Hi 17° | Lo -7°

Letter: Why we need a labeling law

Re “Food labeling bill would impose crushing costs” (Monitor letter, Oct. 16):

I am the prime sponsor of House Bill 660, regarding labeling. A September Kai-Robertson study on the cost of labeling GMOs demonstrated there will be no increased costs to consumers for labeling. Labels are changed on a regular basis.

Dr. Donald Huber of Purdue has studied pesticides for 40 years. Check out his recently posted, hour-long YouTube interview or any of the shorter videos by multiple experts found at that location to get the facts on genetically engineered products. No matter what you Google about GE products, you will find there is no consensus they are safe. Not until 2012 was a long-term study done on products so dissimilar to conventional foods that they are patented. Farmers using such seed must sign a contract stating they will not save the seed (making them market captive) nor share the seed for experimentation.

In a 1992 meeting at the White House – rather than a congressional hearing in which public records would be kept – the FDA chose to accept the word of producers of GE products that their products are “substantially equivalent” to naturally grown products. In 2001 there were so many internal complaints that the FDA stated it would create guidelines for voluntary labeling. We are still waiting for that to happen, and the FDA still does no independent testing.

Finally, a worldwide 2011 study of pesticides and herbicides indicated in the long run more of them are required and we have seen the development of super weeds and resistant rootworms.

New Hampshire residents deserve labeling in order to make informed buying decisions. Please contract me at my legislative address for specific links to any issue raised.



Legacy Comments0
There are no comments yet. Be the first!
Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.