I don’t care what the science says about how safe GMOs are. I want a choice. I want to know when my food contains GMOs or is a GMO. I want the option of knowing if my dairy products were produced with BGH. Most of all, I want the choice to pay more to buy an alternative without the GMO or without BGH.
Too often, science has been wrong about the safety of stuff. Radiation wasn’t well understood early on, if the stories about watch factory workers and glow-in-the-dark watch faces are true. Is Thalidomide a success story or a cautionary tale? They got it right eventually, but there was a cost, and there was a reversal of their position.
Labeling controversial ingredients isn’t the same as banning them. You can still have your BGH ice cream and your GMO soup. If it costs someone a small cost to change the packaging, live with it. Isn’t your point that science is giving you a cost advantage? Your competitors have the same cost if they use the same advantage.
Some bloggers I follow for their pro-vaccine or anti-global-warming-denial stances are also pro-GMO. That’s a little confusing, but I’ll say this: vaccines prevent horrible diseases and even deaths. I’m not sure GMOs in the first world do more than lower costs. It’s not like the world can’t produce enough food; it’s a problem of distribution, not production. GMOs don’t address that. That’s why I can be risk-adverse with GMOs.
Overanalysis While You Wait 