Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: What You Should Know About GMOs and Mandatory Food Labeling
Explainer: What You Should Know About GMOs and Mandatory Food Labeling
Aug 25, 2026 6:32 PM

Last year, the House passed a bill to preempt states from imposing mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food (GMOs). But as Daren Bakst notes, “While it looked like the Senate was going to follow suit, in the last minute, the new Senate bill would actually effectively mandate the labeling of genetically engineered food.”

“In the Senate bill, there would be a national mandatory labeling requirement unless the Secretary of Agriculture determines that there has been substantial participation by labeled foods in voluntary labeling,” says Bakst. “The Secretary has to develop regulations to clarify the process, but there has to be at least 70 percent substantial participation after two years.”

Here is what you should know about GMOs and GMO food labeling:

What are genetically modified organisms (GMOs)?

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are organisms (i.e. plants, animals, or microorganisms) in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural bination. The technology used for GMOs is sometimes called “modern biotechnology,” “gene technology,” or “genetic engineering.” The process allows selected individual genes to be transferred from one organism into another, also between nonrelated species. Foods produced from or using genetically modified organisms are often referred to as genetically modified (GM) foods or GMO foods.

Why are GM foods produced?

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), GM foods are developed “because there is some perceived advantage either to the producer or consumer of these foods. This is meant to translate into a product with a lower price, greater benefit (in terms of durability or nutritional value) or both.”

Which plants are genetically modified?

The mon genetically modified plants are corn, canola, soybean and cotton. Based on USDA survey data, the adoption of genetically modified crops in 2015 was: soybeans, 94 percent of US crops; cotton, 94 percent, corn 92 percent.

Which foods are made from genetically engineered plants?

According to the FDA, the majority of genetically engineered plants are typically used to make ingredients that are then used in other food products. Such ingredients include “cornstarch in soups and sauces, corn syrup as a general purpose sweetener, and cottonseed oil, canola oil, and soybean oil in mayonnaise, salad dressings, cereals, breads, and snack foods.”

Why do some people oppose GMOS?

GMO critics claim that foods made from GMO crops — which they often refer to as“Frankenfoods” — can cause environmental damage and health problems for consumers.

“The genetic engineering of plants and animals is looming as one of the greatest and most intractable environmental challenges of the 21st Century,” says the Center for Food Safety. The Non-GMO Project says that, “Most developed nations do not consider GMOs to be safe. In more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs.”

The Non-GMO project also claims GMO crops pose a threat to farmers:

Because GMOs are novel life forms, panies have been able to obtain patents with which to restrict their use. As a result, panies that make GMOs now have the power to sue farmers whose fields are contaminated with GMOs, even when it is the result of inevitable drift from neighboring fields. GMOs therefore pose a serious threat to farmer sovereignty and to the national food security of any country where they are grown, including the United States.

Are genetically modified foods safe to eat?

In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the safety of foods and food products from plant sources including food from genetically engineered plants. Foods from genetically engineered plants must meet the same requirements, including safety requirements, as foods from traditionally bred plants. The FDA has found that GMO foods are “generally as nutritious as foods parable traditionally bred plants.”

The European Union (EU) conducted a lengthy study on the biosafety of GMOs and found:

The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies.

Additionally, the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and numerous other organizations have examined the evidence e to the same conclusion about the safety of GMOs.

Do GMO foods need to be labeled?

Because some consumer interests are interested in whether food ingredients are derived from genetically engineered plants, some manufacturers choose to voluntarily label their foods as containing or not containing GMO-based ingredients.

However, many businesses, non-profits, and scientific organization oppose mandated labeling. As the American Association for the Advancement of Science says:

There are several current efforts to require labeling of foods containing products derived from genetically modified crop monly known as GM crops or GMOs. These efforts are not driven by evidence that GM foods are actually dangerous.

[. . .]

It is the long-standing policy of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that special labeling of a food is required if the absence of the information provided poses a special health or environmental risk. The FDA does not require labeling of a food based on the specific genetic modification procedure used in the development of its input crops. Legally mandating such a label can only serve to mislead and falsely alarm consumers.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Beware the post-election narratives
In his best-selling book The Black Swan, probabilist Nassim Nicholas Taleb warns against the need for easy narratives to explain the unexpected. Given how unexpected the result of this Tuesday’s election was, it is worth taking some time to review what Taleb calls “the narrative fallacy.” According to Taleb, The narrative fallacy addresses our limited ability to look at sequences of facts without weaving an explanation into them, or, equivalently, forcing a logical link, an arrow of relationship, upon them....
Diverse voters, deep passions: what 2016 exit polls tell us
As, no doubt, many readers are getting flooded on social media with think pieces and hot takes (not to mention apocalyptic worry or celebration), the point of this post is simply to look at what the data seems to indicate about those who voted for President-elect Donald Trump and his opponent, Sec. Hillary Clinton. I’ll add a few thoughts at the end, but I am mostly just fascinated with the result, which shows more diverse support for each candidate than...
Review: ‘NIV Faith and Work Bible’ uncovers God’s story for stewardship
The church has recently awakened with renewed interest in the intersection of faith and work, leading to a widespread movement in congregations and seminaries and a constant flow of books, sermons, and other resources (including a hearty bunch from the Acton Institute). In a new NIV Faith and Work Bible from Zondervan, we gain another valuable tool for expanding our economic imaginations, weaving a rich theology of work more closely with the Biblical text. Edited by David H. Kim, Executive...
Trump’s first ‘Hundred Day’ economic plan
In a radio address on July 24, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt referred to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, a session that produced a record-breaking volume of new laws. Despite the fact that the 100 days referred to a legislative session and not the beginning of a presidency, the term has e a metric for what a new president can plish and how effective they will be during their term....
An Italian view of America’s election results: Berlusconi reincarnate, financial penance
Yesterday, Hillary’s concessionand Donald’s victory speeches would be made only one mile apart at the Midtown Hilton at the Javits Center in New York City. As the night wore on, the Clinton party quickly souredin the ballroom while the Trump camp began uncorking the bubbly. The opposing sentiments set the two camps a world apart. Clinton’s presidential campaign director John Podesta, with aplomb, delivered unwanted news: for now the Democrats’ dream had died and all those sobbing at the Javits...
Why not socialism?
“In spite of socialism’s sorry track record, millions of well-meaning people think it’s a virtual synonym passion,” says Lawrence Reed. “But socialists themselves are constantly retreating from their own handiwork. It’s socialism until it doesn’t work, then it was never socialism in the first place. It’s socialism until the wrong guys get in charge, then it’s everything but.” Socialism never seems to have any theory of wealth creation, only fanciful schemes for its reallocation after somebody goes to the trouble...
How did we get here?
In today’s Acton Commentary, I offer a brief reflection on the results of Election Day in the United States, “Politics, Character, and Competition.” I’ve heard a lot of wisdom and a lot of foolishness in the hours since the final results were announced. The initial speeches have now been made, and we are in that in-between time, the pause of sorts between the election and the inauguration of a new president. It’s a good chance to take a breath and...
Virtuous envy?
Edward Feser, with a nod to Thomas Aquinas, discusses whether there might be such a thing as virtuous Schadenfreude. As Feser puts it, “On the one hand, the suffering of a person is not as such something to rejoice in, for suffering, considered just by itself, is an evil…. However, there can be something ‘annexed’ to the suffering which is a cause for rejoicing.” My collaborator and friend Victor Claar and I ran up against something like this in our...
What a veteran knows
“Thank you for your service,” they say, as they shake our hands and pat our backs. We smile and thank them for their gratitude and try to think of something else to talk about. These encounters with strangers happen from time to time, though always on Veteran’s Day. It’s the one time we can count on civilians—a group from which we came but can never fully return—to think about us. On Veteran’s Day, they think of the men and women...
Musings from Nobel Laureate Vernon L. Smith
UPDATE: The full interview is now available online. ### In June, Nobel economist Vernon L. Smith gave an Acton University speech titled “Faith and the Compatibility of Science and Religion.” While he was in Grand Rapids, he sat down with Victor V. Claar and went into some of the specifics of his lecture, as well as his vast experience in economics, including experimental economics. Their conversation was recorded as the cover feature for the Fall issue of Religion & Liberty....
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved