Name of Author

Course

Name of Tutor

Date of Submission

All foods with GMOs should be labeled

Paper Outline

1. Introduction

Thesis: Irrespective of the benefits gained by modifying organisms, products of this technology should be labeled to serve the interest of the public and allow consumers a choice between organic and GM products.

1. The concept of food labeling
2. Policies and regulations on labeling of GMOs
3. Current labeling policy
4. The united states’ policy on GMO Labeling
5. Pros and cons of mandatory labeling
6. Conclusion

All foods with GMOs should be labeled

Introduction

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are plants, animals, and microorganisms whose genetic compositions have been altered for either scientific reasons or increased food supply. Some of the most common genetic modifications involve cross breeding animals and plants genes and introducing new genes aimed at making organisms hardier (Nelson 77). Following technological advancements, the introduction of genetic engineering makes it possible for scientists and researchers to splice particular genes with desired traits into plants and animals without relying on the popular trial and error selective breeding. Introduced in the late 1960s, this technology currently posses a number of health and environmental challenges. Acting on the promise of increased productivity and quality of food products, the technology is gradually invading our grocery stores, kitchen pantries, and farmlands by altering the genetic composition of some staple food products (Manjula 43). Irrespective of the benefits gained by modifying organisms, products of this technology should be labeled to serve the interest of the public and allow consumers a choice between organic and GM products.

The Concept of Food Labeling

Consumers around the worlds have increasingly become concerned on the type and ingredients of the food they purchase. When making their consumption choices, they pay close attention to product information relating to pricing, health risks, and production processes. This has made food manufacturers, retailers, and processors to also consider these elements (Manjula 69).

However, international standardization organizations, Federal, and state institutions encounter a major dilemma in the process of designing labeling programs and policies for biotechnology products. This is because consumers, producers, and regulators hold divergent views on product labeling, particularly GMOs. While consumers consider labeling as appropriate and necessary, producer and regulators oppose this process on the ground that it would result in a considerable increase in supply chain costs related to verification and segregating products (Tutelyan 172).

Policies and Regulations on Labeling of GMOs

A survey conducted in 2011 by Nelson established that over seventy percent of processed food products being retailed in the supermarkets have genetically engineered ingredients. According to the Center for Food and Safety, more than 85 percent, 88 percent, and 91 percent of corn, cotton, and soybeans produced in the US are genetically modified (84). It is expected that the number of processed animal and plant products with genetically engineered genes will continue to increase in the coming days. This is because corn and soy products are extensively being used in food processing systems (Manjula 91).

Current Labeling Policy

While Asians, Americans, and Africans are fast embracing this technology, its adoption remains restricted and highly regulated in Europe. To help final consumers in making informed decisions regarding their consumption patterns, countries such as the European Union, Japan, China, and Australia have introduced mandatory labeling laws for GMOs. The European Union holds stringent legislation requiring manufacturers to label food products, addictives, and ingredients containing authorized genetic engineered ingredients. Also, such regulations recognize the fact that natural food products may accidentally get contaminated during transportation, production, harvesting, and storage. For this reason, all natural products found to have more 0.9 percent traces of GMOs must be labeled (Lees 70).           

The United States’ Policy on GMO Labeling

Unlike most developed economies, the US has not enacted policies mandating firms to label GMOs. Though attempts have been made to ensure increased consumer protection through product labeling and information symmetry, such initiatives are yet to be implemented for GE food products. Since 1990s, the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) regulations only require mandatory labeling of GMOs when substantial differences are found to exist in safety or nutritional characteristics of the new food. It is only under such circumstances when consumers’ expectations on nutritional and food safety property significantly differ with those of the GMOs that the FDA mandate labeling (Tutelyan 126).

Therefore, the FDA regulations stipulate that methods of production or product development are deemed as immaterial information that should get disclosed through labeling of foods and products as stated in the US Food Safety Act of 1992. However, the FDA through the US Food Safety Act of 2001 proposed voluntary labeling of GM products (Bennet 96).

Pros and Cons of Mandatory Labeling

Debate on the labeling of GMOs is one of the topics that have been surrounded by a number of controversies. While consumer protectionists and watchdogs strongly support the idea of mandatory labeling of GM foods, some scientists and regulatory authorities are opposed to this move. Proponents of the GMOs Labeling theory argue that consumers have the right to accurate and timely information. To avoid by misled, they should be informed on issues relating to the quality, ingredients, and materiality of food products sold to them. According to Bennet, mandatory labeling will make it possible for consumers to make informed decisions regarding the products to consume, with full knowledge of possible health and environment consequences (101).

Mandatory labeling of GMOs should be introduced to serve varied ethical and religious beliefs. This is because some ingredients of GE foods get deemed unfit for spiritual reasons. Therefore, manufacturers should reveal the contents of GMOs to enable different religious groups make informed choices before consuming such products. Surveys conducted by consumer watchdogs have indicated that over 80 percent of Americans prefer mandatory over voluntary labeling. This is because the voluntary labeling processes have been ineffective in informing consumers about the existence of particular GM contents with adverse health consequences (Paarlberg 39).

On the contrary, opponents of ‘Mandatory GMOs Labeling’ argue that the difference between conventional foods and GMOs are statistically insignificant. Therefore, labeling GM products would affect their sale since such a move would be considered as a health warming to the consumers. As outlined in the FDA regulations, mandatory labeling would only implemented in cases where allergenic characteristics or nutritional differences are found between natural and GMOs (Lees 56).

From the economic point of view, labeling of GMOs would increase the costs of the products. Such additional costs would be passed to final consumers, hence a considerable rise in the prices of these food products. They argue that like in the European Union, mandatory labeling would not result in any significant consumer choice. Instead, retailers would shy away from stocking their shelves with GMOs given the negative consumer perceptions about the environmental and health issues associated with these products (Lees 41).

Conclusion

The technology of modifying organisms was first used in the 1960s. Since then, various advancements related to the same have led to improved quality and large-scale production of various food and nonfood products. The most common genetic modifications involve cross breeding animals and plants genes by introducing new genes aimed at making organisms healthier and resistant to environmental challenges. Irrespective of the benefits gained by modifying organisms, products of this technology should be labeled to serve the interest of the public and allow consumers a choice between organic and GM products.

Works Cited

Bennet, Gregory S. Food Identity Preservation and Traceability: Safer Grains. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2011. Print.

Lees, Maurice. Food Authenticity and Traceability. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishers, 2013. Print.

Manjula, Guru. Biotechnology, Iprs, and Biodiversity. New Delhi: Pearson, 2007. Print.

Nelson, Gerald. Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture: Economics and Politics. San Diego, California: Academic Press, 2011. Print.

Paarlberg, Robert. Starved for Science: How Biotechnology Is Being Kept Out of Africa. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2009. Print.

Tutelyan, Victor. Genetically Modified Food Sources: Safety Assessment and Control. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press, 2013. Print.