Oregon GMO Labeling: This Time It's Personal

It amazes me how an editorial board - who happen to be in the information business - can actually fit such a huge foot in their mouth (Congress likely to settle GMO food labeling dispute, Oregonian 7/21).

Food labeling provide essential information about the contents, including nutritional value, which in the U.S. are reflected as percentages of vitamins and minerals of whole ingredients and/or percentages of daily supplements.

The set of nutritional tables we presently read on the back of our food products were produced during World War II era, which is to say that our tables are based on eighty year old science. Don't look for GMO reference on Wikipedia - some of the most reputable sources contain misinformation.

Genetically Modified Foods contain only a small fraction of nutrients, suffering severe deficiencies while producing chemicals that scientists decided can help ward off pests and disease. Not only are these food products devoid of any real nutritional content, they also taste terrible. For instance, corn that taste like Styrofoam is actually very close to that: plant cellulose, low on nutritional content, high in frankenstein-like plant-produced chemicals.

Now GMO labeling requirements are the last battlefront food producers face because it would eventually lead to revised nutritional tables, pointing out wide discrepancies in GMO value versus unmodified, organically grown food.

The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, pending House legislation introduced by Mike Pompeo (R) KS and G.K. Butterfield (D) NC. is exactly the opposite of what it sounds like: it would prohibit states from mandating labels for genetically engineered foods.

The Oregonian editorial board suggestively supports this bill. This is casting a blind eye to valuable future information, much like forgetting how to file a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request.

Editorial boards are not tasked with investigative journalism, but considering the influence they wield through readership, the opinions expressed should at the very least be based on responsible journalism.