Food labels rattle the hungry consumer
Anti-GM activists insist that every single item on the supermarket shelves containing an iota of GM plant material should have the “danger” warning “Contains genetically modified organisms” on the packaging. They are of the opinion that it is the consumer’s right to know what his or her food contains.
With this I fully agree: consumers should be aware of ingredients in food so they can take an informed decision on purchase. However, there’s a caveat applicable here: GM is a technique in the growing of food, not an ingredient. Why then, one may ask, do labels not inform you of the type of fertiliser used to grow the oats in your muesli? What about the irrigation schedule followed for the wheat in your macaroni?
The argument of the anti-GM activists would have had more merit if, as a result of GM, the appearance, taste and nutritional value of the food differed – but this is not the case with any of the GM products in South Africa. The Department of Health only requires labels to carry a health or safety advisory (for example, peanut butter, even if it’s organic, because some people are allergic to this foodstuff). There are, however, no GM products on the South African market that fall under this requirement for labelling. Despite the safety of GM products, the Consumer Protection Act (No 68 of 2008) does require that the GM origin of goods must be shown. However, there are some opposing views on the precise interpretation of the Act. According to Andisa Potwana of the Department of Trade and Industry, regulations will be tabled in Parliament in the near future.
Most scientists empathise with the public’s concern about new developments and wish everyone was better informed on the issue of biotechnology. For this reason, scientists aren’t against labelling as such, but more concerned that intimidating stickers frighten consumers unnecessarily. I would rather buy a vegetable knowing it contained a GM aspect yet it has also lessened the exposure of farm staff to dangerous insecticides. In such a case, one might ask whether GM is not the more sustainable, ethical choice.