Editor's note: David Schubert is professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies.

(CNN) -- Most people like to know what they are eating. However, labeling for genetically modified organisms is not required in any state. This is largely because of the money expended by GM seed producers toward blocking food-labeling laws.

A common claim made by this group is that GM foods have been proved safe to eat and that there is a global scientific consensus to support this statement; therefore, no labeling is needed.
However, an examination of the scientific data, along with discussions on this topic in other countries, show that both claims are blatantly false. What is the evidence that some GM foods are hazardous to human health and that consumers should be able to make a choice based upon this information?

David Schubert

When GMOs were introduced nearly 20 years ago, there was the promise of crops with increased yields and resistant to flooding and salt. Since then, traditional breeding methods have created commercial varieties with these traits, while genetic engineering has created none. For example, recently published data show that conventional breeding of corn and soy increases yields to a greater extent than GM technologies.

With the promise of reducing the use of agricultural chemicals, most of the current GM crops are supposedly either insect or herbicide resistant. In reality, GM crops have fostered an epidemic of herbicide resistant weeds and insects that are no longer killed by the built-in toxins.

The result is a massive increase in herbicide use -- an additional 527 million pounds over the past 16 years. The major herbicide, glyphosate, is found inside the GM plants we eat, leading to its detection in people. Future GM crops will likely trigger a greater use of more toxic herbicides such as 2,4-D, a component of the Agent Orange defoliant deployed in Vietnam. In addition to these problems, there is increasing evidence that GM crops and the chemicals required for their production are harmful to humans.

Mystery wheat strikes fear in farmers Protests over genetically modified food Despite FDA approval, many distrust GMOs

An Associated Press story in October documented the large increase in cancer and birth defects in commercial farming areas of Argentina since the introduction of GM crops. These data confirm recent animal studies showing that GM corn and the herbicides sprayed on it caused a dramatic increase in cancer in the same strain of rats used in FDA drug safety tests. Another large study showed an increase in severe stomach inflammation in pigs caused by GM feed containing insecticidal toxins, a condition that would likely lead to cancer in humans.

Since it takes many years for diseases such as cancer to appear, we could be reaching that point in time after the introduction of GM crops. What has been the reaction in the rest of the world to this and similar information?

The European Union has tightened its GM food safety testing requirements as consumers continue to reject GM foods, resulting in the withdrawal of investment from two large GM seed producers, Monsanto and BASF. India, Peru, Bolivia, the Philippines and Mexico have issued moratoria on GM food crops to go along with Japan, South Korea and a large number of other countries.
Scientists in Russia have proposed a total ban on all GM products. And China, which initially embraced the technology, is having an extended debate about GM crops. The world's food authority, Codex Alimentarius, agreed in 2011 that GM food labels are justified to trace back any adverse health effects of GMOs.

As a result of these new revelations about GM technology, the industry is making a major public relations effort to promote itself, often falsely claiming that there is a "consensus" among scientists that the technology is safe.

In reality, there is no evidence that GM food is safe for human consumption, nor is there any consensus on this topic within the scientific community.

It is critical for the public to educate itself about the realities of GMOs and not be fooled by the rhetoric from companies that sell it.

Most of the world has studied this issue and concluded that GMOs are not worth the risk. Passing GM labeling initiatives in states will be the initial demonstration that the public understands what is at stake.

At the very least, labeling may help reverse the unsustainable trend in this country towards ever increasing industrial GMO farming.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/03/opinion/schubert-gmo-labeling/index.html?eref=edition

谷歌快译如下，英语厌恶症网友凑合看吧：

编者按：大卫·舒伯特是在索尔克生物研究所的教授。

（ CNN） - 大多数人想知道他们吃什么。但是，并不需要在任何状态下标签的转基因生物。这在很大程度上是因为转基因种子生产商对阻断食物标签法例所花费的钱。

该小组提出一个共同的说法是，转基因食品已被证明可安全食用，并有一个全球性的科学共识，以支持这一说法，因此，没有标签是必要的。
然而，科学数据的审查，以及有关此主题的其他国家进行讨论，表明，这两种说法是公然假的。有什么证据表明，一些转基因食品会危害人体健康和消费者应该能够使基于该信息的选择吗？

戴维舒伯特

当转基因生物进行了介绍，近20年前，有农作物的产量增加，耐水浸和盐的承诺。从那时起，传统的育种方法创造了商业品种与这些性状，而基因工程创造了没有。例如，最近公布的数据显示，玉米和大豆增加常规育种产量比通用汽车的技术在更大程度上。

与减少使用农药的承诺，目前大多数转基因作物是所谓不是昆虫或除草剂的抗性。在现实中，转基因作物培育的抗除草剂杂草和昆虫是由不再杀害疫情内置的毒素。

其结果是大量增加除草剂的使用 - 在过去的16年额外5.27亿磅。主要的除草剂，草甘膦，是我们吃的转基因植物内发现，导致其在人检测。未来转基因作物可能会引发更广泛地使用毒性更强的除草剂如2,4 -D的橙剂脱叶剂部署在越南的一个组成部分。除了这些问题，有越来越多的证据表明，转基因作物和需要它们的生产的化学物质对人体无害。

神秘小麦罢工恐农民抗议转基因食品尽管FDA的批准，很多不信任转基因生物

美联社在十月的故事记载和大量增加癌症在阿根廷的商业养殖区出生缺陷自从引入转基因作物。这些数据证实了最近的动物研究显示，转基因玉米，并喷上除草剂导致在FDA的药物安全试验所用大鼠一脉相承的显着增加癌症。另一项大型研究显示，造成转基因饲料含有杀虫毒素，这可能会导致人类癌症的条件头猪增加了严重的胃病炎症。

由于需要很多年的疾病，如癌症出现，我们可以到达该时间点引入转基因作物后。什么已经在世界各地这种反应和类似的信息？

欧盟已经收紧了转基因食品的安全测试要求消费者继续拒绝转基因食品，导致投资从两个大的转基因种子生产商孟山都和巴斯夫撤出。印度，秘鲁，玻利维亚，菲律宾和墨西哥已就转基因食品作物暂停一起去日本，韩国和许多其他国家。
在俄罗斯的科学家们提出了全面禁止所有转基因产品。而中国，最初接受了技术，是有关于转基因作物的扩展辩论。全球权威的食品，食品法典委员会，同意在2011年，转基因食品标签是有道理的追溯转基因生物的健康造成不良影响。

由于对转基因技术的这些新的启示的结果，该行业作出重大的公共关系努力促进自身，往往谎称有一个“共识”，科学家们认为这项技术是安全的。

在现实中，没有证据表明转基因食品是安全的供人食用，也没有在科学界这个话题的任何共识。

它为大众教育本身对转基因生物的现实，而不是从销售公司的花言巧语所迷惑是至关重要的。

世界上大多数国家已经研究这个问题，并得出结论认为转基因生物不值得冒这个险。通过转基因标识举措状态将是公众理解什么是利害攸关的初步论证。

最起码，标签可以帮助扭转这个国家对日益增加的工业养殖转基因的不可持续的趋势。

按照我们在Twitter @ CNNOpinion 。

加入我们的Facebook / CNNOpinion 。

～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
据说百度机器翻译更强一些，拉出来练练：