Senate effort to block food labeling of modified food stalls

sangha said:

Nonsense. Labelling is so inexpensive it's practically free

Click to expand...

That is a grave misconception. This is for instance because there is cross pollination or as food products are frequently stored together and you would require additional warehouses and software etc.

danarhea said:

If you want GMO free food products, you want the producer to guarantee it. Putting it on every package will just increase the costs of production for the poor so you can have your luxuries.

Click to expand...

It's still one label. All they have to do is change what's on it. they do this all the time. It's just a little simple layout change, done one time. For example, every time some claim is made that a certain ingredient is heart healthy, you see it on a label within days. It's called advertising. Changing the label won't cost any more. I am for the standard label listing what is actually in the food, not because I believe GMOs are harmful, but because I believe everybody has a right to know what's in their food, so they can make the choice THEY want to make, not a choice made by the manufacturer.[/QUOTE]

That seems so, but is not always quite the structure of the thing along the long product lines. Trans pollination and storage make the costs of guaranteeing gmo free end products go up. This is especially true, where the legal or pr costs can be huge, where pure mistakes slip into the production line. Control becomes a real factor. Why should the cost of all food be regulated up? That hits the poor hard.

sangha said:

1) Wrong.Only a few crops have been GE'd

2) It's not supposed to educate anyone. You're strawmanning again

3) No they're not. Nearly every adult knows where the labels are. Many CHOOSE not to read them. That's their choice and I'm all about the choice. That's one reason why I support labelling.

Click to expand...

1. I'm not talking about crops. I am talking about food made with those crops which is practically every food. So do you want genetically modified wheat and pigs labeled? or do you want genetically modified bacon and spaghetti labelled?

If you want the GMO pigs and wheat labelled the consumers will not see that on their food products. If you want GMO bacon and spaghetti labelled then you lied when you said you didn't want all food labeled. that's normal food you want labelled. See the difference??

2. Again another lie. Stop hiding your transparent agenda. You said:

sangha said:

1
2) So people can know and use that info to make choices

Click to expand...

If you want to inform people so that they potentially question the brands they like so that they can go for the brands you like, then that's a form of education.... Albeit a misleading education and more in-line with lobbying. But whatever. Keep defending that effort.

3. Invisible to them because fat americans choose not to read them and if they do, they aren't going to care if that package of oreos is genetically modified. They'll still eat the oreos. I'll never understand this "It will raise awareness," crap. No it won't. People will keep eating what they like and the food companies will keep on deciding how to make their foods. Hardly anything else will change except for more slogans being generated by the food companies whom you claim to want to inform people with baseless slogans.

So I ask again. What's the point to this charade? That's really all you want??? What happens if you get it? Will you be satisfied or will you find something else to complain about in food? How does a label realistically solve your problem with GMOs?

ModerateGOP said:

Source please? Or are you making this up?

Click to expand...

Source?

You want me to link to price lists from packaging companies?

AFAIK, they don't list their prices on the internet but think about it. With or without this labelling, the packaging is the same. The only difference is what's printed on the packaging. The cost of printing is not based on how much printing there is. Cost of printing is based on type of ink needed and the # of colors used. Since the GE label doesn't change either of those, it doesn't change the cost of packaging.

The only cost of GE labelling would be related to certifying ingredients as non-GE so only products with no GE in then would incur those costs and those costs would be a yearly cost that covers their yearly production. On a per unit basis, the cost is negligible.

iguanaman said:

You didn't answer. Do you plan to avoid foods marked GMO if they are required to? I believe you do. So you have answered your own question. There is no reason for the FDA to placate this conspiracy theory that eating food containing GMO ingredients is going to turn us into Martians, green skin and all. Besides there are plenty of foods now that say "no GMO's" just stick to those .

Click to expand...

There is no conspiracy theory. Let me know when you want to debate the facts instead of your made up nonsense.

joG said:

That is a grave misconception. This is for instance because there is cross pollination or as food products are frequently stored together and you would require additional warehouses and software etc.

Click to expand...

At harvest time, the crop is genetically tested. If no GE genes are detected, the crop is certified as GE free. Cross pollination is not an issue once the harvest is certified.

The only costs are to those who want to provide GE-free products. If they think the profits will exceed the costs associated with doing so, they can go on and do it. Otherwise, they can not get certified and there is no additional costs.

ModerateGOP said:

1. I'm not talking about crops. I am talking about food made with those crops which is practically every food. So do you want genetically modified wheat and pigs labeled? or do you want genetically modified bacon and spaghetti labelled?

Click to expand...

And again, since only a few crops are GE, most foods are already GE free. It is not "practically every food"

If you want the GMO pigs and wheat labelled the consumers will not see that on their food products. If you want GMO bacon and spaghetti labelled then you lied when you said you didn't want all food labeled. that's normal food you want labelled. See the difference??

Click to expand...

This may surprise you but speghetti and pork are not the only food products sold

2. Again another lie. Stop hiding your transparent agenda. You said:
If you want to inform people so that they potentially question the brands they like so that they can go for the brands you like, then that's a form of education.... Albeit a misleading education and more in-line with lobbying. But whatever. Keep defending that effort.

Click to expand...

This is pedantry and it's failing.

3. Invisible to them because fat americans choose not to read them and if they do, they aren't going to care if that package of oreos is genetically modified. They'll still eat the oreos. I'll never understand this "It will raise awareness," crap. No it won't. People will keep eating what they like and the food companies will keep on deciding how to make their foods. Hardly anything else will change except for more slogans being generated by the food companies whom you claim to want to inform people with baseless slogans.

Click to expand...

Gee, another straw man. This time it's "It will raise awareness" What a surprise!!

So I ask again. What's the point to this charade?

Click to expand...

Asked and answered

sangha said:

Source?

You want me to link to price lists from packaging companies?

AFAIK, they don't list their prices on the internet but think about it. With or without this labelling, the packaging is the same. The only difference is what's printed on the packaging. The cost of printing is not based on how much printing there is. Cost of printing is based on type of ink needed and the # of colors used. Since the GE label doesn't change either of those, it doesn't change the cost of packaging.

The only cost of GE labelling would be related to certifying ingredients as non-GE so only products with no GE in then would incur those costs and those costs would be a yearly cost that covers their yearly production. On a per unit basis, the cost is negligible.

Click to expand...

No I don't care about your opinion. You made a bold claim so you have to cite evidence, but you haven't done this so far, so why should I except something different.

sangha said:

And again, since only a few crops are GE, most foods are already GE free. It is not "practically every food"
This may surprise you but speghetti and pork are not the only food products sold

Click to expand...

List the foods you think aren't GMO. I'll wait.

ModerateGOP said:

No I don't care about your opinion. You made a bold claim so you have to cite evidence, but you haven't done this so far, so why should I except something different.

Click to expand...

Wrong again

It was actually you that made the bold claim that this label would cost producers lots of money and, so far, you've posted bupkis to support your claim.

And as someone who is actually in the business of selling food products that have strict labelling requirements, I know that your claim is BS. I buy hundreds of thousands of labels a year they cost the same regardless of what they actually say on the label.

ModerateGOP said:

List the foods you think aren't GMO. I'll wait.

Click to expand...

And we have another example of you making an outrageous claim (ie that almost all foods are GE) and then poutily demanding that I prove you wrong.

This is not a chat room; it's a debate site. You made the claim so you're the one with something to prove.

sangha said:

Wrong again

It was actually you that made the bold claim that this label would cost producers lots of money and, so far, you've posted bupkis to support your claim.

And as someone who is actually in the business of selling food products that have strict labelling requirements, I know that your claim is BS. I buy hundreds of thousands of labels a year they cost the same regardless of what they actually say on the label.

Click to expand...

How can I trust you when you haven't provided any evidence to back up your claim?
Anyway, you are mis-representing my position on the subject. I never claimed that it would cost producers more money. Though they are spending money to stop the effort. In fact, what I did say was that you claimed big AG would lose business because of the label. My opinion on this matter is that the label is useless fear-mongering. Not that it would cost more money. If you have quoted evidence of me saying otherwise please go back through the thread and find it.

sangha said:

And we have another example of you making an outrageous claim (ie that almost all foods are GE) and then poutily demanding that I prove you wrong.

This is not a chat room; it's a debate site. You made the claim so you're the one with something to prove.

Click to expand...

You said you don't want to label all foods. I am simply asking you what foods you don't want to label? This you still haven't answered! Some twisted logic you have there.

ModerateGOP said:

How can I trust you when you haven't provided any evidence to back up your claim?

Click to expand...

You haven't provided any evidence to back up your claim. I have

Anyway, you are mis-representing my position on the subject. I never claimed that it would cost producers more money. Though they are spending money to stop the effort. In fact, what I did say was that you claimed big AG would lose business because of the label. My opinion on this matter is that the label is useless fear-mongering. Not that it would cost more money. If you have quoted evidence of me saying otherwise please go back through the thread and find it.

Click to expand...

You're right. You didn't explicitly argue that it would cost a lot of money, though you did say

ModerateGOP said:

1. So you don't want to label all my food? You don't want to force food companies to make up asinine labels and waste time and resources on something as inefficient as yet another food label?

Click to expand...

As far as it being useless, that is your opinion and your opinion does not determine what the law should be

ModerateGOP said:

You said you don't want to label all foods. I am simply asking you what foods you don't want to label? This you still haven't answered! Some twisted logic you have there.

Click to expand...

Your request for a list of "all foods" that wouldn't be labeled is absurd. It's analogous to me asking you to name all the "anti-GE purists" you've referred to repeatedly

sangha said:

Your request for a list of "all foods" that wouldn't be labeled is absurd. It's analogous to me asking you to name all the "anti-GE purists" you've referred to repeatedly

Click to expand...

So you don't have a specific answer to this question. Figures I wonder why you don't want to answer.

You have cowardly refused to name a single food you don't want to see labelled. The difference is, you never asked me to list the people I was talking about.