Tuesday, November 08, 2016
Join me for a moment to consider a positive development in
particular and the efficacy of rational persuasion in
For a refreshing change of pace in today's technophobic culture of precautionary thinking, it was nice to see that a group of mothers has decided to boycott foods carrying the "Non-GMO" label. After presenting several arguments against seeking out such foods, the group summarizes its case, in part, as follows:
In the US and Canada, we are fortunate to have the luxury of many food options. Customers can choose non-GMO food via the USDA's organic label, which excludes these crops. As individuals who are not interested in Non-GMO labeled products, we find that our options are gradually shrinking, particularly in the stores we shop in, such as Costco, Publix, Kroger, Meijer, Harris Teeter, and others. While certain groups may declare this a victory, it is reducing safe choices and freedom for farmers and the large majority of consumers based on the unfounded fears of a small, yet vocal, group that is imposing its dietary preferences on the rest of the market.As my regular readers might surmise, I do not agree with this group on every premise. (For example, I oppose regulations, such as labeling laws, and I reject environmentalism.) That said, I do agree with them that there is a need to stand up for agricultural and nutritional innovation and for rational evaluation of food choices. Indeed, I would go further and add that we should also explicitly make a stand for freedom of contract, which makes the two broad goals of this group possible.
We, as concerned consumers and parents, actively avoid non-GMO labels, especially the Non-GMO Project's label. Whether a product was made from non-GMO or GMO seeds is irrelevant to us since the process of making a seed tells us nothing about sustainability, pesticide use or nutritional content. [bold added]