All GMO ingredients should be banned from foods. In the meantime, they MUST be clearly labeled. A bill was passed this year which says that food no longer has to be labeled as bio engineered. That is absolutely not acceptable.
All genetically modified ingredients must be indicated on food labels.
Agreed⌠however, I would expand this idea and suggest, that to make things easy and not have to reinvent the wheel⌠just adopt all the most strict consumer protection food laws that have been passed by any other developed nation. At this time we have among the least healthy food of any developed nation. It would be nice to see us very easily go the the healthiest food of any developed nation. Yes prices would increase, especially initially⌠but it would be worth it. Americans would save the money back in reduced healthcare costs.
A related policy proposal below attempts to protect the current non-GMO plants and food ingredientsâŚ
There is NOTHING wrong or unhealthy about GMO foods! GMO foods are saving lives, particularly in third-world countries where diets are deficient in particular vitamins and minerals. ONE EXAMPLE: Golden Rice. The GMO âadditiveâ is vitamins that STOP BLINDNESS. Too much untruth and hysteria has been attached to GMO foods and too much non-science lying manipulated data fraud has driven âclimate change,â which does NOT exist except naturally. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. The Earth is NOT on fire. GMO foods are HEALTHY and save lives. AND âgreen house gasesâ also DO NOT EXIST. Gases cannot hold heat beyond a limited time during the day. They do not and cannot HEAT UP TO CAUSE ANY health problems, burn the earth, damage the air - BLAH BLAH BLAH - much less âgreen house gas.â This is just another communist fraud to enrich evil people. SO IS âorganic food.â Research it.
Oh, well why didnt you say that in the first place, Anne! And all this time, we thought that genetic manipulation was still in its emerging phase in the bio-technology field. But you already have it figured out. Nothing left to do, or worry about, it seems. 
So what you are telling me is that I can modify any molecule, twist any arrangement of atoms, or even hang additional inert compounds on existing biological materials and it will NEVER become hazardous to humans once this material is broken down and absorbed into the human body. Amazing!
WowâŚyou must be really really good. As a scientist myself, I am quite impressed that you can make such a massively broad-reaching deduction in your very first overly dramatic sentence, saying: âThere is NOTHING wrong or unhealthy about GMO foods!â
No qualified subject matter expert (ie: organic chemist or genetiicist) would dare to make such a blanket claim about the entire spectrum of genetically modified organisms. Your opening arguement does not contain supporting evidence in the subsequent sentences Your discussion is all over the place â seemingly desperate to incorporate other unrelated truths in to support your âhealthy GMOâ claim. It ainât workinâ dear.
I call BS on your credentials and your claim - this post sounds like it is coming from a very amature and inexperienced unscientific source. By your arguement, you state that nobody has ever released modified genetic material that is harmful once ingested. How can you claim this? Your claim is monstrously huge; yet your supporting evidence is microscopically small. It doesnt fit â that much is glaringly obvious to anyone reading your post. Here are a few points you left outâŚHow old is crispr technology? How long would you estimate that âlong term studiesâ need to be before considering something safe for ingestion? A decade? 3 decades? Have todayâs GMO crops and livestock even been on the open market that long? As any person of scientific understanding realizes, these should have been part of your supporting arguments â but they are absent from your post.
Anyway, the text seems to be authored by a self-absorbed high school student writing an unconvincing lecture in a debate writing club, ideally written to make daddy happy because he loves to farm his GMO beans that he buys every Spring.
To your credit though, you do add a lot of other extemporaneous âtruthsâ to your post (many of which I also agree); however, they are completely unrelated to the â100% GMO safetyâ claim that you state when opening your post.
A final thought: One thing you CANâT claim to be false is this: Food that is non-GMO, with a reputation of being eaten over centuries of humanity, would be considered far less risky than GMO materials, simply by virtue of them containing far less âunknowns and unmeasured variables that brand new GMO materials introduce into the equationâ Simply logical, my dear Anne.. 
GMOs have been around for thousands of years. Gregor Mendelâs experiments of hybridization with pea plants are an early and notable example. Multiple studies have shown that GMOs pose no health risks to the consumer, and are, in fact, as healthy as conventional crops. GMOs are also approved by the FDA, having passed the rigorous testing required to be sold to consumers.
Beyond health, the benefits of GMOs are widespread:
Less cost
Higher yields
Fewer chemicals and pesticides
Less soil erosion than unmodified crops
Used in medicine to produce life-saving vaccines, insulin, and treatments for diseases
GMOs can be engineered to have higher nutritional value. While mixing DNA has the potential to be risky, REAL SCIENTIFIC research has shown that GMOs are not more likely to cause negative reactions than non-GMOs. GMOs help lower the cost of food because farmers are able to grow higher yields thanks to the pest- and drought-resistant properties of some GMO crops, including corn. These increased protections enable the corn to better fight off these pests on its own, which means farmers can use less pesticide on their fields. This helps farmers protect the environment and also reduces the cost of growing the crop, which helps keep down the cost of products and food for consumers. *
Oselinsky, K., Johnson, A., Lundeberg, P., Johnson Holm, A., Mueller, M., & Graham, D. J., 2021, GMO Food Labels Do Not Affect College Student Food Selection, Despite Negative Attitudes towards GMOs.
Since approximately 75% of processed foods contain GMOs, buyers need not be intimidated by them and should remember that genetically modified products are just as healthy as regular ones.
It is obvious, Susan, that you are a determined to refuse scientific research and continue to damn GMO products, but the truth is that human beings have survived for thousands of years despite horrific bacteria, virus, and natureâs own GMO and doing so has strengthened DNA passed on.
What is truly ironic about this entire concern about GMO products is that so many people who are very âwiseâ about their food choices and general health ACCEPTED without QUESTION the DEADLY COVID JAB that is not a vaccine - that definition was ânon-scientifically modifiedâ to FIT the COVID JAB because it IS a gene-altering injection (âscienceâ lied) and has caused the deaths of MILLIONS, caused cancer rates to rise, created horrific heart problems, spontaneous abortions, and the deaths of little children who should never have been given the jab in the first place, among other horrors. THAT and Dr. Fauci should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity and child abuse.
The other irony is that silly people believed Dr. Fauci when he insisted that all of us wears masks when, in fact, we have known for over 100 years that wearing masks do NOTHING but cause horrific medical and psychological harm. Dr. Fauci knew this but LIED, as he also did with the made-up âsix feet distanceâ BS, and laughed at all he could control. Yet, silly people get their panties in a twist because of GM FOOD!!! OMG!!! that have caused NO health-related problems.
GMO food has been around forever: even indigenous people knew to GMO wild corn to make it something that offered great benefit to their diets and heath.
Those who accepted the HIDEOUS LIE about the COVID JAB that DOES, in fact, ALTER GENETIC MAKE-UP, and put that in their bodies without bothering to question the deadly JAB pushed on the world, made themselves âgenetically modified.â The research that the JAB was a gene-altering deadly and permanently injuring horror was known right from the start, but people failed to believe the SCIENTIFIC TRUTH, and accepted the Total non-scientific BS.
Did you get the gene-altering COVID JAB, Susan?
About time people put the non-scientific fear and pearl-clutching about GMO food in the trash where it belongs. Your final thought⌠âOne thing you CANâT claim to be false is this:⌠" SIMPLY logical, my dear Anneâ is just more of your total and complete non-scientific BS, Susan.
Logic isnât the issue here, Susan. Research and science are, both of which seem to confuse and agitate you and therein lies your problem: your logic isnât logical because it is not based on FACT.
Your comment - âI call BS on your credentials and your claim - this post sounds like it is coming from a very amature and inexperienced unscientific sourceâ is both puerile, misspelled, and pure projection, Susan - unintended truth slapping your arrogance.
Absolutely NO GMOâs
Dearest Anne, I will address each of your nuances promoting GMO products in a particular orderâŚyours is bold; mine is italics. Let us beginâŚ
GMOs have been around for thousands of years. MISLEADING â You are suggesting that gradual natural evolution over millions of years equates to profound and forced genetic changes in a lab, done only in a span of a few decades by radical gene-splicing. Crispr gene-splicing technology on crops and livestock is not the same as Mendelâs happy little happy pea plant experiment that we learned about in grade school. Mendel didnât say, âHeyâŚI have an idea! Let me take this rootworm genetic material and splice the DNA snippet into my peaâs DNA helix and see what happensâ.
And Mendel didnât say; âHey, I have an idea! Let me modify the genetic material in my peas so that they can be more resilient to the weed-killer that I spray around it, so that I can use a lot more weed-killer on my peas and still not destroy the plant â yea it may have a lot more herbicide stuck and dried on it when it hits the store shelves, but at least my happy little peas are hitting the store in the first place â I need the money!â
Multiple studies have shown that GMOs pose no health risks to the consumer, and are, in fact, as healthy as conventional crops. Multiple studiesâŚahâŚthose wonderful and prolific studies. You mean those same studies that are funded by the very research grants and loans from the ngo and govt organizations which insist that you come up with the âright conculsionsâ even BEFORE you start the studies? Those studies, you mean? I thought so. And you might want to send those âmultiple studiesâ over to the ENTIRE European Continent, because even in 2024 they are still not convinced of those âsafe and effectiveâ studies.
GMOs are also approved by the FDA, having passed the rigorous testing required to be sold to consumers. Oh, you mean the same FDA that granted emergency use authorization of the mRNA COVID âvaccineâ to Americans, burying-and-harming millions? THAT FDA? UhmâŚOK. Now, tell the audience who does the testing â not the FDA â the very corporations that created the GMO product in the first place. We know how this game works. FDA is a rubber stamp outfit that takes bribes under the table.
You are starting to sound like a GMO sales person here â most people here are concerned about GMO garbage winding up on their dinner tables, but go ahead with wherever you found/cut/pasted this additional benefits listâŚ
Beyond health, the benefits of GMOs are widespread:
Less cost
Higher yields
Fewer chemicals and pesticides
Less soil erosion than unmodified crops
Used in medicine to produce life-saving vaccines, insulin, and treatments for diseases
We already know that GMOs can provide positive benefits to existing organic material â this is not being disputed. What is being voiced in this policy proposal is that many people simply do not want the proposed added benefits to society, ecology, and economy at the expense of even remotely experiencing adverse affects at their dinner tables because of genetically modified materials. And before you state that there are NOT ANY â let me remind you that you are not in a position to proclaim that because you are NOT the one behind the gene-splicing equipment. (Letâs not assume that humans are inherintly âgoodâ - especially after the COVID plandemic). Your only argument to them being safe is that they have not caused notable issues in America in the last 18 years, so they must be safe going forward into eternity, no matter what the hell these corporations splice into the organic matter. (mRNA vaccines anybody?) I think you need to do a lot more convincing to the people here that GMO (like mRNA) will remain safe and effective till the genetically-modified cows come home.
Since approximately 75% of processed foods contain GMOs, buyers need not be intimidated by them and should remember that genetically modified products are just as healthy as regular ones . This is misleading propaganda garbageâŚLet me rephrase it a bit more refreshingly: âSince ž of our processed grocery items contain Round-up resistant GMO corn, wheat, and soybean as their base ingredient, please donât test the amount of cancer-causing glyphosate in the food because we sprayed the hell out of it to keep the weeds down so our profits stay up and we can slide that extra money to the FDA each year to keep their heads turned.â
It is obvious, Susan, that you are a determined to refuse scientific research and continue to damn GMO products, but the truth is that human beings have survived for thousands of years despite horrific bacteria, virus, and natureâs own GMO and doing so has strengthened DNA passed on. You act like science and GMO products are mutually inclusive, and that I must embrace both or none. This is misleading. Not once in this post have you admitted that GMO could even remotely be damaging. This in itself leads any scientist to question your motives. Are you a GMO door-to-door shill, trying to make some Christmas money through posts? Are you trying to win over the populous to mRNA-anything and mRNA-everything (especially after the population realized what DNA/RNA modification can do in the wrong corporate and govt hands?
Ya knowâŚit is sad that the population did unquestionably roll up their sleeves and accept the propaganda of mRNA vaccines being âsafe and effectiveâ. They didâŚmany diedâŚmany more were maimed for life. *And now you have the audacity to stand right in front of these very same people, and say that genetically modified products are âsafe and effectiveâ?
Has it even dawned on you that many simply donât trust the gene-editing technology in the wrong hands, when it comes to their own health and safety? Banning it would certainly keep it off the dinner table before any gene-splicing âoopsiesâ happen, donât you agree? It would damn sure shut down that future risk, and you know it for a fact; however, I am sure the audience is open to other options you might offer, besides trying to convince them that their health concerns are merely unicorns and fairy dust.
Sadly, like most on the European continent, I really donât think you will gain much traction in here with your GMO âsafe and effectiveâ campaign. But now I could be wrongâŚthere is no such thing as âsettled scienceâ right? Good luck with that sales pitch, dear. It will be interesting to see how effective it turns out to be.
*Side note: No need to reply with more copy/paste internet article snippets â I have internet connectivity as well. Your foolish arguement is as dumb as such: âWe can rely on Pandoraâs Box to be safe because we have appointed someone who we now trust, with a key to that box.â Nobody believes your BS anymore dear. GMO trust is dead after mRNA deaths continue to mount. Even my eldest son was a victim to this intentional genocide. So you seeâŚits not what they DID do with GMO thusfarâŚits would the COULD do with it (like they did with COVID). And the American People are not as naive and trusting as they were, once before. As a professional scientist myself (with a Masters Degree), I again call your BS. Go play child; you are nothing more than a paid GMO troll. with a selfish Christmas list., IMO.
++Final note: Have you noticed that we didnât once copy/paste any parts and pieces of external internet articles hereâŚthat the text is all from our own minds and fingers? You should try that on for sizeâŚpeople notice it. We bid you, have a nice Christmas, sweetie. 
To ban GMO ingredients in food you also have to ban chem trails spraying the atmosphere that rains down on those plants and us as well. It should be a policy that in my opinion must go hand in hand.
Anne. You are 100% WRONG, except about CO2 and âGW GCC Climate Changeâ!!!
First of all, many countries outlaw this,
The #1 REAL GMO âadditiveâ is GLYPHOSATE resistance! GLYPHOSATE KILLS normal plants! That means they canât be sold! There is generally nothing TO sell. Th GMO products THRIVE with it! THIS means it CAN be sold, and people can EAT the POISON!!! NO THANKS!!!
On GMO food ALSO, only the FEMALE part is sterile. So the traits can spreead to OTHER plants, and Monsanto CAN SUE, AND HAS SUED, farmers that had this happen! That raises prices!
Ban all GMO! Prevent grocery stores from selling them at a cheaper price than organics. And give the power back to the farmers. It should be illegal to have organics cost more than GMOs!
Obviously your COVID gene-altering JAB has done its best to destroy both your brain cells and your manners.
Congratulations.
Your reply (as with others) is much more polite than Annâs hostile post. There is a reason the natives have protested a modified product, though for now at least theyâd retain seed rights. They would rather support their diet with other vegetables with far more beta-carotene than Golden Rice has. MASIPAG lists Philippines crops: tomatoes, squash, malunggay, carrots, and sweet potatoes. All are said to have significantly higher beta-carotene content than Malusog Rice (whose beta-carotene deteriorates), according to Science Direct.(Kinetics of β-carotene degradation under different storage conditions in transgenic Golden RiceÂŽ lines - ScienceDirect) quickly when stored after polishing). The group asks that local growers receive government support for using these crops instead.
For example, MASIPAG cites the beta-carotene content between Golden Rice at 3.57 micrograms and squash at [410 micrograms] as per the Philippinesâ Food and Research Institute. To get the required daily recommended amount of vitamin A, one would need to consume at least 8.8 kilograms (19 pounds) of Golden Rice in a day, the group says.
Pure troll bait. No one straddles the line between anti vax and pro gmo. No such person exists. Trust " the science" emphatically and completely on gmosâs, and totally distrusting âthe scienceâ on vax. No way, isnât real, fake post.
CHEMTRAILS are a totally separate agenda, But I agree with you 100% chemtrails and all GEO engineering of weather patternS should be banned when used in nefarious ways to create dangerous storms.
Disagree. You can spray roundup on GMO seeds and it doesnât kill the crop. Think about that! Also one can argue that obesity is related to over nutrition. Too many vitamin supplements. GMO alters the gluten in the grain which is more difficult to digest and why more and more people have gluten sensitivity.
Oh so itâs ALL or NOTHING - now thatâs just dumb.
Talk about pure troll bait - âŚ
Yeah, you would not apply full trust to pro gmo âscienceâ, while maintaining extreme skepticism of mrna vax âscienceâ. You literally do not exist. 
Apparently, add alcohol to this also. I just learned people have died from undisclosed ingredients! There is no transparency nor ingredient list required since ATF regulates alcohol.
GMO food results in immune disorders in humans for life. And that is where the Chronic Diseases come from.