GMO foods should not be required to be labeled

"even if they're wrong they still have a right to know"-people have the right to choose what they eat. But it's no ones responsibility to help them make that choice. That is like a group of right wing Christians requiring any food made by homosexuals to be labeled because they think if they eat it they will go to hell.The reality is that people who want GMO foods labeled think GMO's are dangerous. They want GMO foods labeled so that they can boycott those products and so that they can plant the seed in peoples head that GMO's are dangerous and therefore need to be avoided. This is the only reason for it. why should a company have to label it's food so that a small (because it is small comparatively) group of people can therefore boycott it. Again this isn't just a case of labeling for the sake of making informed choices. This is just one small part of the anti GMO crusade. This is an attempt to create the image of GMO foods causing harm to turn public opinion against them. If such a law was passed then people will ask,"well why do they need to be labeled?. If GMO foods are required to be labeled people will think there is a reason why they need to be labeled. however there is no reason. GMO foods are not bad for your health or the environment and there is little to no difference in nutritional value.Simply put. IF people want GMO foods labeled then they have to give a reason as to why they need to be labeled. the burden of proof is on them. simply wanting them labeled because they want them labeled is not reason enough. otherwise it's exactly the same as my homosexuality analogy.GMO's cause autism? correlation does not equal causation. also your first hand accounts are not indicators that GMO foods cause harm. anything could have caused you to become ill.Now onto the safety of GMO foods. GMO foods are one of the most researched things in the world. no medicine,food stuff,electronic device,engine,safety device, nothing has gone through as much rigorous testing as GMO's. Some claim that we cannot know the long term health effects so therefore we shouldn't be using them so freely as we are now. If we applied that kind of logic to every new technology them microwave ovens and washing machines would only just be starting to become available to the public now. vaccines,basic medicines and x-rays would only now be starting to be used to treat people. The internet would still be another 100 years away. And plus, we do already know the long term health effects. you might not. The anti GMO protester might not. but the scientists do. people claim we cannot absolutely know if GMO's are safe. but once again. the scientists can.here's an example to my points. i could claim that you cannot ABSOLUTELY prove that oranges don't cause cancer. but you can. The same way that a chemist can. A chemist knows the exact chemical make up of an orange. Here it ishttp://www.answers.com...He can also know the exact nutritional value. Now that chemist knows that none of those chemicals will react or amalgamate in any way shape or form with the chemicals or make up of your body that will have a cancer causing outcome. why? because he knows exactly how chemicals react. what will and what wont react with the body to cause health problems. It's from this information that he can prove absolutely that oranges will never cause cancer not now nor in 20,50 or 100 years. It's not guess work for scientists working on GMO's. They know exactly how they will or wont react with the human body or with the environment. Your average layman doesn't know this though. so he assumes that the scientific community doesn't either. The following link is to a paper which reviewed over 1000 scientific papers written on gmo foods from 2002 to 20012, which only represents a third of the research done over the lifetime of GMO's. http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org...In actuality there are over 2000 independent peer reviewed studies attesting to the safety of GMO's. Now i think it would be ignorant to expect you or anyone else to read through these studies and check the methods etc. People don't want to spend their precious free time having to read through scientific journals to find out if what they are using/consuming is safe. nor would i think it wise to blindy just believe anything you are told. It's good to be critical of things. but when you apply critical thinking to GMO crops the only logical conclusion reached is that they are completely safe. There is not once piece of credible evidence as to adverse health effects from GMO foods. and 0 zero deaths that can be linked to it. "We need to label them because, hey, it's just a label, why the fuckk, not? "why not?. i think the comments from a Vermont state senator sum it up pretty well."“This is a marketing ploy by the organics industry so they could get a bigger share of the market. If you scare people about what they’re eating, they’re going to change,” state Sen. Norm McAllister, R-Franklin, told Vermont Watchdog.[1]McAllister said GMO labeling advocates stand to see a 15 percent gain in market share as a result of mandatory labeling. McAllister’s comments come as Vermont’s attorney general late last week asked a U.S. district court judge to dismiss a lawsuit against Act 120, the state’s new GMO labeling law.[1]McAllister said the use of Vermont’s legal system to support special interest groups was appalling.[1]“Whoever comes along with the most money can buy whatever they want,” he said. “We put our legal system up for sale. If you have an advocacy thing, we’ll just let you start up a fund and let people donate to it. And we’ll let the state fight it for you with tax dollars. It’s disgusting.” [1]Any way. time is running out for this round so ill leave it at that for now. btw i know you are trolling but i thought i may as well treat the debate seriously as it's a subject i actually care and feel quite strongly about. back to you ol chum[1] http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org...