I am a big fan of the food writings of Michael Pollan, but his recent opinion piece on GMO labeling could be stronger.
His argument for voting “yes” on mandatory labeling is mostly mood affiliation, namely that this is part of some broader battle against “Big Food.” He doesn’t for instance consider how the Proposition may damage many smaller farmers, or that GMOs seem to lower carbon emissions and otherwise help the environment. Here is yet another discussion of benefits, or see this survey post.
His final and in fact main argument contains a simple error in economics, all too common among food writers:
…to date, genetically modified foods don’t offer the eater any benefits whatsoever…
He forgot to mention that they increase supply and lower price. Quick question: how did the GMO products otherwise obtain market share?
For the pointer I thank Michael.