October 22, 2013 6:14 AM

GMO foods: A scientific fight without a lot of science

Joann Hare, a retired dog groomer, says genetically modified foods seem weird and she would like them clearly labeled so she can avoid them…. “We’re consuming stuff we didn’t even make 50 years ago,” Hare, 63, says as she hefts a large bag of Costco cat food into the back of her car. But she’s not sure she can support the initiative on Washington’s Nov. 5 ballot that would require labeling. After reading a mailing from the opposition, she says, she worries it might be an exemption-riddled mess…. “They’re trying to confuse you,” Hare says of the $22.8 million fight over Initiative 522 that’s pumping TV ads and mailings into Washington homes. “That’s what they’re trying to do.”…. [A]s the big money indicates, a lot is at stake, with the bulk of the money flowing in from out of state. The food and biotech industry has spent more than $17 million fighting the measure. Backers of the burgeoning organic food movement are running their own sophisticated, albeit outfinanced, $6 million campaign in favor of it.

I’ve been following the argument over Washington State’s Initiative 522, which would require genetically modified foods to be labeled as such. At first glance, it seems simple enough, but it’s an argument that seems far emotional than empirical. In an era when “smaller government” is the mantra of the moment, I-522 is on the surface an attempt to bring yet more government regulation to the marketplace…and toward what end? What I’ve been trying to wrap my head around is the “Why?” part of the equation? Why is I-522 deemed as being necessary? What is the problem being addressed? What will labeling GMO foods warn the public of and/or protect them from?

I ask these questions because I honestly don’t know. “Consuming stuff we didn’t even make 50 years ago” seems a poor argument, in that Pizza Hut, Domino’s, and Chipotle didn’t exist 50 years ago. Food science is not a bad, evil, or even inherently dangerous thing. So what is it about GMOs that poses such an alleged risk to public health?

I’m normally loathe to come down on the side of corporations like Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, and others not normally famous for being outstanding corporate citizens. That said, I still haven’t heard a compelling argument made for why I-552 is necessary. What’s the risk to public health…or IS there a risk to public health? Where are the studies demonstrating that GMOs are or can be harmful to humans? What exactly is I-522 supposed to prevent? Why are GMOs ipso facto deemed to be unsafe enough to be subjected to government regulation?

I’m going to be sounding like a Republican here, but in the absence of studies demonstrating GMOs to be harmful, why not let the market set the approach for how GMOs are marketed and sold? Nationally, Whole Foods and, here in Portland, New Season Market are requiring suppliers to label their GMO foods. If there is in fact generalized and wide-spread concern about GMOs, consumers will demand that such foods be labeled and grocery stores will inevitably comply and give consumers what they want. I’m not certain there’s a compelling argument to be made for why I-522- and with it more government regulation- is necessary.

This really isn’t a Liberal or Conservative issue; to me it seems more about common sense and allowing the marketplace to react to consumer demand. Of course, I may well change my mind if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, but I’m not certain that I-522 isn’t a solution in search of a problem. Genetically modifying a food doesn’t automatically make it dangerous to consume. There are any number of reasons why something might be genetically modified. Perhaps there’s a need to create a strain of plant that can grow and thrive in harsh climates. Or provide a larger yield. Or to be resistant to destructive pests. None of those are bad reasons, nor do they necessarily lead to a food that’s dangerous or potentially harmful to human health.

Perhaps I’m being overly simplistic, but it seems to me there’s a very simple solution available, one that doesn’t require untold millions to be spent on pointless and wasteful political ads and yet more millions of taxpayer dollars on creating and enforcing regulations. If you’re concerned about GMOs, make your concerns known to the grocery store(s) you shop at. If enough people do this, you can bet that grocers will respond and require suppliers to label their foods accordingly. That’s the free market Conservatives love to champion at work. In this case it’s appropriate, because more government regulation will not only cost taxpayers more, but there’s evidence to suggest that food prices will also increase. I-522’s supporters claim that require labeling of GMO foods won’t increase food costs…which makes sense only if you assume that corporations won’t pass along the additional cost they’ll incur on to consumers. When’s the last time you experienced a corporation willingly absorbing additional costs without passing them along?

Yeah, I thought so.

I-522 may seen like a good idea on an emotional level, but from what I’ve seen thus far, it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Of course, my opinion hardly matters. I live in Oregon, and my opinion counts for squat across the Columbia River.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on October 22, 2013 6:14 AM.

A handy graphic guide to understanding the Know Nothing...uh, Tea Party was the previous entry in this blog.

Autumn comes to Portland is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 5.2.6