Quote

The public should know that the liability issues here have yet to be resolved, or even raised. If you're a farmer and you're growing a genetically engineering food crop, those genes are going to flow to the other farm.

Over time, yes, countries will need to look at specific GMO products like they look at drugs today, where they don't approve them all. They look hard at the safety and the testing. And they make sure that the benefits far outweigh any of the downsides.

Whether Congress decides to block GMO labeling is about more than the right to know what we're buying and eating. It's also about consumer confusion.

The battle over genetically modified crops is rife with business interests and political opportunism. When GMOs were first produced in laboratories around the world, they were rightly heralded as a tremendous leap forward in our ability to supplement nature by providing high-nutrient foods.

Genetically modified organism (GMO) foods are feared and hated by environmentalists and the public alike. Yet the scientific assessment of GMOs is remarkably different. Every major scientific evaluation of GMO technology has concluded that GMOs are safe for human consumption and are a benefit to the environment.

To reap the benefits of GMO technology, the U.S. must ensure that decisions about our food system are made based on science, not innuendo.

I have been intimately involved in the techniques of genetic modification as a scientist since GMOs were first conceived. In that time, hundreds of studies and tests have been done on GMO safety - and we've seen no scientific evidence that GMOs are inherently more dangerous than crops produced by traditional plant breeding.

Monsanto can do anything they want to you, and put anything they want into your foods. There's nothing you can do about it.

GMOs play a central role in meeting the challenge of providing affordable and nutritious food to consumers all over the world.

There are GMO skeptics more in Europe maybe than in other places, but not exclusively.