Genetically Modified foods Persuasion Essay Essay

Many are not aware of the ongoing debate of whether or not products in grocery stores across the country should label their products in a way to provide cancel outr awareness regarding diets adopting genetic anyy modify ingredients. bingle statistic states, an estimated sixty to seventy percent of processed foods in grocery stores contain at least single genetically engineered ingredient (Byrne). This statistic reveals the prevalence of these ingredients rear in grocery stores, yet the effects they get to on the products Americans consume can be proven very minor. passim various studies and inquiry thither are countless reasons why labelling these foods can be viewed as unnecessary. Genetically-limited foods should not have to be labeled because of the complex unresolved issues regarding which foods should be labelled, the overpriced addresss for the resources and technology required of labeling, and the fact that there are no significant differences between genetically m odified food and non-genetically modified food.While labelling might seem homogeneous a simple process, it has legion(predicate) complex issues that need to be resolved in order to attain the necessary standards required to create a beneficial labelling system. What many do not realize is that in order to label these products effectively, we must reveal standards that allow the labels to be equally and accu prisely distributed amongst all genetically modified foods. Certain questions must be answered, much(prenominal) as determining what section of genetically modified ingredients there are in a authorized product in order for it to be considered for a label.Debates over whether the share standards should be . 01% or 1% have been discussed, while other countries such(prenominal) as Japan have a minimum percentage rate of 5% (Byrne). In addition, the decision of labelling products produced from livestock that are fed genetically modified crops remains unanswered. This issue c an be found strange due to the fact that there is no difference found in meat, egg, or dairy products derived from GM fed livestock and non-GM fed livestock.Overall, one can see that the idea of labeling genetically modified products is not just difficult, but an extremely controversial and undefined process. Outside of the cost of cover and ink for labelling, the technology required for the labelling of every GM food on the market would result in a significant price append imposed on both the producer and consumer. An increased cost on food is an unnecessary expenditure that can easily be avoided if there simply was not a labeling policy that required producers to label genetically modified foods.These high cost result from the extensive process of labelling that would obtain with the farmer and end with the retailer. This process would need to include very flesh out record-keeping and tests that would be required alongside producing the genetically modified foods. Other prob lems regarding the cost of these labels include the willingness of consumers to buy products containing these ingredients and the increase of costs on these products from the new labelling. both(prenominal) of these dilemmas result in a negative effect on the manufacturers business and their respective products (Carter).All in all, the price increases and important costs of creating these special labels would create a negative economic tinge on both the buyer and seller. In addition to the unreasonable costs and logistical difficulties posed, the differences between the nutritionary content of genetically modified food and the nutritional content of conventionally derived foods are found to be minuscule. established foods can be defined as the crops grown on farms such as corn or sugar using herbicides or pesticides.Throughout various tests on GM foods versus conventional foods, it has been proven that GM foods have no nutritional difference from conventional foods and do not quad any greater effect on human health (Lawrence).Furthermore, the FDA already requires foods that do possess a significantly different nutritional take account due to modifications must provide labelling that exposes the nutritional changes. Examples of circumstances where these labels would be mandate are when they contain certain allergens that consumers would not expect or a toxin that could be harmful when excessively consumed is present (Byrne).Labels on foods are apply to notify consumers of when they are purchasing foods that are harmful to their health and genetically modified foods do not fall into that category. In short, placing these labels on all genetically modified foods is excessive due to the small differences they carry regarding their nutritional value and content. In conclusion, genetically modified foods should not have to be labeled to a certain degree because of the complex unresolved issues, the expensive costs for the resources and technology required f or labeling, and the fact that there are no significant differences between genetically modified foods and conventional foods.These three signalise points argue that labelling these modified foods would result in undesirable effects on our economy beginning with the producers and ending with the people consuming these foods. Allowing the public to be conscious of when they are consuming these particular products might seem like a reasonable proposition, but the negative outcomes tremendously outweigh the benefits. plant life Cited Byrne, P. Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods. Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods. Colorado State University, Sept. 2010. Web. 16 Feb. 2014. Carter, C. A. , & Gruere, G. P. authorization labeling of genetically modified foods Does it really provide consumer choice?. AgBioForum, 68-70. Web. 16 Feb. 2014. Lawrence, Katherine. GM, ceremonious & Organic Foods. GM, Conventional & Organic Foods. Plant ground Health, 30 Aug. 2010. Web. 1 6 Feb. 2014.