Unknowingly we are exposed to deadly GMOs pr genetically modified organisms when we eat at fast food chains such as McDonalds. When we dine in places such as McDonalds, we eat meat that was harmed and lived horrific lives. As Americans and as human beings I think that it is our right to know exactly what these corporations are doing to our food. I think that there should be something telling us that the food contain deadly GMOs our that the meat is treated inhumanly so we can decide for ourselves what we consume. I think that this small action would help lead us on our way to getting rid of GMOs and factory farming
First of all, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that GMOs are less safe than non-GMOs. The claim that we are exposed to deadly GMOs in food is patently absurd. There is a strong scientific consensus on this issue. Every reputable science organisation in the world agrees that GMOs are as safe as their non-GMO counterparts.
Second, if you don't want to eat GMOs then you can buy certified non-GMO or certified Organic food. Problem solved.
According to The NonGMOProject.org, in the short time that Engineers have been creating GMOs there have been numerous negative health effects both on the environment and on humans . More than 60 well developed countries view GMOs as harmful and have begun to ban them. These countries include Australia, Japan and all of the countries in the European Union. In the USthe Government has deemed GMOs safe due to studies done by major corporations such as McDonalds. These corporations make an enormous profit from GMOs and are also conducting the experiments . The problem is, most of the foods we consume on a daily basis have GMOs in it without our knowing. The belief that all you have to do is buy GMO free food is easier said than done.
Of course NonGMOProject say that; spreading fear of GM crops is their job. They are not a scientific organisation. If that's where you go for information on this topic, then it's not surprising that your views are so discordant with the empirical evidence and scientific consensus.
Whenever a country has banned growing GM crops (of course, they still import them even if they don't grow them!), it has been a political decision that is not based on science. That's why, whenever a government moves to ban this safe technology, the peak scientific bodies in the country always protest. Scotland is just one example: http://www.theguardian.com...
I would just like to remind Con that we are not arguing the severity of GMOs, but whether when companies are using them they are letting the public know. In the brief time that GMOs have been around there have been many controversies regarding the health and safety of the organisms. According to PublicMed.org, GMOs have had serious health effects. These health risks include hepatic, pancreatic, renal, or reproductive effects and may alter the hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters. If given a choice, most consumers would want to avoid these side effects. Unfortunately most foods containing GMOs don't specify that they contain them. This argument is simply saying that consumers deserve to be aware of these health risks.
You continue to claim that GMOs are unsafe ("deadly" even) and therefore should be labeled. First you cited NonGMOProject.org, an anti-GMO org that has no scientific credibility. Now you are citing PubMed, which is a search engine. Saying "according to PubMed..." is like saying "according to Google..." It means nothing.
GMOs have been on the market for about 20 years. There has not been even one case of harm. Not even one. Every reputable scientific org in the world agrees on this. That's why the AAAS does not support GMO labeling: http://www.aaas.org...
Again, you can avoid GMOs by purchasing certified non-GMO. This might not be convenient for you, but it's the price you pay for refusing to accept facts.
It is our right to know what we are consuming. The fact that in 80% of foods contain GMOs and there is no labeling is wrong. When a food contains allergens such as gluten or dairy it is labeled. That is simply how it is. These foods are labeled because some people choose not to eat them due to dietary needs or life style. There are non-GMO foods that are labeled but at a higher price and less quantity. Simply a label explaining to the public what GMOs are and that they are is enough. According to http://www.webmd.com..., GMOs have had negative effects on peoples livers, kidneys and heart. People who consume GMOs can be at a greater risk of cancer. People should be aware of the placement of GMOs.
Labeling foods that contain allergens is a good thing because there are negative health effects for some people. The same is not true for GMOs. You can cherry-pick information from unreliable sources all you like, but the fact remains that there is a strong scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs. Read the AAAS statement again, esp. par 2, 4, 5.
In any case, 'GMO' is just a blanket term that covers all products deveoped using a certain breeding method. Therefore, a 'GMO' label only tells you something about the process used to develop the product. It tells you nothing about what is actually in the food.
You are free to buy certified non-GMO. The fact that it is overpriced, of limited supply, and in no way safer than GMO is your problem.