Editor:

The GMO article left me confused about why the author really wants Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) to be labeled. It repeatedly stated that the consumer has a right to know where their food comes from. I agree with this. Unfortunately, there are few laws that regard informing consumers where food comes from.

When purchasing foods we usually are not even aware of which country it came from. We should be informed of this. Consumers are also not informed about the way in which food is produced, including what pesticides are sprayed, what fertilizing practices are used, and what varieties are planted (included GMOs).

The column also stated that the debate should not be whether GMOs are bad for you or not. However, selective labeling of this one part of all farming practices is going to insinuate that GMOs are indeed harmful. If the author truly believed in knowledge for the consumers’ sake, they would not advocate solely for the labeling of GMOs.

The use of chemicals on crops such as pesticides and fertilizers is regulated by government entities, such as the USDA. As consumers we trust the government to prevent the inclusion of toxic chemicals into our food. Why would our trust halt at GMOs? Why don’t we label which chemical additives are in our food, but instead want to label which varieties have been genetically modified?

By labeling GMOs you will identify them as something to be wary of. The article argues that consumers need information about GMOs for knowledge’s sake, and that the debate should not be whether they are harmful. But it clearly identifies them as something to avoid, and as worse than all other chemicals in our food. There is no reason that GMOs should be labeled, while all other aspects of food production are ignored.

Thomas Sexton

Junior biology major