New Fanken-food is creepier than ever

Shouldn’t consumers have a right to know more about nano-foods before they’re just rolled out without clear identification? Maybe it’s safe, maybe it’s not, but it just seems even creepier than cloned meat to me. Consumers overwhelmingly reject cloned meat when asked and I suspect if they were properly educated on nano-food, they would feel the same. I’m not sure comparing nano-food to asbestos (as there is at the end of the article) is what I want to hear for products already in the market.

Consumer advocates taking part in a food safety conference in Orlando, Florida, this week said food produced by using nanotechnology is quietly coming onto the market, and they want U.S. authorities to force manufacturers to identify them.

Nanotechnology involves the design and manipulation of materials on molecular scales, smaller than the width of a human hair and invisible to the naked eye. Companies using nanotechnology say it can enhance the flavor or nutritional effectiveness of food.

U.S. health officials generally prefer not to place warning labels on products unless there are clear reasons for caution or concern. But consumer advocates say uncertainty over health consequences alone is sufficient cause to justify identifying nano-foods.

Prefer not to place warning labels unless there are clear reasons for caution? If there’s been a hearty debate on the issue in public circles, maybe, but this has been a pretty quiet rollout, so maybe there ought to be labels and let consumers decide.

An American in Paris, France. BA in History & Political Science from Ohio State. Provided consulting services to US software startups, launching new business overseas that have both IPO’d and sold to well-known global software companies. Currently launching a new cloud-based startup. Full bio here.

Share This Post

© 2021 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS