We recently ran a (totally unscientific) straw poll on the Blue Ball Skeptics twitter account to get a sense of whether skeptics alter their grocery shopping habits based on anti-GMO labelling:
Should skeptics conscientiously avoid products marketed as GMO free? pic.twitter.com/2RITWDkwBV
— Blue Ball Skeptics (@BlueBallSkeptic) December 13, 2015
As you can see, the results were fairly evenly split. I myself am of two minds on this issue. On the one hand, voluntary labeling could well pave the way for an irrational moral panic, legally mandatory labeling, and the consequent diminution or destruction of the consumer market for genetically modified crops. According to The Economist, this process has already played out in Europe and is slowly taking hold in the U.S. on a state-by-state basis.
On the other hand, voluntary labeling may not be the first step in marginalizing an entire set of consumer products. Some forms of niche labeling are only relevant to a relatively small and insular group, for example, those who require information about kosher and halal certifications. (It would be absurd to suggest that halal certifications are likely to become legally mandatory and socially relevant enough to alter the North American food landscape, barring some sort of Steynian nightmare scenario.)
If you believe genetically modified foods are as safe as their unmodified counterparts (as a survey of relevant evidence strongly suggests) then efforts at including warning labels are faith-based fear-mongering at best. At worst, anti-GMO labels are the leading edge of a movement which would ban GMOs even when they have the potential to save millions of lives over just a few years.
I’ve occasionally found myself replacing a product on the shelf after realizing that it encourages a technophobic and potentially harmful consumer movement, but I doubt whether most skeptics are similarly concerned. Is this really a hill worth dying on, or just another hill of beans?
