>> " it was more to make the point that as a population, we don't look at 
>> labels nor do we seem to care about what goes into our food, for the 
>> most part.

> And how does that fit with the GMO furor?

It fits in.  Let me give you two examples of consumer behavior to mull over.


First, I offer my humble table of honey and candles, and Joanne's beeswax
skincare products (in ever-more baroque and expensive packaging) at the
church Christmas Fair.
A lady and her daughter ask me about the candles.
"Pure local unbleached beeswax, some of it from hives on the roof of this
Church", sez I. "Cotton wicks. Couldn't be simpler, can't be any more
natural."
They have a brief discussion of the merits of my pretty golden-yellow pure
beeswax candles versus "recycled wax" candles being sold by another vendor
at the fair.  Apparently, this person buys up half-burnt or unused candles
from thrift shops, re-melts them, and pours them into glass containers, also
recycled.  So, you end up with a random mix of soy, paraffin, perhaps a tiny
bit of beeswax, Lord only knows what.  

They walk away, having purchased no candles from me.  
Is the burning of recycled who knows what from who knows where considered
"more green" than burning pure locally-produced beeswax?

And what do I tell my fireplace?  It can burn only alcohol gel, or I will be
raided by the NYC Dept of Environmental Protection shock troops over smoke
emissions.  (Note that alcohol gel is easy enough to make in one's own
kitchen from 90% rubbing alcohol, Calcium Acetate, and some copper and zinc
for color, but I then face annoying the US Dept of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms, not because of the alcohol, and not because of the smoke, but
because "alcohol gel" is really really hard to discern from Napalm.  But you
gotta love a country that puts the booze, the smokes, and the guns together
in one department!)

The second example has to do with disposable diapers and baby wipes.  
Don't blame me, someone else brought up E. coli!
At issue was diapers labeled "Pure & Natural" and "Natural Care" baby wipes:
http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2013/12/natural-plus-green-imagery-not-puffery.h
tml

You can read about the class-action suit, but the short story here is that
consumers have a valid cause of action against a misleading product label
even if the side panel clearly lists the precise components/ingredients:

"The judge also rejected Kimberly-Clark's argument that the packaging clears
up any misconception by identifying which parts of the diaper were natural:
"Soft Outer Cover With Organic Cotton" "Aloe & Vitamin E," and "Liner
Includes Renewable Materials," were on the back or side panels.  But, under
the Ninth Circuit's Williams rule, reasonable consumers aren't expected to
look beyond misleading representations on the front of the packaging to
discover the truth from small print or from the back of the packaging.
"Further, the Court fails to see how the disclosures necessarily inform the
consumer that the diapers include non-natural ingredients."

Needless to say, the entire issue seems no less redolent than one would
expect diapers to be. The notion that any disposable diaper might somehow be
a "green" choice seems laughably ignorant.  But consumers are permitted to
claim to be "misled" and line up for class-action monetary damages even when
they ignore clearly-worded side-panel label information.  This should
actually be viewed as a generally good thing, as the old saying about "The
Large Print Giveth and The Small print Taketh Away" seems no longer to be a
workable con for the large corporations that sell consumer products.

A few dozen hives don't pay the bills in Manhattan, so I have interests in a
few businesses, one of them a small chain of high-end greengrocers here in
the city.  I also make a product used by beekeepers that maintains a
certified organic rating in Hawaii, about the only place in the USA where
legitimate organic beekeeping can be done.  The mess of paperwork and
conflicting requirements surrounding "Organic", "GMO", and all the other
terms being bandied about creates an environment where the profits of the
charlatans go up, while the costs of honorable men go up.  

The one universal truth seems to be that people really prefer "buying
local", or at least knowing where their food comes from.
Country-Of-Origin-Labeling helped create a more stable environment for both
retailers and consumers, as both were being defrauded.  For me, one of the
greatest pleasures of living in the 21st century is that Costco NEVER EVER
RUNS OUT OF FRESH STRAWBERRIES(!!!), and yeah, of course they come from
South of the equator when it is the Winter Solstice, but for some people,
the fewer miles their food traveled, the better.  

In summary, "local" continues to trump all other aspects of food, and I've
got sales data to prove it, as there seems to be no price point differential
at which "local" does not outsell food from "elsewhere".
So, it follows that local GMO food will sell much better than out-of-state
or out-of-country non-GMO food.
	


  

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html