+

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 6.8k Pittsburgh voters.

82%
Yes
17%
No
70%
Yes
13%
No
7%
Yes, consumers have a right to know what is in their food
3%
No, we have selectively bred crops for thousands of years and labeling just adds an unfounded stigma to the science
4%
Yes, I trust the science of responsible food engineering but I don’t trust the motives of the food companies selling them
1%
No, GMOs are the most promising solution to ending world hunger
1%
Yes, but I would prefer to ban GMOs

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 6.8k Pittsburgh voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 6.8k Pittsburgh voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Pittsburgh voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @5C68SLVfrom Utah  answered…4yrs4Y

GMO's- Do some research! GMO's aren't typically bad. Insulin that diabetics inject themselves with, is a GMO. It's a genetically modified organism. Modifying organisms goes all the way back to Egyptian times. Tomatoes are genetically modified, Cherry tomatoes are what tomatoes used to be until people started modifying them. So tell that to everyone who thinks their tomatoes should be left alone... and then give them cherry tomatoes and see how they feel. It's ridiculous that people have such strong opinions without doing any research themselves. They ask doctors about vaccines or vegans about GMO's... how about you do research from both sides and actually look at the facts to base your opinion off of. Don't have an opinion based off of someone else's opinion.

 @9ZC5Q7V  from North Carolina  answered…1mo1MO

Yes they should be required to label genetically engineered foods until those foods are removed from the markets. Consumers have a right to know what is in their food. Producers should not be allowed to patent foods. Seeds should not be allowed to be patented. Incentives should be made for the markets to switch to fully organic and 100% natural foods that do not include any harmful pesticides or fertilizers and farmers should be subsidized to afford the proper, cleaner pesticides and fertilizers as well as equipment to provide health foods.

 @9D5C9WN from Colorado  answered…1yr1Y

It depends on what exactly is meant by this. Having 2 breeds of a plant near each other for cross-pollinating technically makes it a GMO, and should not need to be labeled. Foods entirely created in a lab should be required to be labeled.

 @58WCY6Wfrom California  answered…4yrs4Y

The anti-GMO advocates are paranoid. Popular Mechanics magazine points out the about 70% or more of our processed foods are GMO's and have been for decades. There are so many thoroughly false rumors about GMOs, and people believe them. I lived on a farm and we grew crops with "engineered" seeds, and they grew very well with no ill effects on man or animal.

 @57QNQ7Pfrom Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

it's too late. How long have we that are over 50 been exposed? the effects are already in process. So, I think the point is mute now

 @9ZCD8TC from California  answered…1mo1MO

Yes, but without loaded wording or scare tactics. As you said, "we have selectively bred crops for thousands of years and labeling just adds an unfounded stigma to the science," but also "consumers have a right to know what is in their food." The labeling just has to be factual and neutrally worded.

 @58CWKS7from Texas  answered…4yrs4Y

Frankenstein food should be outlawed. How many gov. Officials have been purchased by the Evil of Monsanto?