OP here; not kidding, but once you get down to talking to your actual customers, one has only so much energy to convince people that GMO is not necessarily bad. May be I'm harming myself by being so honest here- but the general consumer is so pleased to know that our produce is so good and is not 'the plastic GMO thing'. This, so far, has been what I've found in over 10 restaurant/gourmet/general consumer interviews.

You are probably right. But directly advertising your product as "GMO-free" helps spread fake-news that GMO may be harmful. Please don't do it.

> fake-news that GMO may be harmful.

I would argue that saying all GMO products are equal and the entire concept is safe is also not correct. To me, "GMOs are totally safe" sounds a lot like saying "chemicals are totally safe."

There are multiple techniques, many possible product categories, with many possible safety outcomes. The safety relies on regulation by U.S. agencies which are mostly compromised by regulatory capture in a market with trillion dollar IP potential.

It is not insane anti-science to question the deployment of GMO products into the food chain and ecosystem.

See my link above with scientific references. In the same way you can add poison (or herbicides) in non-GMO crops. It does not prove anything.

See also: https://xkcd.com/641/.

I agree with your sentiment, but I fail to see how it applies to what I was replying to.

> I would argue that saying all GMO products are equal and the entire concept is safe is also not correct.

GMO products are as (un)safe as all other products. This label just has not meaning related to safety. You can create harmful products using GM or by x-ray irradiation (which doesn't count as GM) or by using fertilizers. The "non-GMO" label is simply misleading, it doesn't mean what people think it means.

> To me, "GMOs are totally safe" sounds a lot like saying "chemicals are totally safe."

So do you suggest to print on every product (food or not) "chemical-free"?