According to some health organizations, many foods on our grocery store shelves are made with genetically modified ingredients. Most of these foods, however, do not have a
GMO (genetically modified organism) label. Do you think there should be a law requiring manufacturers to label foods containing GMOs? Use specific reasons and examples to sustain your position.
I think that it is important that consumers be able to identify GM foods before they purchase them since the ability to do so increases their control over the foods that they ingest. There is still extensive controversy over GM foods, and it seems that the food industry in the U.S. wants to keep it a secret that most of the foods they grow and sell are genetically modified. Take a walk down any aisle, and nine out of ten foods that you observe have at least one genetically-modified component, especially if corn syrup is on the list of ingredients.
Scientists take the resistant qualities of one plant, such as a potato bacteria lethal to insects, and add it to the genes of another, such as corn, creating a new species: bacillus thuringiensis (or Bt) corn. Such corn requires one-fifth less pesticides, meaning less chemical spraying and fewer health and environmental hazards. Maybe. But experiments have revealed that Monarch butterfly caterpillars give up the ghost after eating Bt corn pollen. Bioengineered corn approved for animal use slipped through rigid protections and found its way into taco shells. "Consumers want to know and should know what they are putting into their mouths," argues Senator John Nutting, a dairy farmer from Maine. The greater part of consumers undoubtedly would support his statement.
A recent upsurge of opposition to the production of genetically modified crops has farmers all over America asking themselves one question: To modify or not to modify?
Genetically modified (GM) crops allow farmers to use fewer pesticides while still achieving the same yields. American farmers have planted GM crops since 1995 and, at least for the first few years, had no problems selling these products to the public.
Recently, however, there has been a movement by several activist groups, some of which have the support of accredited scientists, to make a distinction on grocery store shelves between GM foods and those that were produced normally. This process, called labeling, strikes fear in the hearts of most farmers who are afraid that an uninformed American public will steer clear of the GM crops “just to be on the safe side.” The fact of the matter is that Americans have been eating these altered crops since 1995 and no one has been harmed.
Kraft Foods recently sold taco shells that produced problems for consumers. The taco shells were genetically modified. The genetic protein in question, Cry9C, has not been shown to cause any allergic or other reactions in humans. And the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention concluded it had no adverse human side effects. Still, the psychological effects were real. Many consumers grumbled that the taco shells caused allergic reactions and other illnesses. Consequentially, McDonald's and Frito-Lay have begun to decrease their use of bioengineered crops, not for safety reasons, but from consumer fears. Can you envision the sum of money they could lose in a lawsuit?

I wonder about the claims that some GM crops are essential to feed the world's growing populations. Is it really true? Is the problem sometimes lack of money, rather than lack of food? And how will the companies who own this technology make a sufficient profit from selling their products to the world's poorest people? Wouldn't it be better to concentrate instead on the sustainable techniques which can double or treble the yields from traditional farming systems? The public discussion so far has concentrated on the risks and capabilities of the technology and the effectiveness of the regulations.
These things are important, as are effective and comprehensive labelling schemes to ensure that those consumers like me who do not want to eat GM foods can avoid them.
But there is an important public debate needed also on whether we need GM crops at all."