Genetically modified food labels don't sit well in U.S.

[COMMENT:  ‎"The public gets bogged down on whether [crops are] genetically engineered or not. We think that's a distraction," said Pamela Ronald, a professor of plant pathology at UC Davis. "The consumer needs to know: Is it safe to eat?"  This is not adequate. It relies on believing that everything sold on store shelves is safe, which is entirely untrue.  Most of what is sold on store shelves has not been adequately tested and is only removed from shelves AFTER enough people get sick from it.  The consumer has a right to know where the food they eat comes from. Safety for one isn't safety for all. In order to declare a food safe, it would have to be thoroughly tested with longitudinal studies and then monitored closely. If it's a "distraction" for an individual consumer, they may choose to ignore the label." The far greater danger is that unlabeled produce will unnecessarily lead to complete avoidance of fresh fruits and vegetables and limitations in the diet that could be avoid if consumers were able to determine which foods were natural and which were modified and make appropriate selections.]

Genetically modified food labels don't sit well in U.S.
http://www.healthkey.com/la-he-gmo-foods-20110710,0,3094656.story?track=rss

"An agreement that some consumer activists say opens the door for labeling probably won't have much effect in the U.S. Some scientists say that's a good thing.

Activists rejoiced last week when a hard-fought battle over international standards for labeling genetically modified food came to an end — finally — after decades of debate.

But the agreement, which many say opens the door for labels to be placed on such foods, will probably have little effect on food labels in the U.S. for the foreseeable future.

"The public gets bogged down on whether [crops are] genetically engineered or not. We think that's a distraction," said Pamela Ronald, a professor of plant pathology at UC Davis. "The consumer needs to know: Is it safe to eat?""