Abstract
Genetically modified organisms are a current topic that gives rise to various reactions across different forums ranging from academic discussions to public forums. Recent advances in biotechnology are not only a matter of concern to scientists but to lay people as well. Genetically modified food is one of the issues of biotechnology that consumers may encounter in their daily lives. The reactions that genetically modified organisms or more specifically genetically modified food bring about may stem from various reasons. What is important is that these reactions should be taken into account in decision making. In this paper, I argue for the importance of respecting consumers’ integrity by providing them with a sufficient amount of information for making meaningful choices concerning their food purchases. The context of this paper is consumer autonomy in the European Union and the focus is more specifically on labelling. As long as consumers regard the difference between genetically modified food and traditional food significant, labelling provides at least one means for respecting the consumer’s integrity.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Dawe, D., Robertson, R., & Unnevehr, L. (2002). Golden rice: What role could it play in alleviation of vitamin A deficiency? Food Policy, 27, 541–560.
European Community (2003). Regulation (EC) No. 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed. Retrieved June 11, 2007, from http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_268/l_26820031018en00010023.pdf
GMO Compass (2007, January 23). GMO labelling: Labelled goods hard to find. Retrieved July 10, 2007, from: http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/regulation/labelling/92.gmo_labelling_labelled_goods.html
Hyun, I. (2001). Authentic values and individual autonomy. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 35, 195–208.
Midgley, M. (2000). Biotechnology and monstrosity: Why we should pay attention to the Yuk Factor. The Hastings Center Report, 30, 7–15.
Pascalev, A. (2003). You are what you eat: Genetically modified food, integrity, and society. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16, 583–594.
Probyn, E. (2000). Carnal appetites: Food sex identities (p. 2). London/New York: Routledge.
Räikkä, J. (1999). On the morality of avoiding information. In V. Launis, J. Pietarinen, & J. Räikkä (Eds.), Genes and morality: New essays (pp. 63–75). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Siipi, H. (2005). Naturalness, unnaturalness and artifactuality in bioethical argumentation (pp. 15–16). Dissertation, University of Turku.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer Science + Business Media B.V
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Uusitalo, S. (2008). Affective Implications of GM Food on Social and Individual Integrity: An Ethical Approach. In: Molfino, F., Zucco, F. (eds) Women in Biotechnology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8611-3_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8611-3_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-8610-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-8611-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)