The commentary by Molecular Biologist Dennis Kleid ("Proposed GMO Labeling Laws Have It Backwards," Nov. 28, 2013) was very succinct in explaining that the reason the referendum ballot that required merchants to label genetically modified foods was defeated in several recent elections was because they were "impractical."
Kleid may be correct when he says that it would be confusing and unrealistic to put the words "May contain GMOs" on food labels, because then most manufacturers and distributors would end up labeling all foods with those very words just to be on the safe side and to avoid litigation. So in the future, the onus of labeling organic foods "GMO-Free" will probably fall to the organic farms that provide us with these non-modified foods.
But what if there is no such thing as "organic farming" in the future? What about organic farm complaints of Monsanto's policy of not controlling their GMOs so that these transgenic seeds blow willy-nilly onto their organic farm fields, causing traces of genetic "contamination" of our food supply? Would the public reject this expensive, "healthy" food because it may contain GMOs? And as a result, would the organic food industry be forced to spend more dollars than it can afford trying to keep crops pure, and end up going out of business?
and Another Thing…
But those are minor issues compared to the bigger challenge facing mankind, which is not "how to feed 10 billion people." The biggest problem is how to slow down to zero population growth standards so that we won't have to try to feed two or three times that many in the near future!
This is where many anti-GMO activists and ordinary folk who love the planet and the "natural order of things" part ways with evangelicals and extreme pro-life activists.
Religious and political groups that encourage over-population, and thus, directly cause those zillions of carbon footprints, have to assume major responsibility for this problem. And the rest of the world has to be educated and given whatever methodology is available to try and slow down it down.
"GMO-think" is a narrow tunnel that leads to more and more and more people being born, and results only in a larger and ever-growing need to keep trying to feed this onslaught of overpopulation. It may sound euphoric to them, but when one does the simple math, one quickly sees to where it all leads.
Nobody is saying we should adopt China's policy of forcing people not to have zillions of kids, but can't we look beyond the trees at the forest and agree that over-population is one of the major causes of most wars, famine and problems facing us today?
A sizable portion of the dollars now being spent on trying to feed the overpopulation nightmare could just as easily work wonders to help resolve it. By promoting and funding education, disseminating information, giving the issue lots of publicity--and imploring the organizations which heavily promote and influence overpopulation to reevaluate their credos--we could all work together to try and resolve this issue using realistic and practical 21st century knowledge without forcing the potential elimination of pure organic seeds.
The time to start was yesterday; but it's still not too late to begin the process at the grassroots level.
Email email@example.com or subscribe to his daily ramblings on Facebook.