> The requirement that GM foods be labeled was rejected in CA.
>
> I'm clueless as to why....except for the threat that it would make food
> more expensive. But that's just a guess. Anybody know why people would
> oppose GM food labeling.
>
> Joanna
---------
Shane Mage proposed Monsanto $$$. But reactionary $$$ were spent all over the spectrum of candidates and propositions with very ambiguous results.
The GM food movements have had nowhere near the success they enjoyed in Europe where food in countries like France and Italy are almost identical to a national identity. You might be able to start a revolution if you introduced genetically modified wine, olive oil, or cheese.
The other problem (I think) is that nobody understands what `genetic' modified means, let alone genetic anything.
I actually agree to some extent that GM is a so-what consumer issue. It lacks controversial attraction like high fructose corn syrups, HFCS. It's easy. HFCS=>FAT. While GM=>...? Now if we could GM=>CANCER there would be an real up roar.
The real issue is the control corporate agriculture can extend over food crop production. That is an issue that has almost no consumer attraction. It is an obscure topic buried in the bureaucratic mysteries of the Dept of Agriculture.
CG