Do GM foods have to be labelled? GM foods, ingredients, additives, or processing aids that contain novel DNA or protein must be labelled with the words ‘genetically modified’. Novel DNA or protein is defined in the Food Standards Code as DNA or a protein which, as a result of the use of gene technology, is different in chemical sequence or structure from DNA or protein present in counterpart food, which has not been produced using gene technology.

The author discusses the issue on requiring to label genetically modified foods in the U.S. He believes that labeling should be required so that the public will know the ingredients of a food. Supporters of labeling genetically modified foods believe that the activity will enable consumers to make better-informed options, while opponents of the idea state that labeling would create confusion and increase costs.

The authors offer advice on labelling, selling and using products that are genetically modified (GM). They claim that labelling is the most important advertising tool for food producers and the source of product information of consumers at point of sale. The definition of GM foods under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code is provided. The Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) determines if the GM foods are safe to eat before they can be sold or use.

The author states that crops that aid humanitarian causes may soften opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMO). He suggests that genetically modified crops can reduce the use of environmentally damaging agrochemicals. He cites the genetically modified eggplant variety known as Bt brinjal approved by the government of Bangladesh and the golden rice owned by an independent humanitarian board as examples of how GMOs can serve the values and political goals that motivate their opponents.

Once again, genetically modified crops are in the news for all the wrong reasons. In the WA Supreme Court, organic farmer Steve Marsh is suing his neighbour Michael Baxter for allegedly ruining his crop by contaminating it with GM canola. Mr Marsh lost his organic certification as a result, and members of the green movement have rallied to his cause. But the case is just the latest episode in a saga that has left scientists bemused at the strength with which the public has been swept up by the anti-GM movement.

It’s a common gripe among genetic researchers. There seems to be widespread public acceptance of the need to modify genes to cure or reduce disease in humans but when you talk about genetically modified food, the response is outrage. Part of the problem seems to be that few lay people fully understand the process and, therefore, making a judgment call on it is difficult. Currently, the only genetically modified food produced in Australia is cotton oil but this is set to change as more States change their legislation to allow farmers to experiment with different genetically modified crops...

The article explains the reason why people will need genetically modified (GM) foods as climate change make crop production more difficult along with the growing population. It cites the advantage of using genetic engineering to help crops adopt to climate changes and the potential of bioengineered food crops to fulfill hopes for genetically modified organisms (GMO). It highlights efforts to develop transgenic potatoes and grains and looks into the effects of heat wave on agriculture.

The author shares her views on why she supports genetically modified organisms (GMOs). According to the author, GM crops are becoming popular worldwide, with 15.4 million farmers growing GM crops. She explains that plantings have risen following the introduction of GM crops. She further points that although there are questions over the benefits of GM crops, they have clear benefits in relation to farmers' income, efficiency and the environment.

The article speculates whether the consumption of food products made of genetically modified organism (GMO) are harmful or beneficial for health. It informs that GMO crops were commercially grown in the U.S. because they are pest and disease resistant and discusses potential causes for concern of chronic disease associated with the GMOs. It explains that there is no need for panic related to GMOs as few whole foods are genetically modified and informs that there are no proven health risks.

A new “super salmon” is expected to be approved for sale in the US within the next few weeks, reigniting a heated debate over genetically modified food. The salmon would be the first GM animal approved for human consumption and has been under development in Massachusetts for 18 years. It is expected to be cleared for sale soon by the US Food and Drug Administration, and supermarkets are coming under increasing pressure to refuse to stock the fish.

It’s a common gripe among genetic researchers. There seems to be widespread public acceptance of the need to modify genes to cure or reduce disease in humans but when you talk about genetically modified food, the response is outrage. Part of the problem seems to be that few lay people fully understand the process and, therefore, making a judgment call on it is difficult. Currently, the only genetically modified food produced in Australia is cotton oil but this is set to change as more States change their legislation to allow farmers to experiment with different genetically modified crops...

The author shares her views on why she supports genetically modified organisms (GMOs). According to the author, GM crops are becoming popular worldwide, with 15.4 million farmers growing GM crops. She explains that plantings have risen following the introduction of GM crops. She further points that although there are questions over the benefits of GM crops, they have clear benefits in relation to farmers' income, efficiency and the environment.