Why Genetically Engineered Foods Should be Labeled: Gary Hirshberg at TEDxManhattan 2013

Gary Hirshberg on GE Food Labeling

Gary Hirshberg argues that genetically engineered (GE) foods should be labeled so consumers can know what is in their food. He distinguishes genetic engineering—transferring genetic material between species—from traditional breeding, and says the resulting changes are not obvious to consumers.

U.S. Labeling Policy

Hirshberg criticizes the U.S. government’s approach to GE foods. The Patent Office treats GE crops as distinct inventions that can be patented, while the FDA has relied since 1992 on a policy of “substantial equivalence” to conventional foods and does not require labels. He says this policy was developed without public or congressional input and is outdated.

He notes that many other countries require GE-food labeling and cites a poll indicating that 92% of Americans want to know whether their food contains GE ingredients.

Transparency and Consumer Choice

Hirshberg presents labeling as a matter of transparency, not a judgment that GE foods are unsafe. He argues that consumers are entitled to know about processes that materially change food, comparing GE labeling to disclosures about irradiation, country of origin, and other food-production methods.

Research and Safety Concerns

Hirshberg questions the evidence used to assess GE crops, saying that studies supporting their equivalence have often been conducted or funded by companies that hold the patents. He claims GE crops have not undergone the same extensive testing required for drugs and points to reported detection of Bt toxins in the blood of pregnant women as a reason for further independent research.

He argues that without labels, researchers cannot reliably track exposure or investigate possible long-term effects.

GE Crops and Chemical Use

Hirshberg says herbicide use has risen substantially since GE crops were introduced, while weeds have developed resistance. He says this has prompted the use of stronger herbicides, such as 2,4-D and dicamba.

He describes this cycle as increasing farmers’ dependence on chemical companies that sell both patented seeds and associated chemicals. He also raises concerns about herbicide drift, chemical exposure, and pesticide-related health risks.

Call to Action

Hirshberg concludes that uncertainty about the long-term safety of GE crops, combined with known changes in chemical use, makes disclosure important. He calls for the FDA to update its approach and urges people to support mandatory labeling through the Just Label It campaign.

Presenter: Gary Hirshberg.