Argumentative Essay: The Ethics Of GMO Labeling

Super salmon hit the market in 2015, approved by the FDA and designed by AquaBounty Technologies, it opened the flood gates on genetically modified foods that are now commonly found in American diets. The approval of this super salmon also created a debate on whether GMO foods should be labeled. The U.S government reviews all GMOs, and once approved, GMOs are under a concept known as substantial equivalence. Substantial equivalence means that the GMOs are the same as those found in nature. Once under this concept, there is no need for special labeling (ResearchSEA, 2016). The most common GMO crops are corn, soybean, sugar beet and cotton. Many processed foods contain ingredients (high fructose corn syrup and soy protein) from one of these crops and is very likely to contain GMO (Byrne, Pendall & Graff, 2014). Arguments for labeling of GMO foods claim that consumers have a right to know what is in their food, and allows consumers to avoid the types of foods they wish avoid. There are religious and ethical reason for labeling. Current voluntary labeling is not sufficient and that the majority of Americans approve of mandatory labeling (Byrne, Pendall & Graff, 2014). Opponents of GMO labeling worry that industry has been swayed by the large amounts of money involved and is lacking adequate scientific backing (ResearchSEA, 2016).

They also claim that because mandatory labeling requires enforcement and regulation, costs associated with these activities will be forced onto consumers whether they want labeling or not (Byne, Pendall & Graff, 2016). Propents also argue that retailers in other countries removed GM products due to perceived consumer aversion and the current infrastructure (storage and transportation facilities) could not segregate GM and non-GM products (Byrne, Pendall & Graff,