It sounds simple enough: Affirm that the food one buys has not been genetically modified. Require it on the nutrition label, right alongside the counts for cholesterol, sodium, carbohydrates, etc.
This is anything but simple. Counterintuitively, in fact, a GMO label will likely achieve the opposite of its purpose. How so? Right now, organic foods that are produced with every effort not to introduce genetically modified seeds or ingredients affirm the GMO-free process of production. What the GMO label demands, however, is something else: affirmation of a GMO-free food.
Sounds the same.
No necessarily. The food production process is radically different from the final food product.
A producer of organic foods can do no more than affirm that his own process of production is free of genetically modified substances. To affirm the same of the finished product — the actual food — is something else, since genetically modified organisms and seeds float through the atmosphere. These tiny substances are impossible to control or confine. The most earnest organic farmer cannot guarantee that his food product is free of genetically modified seeds or organisms from the air or soil. Yet, this is what a GMO label demands: a genetically pure final product.
That raises the bar substantially and, many say, impossibly. Few organic farmers will be able to affirm that his finished food product is genetically pure, given the recalcitrance of the atmosphere. The requirement to affirm a finished product as non-genetically modified could severely depress the organic food market.
The GMO process can be guaranteed, since all that is asked for is a farmer’s measurable input. The final product is much more difficult to guarantee because more is asked for, an immeasurable input: a genetically pure atmosphere.
Message to GMO label advocates: Be careful what you pray for. Not to mention, there is no scientific evidence that genetically modified food is bad for you.
Copyright © 2014 by the Intermountain Jewish News
