Mandatory Labeling of GMO, It’s Time To Take A Step Back

Famous nutritionist Ann Wigmore once said, “The food you eat can be either the safest and most powerful form of medicine or the slowest form of poison.” This quote tells the importance of understanding the food we consume.

Similarly, as the portion of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is increasing in our food supply, the public is requesting stronger transparency of the food product. For example, on February 7, 2023, 420,000 EU citizens signed a petition calling for all GMOs to be regulated and labeled in response to the Commission’s long-awaited proposal on whether to loosen EU rules on new genetic techniques.

However, labeling GMOs on every food product may do more harm than good than we think. Nowadays, in our rush to demand labeling on every product, we usually overlook the science that underpins GMOs. But as gene editing technology and our understanding of GMOs have significantly improved within several years, we should now break the conventional stereotype of GMOs, such as unbounded fear toward GMOs, and carefully look at the other side, embracing the science behind it.

Many people request the mandatory labeling of GMO-containing products because of the harm they may do to their bodies. However, GMOs are way safer than we all think. To prove it, representatives from 15 scientific societies met to explore GM crops’ negative effects and benefits in 2016. The scientists conducted animal testing, compositional analysis, and allergenicity testing to test the safety of GM crops on human health. 

As expected, the result of these tests showed that animals were not harmed by eating foods derived from GM crops, and the differences in the chemical composition of GM crops fell in the range of naturally occurring variations found in Non-GM crops. Therefore, through this substantial scientific conference, we can know that there is no evidence of the risk of GM crops on human health.

Other than this conference, sufficient scientific research and even a few governmental organizations have proven that consuming GM food is safe. Thus, the public’s primary concern in mandatory GMO labeling, which is the potential negative effect of GM products on their body, could be considered a futile claim derived from the fear of ignorance.

On the other hand, regardless of the safety issue, someone might request mandatory labeling of GMOs, bringing up the right to know. However, mandatory GMO labeling has numerous side effects, which are more significant and severe than just the consumer’s right to know.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, over 90 percent of corn, cotton, and soybean acreage in the United States is planted with genetically engineered seeds, making them more suitable to grow in a harsh environment. And this agricultural method constantly decreased the food price in the last 50 years. 

However, imagine we put GMO labeling on every food containing GMOs. A significant amount of the public will refrain from purchasing those with labels. Then, as the consumption of GMO food decreases, farmers will refrain from planting genetically engineered crops, eventually forcing the food price to rise again. 

Similarly, a study conducted at Cornell University discovered that if GMO labeling became mandatory in New York, a family of four would have to pay at least $500, 1% of the median salary in the U.S., more each year. If not regulated properly, the food price will constantly rise, eventually leading to severe economic crises in especially developing countries.

The other considerable side effect is the miscomprehension of Genetic Engineering technology itself. Requiring labels on GMO-containing products could convey an implicit message that genetic engineering is wrong. This is precisely contrary to the report published by the FDA about GMOs’ ensured safety. 

Imagine the public misunderstands that genetic engineering technology is dangerous. In that case, it may inhibit the further development of this promising technology—a key to world hunger, biodiversity, and other crises worldwide. And once misconceptions about GMOs have become rooted in the public’s mind, it may be irreversible, followed by the constant raising of food prices.

As the income and sales of GM products have soared in recent years, providing details about them transparently to the public may seem crucial. However, considering a few irreversible side effects that it may bring, such as rising food prices and misconceptions about GM technology, we must take a step back with an open mind and objectively reconsider the effects of mandatory labeling of GM products. If people don’t act fast, we may risk creating a technophobic society that neither utilizes this promising genetic engineering technology nor has sufficient money to further develop them shortly.