Today, people are becoming more concerned about the need to protect themselves from the effects of harmful factors and to buy quality food. The U.S. government has decided to expand expenditures on food quality and safety control programs significantly. Therefore, a federal law was passed to label GMO products in stores (Greiner, 2017). In this way, one can use the phone and scan QR codes to determine if a product in the store contains GMOs. Although I visually searched for products in the store that had GMOs, I could not detect them. When I used the application and scanned the codes, though, I found many goods. Hence, I can say that there are products in stores that contain GMOs, but they are not clearly labeled, which prevents them from being immediately identifiable. This made it challenging to detect such foods and required more time to recognize them.
It is significant to mention that the population has an opinion about the negative consequences of consuming GMO products. Similar surveys were also conducted in the USA, France, and Germany; in these countries, about 90% of the population also have an adverse reaction to artificial genome modification (Dietz-Pfeilstetter et al., 2021). One of the primary arguments of GMO opponents is that any interference with DNA is unnatural.
This implies that eating GMO plants and products can cause dangerous mutations in humans and, as a result, diseases. While many research studies prove that GM foods are safe, a 2016 report from the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggests that such foods are not harmful but are even suitable for humans (Dietz-Pfeilstetter et al., 2021). The authors examined studies concerned with two types of GM plants: insect-resistant and chemical fertilizer-resistant. Data from the past 20 years demonstrated that these crops did not affect the people and animals that consumed them. Scientists conduct years of testing before putting a GM product on the market. They observe how transgenes and gene expression products behave and whether they cause allergies or poisoning (Dietz-Pfeilstetter et al., 2021). International legislation requires that every such product pass rigorous human, animal, and environmental safety tests.
Researchers’ opinions concerning the labeling of GM-containing products are divided. Some argue that such information renders the product unsafe or harmful to the environment in the eyes of consumers. Others maintain that “labeling gives consumers a sense of control and inspires trust in the manufacturer” (Dietz-Pfeilstetter et al., 2021, p. 974). The paper’s authors interviewed residents of Vermont and other U.S. states by phone and online before and after the legislation was enacted. It appeared that among the state residents after the introduction of the labeling, the number of people who have a negative attitude toward GM food decreased by 19 percent (Dietz-Pfeilstetter et al., 2021). Thus, product labeling is essential to inform the consumer, and they will decide how to consume it.
I believe that the products I find in the supermarket have undergone quality control, which is why they are safe for humans, even if they contain GMOs. At the same time, I support that GMO foods should be labeled in grocery stores; it will enable a person to make an informed choice. There are laws in the US governing the production and labeling of GMO products. If a product unintentionally contains at least 5% bio-engineered material, it needs to be marked (Greiner, 2017). I consider they should be strengthened; at least any product that contains bioengineered ingredients is required to have a label on the product, not just QR codes.
References
Dietz-Pfeilstetter, A., Mendelsohn, M., Gathmann, A., & Klinkenbuß, D. (2021). Considerations and regulatory approaches in the USA and in the EU for dsRNA-based externally applied pesticides for plant protection. Frontiers in Plant Science, 12, 974.
Greiner, A. L. (2017). Visualizing human geography: At home in a diverse world. (3nd ed.). Wiley.