It took three years for organic farmer Will Allen and his friends back in Vermont to gain the food industryโs undivided attention.ย
Thatโs the time they needed to convince the stateโs elected leaders to enact the nationโs first law requiring food labels that acknowledge the presence of genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.ย In doing so, they shoved their state onto the front lines of the battle between food activists and an industry that includes Creve Coeur-based Monsanto, one of the nationโs leaders in genetically engineered seeds.
Itโs a fight that pits consumersโ desire to know more about the contents of their food versus the industryโs fear of backlash against companies that use genetically modified ingredients.ย Vermontโs law goes into effect in July 2016. But already, supporters are preparing for what most expect to be an expensive legal battle.ย
โI think thatโs inevitable. Thatโs why we were so careful,โ Allen said, after noting the Vermont Law Schoolโs help in crafting the law.ย Until Vermont took up the fight, no one wanted to be first, said Allen. He credits the efforts of a grass-roots coalition, along with vocal support from the public, for convincing lawmakers to take the plunge.ย โPeople want to know whatโs in their food,โ he said. โAnd they wouldnโt leave the Legislature alone about it.โ
โA DE FACTO WARNINGโ
This idea of the consumersโ right to know has been a rallying cry for supporters of mandatory labeling. It pops up in bills and initiatives across the country, with activists questioning whether GMOs are truly safe.ย Itโs a position the industry challenges.
โRight to know what? What does that mean?โ asked Karen Batra, a spokeswoman for the Biotechnology Industry Organization, a trade group. โSome say itโs a right to confuse. A right to mislead consumers.โย The problem, Batra and others say, is that a government-mandated label suggests the product is somehow inferior, if not actually dangerous. And they point out that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sees no difference between GMO and non-GMO ingredients. So why label?
โItโs like a de facto warning,โ Batra said.
A POLITICAL ISSUE
What happens next in Vermont is going to be closely watched by activists and lawmakers across the nation.ย The law has drawn harsh criticism, with the Grocery Manufacturers Association calling it โcritically flawedโ and saying it plans to file a lawsuit to stop it.ย โIt sets the nation on a costly and misguided path toward a 50-state patchwork of GMO labeling policies that will do nothing to advance the safety of consumers,โ the group said in a statement.
The matter could be settled on the national level, with U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo, R.-Kan., introducing legislation that would, among other things, prohibit states from following Vermontโs lead.ย His Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2014 would give the Food and Drug Administration sole authority over labels.ย โIt prevents a mishmash of labeling standards and allows farmers to continue to produce higher yields of healthy crops in smaller spaces with less water and fewer pesticides,โ Pompeo said in his announcement of the legislation, HR4432.ย
Share this article
CHEERIOS
Against all this fighting, there remain questions about who really wants mandatory labeling.ย To be sure, there are companies catering to this segment of the population. Upscale grocer Whole Foods, for example, is in the midst of fulfilling a pledge to have everything in its U.S. and Canadian stores labeled by 2018.ย
But whether the general public is clamoring for change on a larger scale is unclear.ย On one hand, polls have shown that when people are asked if they want GMO foods to be labeled, most say yes. But other polls show that most people donโt mention GMOs, when asked if thereโs anything else theyโd like to see on food labels.
Then thereโs Cheerios.ย Earlier this year, General Mills made a splash when it announced it would no longer use GMO ingredients in its original Cheerios breakfast cereal. Other variations of Cheerios will continue using GMO ingredients. The move drew applause from anti-GMO circles, but it hasnโt done anything to boost sales.ย
Labeling proponents say that means nothing.ย Critics, however, see it as evidence of how the average person views GMO ingredients.ย โMost consumers donโt go to the store and worry about these issues,โ said Monsantoโs chief technology officer Robert Fraley.ย That, he said, highlights one of the dangers of food labeling laws: โYou donโt want a small affluent section of the economy to drive up food costs.โ
But what sort of impact would mandatory labeling have on food prices?ย The challenge of estimating the financial impact is that it depends heavily on several unknown factors, according to a recent paper published by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, whose membership includes Monsanto and other key industry players.
Among the authors is Alison Van Eenennaam, an extension specialist with the department of animal science at the University of California, Davis.ย โI listened to outrageous statements on both sides of the issue,โ Van Eenennaam said. โThere was no calm, reasonable discussion.โย The paper concludes that consumers would end up paying more for food, it but doesnโt attempt to put a dollar figure on it. Thatโs because it largely depends on how companies respond to new laws, and whether activists mount campaigns targeting products with genetically modified ingredients.ย โThere is one thing we can all agree on,โ Van Eenennaam said. โItโs not going to be zero.โ
Read the full, original article:ย Will consumers win or lose with GMO labeling?
Additional Resources:
- “Court challenge looms asย Vermontย legislature passes law requiring GMOย labelingby 2016,” Wall Street Journal
- “Vermontโs GMOย labelingย law passed because of well-organized and well-funded campaigns,” Burlington Free Press
- “No science-based reason to justify mandatory GMOย labeling, study concludes,” Genetic Literacy Project
