Prop 37: Don’t Let Frankenfoods Scare You
November 6, 2012 at 5:00 am
Like any student riding their bike to class, I am forced to see the mass of political signs along the bike paths. However one sign during this election season has caught me off guard: A sign asking voters to say yes to Prop 37, which wants to label genetically modified foods (GMOs). Now I have a sense of great pride in my fellow Gauchos that grows every time I see their intolerance of the pseudosciences that invade this campus, such as Scientology and the creationists with the signs that say “EVILution is a lie”. So how can a portion of those same educated students be in favor of a bill whose rhetoric is unnervingly similar to other anti-science movements?
Do you “have the right to know?” You have the right to know that there are people who have dedicated years of their lives to incorporating additional nutrition into crops grown by third world countries and to include resistance to common pests so that pesticides aren’t necessary. You have the right to know that believing that the increase in U.S. food allergies and the increase in GMOs are related is a cause-causation fallacy akin to saying “vaccinations cause autism.” You have the right to know that DNA, no matter where or what it is from, is strictly hereditary material that acts like a genetic library and cannot affect you in any way. Perhaps if proponents of Prop 37 had access to a library they would realize how ironic the term “Frankenfood” (used to describe GMOs) is. The Frankenstein monster was actually an intellectually benign monster until he became hated by a hysterical mob. Like the horror movie that was influenced by the original novel, Prop 37 attempts to scare you into believing the lack of labeling isn’t utterly redundant. California already has labeling for its foods: It’s called “organic.” By law, organic foods cannot contain genetically modified DNA, nor be grown with the use of pesticides. There is a good chance that if what you are eating isn’t organic, then it has been grown with the use of pesticides and/or genetic modification. These so called “Frankenfoods” aren’t the real monster here, ignorance is. If we let ignorance run amok on the university level, then what kind of message does that send to the rest of the Santa Barbara community?
Patrick Allen is a fourth-year Biochemistry major and a Varsity member of the UCSB Men’s Club Rowing team.
Views expressed on the Opinion page do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Nexus or UCSB. Opinions are submitted primarily by students.
You made the statement “organic foods cannot contain genetically modified DNA”. This is wrong. It can certainly contain GMO. The problem is how the law is structured. For example cows and chickens are allowed to eat GMO grains yet their byproduct like eggs and meat can be called organic if other standards are met. If the animals eat these foods then in turn we eat these animals or byproduct we are eating GMO animals.
Actually Mr. Lowery, ingested DNA does not affect any biological processes as stated in the article itself. So regardless of the genetic state of the food cows/ chickens eat it would not affect the biological processes that produce our milk and eggs. Eating genetically modified foods does not make you or any other organism genetically modified. It is not possible to modify an animal after it has developed in utero without directly infecting an animal or human with a virus that does so. The genetic modification must come before development. It is not an issue of how the law is… Read more »
They have not been studied sufficiently we don’t know what allergies or illnesses they may cause. We do have a right to know what is in our food. Somehow they are able to label salt content etc.
USDA Organic prohibits GM ingredients or organisms. That Organic Certified can be GM is one of the many lies spread by the Pro 37 campaign to misinform people.
To compare Gmo to scientology is ridiculous. They label it in 50 other countries and I have a right to know. If organic meant anything that would suffice. Why would a label in the USA change anything if it is so good?
Angie,the is one thing I neglected to include in the article is our comparison to other nations. It is true that many other nations have labeling for GMOs. The amount of countries that approves something does not make the issue that much more relevant or valid. In essence my counter argument is “if the other kids jumped off a bridge would you do it as well?”. Comparing us to other countries is a good thing, but you should analyze why those countries approved such measures for GMOs. I have, by following their “frankenfood” campaigns and have accepted that it means… Read more »
You criticize scare tactics but compare GMO labeling to “jumping off a bridge” ???
Consumers have a right to know what they buy, and producers a duty to inform.
BB, no I did not compare GMOs to jumping off a bridge. I compared labeling them just because “all the other countries are doing it” to jumping of a bridge. There is a difference in the logic used, where as that is an example of group thinking. That is the example of scientific illiteracy. Now of the other hand, as the comment that Tyler P has posted above shows a legitimate concern over GMOs, based on what he has personally found. Perhaps if the reasoning that he used were at the forefront of the movement rather that the “scare tactics”… Read more »
Consumers have the right to choose to buy what a producer will offer them, nothing more nothing less. Consumers also have the right to NOT buy something.
If the vender does not give consumers sufficient information about his product, no one will buy it, and he will go out of business. That’s free enterprise.
Food manufacturers have the right to tell you what they want about their food, aside from nutrition facts which are mandated by the law. You have the right NOT to buy something you don’t want or think is suspicious.
Sorry, I meant andrew. Angie was the responder above yours.
They have created GMO corn that kills the insects that eat it, could that same corn not be harming us?
?? All due respect, this is bunch of malarky. This just seems like Patrick’s opinion rather than fact. There are plenty of scientists who disagree with you on the safety of GMOs. I assume you’ve seen Food, Inc. and won’t go into details on it. Bottom line – no one is trying to ban GMOs… just label them on products. Is that so unreasonable? So all these countries that require them are all just a bunch of “scientifically illiterate” morons, huh? Sure buddy.
Agreed. This article is a utter ridiculousness. It is written by a bachelor’s degree student who does not know what he is talking about.
Your argument is a personal attack that is an ad hominem logical fallacy. Stick to the issue. I am PhD plant geneticist that agrees soundly with Patrick.
Ad hominem? WTF does that mean – is that latin? Anyhow – the two of you are obviously working (or studying to work) in that field. This genetic labeling will obviously hinder the progress of your field, will it not? You’re obviously biased in your opinion. It’s OK – people who make lots of money don’t want prop. 30 to pass.
I don’t think this was ever intended to be a typical news article. It is a letter filed under the opinion section, so I hope people don’t read it as news.
Well this is in the opinion section, so yes it is my opinion. The concern over ingesting foreign DNA (and stating that ingested DNA cannot harm you is factually correct). I stated that Frankefoods is ironic based on the origin of Frankenstein’s monster in Mary Shelly’s novel, and that is true. Labeling foods as organic does by law exclude GMOs, and again that is also true. It becomes my opinion when I state that the prop is unnecessary because it based on fear. So I don’t know why you dismissed my argument by calling it an opinion. Isn’t that where… Read more »
Why has the rest of the world either outright BANNED GMO’S ? or at the very least require labeling ? why ? Is the worldwide scientific community just ignorant? or simply not bought and paid for as your above garbage “opinion” was..
While the claim that modified DNA cannot influence an organism physiology may be partially correct, I would suggest some reading into micro-RNA and what a Chinese University discovered about interspecies communication via ingestion of MRNA and its interface with DNA and corresponding alterations in cholesterol levels. Fact is, Monsanto and other agri giants have taken over the USDA FDA and other regulatory agencies, and make sure any trials run are too short to show long term effects of GMO consumption. When long term studies ARE done, the animals display tumors, GI problems, autoimmune disorders, decreased fertility, and a host if… Read more »
—“Perhaps if proponents of Prop 37 had access to a library they would realize how ironic the term “Frankenfood” (used to describe GMOs) is. The Frankenstein monster was actually an intellectually benign monster until he became hated by a hysterical mob.”
Are you kidding? Frankenstein became hated because he killed people, not for being intellectually benign.
Perhaps if you had access to a library, you would realize how ironic your misguided beliefs about GMOs and the comparisons you use about Frankenstein are.
Holy crap.
if you want to know if your food is GMO, read the ingredients. taxpayers should be forced to fork over millions of dollars because hippies/art majors are concerned that they are eating GMO foods. guess what, genetically modified foods has totally industrialized how food is manufactured and produced – in a GOOD WAY. many GMO fruits/veggies have been designed to resist fatal diseases. everything from your lipstick, makeup, eyeliner, canola oil etc…etc..are byproducts of GMO and GMO technology. is all GMO food safe? compared to food subject to no analysis and study, yes. it isn’t 100% perfect, but it isn’t… Read more »