

Prop 37 Loses, Scientists Cheer - tokenadult
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/2012/11/07/prop-37-fails-scientists-cheer/

======
001sky
_The proponents of Prop 37 sought to use rhetoric and language to sway against
science._

Not sure I understand this. Labeling is a fight about marketing, not science.
I don't think this headline flatters scientists in anyway.The argument for
labeling is that the products will be perhaps not purchased if the origin of
the produce was revealed. That is actually how a market economy is supposed to
work. It's un-economic for consumers to do the genetic testing themselves.
This is the same logic on why we have nutrition labels, and country of origin
labels, etc.

None of this has anything to do with the term 'science', in its common usage.

~~~
byoung2
_Labeling is a fight about marketing, not science._

I think that's the point...the label will just say GMO, without a scientific
explanation of what modifications were made. For example, soybeans can be
modified to increase resistance to pesticides or fungal infection, increase
production, which may be fine for consumers, but if it is modified to make it
taste like a carrot, or to add vitamins, people may object.

~~~
001sky
The anti GMO arguments include many that are agnostic to the details. That's
not a flaw per-se. There are considerations beyond health and nutrition. For
example, some may not want to financially support the patenting of nature,
full stop. Again, a well-operating market would let such informed decisions be
made. Again, the science angle is sort of irrelevant. The people who oppose
labeling do so out of their financial interests, not the love of or respect
for the idea of science.

