October 17, 2014

Farmers, chambers opposing GMO-labeling proposal

It’s not just concerned farmers, like me, and other food producers opposing Proposition 105.

Opposition to the GMO-labeling proposal has poured in from the Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance, the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce and other various organizations, along with scientists at the University of Colorado in Boulder and elsewhere.

And for good reason. 

Proposition 105 is inconsistent and misleading. It would impose huge costs on food producers, increase grocery bills and not give consumers any reliable information.

SPONSORED CONTENT

Many have spoken out against GMO-labeling in general. As the New York Times editorial board put it last year, the FDA says it has no basis for concluding foods containing GMOs present greater safety concerns than others, so there seems little reason to make labeling compulsory. And, consumers can already find products free of GMOs, with voluntarily placed labels.

We couldn’t agree more.

Please join me in voting “no” on Proposition 105.

— Dave Eckhardt, LaSalle, Colo.

It’s not just concerned farmers, like me, and other food producers opposing Proposition 105.

Opposition to the GMO-labeling proposal has poured in from the Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance, the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce and other various organizations, along with scientists at the University of Colorado in Boulder and elsewhere.

And for good reason. 

Proposition 105 is inconsistent and misleading. It would impose huge costs on food producers, increase grocery bills and not give consumers any reliable information.

Many have spoken out against GMO-labeling in general. As the New York Times editorial…

Sign up for BizWest Daily Alerts