This concerns Ben Bragdon’s editorial, “Consumers should know if food genetically tweaked” in the May 31 Lakes Region Weekly, written in support of Maine bill LD 718.

On the surface, the position Ben presented – that consumers have a right to know what is in their food – sounds perfectly reasonable. Food labeling requirements are the primary responsibility of the Federal Government, chiefly the FDA, although the USDA is the authority with meats. There is a great body of detailed rules and legislation with the purpose of informing the consumer of what ingredients are used in the foods they purchase as well as providing other information (such as the net weight and nutrition) that helps him or her make an informed purchase. I believe GMO labeling would add unnecessary and even confusing information to the limited space on the label, distracting the consumer from the important information, and providing no benefit to justify the cost, which eventually gets passed on to all of us.

I am a food scientist with over 30 years experience in food safety and have read widely on this topic, though I have no personal or business stake in it one way or the other. I have learned that we digest genetically modified crop plants no differently than conventionally bred plants such as the hybrid sweet corn we all enjoy – it is just a more efficient way of obtaining desired characteristics compared to selection of seeds over multiple generations. GM crop seeds have become immensely popular with farmers for one simple reason: they perform well. Some GM crops produce higher yields while others actually allow for a reduction in chemical pesticide use because they have been bred to resist insects. This is NOT the same as the wildly inaccurate claim made by GM opponents that GM foods “contain pesticides”!

I know the term “GMO’s” may sound threatening but believe me, there is no conspiracy among industry and government to force something unhealthful upon the public! Most of us with expertise in this area believe our most important responsibility is to prevent food poisoning caused by bacteria such as Salmonella – something that results in REAL illnesses and even deaths. The FDA is currently strapped for resources to fully implement the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act that requires stringent new preventive controls in food production. This is the reason the FDA (and I) do not support labeling of GMO’s – it would siphon off scarce resources from a much more important goal to deal with a minor issue that is NOT hurting people.

I believe that LD 718 is a well-intentioned but misguided attempt. One can go to the Maine Legislature website and read comments from parties on both sides of the issue. I found that the comments submitted by the major food organizations such as the Grocery Manufacturers of America and The Maine Grocers Association had merit. These trade groups want to do the right thing for their members AND for their many customers (it is not good for business to kill your customers). Support for the legislation from small local or organic food producers is not surprising because the GMO labeling would provide those producers with a competitive advantage over producers of conventional foods (GMOs are already prohibited from USDA Organic foods). This is not to say that the organic proponents are not sincere in their beliefs, but that does not mean the rest of us should have to share them. I agree with the FDA’s and the GMA’s positions and see no need for Maine to expend its limited resources trying to require special labeling of foods that may contain genetically modified ingredients.

John Manoush is the president of Manoush Associates in Raymond.