Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: FDA won’t allow food to be labeled free of genetic modification: report page

  1. #1
    shemdogg's Avatar
    shemdogg is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Cradle of Liberty, Taxachusetts
    Posts
    181

    FDA won’t allow food to be labeled free of genetic modification: report

    Primal Fuel

  2. #2
    Jenny's Avatar
    Jenny is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,527
    I think if anybody can show there's a difference in the food that could affect health, it should be labeled. (for example, existing labeling on milk for hormones.)

    If not, then labeling would mislead people into worrying about things they don't need to think about. For an extreme example, let's say you're looking at two cuts of beef and one is labeled "Plutonium-free!" when in fact neither is radioactive...

    "genetic modification" is such a broad term that it would also include selective breeding. Everything we eat is already genetically modified, whether we want it to be or not.

  3. #3
    jendoe's Avatar
    jendoe is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    117
    People have a right to know what they're buying/eating!

    I'm not well-educated in biology, but it seems like there would be a difference between traditional breeding programs to maximize desirable traits, versus splicing foreign genes into an animal (iirc they are adding genes from eels and something else into the salmon)?

    It also seems like - we don't know what the effects are. This is too new. I don't want to be any more of a guinea pig than I already have been with SAD.

    There's a comment on the RAW article:
    Just some food for thought - “The American Academy of Environmental Medicine this year said that genetically modified foods, according to animal studies, are causally linked to accelerated aging, dysfunctional immune regulation, organ damage, gastrointestinal distress, and immune system damage.

    Isn't that what most of us are trying to get AWAY from by going primal?

    I don't know, I suppose my position is that I'm all in favor of science and experimentation, HOWEVER, I think it's unethical and unfair to NOT let people know what's going on with their food. If it doesn't matter and is healthy, why not require it to be labeled so people can make their own decisions as to how much risk they wish to incur?

    If it's safe, why hide it?

    I also worry, without knowing more details, because it seems like traditionally the food industry has focused on profits over health (duh, right?) - i.e. HFCS and the new campaign to change its name. This alone makes me feel very wary of any changes like this (GM-salmon), especially when they are lobbying/working to make it impossible for consumers to identify

  4. #4
    Jenny's Avatar
    Jenny is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,527
    “The American Academy of Environmental Medicine this year said that genetically modified foods, according to animal studies, are causally linked to accelerated aging, dysfunctional immune regulation, organ damage, gastrointestinal distress, and immune system damage."

    Pretty broad and unequivocal -- so then are these peer reviewed studies by different unaffiliated teams of scientists etc? And they all assert a _causal_ link?

    Love to know more, then. Like I said, if somebody can show a dfference that affects health...

    My impression (and yes that's all it is) from my biology background is that this is a much bigger risk to wild fish populations than to us. We've already been eating fishes with these genes in them, and eating the proteins those genes build. But in terms of being suddenly excellent competitors for wild fish.... Yeah.
    Last edited by Jenny; 09-21-2010 at 07:16 PM. Reason: Last paragraph

  5. #5
    avocado's Avatar
    avocado is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    702
    Quote Originally Posted by Jenny View Post
    I think if anybody can show there's a difference in the food that could affect health, it should be labeled. (for example, existing labeling on milk for hormones.)

    If not, then labeling would mislead people into worrying about things they don't need to think about. For an extreme example, let's say you're looking at two cuts of beef and one is labeled "Plutonium-free!" when in fact neither is radioactive...
    Such great big ifs. This why milk now gets labelled as hormone free, followed by a disclaimer that hormone free isn't shown to be better. Most of us would disagree. But we don't get to decide. Government does. So I'd prefer to err on the side of labels being allowed to say they're GMO-free regardless of "proof." Better than expecting the gov to evaluate the evidence fairly.

  6. #6
    Jenny's Avatar
    Jenny is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,527
    As for labeling... *shrug* I did give an example of how labeling could mislead above, but I'm fine with labeling them too -- especially since people do want it labeled. I should've been clearer on that point.

    Maybe what we need are better labeling rules in general that are a better match for what people want labeled. (as opposed to industry lobbying for labeling that makes them look good, like "cholesterol-free" potato chips etc...)

  7. #7
    periquin's Avatar
    periquin is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Uruguay
    Posts
    1,367
    Personally, I am very concerned about avoiding plutonium in my diet. I would like to know.

  8. #8
    SerialSinner's Avatar
    SerialSinner is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    286
    Lets all gather together and sing Kumbaya while we enjoy the infallible umbrella of security provided by our very smart and capable bureaucrats.

    They have already approved that food companies to refer to HFCS as "corn sugar" to prevent us from getting "confused". We are surely in good hands.
    Last edited by SerialSinner; 09-23-2010 at 06:42 PM.
    “Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.” -Oscar Wilde
    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." -George Bernard Shaw
    "The trouble with jogging is that the ice falls out of your glass." -Martin Mull

  9. #9
    Chefgerry's Avatar
    Chefgerry is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    In the frozen North
    Posts
    340
    Whether you think you can..... or you think you can't..... your 100 % correct.

  10. #10
    periquin's Avatar
    periquin is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Uruguay
    Posts
    1,367
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    I read an article about honey. It seems that many people market various things, including corn syrup, as honey and that it is not disallowed by governmental regulations. Also, no need to label their products.

    If you want honey, buy it from a local producer.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •