While I can’t speak for the biotech industry, there is an important principle at stake in many of these ballot measures. Activists and elements of the organic and natural food industries are spending millions of dollars to stigmatize conventional and biotech foods in order to promote their niche products that are generally sold to consumers at a higher price. In essence, they are creating fear with unproven, outlandish allegations in order to get unsuspecting consumers to avoid affordable, safe and wholesome foods, in hopes that they can sell you their niche product at a higher price and profit for them. If regulators allowed this to happen with biotechnology, there could be no end to the types of safe food and agriculture technologies that could be unfairly banned or stigmatized by false accusations and innuendo rather than scientific consensus. The success of American commerce, admired around the world, is a level playing field based on facts and fairness, and our regulators help ensure that remains constant.
Please review the following responses on this topic:
One passage from Dr. Neal Van Alfen from UC Davis reads: “Without evidence that GMOs are a health risk we should not compromise the integrity or credibility of our food labeling system by requiring a warning when there is no credible scientific evidence for adverse health effects being associated with the consumption of GMOs.”
“Foods can be and are labeled to help consumers make choices, but such labeling is voluntary. Common examples are kosher and halal labels that help consumers select or avoid foods based on their belief systems.”
If you feel that your question has not been answered in these responses, or if you have additional questions, please ask here: http://gmoanswers.com/ask-your-question.