Editor, The News:
Re: Destroy the trees, kill the root hairs (Along the Fraser, July 27).
GMO labeling is not a realistic need because GMO products have no negative effect to consumers. It is like requiring sellers to identify the type of carrot variation or species of chicken or kind of cow slaughtered.
Those wanting labels for GMO are praying on public fear of GMO because some extremist want to imply there is some danger about GMO products.
It is nice to have all local grown foods with natural fertilizers, but an unrealistic situation. It is just a push for the good old days.
Reality is the world has changed and for the better.
Ninety per cent of the population used to be farmers, now very few produce food for many more, allowing more of the workforce to produce a lot of goods never dreamed about 100 years ago.
We have doubled our lifespan by producing goods to improve our lives.
We have so much free time to learn and enjoy the fruits of our labour.
Recently, local farmers dumped strawberries because the public preferred to pay less for GMO strawberries.
GMO strawberries may not have the same quality, but the public sees the lower cost well worth it.
GMO food products have increased productivity, and without GMO foods, production would be a way down. World starvation would dramatically increase – especially if grown the way extremists envision. To meet their goal, you would need the entire population forced to put in several hours of farming to the state.
Everyone eats GMO products one way or another. Much of the corn produced is GMO, as is tomatoes, and products feed to animals. GMO products are simply changed to have better growth characteristics or better shelf life.
I would certainly prefer pure GMO foods over those that have so many chemicals in them. Those products present a lot more danger to health.
Dan Banov
Whonnock