GMO ‘right to know’ battle heats up in Oregon
Activists pushing for greater disclosure on genetically modified foods in Oregon said they are working on a petition campaign to require labeling on such products, while one small community has plans to ban GMO food altogether.
Oregon Right to Know, a grassroots campaign
to label foods using genetic modified organisms (GMOs), said it
was actively collecting signatures to get its measure on the
November ballot in Oregon. Meanwhile, the citizens of one county
in the state will vote next week whether to ban modified products
from their stores altogether.
"It's going to be a major effort," Sandeep Kaushik,
spokesman for Oregon Right to Know, told Reuters. "We believe
that people have a right to know what's in the food they eat and
feed their family."
The group must collect 87,213 signatures by July 3 for
consideration of the bill, which if it passes would require
companies that sell GMO food to begin labeling their products by
January 2016.
The campaign has already raised about $826,000 in donations so
far this year, in addition to $621,000 in cash.
Activists say consumers have a right to choose between products
that are genetically engineered, especially given the
questionable health and environmental impact of the crops, and
products that are grown without genetic modification.
"We have a right to know important information about the food
we eat and feed our families," Aurora Paulsen, an attorney
at the Portland-based Center for Food Safety and a co-petitioner
of the initiative, told the Oregonian. "We should have the
right to choose whether we want to buy and eat genetically
engineered food."
As opposed to other developed countries, the United States does
not require GMO products to be proven safe for consumption,
despite significant safety concerns.
“A review of the scientific literature shows there are still
open questions about the safety of genetically engineered foods,
with independent studies finding some evidence of adverse effect,
while other studies, often funded by industry or performed by
industry-affiliated scientists, tend to find no safety
problem,” Michael Hansen, senior scientist with the
Consumers Union, said in a statement.
"This will provide Oregonians with the knowledge needed to
make informed decisions about the foods they purchase and
consume, and to identify any potential health problems that may
arise from consumption of such foods."
Genetic engineering is different than conventional food
cultivation and raises potential health issues, Hansen says.
Meanwhile, the growing consumer backlash against GMOs is forcing
new requirements on the products. Vermont earlier this month
became the first state to mandate GMO labeling.
However, the powerful GMO industry insists their products pose no
threat to public health, and that enforcing mandatory labeling
will only increase costs.
Patrick McCormick, who supported efforts against GMO labeling in
2002, expressed his doubt over the benefits of labeling.
"In the end, they don't provide meaningful information to the
consumers on the product," he said.
Sixty-four countries require GMO product labeling, including 15
nations in the European Union, as well as Japan, Russia and
China.
