What Are We Eating?

Fact: GMO's have not been proven safe, and the long-term health risks on humans of genetically modified foods have not been adequately investigated.

We have a Right to Know What's in our Food


We Currently Eat Genetically Engineered Food, But Don’t Know It

A genetically engineered food is a plant or meat product that has had its DNA artificially altered in a laboratory by genes from other plants, animals, viruses, or bacteria, in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This type of genetic alteration is not found in nature, and is experimental. The correct scientific term is "transgenics," and is also often referred to as (GE) genetically engineered.
Example: Genetically Modified corn has been engineered in a laboratory to produce pesticides in its own tissue. GMO Corn is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an Insecticide, but is sold unlabeled. [EPA Pesticides]

The Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods Are Unclear

Unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the safety of genetically engineered foods for human consumption is not adequately tested. 
There have been NO long-term studies conducted on the safety of genetically engineered foods on humans.

The issue of GM food safety was first discussed at a meeting of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Health Organization (WHO) and biotech representatives in 1990. The "substantial equivalence" concept was proposed in early 1996. The adoption of the concept of substantial equivalence allowed permission to market and sell new foods without any safety or toxicology tests as long as they were not too different in chemical composition to foods already on the market. [FDA GRAS proposal] To decide if a modified product is substantially equivalent, the product is tested by the manufacturer for unexpected changes in a limited set of variables such as toxins, nutrients or allergens that are known to be present in the unmodified food. If these tests show no significant difference between the modified and unmodified products, then no further food safety testing is required.   



Much of the World Already Requires Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

64 countries with over 40% of the world’s population already label genetically engineered foods, including the entire European Union. China labels genetically engineered foods.  The same companies that fight GMO labeling in the US reformulate or label GMOs in the foods they sell overseas. Why do they afford non-citizens transparency when they've spent over $100M to keep us from knowing what's in our food here in the US?


Just Like Nutrition Facts

We didn’t use to label foods with calorie or nutritional value information, but we do now, and most consumers use this information every day. The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act simply requires food producers to also label food that contains genetically engineered ingredients.


Cost to Consumers or Food Producers

According to a 2014 report by Consumers Union, labeling would cost consumers about 1 penny per day.  Producers change their labels all the time and don't increase the costs to their customers.  Once people KNOW what is in their food, they can then make the informed choice to avoid the potential health risks of GMOs until more research on their long-term effects can be done.  


Learn More:

Showing 119 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • commented 2016-04-02 16:53:45 -0700
    Should genetically modified foods be sold with a warning label?
    By: Brecon Schumann
    Have you ever wondered what’s in your food? That’s an easy question and answer, right? You just look on the back and read the label, but that’s actually not everything. And the secret ingredient is: Genetically Modified Organisms or GMOs. What if there was this thing called the GMO label or something like that, which kept the GMOs out of your home and body? I’m here to argue FOR GMO labels
    The reason for the need for GMO labels is because GMOs are just plain bad. According to the FDA GMOs cause disease, allergies ,and nutritional problems. But not enough tests have been done on long term impact even though it’s been urged many times by the FDA, but why? Infact as much as we claim to know about GMOs they still are a mystery.
    My first point is the fact that GMOs are very unethical. It’s literally modifying the genetic makeup of your food, packing it, shiping it to your stores, and putting it into the consumer’s homes. For this reason people rightfully want to know whether or not they are eating GMO food. If it was labeled people wanting to avoid it could just keep walking by in stores.
    My second point is .that if people were avoiding GMOs in food, those companies would lose business. Thus, it forces them to drop their GMO ingredients in food. which would lead to a healthier and better lifestyle for the people and companies producing these foods and eating these foods.
    My third point is how it would be almost costless. Considering the amount of paper used for the normal labels it would be easy and almost costless to add the three letters “GMO” to your favorite foods labels. Or you could produce GMO stickers that would be put on GMO foods.
    For these reasons I think that GMOs should be labeled at least. I hope in the future People can come to see what GMOs really do and start building a healthier and better food industry. I hope I helped bring you to my side of the argument about GMOs but if not I’m glad that I was able to inform you at best, And thank you for reading my essay.

    had to write this for school (essay) like it?
  • commented 2016-03-06 14:00:19 -0800
    also to what Daniel Gilleron said, “But that is not all. GMOs rely for their survival on massive use of pesticides and herbicides” The point of making a gmo is to make the plant have a gene or genes to make its own pesticides. Therefore the farmer would not need to buy additional pesticides. This proves your point wrong.
  • commented 2016-03-06 13:51:14 -0800
    to what Daniel Gilleron said, “How innumerous the individuals who observed that GMO feedstuff or food is left untouched for weeks in nature, but the organic or conventional (non genetically modified) food doesn’t survive even one night without being eaten by wild animals.” What I have to say to that is this, cat food is a gmo product and at night wild animals eat it and there is none left in the morning. This proves your point wrong.
  • commented 2016-02-22 01:56:28 -0800
    None of what Daniel Gilleron posted has any factual backing. Thousands of experiments have been conducted to examine a link between cancer and GMO, there is a stronger correlation between cancer and bacon or not taking exercise than there is with GM agriculture.
    Some GM crops are avoided by animals because they contain pesticide resistance, meaning that farmers that grow these will have a greater yield so YES, they will help small farmers to grow a better yield and help reduce world poverty and hunger.
    Go to or any peer-review scientific publishing site and get some proven facts before you advance any arguments about GM.
  • commented 2015-11-18 13:54:36 -0800
    @daniel Gillieron. There are no crops on the market with terminators, that technology is not being used. Do your research. Everything you just said is full of absurd hyperbole. Animals do not refuse to eat GMO food, that is completely made up. You need to understand the facts of an issue before you advance an argument. Trying to tie cancer rate to GMO introduction with the information you have is a correlation vs. causation fallacy—in other words it is illogical and incorrect.
  • commented 2015-10-16 14:54:00 -0700
  • commented 2015-09-03 12:37:32 -0700
    This link goes to an interesting and informative article on HR 1599 (GMO labeling)
  • commented 2015-05-02 06:27:14 -0700
    Dear friends, please allow me to advance irrefutable and ultimate arguments AGAINST the use of GMOs in agriculture and the need for mandatory labeling.
    I suggest that we first turn our attention to our animal friends. Wild animals (and, for that matter, domestic animals if given the choice) don’t touch GMOs. How innumerous the indivduals who observed that GMO feedstuff or food is left untouched for weeks in nature, but the organic or conventional (non genetically modified) food doesn’t survive even one night without being eaten by wild animals. Now, let us ponder a little bit on wild animals. Do they have health insurance to treat their cancers and a huge array of other degenerative diseases? No, of course they don’t, they have to remain healthy until the end of their life or spend their existence in misery. Therefore, the sole fact that animals categorically refuse to eat any GMO (if given the choice) should already motivate us to become cautious. Why do animals have the capacity to distinguish non GMO food/plants from GMO food/plants? The only answer is that GMO/non GMO is intrinsically and inherently different. So, how can the FDA claim that there is no inherent or substantial difference between GMOs and non GMOs? The FDA is deceiving all the people. Of course, GMOs and non GMOs are substantially different. The genome of non GMOs does not contain genes from other species…
    I ask you, why is it that the US has the highest average incidence of cancer and degenerative diseases in the world? Why is it, that this morbidity curve took off like a vertical take-off just shortly after the introduction of GMOs? Is this really only a pure coincidence?
    Now, let me debunk a few of the hollow arguments advanced by proponents of GMOs, the soldiers of negation. According to them, GMOs help in combating world famine. It is the opposite, GMO crops failed in India when hit by drought. Organic plants are much more able to cope with extreme weather, but they don’t bring money to industrial lobbies.
    Another argument I would like to debunk here is that GMOs help small farmers. That’s an insolent proposition. GMO technology relies on patented seed with terminator technology (you can’t reproduce them like organic or conventional seed). It is expensive. But that is not all. GMOs rely for their survival on massive use of pesticides and herbicides (by the way, is it not funny to note that the same companies which commercialize GMOs are also in the business of producing pesticides/herbicides/fungicides/growth hormones?). GMOs have been engineered to resist huge quantities of chemicals, the worst ones being systemic ones, those that wander into all cells of a plant and are persistent. Small farmers go into debts to buy the seed, the fertilizers, the pesticides and the herbicides. Afterwards, if the climate is not clement, the harvest is not good and they can’t pay back their loans. That’s when most kill themselves. In India, hundred of thousands of farmers have committed suicide, but no country in the world is totally immune of this phenomenon. In each country, farmers are more likely to commit suicide than the general population, for divers reason, one of which is the dependence created by GMOs. In reality, companies such as Monsanto, Bayer, DuPont, Dow, BASF and Syngenta are mortal enemies of small farmers, irrespective of whether they practice organic/non-chemical or conventional farming. There are no bigger oppressors of the small-hold farmer than the biotech/GMO/agrichemical companies (which in reality are almost one and the same).
    Every argument that is put forth by proponents of GMOs lacks good faith. If we analyze it and ponder and reflect the matter more in depth, we will come to see that all the pro-GMO lobby’s arguments are hollow and deceptive. They are only a travesty to hide the dark agenda behind GMOs. This should be clear to anyone endowed with a seeing eye and a discerning mind.
    Industrial chemical farming, and especially (to a much higher degree) GMO farming practices are in conflict with the laws of nature, such as the need for the largest diversity possible, the law of interconnection and interdependence, the law of natural balance (each pest has its natural enemy in an unbroken environment), the principle of beauty instead of monotony (monoculture).
    The GMO lobby is grounded in an aspiration for world domination. If you control the whole food chain, you also control each and every human being on this planet. Or, as French-speaking people would call it: “la mainmise totale sur le vivant”.
    I ask you, you, the majority of human beings all over the world, do you want to became the guinea pigs and the socio-economic slaves of a tiny minority who more often than not refuses to eat GMOs? Do you want to have less and less diversity to choose from? Do you like emptied, monotonous landscapes? Do you enjoy to see the world’s ecosystem collapse? Do you like your lifespan to be dramatically shortened by the effects of GMO products on your body just to fill the pockets of a restricted circle of greedy and power-hungry people with oversized egos?
    To the proponents of GMOs that claim GMOs are completely safe: If GMOs are so safe, why do you put up ferocious resistance against mandatory labeling of GMOs? Why did you have to spend countless millions of dollars in California just to get victory by a tiny margin? Why is it that a figurehead among your ranks has admitted that labeling GMOs would be equivalent to putting a big warning sign with a skull and bones on each GMO product?
    I ask each of you: Doesn’t every human being on this planet enjoy the sacred basic human right to decide what he/she wants to eat? Is it not the right of every human being to be informed about the real nature of GMOs and the detrimental effects that sound independent scientific studies have, irrefutably, shown, but that are being discredited by the pro-GMO lobby that only admits the studies financed by it, where the conclusion is already determined before the study even begins? Why is mandatory labeling frightening the hell out of biotech companies, if their food is as safe as they claim?
    Why do so many human rights have to be trampled on just to further the agenda of private interests? As a fair-minded individual, do we not have the responsibilty to admit that GMOs in agriculture are devoid of common sense and ethics? As for me, I have already investigated all these questions and many more almost two decades before and given the only possible answer: GMOs are scientifically unsound, socially destructive, environmentally unsustainable and one of the biggest transgression against humanity. That’s why I put all my weight behind banning GMOs in Switzerland and together with untiring efforts of countless other souls was successful to get them banned. Isn’t it ironic that Syngenta, a Swiss biotech company and a leading player in its field, is prevented from selling its GMO products in Switzerland? Should not people and politicians all over the world heed what happened in Switzerland, one of the few (albeit not perfect) relatively real democracies in this world, where people can freely voice their opinions and information be freely shared. In a country, where people have one of the highest education level and where science is kept in high esteem, a large majority supports not only mandatory labeling of GMOs, but the total ban? What does this say about GMOs?
    By now, I am sure that most fellow human beings, having taken time to read my comment, agree with me. It is likely that many already agreed with me before reading this comment… And those who are not of good faith, namely the proponents of GMO, will continue their meaningless attempts at brainwashing people into believing GMOs are safe.
    In the long term, the GMO scourge will be overcome, as more and more people become aware of the frightening dangers associated with as well as the evil motives behind its drive for world domination and arise, in a collective effort, to get rid of this scam. We, the vast majority of peoples of the world, are one on this subject and shall prevail against the forces of darkness. Darkness is frightened by light, the same is true with the GMO lobby, it is frightened by the light of truth.
  • commented 2015-04-22 20:01:39 -0700 SPREAD THIS FOR OUR OWN GOOD
  • commented 2015-04-05 22:10:57 -0700
    Eating GM corn and soybean causes kidney and liver damage.
    GM grains are also full of herbicides such as glyphosate (Round-up).
    Last month the WHO announced that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen..

    GMO’s are evil!
  • commented 2015-03-18 17:56:00 -0700
    Label GMO’s!
  • commented 2015-01-12 22:57:43 -0800
    The FDA is proposing to update the Nutrition Facts label found on most food packages in the United States. The Nutrition Facts label, introduced 20 years ago, helps consumers make informed food choices and maintain healthy dietary practices.
  • commented 2015-01-11 23:56:24 -0800
    Most Americans haven’t been told about some of the ingredients that are in the food they eat. So it’s no wonder that 92% of Americans want to label genetically engineered foods. If more of us speak out about why we care about the food we put in our own bodies and in our children’s bodies, then we can convince the FDA to change its policy.
  • commented 2014-04-29 22:25:05 -0700
    Why the GMO food provider is not looking to add labels to the such food. This question must be answered. Everything from a small candy to the Drink have ingrediats label patsed o print with it so consumer would know that what they are eating. Government has to ask to add labels to the GMO food. salutes your efforts.
  • commented 2014-02-25 13:14:20 -0800
    @lee P. Your skin has tons of bacteria. Your mouth has tons of bacteria. We are mostly bacteria.
  • commented 2013-12-07 06:20:44 -0800
    How do you feel about ‘organic foods’ using poo as fertilizer? SURPRISE! Poo is full of bacteria.
  • commented 2013-11-24 20:56:46 -0800
    Now we have seen number of leading brands offering appliances to preserve food in hygienic environment. But most of people are not aware by the fact that food genetics are also preferred while it comes to healthy diet talk. Number of researchers discovering new ways to produce more healthy diets for general public. But it also matters that where and how you are preserving your food.
  • commented 2013-06-23 12:05:39 -0700
    Wow, really opens my eyes. Now I’m more clear on what I’m feeding my family.
  • commented 2013-03-15 12:02:38 -0700
    People are such SHEEP these days…I cannot help but wonder if Grassroots organizations have a fighting chance, what with all the “evil” lobbyists there are and not 1 concern for the general population.
  • @SaferBrand tweeted link to this page. 2012-12-07 08:01:14 -0800
    50 countries have banned or restricted #GMO's, U.S. doesn't even require labeling! (Read: #NoGMO!
  • @__Constance__ tweeted link to this page. 2012-11-08 19:40:31 -0800
    What Are We Eating?
  • @jimmytst tweeted link to this page. 2012-11-04 06:02:37 -0800
    What Are We Eating? via @label_gmos
  • @12andomthoughtz tweeted link to this page. 2012-11-02 12:23:06 -0700
    What Are We Eating? via @label_gmos
  • @ArboldelaVida_ tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-22 23:05:44 -0700
    Californians please vote: LabelGMOs - It's Our Right to Know
  • @GreenUnicornPow tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-17 12:36:37 -0700
    Learn about what exactly GMO means to YOU & your FAMILY visit this site
  • @GreenUnicornPow tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-17 12:16:57 -0700
  • @spiny_starfish tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-15 11:45:48 -0700
  • @opassoap tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-09 14:34:55 -0700
    What do you think? Should GMOs be labeled?
  • @Simplifyphotos tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-05 16:58:05 -0700
    What Are We Eating? via @label_gmos
  • @gatses13 tweeted link to this page. 2012-10-05 14:03:01 -0700
    What Are We Eating? via @label_gmos
Volunteer Events Donate