As Hawaii’s debate about GMOs rages, the editorial board of Scientific American has come down strongly against a policy requiring labeling of genetically modified ingredients in foods. 

(A statewide policy requiring GMO labeling failed to pass the Hawaii legislature this past session.)

Here’s the takeaway from Scientific American:

Such debates are about so much more than slapping ostensibly simple labels on our food to satisfy a segment of American consumers. Ultimately, we are deciding whether we will continue to develop an immensely beneficial technology or shun it based on unfounded fears.

Over the past decade, Hawaii has become a testing ground for the world’s major biotech companies. Syngenta, Dow AgroScience, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, BASF and Monsanto have all taken up root in the islands.

The arguments swirling around biotech in Hawaii go beyond whether or not GMOs are safe for consumption, touching on issues of pesticide use and disclosure, as well as what is the best use for Hawaii’s limited ag land. And some just worry that the multi-billion dollar companies aren’t being good neighbors.

But Scientific American’s take on the labeling issue is a good read, regardless of which side of the debate you fall. 

Read the full editorial here: Labels for GMO Foods Are a Bad Idea.

Photo: A Syngenta worker keeps an eye out for birds in a crop field on the west side of Kauai. (Nick Grube, Civil Beat)

You can catch up on Civil Beat’s most recent coverage of the GMO issue here: 

• GMO Fight Club: Accusations Fly Over Biotech on Kauai
• Papaya Nightmares: A Farmer Struggles Amid Hawaii’s GMO Debate
• GMO Fight Heats Up on Kauai, Big Island
• Hawaii Fight Over GMO Labeling Turns Ugly
• GMO? Hawaii Lawmakers Elect To Study The Issue
• Monsanto Notches Another Victory In GMO Fight

— Sophie Cocke