Geoffrey Zehnder writes:
>I don't like the idea of eating non-natural or altered foods any more
>than you do, but consumers need to be educated a little about some of
>these biotechnology methods so that they can decide for themselves
>whether a bioengineered food really represents a health risk, or whether
>the media or consumer groups are overstating these risks.
There are already sources for interested consumers to educate themselves. The
problem is that there is no way for those who have decided (for
whatever reason) that they do not want engineered food to tell which food
is and which food is not engineered.
You mention health risks, but there are other issues as well. For example,
I personally don't think there's much of a health risk involved in the use of
rBGH. However, I am against its use for several philosophical reasons. Milk
products in the US are cheap, plentiful *and* publically subsidized.
IMNSHO the use of rBGH serves no purpose other than to publicly subsidize
Monsanto, a company I would choose not to support if I had a choice.
I can't for the life of me figure out why the FDA wants to prevent me
from making an informed purchasing decision, but that's what they're
doing. Heck, I won't even ask for mandatory labelling--but for heaven's
sake quit trying to prohibit voluntary labels!