Amazon.com Widgets
  • GMOs Need Labeling

    GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) need to be labeled because they are harmful to everyone's and everything' health. GMOs change the DNA in whatever is modified. Lets say a genetically modified crop like corn is made. That "corn's" DNA is now changed and whatever consumes it (lets say a cow) has a radical DNA change as well. After that humans consume these sick animals changing our DNA, which also causes severe health issues such as leaky gut, allergies and so many others. With leaky gut, that is when GMOs practically create holes in your stomach lining and your poisoned food seeps into your blood stream and throughout your body, harming the rest of your body. Genetic modification can also change chromosomes in small infants through baby formulas causing autism and other "mental disorders". GMOs are one of the biggest, yet hidden, things that ruin health. It should definitely be labeled and eventually banned! GMOs and companies like Monsanto that create/supports it are destroying the health of everyone including fragile beings such as elders and small children. It is also killing our beloved animals and crops!
    Heck no GMO!

  • The right to know

    We deserve to know what's in our food. If there's a skull and crossbones on the label then it must be there for a reason. Don't live in ignorance, be educated. Time to step out of the dark--this is 2014, after all. One would hope we care about what we are putting in our bodies.

  • We can go on without GMOs

    We made enough goods without the use of GMOs before, so why do we need them now? Many studies show the dangers of GMOs and they really should be outlawed. To the people who say that it was cause job loss: if a company gets labeled with GMOs it's simple enough to just cease the use of them, and everyone gets to keep their jobs. It wouldn't be that much of a problem.

  • Watch Out for GMOs

    Toxins were found in pregnant women's blood as well as the newborn's blood. People should know what they are buying and be able to choose the right food for them and everyone else around them. By not labeling GMOs, we are not giving people the choice to be able to eat healthier and provide better food for their children.

  • GMO Labeling Ruins

    How come we don't get the right to know what is in our food. I wonder why obesity is so high in the U.S. it probably has to do with all these genetically modified food we eat. The process of a GMO corn is that the genes are taken out and blasted into vegetable genes. If back then they ate non-GM food why don't we.

  • GMO labeling needs to be required!

    People have died from GMO foods, and in these days, a lot more people desire to eat healthier, for example eating organic foods. We need to know just what we're eating. Who knows what's in GMO food? GMO uses harmful chemicals that can cause illness, fatal illnesses, and even death.

  • Your right, your food.

    You have the right to know what's in your food. Would you send your child to a school you don't know anything about? Would you let your child continue in a job when you didn't know they had a job? You have the right to know what school your child is going to, if they have a job or not. You have the right to know what is in you and your family's food!

  • This food is BAD!

    Who wants to eat food that kills you? If you don't know what kills you than you'll die without knowing you ate Genetically Modified Food. It's like eating poison that no one told you about! It's good if those people lose their jobs: the jobs of killing people in food. That way they can make it healthy and end discussion!

  • Watch Out for GMOs

    Toxins were found in pregnant women's blood as well as the newborn's blood. People should know what they are buying and be able to choose the right food for them and everyone else around them. By not labeling GMOs, we are not giving people the choice to be able to eat healthier and provide better food for their children.

  • Right to Choose

    There is overwhelming evidence that GMOs are dangerous or at least need another decade of testing. Since the introduction of GMOs in 1996, so many diseases have exponentially increased. Does correlation always mean causation? No, but it is extremely suspicious and needs to be looked into. It is unfair to force humans to be the guinea pigs.
    FACT: Nearly all doctors prescribe non-gmo diets to sick patients. How are they supposed to effectively follow that order without mandatory GMO labeling? It's an oppression of rights. People have a right to know what they are putting into their body.

  • Should there be GMO labeling.

    No because people can be scared by the warning label i mean would you really want to buy a food with a skull and cross bone's. When people don't buy the GM food it makes the company go bankrupt and people would lose there jobs. There is also a dIfference from a label and a WARNING LABEL. A label shows what the food is made from a warning label says that it could be bad or made from something bad.

  • GMO Labeling is Fear Mongering

    We can observe the negative effects of GMO labeling by directing our attention towards Europe. In 1997, with a growing apprehension toward GM foods, the EU began to require labeling. Subsequently, by 1999, almost every major market had gotten rid of GM products. Today, it is virtually impossible to find GMO's in European markets.

    So, while you all argue about your right to choose, you are attempting to pass a law that will essentially destroy any choice that Americans have.

    How? Well, as the Scientific American put it, "Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health". If you've done your research, you would see that no evidence suggests negative health effects from GMOs.

    To conclude, if any of you wants to live his/her life according to pseudoscience, then be my guest. Head over to Whole Foods. However, please refrain from spreading your food fear mongering on to the rest of us.

  • GMOs are not as bad as people say

    The fact of the matter is, GMOs are nowhere near as bad as some websites say. They pose numerous economic benefits including increased production of crops. Putting a warning label would drive consumers away from GMOs, despite all the good they can do. Governments aren't stupid, GMOs undergo stringent testing to make sure they are safe for human consumption. They aren't going to make you sick or give you cancer like some people say. Trust your government to make the right decisions and don't put warning labels on GMOs.

  • Natural Science Advances

    GMOs are natural. They are necessary to progress in the field of agriculture. Genes like drought resistance, which is highly needed in crops in drought-ridden areas such as California, can be taken from one plant, such as a cactus, to another plant, such as a tomato, which has little drought resistance. Although the plant might not take to the new genes, there is a good chance the tomato will, and will grow stronger. Seeds that are genetically modified become stronger and more resistant to threats. No studies show that GMOs are actually harmful to us! And some companies that produce products that contain GMOs are working to make their products more nutritious and healthier. If we ban GMOs outright, we may never have the chance to make them better for the good of agriculture.

  • No way Jose

    There hasn't been a single study showing that there's anything bad about GMOs. The only thing we are doing by labeling GMOs is helping concerned people who haven't done enough research buy their organic foods. Organic is BS, it's just a way of making more money, and GMOs are the way to go.

  • There is no proof they are harmful

    GMOs have been research since the 1980s and not one has shown that GMO have had any effect on health. The genes that are being modified honestly have nothing to do with food safety. As an example BT Corn is simply corn that has had a gene added that produces a bacteria in root cells and only the root cells. When the grain is harvest and the grain is ground up that gene can't harm anything. If you expect roughly 1% of the U.S population to feed the rest of the country, people who know nothing and have no proof to support of how there are bad need to stay out of the way. Genetic technology allows farmers to produce more with less water, nutrients, and chemicals this means more and less expensive food for the entire nation and higher exports
    Signed a 5th generation Colorado farmer

  • There are no credible studies that show that GMO's are harmful

    It has been proved that GMO’s have no short term side effects. “If GMOs were dangerous, the FDA wouldn't’t label them, it would ban them” (Washington post). In fact, some non-GMO foods are even more dangerous. They require more herbicides and pesticides to keep them healthy. This has the potential to create “Super Weeds”, weeds extra resistant to herbicides. This would, in the long run, make it harder to grow crops. Leading to world hunger, stronger pesticide use (which could be hazardous to your family’s health), and much higher prices. But those won't be the only raised prices.

  • It should not.

    Corn is corn, it's like requiring them to label the farmers ethnic background, it makes no sense. GMOs have been extensively research, by independent labs, all coming to the same conclusion. There is no scientific evidence GMOs have any negative consequences, other than a few faulty studies (I'm looking at you French), that are laughed at by the scientific community. GM crops are better for the world. They are grown faster, and have the potential to feed billions of people. Labeling causes ignorant paranoia, and can deter consumers from buying GM food, creating more demand for organic (Organic industry is even more dishonest than monsantos, which is not as evil of a company as some try to make them out to be) which has no evidence have any difference as GM crops, except they take longer to grow, and are susceptible to viruses, pests, that destroy the crop. GMOs limit the use of pesticides and herbicides, and can grow more crops in smaller fields.

    No peer reviewed scientific data has shown any negative side effects of GMOs.

  • The economy would suffer!

    Although it seems like a good idea at first, the consequences of such need to be considered. Most people don't even know what GMOs are, so if they see it on a label they will probably just assume it's bad and not buy that product. Major food companies could suffer for potentially no reason. There is no solid evidence that GMOs are dangerous to our health. At least find out what's in GMOs before deciding to label products containing GMOs. If it turns out GMOs are bad for our health, then there should be labels. If not, then the label is practically worthless. Do your research before arguing, people.

  • GMOs benefit far more than hurt

    Let's review the fact. Millions of people are dying of malnutrition. How many are dying of GMOs? 0. Nobody. That's because it's new, right? It's been on our shelves for 20 years and nobody has been harmed.
    The positives. It will increase the world food supply and make it more efficient, helping millions who would otherwise be malnourished. As we face future challenges, we need GMOs.
    Supporters of GMO labeling like to say its about consumer choice. However, labeling will be seen as a health warning, as European examples have proven. That will drive out GMO firms and the disruption of the market from labeling will raise prices, reducing choice.
    These arguments are anti-scientific, hurtful to the economy and harmful to humanity. Don't we deserve an end to this stupidity?
    Food companies have good reason to oppose these efforts. So does any well-informed, smart person.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.