Consumerist
Accidental Hedonist has a post up examining the lawsuit brought by a consumer group against the FDA over Genetically Modified Foods. And the reason I'm posting this is because it contains the best criticism of the FDA's handling of genetically modified foods I've ever heard:
The FDA should have very strict labeling and testing protocols for foods containing genetically modified crops because of allergies.
What a fine criticism! Of course, it stands to reason that, hypothetically speaking, tomatoes spliced with peanut genes should be well labeled and tested. And a quick look on Wikipedia shows that G.M. foods that induce allergies have well been created. Awesome!
Of course, after expressing a pragmatic, common sense opposition to the FDA's current approach to G.M. foods, Kate over at A.H. then goes on to ruin my buzz by claiming that genetically modified foods could destroy the planet. Hey, just like technology if Skynet ever went sentient!
comment on this post and read more
Ultimately, I'm a pretty big believer in G.M. foods. I don't believe it is possible to feed the hungry of the world without them. But I'm also, obviously, a very big believer in buying power. Americans have the luxury of discriminating not only what they will eat but what process was used to produce it. In that sense, if Americans are concerned with the dangers insinuated by G.M. foods and want them labeled, those foods should be put under greater scrutiny so we all can make an informed choice. Hyperbole about the destruction of virgin Gaia aside, I think that's the most compelling argument in favor of the FDA dropping the ball on G.M. foods: they are robbing the American populace of information they want to have to grocery shop.
Consumer group sues FDA over biotech foods [Accidental Hedonist]
