Who's starving for some oatmeal crossed with a trout? There's no science saying that it would be bad for you. So eat up. But some hippies want to know they're hunkering down over a piping hot bowl of fishy-grain-chow. Those folks are the proponents of Initiative 522, a measure on the fall ballot that would require labels on the front of most food packages containing GMOs to announce that they have GMOs.

As you've heard, on the other side, a $17-million dollar campaign run by mega-argibusinesses—such the Grocery Manufacturers Association, Montsanto, Dow, and DuPont—is opposing the initiative. They argue that labeling GMOs will make food super expensive and the science is inconclusive. The Seattle Times transcribed those talking points in a mostly fluffy editorial over the weekend:

Labeling is one part of an effort to make the use of GMOs more expensive, arduous and complicated for farmers, processors, shippers, inspectors and regulators.

Confused consumers are a desirable bonus. Ominous labels must mean something is dicey, right? The reality is we have all been eating genetically altered agricultural products for a long time without demonstrable problems...

Washington voters and consumers can serve their best interests by voting No on I-522. Make a much stronger point by buying organic or starting a garden.

As everyone knows, elections aren't decided on the ballot or by starting a garden (really, Seattle Times, make a strong point by "starting a garden"?). Elections are decided on Slog. So we have a poll that will decide the election. And if you like, here's the totally neutral, fairsy-squaresy summary of the initiative.