, but by labeling it I am now empowered to make a choice about what I want to put in my body. And labeling organic food has not eliminated conventional food from our food system, so I don’t see how labeling GMO food would eliminate that either.
did you even read the linked article?
“In 1997, a time of growing opposition to GMOs in Europe, the E.U. began to require them. By 1999, to avoid labels that might drive customers away, most major European retailers had removed genetically modified ingredients from products bearing their brand. Major food producers such as Nestlé followed suit. Today it is virtually impossible to find GMOs in European supermarkets.”
Yes, I did read the linked article and in my opinion the result of GMO labeling from the EU in European supermarkets in 1999 is different then GMO labeling in Washington State in 2013. Whether anyone believes me or not, I can honestly say that I don’t fundamentally have any problems with GE food, I just personally want to know if what I’m eating is made from GE food. In the future there could be GE apples that have better taste and higher nutritional values and I would absolutely buy those. For me, GMO labeling is about transparency and if the GMO product is superior, I’d like to know that so I can buy it but right now regardless of the decision, I don’t even have the information to make a choice.
The consumer is the one that pays for their food choices. Until Prop37, it was biotect’s secret. Well the secrets out. Gmos are a monopoly involving patented seed and chemicals. Scientists need to do longer research in order to regain the consumer confidence. Who if they knew would consume a food that has a built in insecticide that has only been tested for 90 days.
Here is another example of people fearing the new, when the old is no better. Practically everything you stuff in your gob hole is “genetically modified” already. Every sort of meat or other food derived directly from animals is coming from critters bred over decades, centuries, or millennia to produce more, or bigger, or leaner, or whatever. Veggies? Don’t get me started. Americans even a hundred years ago wouldn’t recognize half the fruits and vegetables we think are “normal”.
All we are talking about here is that the new version of “genetically modified” is being done in a controlled and scientific manner, rather than being left to chance and happenstance. Worry about something else.
I believe one key difference thought is that the means by which genetically modified food is created nowadays is vastly different than the selective breeding methods used before. For example, while humans have always been able to cross breed different types of corn to create new varieties, with genetic engineering companies have added viral and bacterial DNA into plant DNA so the crops are resistant to certain disease; and this type of genetic engineering cannot occur naturally. Ultimately, I-522 is about our right to know as consumers so we can make informed choices about the food we decide to eat. Some people don’t care if their food is genetically modified, and this won’t impact them one bit. But for those who do care, I-522 will empower them to make the right choices for them and their family. It won’t raise the cost of food for consumers, lots of farmers in Washington State support it, and once I learned a little more about GMOs and what the initiative would actually do, I decided to support it too.
That is a well reasoned argument. But let’s turn it on it’s head. We have criteria by which manufacturers can label food as “natural”, “organic”, and even Non-GMO. This legislation is not to allow manufacturers to label products as Non-GMO, it is about making manufacturers that cannot prove with 98% certainty that there products are GMO free label their products with a scarlet letter. Where is the initiative to make every manufacturer that cannot prove their product is “natural” mark it Non-Natural? How about the same for “Non-Organic? One of the Major sponsors of this legislation is the Non-GMO project http://www.nongmoproject.org , they have already created a process to submit product for verification to carry a Non-GMO label. What’s next? Labels that say “Not Non-Dairy”? People have a right to know.
“this type of genetic engineering cannot occur naturally”
False. Look up Horizontal Gene Transfer.
As a geneticist, I can tell you that most of the critiques of GMO are based on utter misconceptions of the actual science. Don’t believe everything you read on some anti-GMO site, dude.
Even if this process couldn’t “occur naturally,” why does that mean it’s necessarily bad? Naturalistic fallacy much?
“Ultimately, I-522 is about our right to know as consumers so we can make informed choices about the food we decide to eat.”
Here’s a fun game: go to your closest QFC and find as many products already labeled “GMO free” as you possibly can. Don’t conflate mandatory labeling with “consumer choice,” I-522 is about eventually eliminating GMOs from the market, pure and simple.
Sure, I’m not a geneticist so I can’t speak specifically to what can and cannot occur in nature. I sort of mangled some information I read on the World Health Organization website which says, “(g)enetically modified (GM) foods are foods derived from organisms whose genetic material (DNA) has been modified in a way that does not occur naturally, e.g. through the introduction of a gene from a different organism.” http://www.who.int/topics/food_genetically_modified/en/ Yes, there are a number of products already labeled as Non-GMO or GMO free, but personally I’d rather have clear and consistent labels for everything that I buy. Obviously there are incredible advances and possibilities for our health with genetic engineering, so of course I don’t want to see that go away. With I-522, I really do just want to know what is in my food and if the GMO product is better, I will buy it. To me it seems kind of contradictory that if GMO products are in many ways superior, labeling them will mean consumers won’t buy them. If I made canned soup and that was my belief, then wouldn’t I want to label my product as made from GMO ingredients? I guess I don’t understand why anyone would be opposed to GMO labeling regardless of their opinion on GMO food.
No, you are not even close on this. Salmon are now being genetically modified where biotect would own all fish that have the new modified gene. This is called a monopoly. Next would be farm animals. Imagine the royalty fees involved as this is a world wide problems. The food in the old days did not involve a patent where animal, bacteria and virus genes are mixed into plants and animals in a laboratory resulting in a monopoly . Now it it possible for a few chemical companies to own the food chain. This never existed in the old days.
[…] Dine Out for 522 Capitol Hill: The push for I-522 requiring the labeling of genetically modified food in Washington will get a boost from the food and drink providers of Capitol Hill Thursday night. The Dine Out for 522 Capitol Hill event will send participants on a seven-restaurant tour of neighborhood eateries. “Enjoy various appetizers/small plates at participating Capitol Hill Restaurants to support labeling genetically engineered foods in Washington,” organizers promise. The passport goes for $50. You can sign up here. Earlier this year, the Seattle City Council voted to support the initiative. […]
[…] This November, Seattle will join voters across the state in deciding whether to approve I-522 to require GMO — genetically modified organism — food labeling. Details on Saturday’s March Against Monsanto event are below. Participating groups are also […]