The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.
[Campbell’s], . . . thinks food and beverages regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture should be labeled for GMOs, if they contain them.. . . .
So, what exactly does Campbell’s new labeling verdict mean? For one thing, you can expect to see Campbell drop out of any industry organization that embraces a contrary position. . . .
Instead, the company is forging ahead proactively with plans to label all of its U.S. products for GMO content. It started doing this in an anticipation of Vermont’s law, slated to take effect July 1.
“Consumers may see labels on some of our products appear later this year if the law takes effect,” Hushen said. “That said, this is not the mandatory federal labeling we’re seeking. This is an example of a state law which is impractical and creates unnecessary confusion for consumers — it covers products covered by the FDA but not those that contain meat and poultry and are governed by USDA.”
Under the Vermont law, for example, a vegetable soup regulated by the FDA would be required to declare GMO content. The same recipe including beef or chicken, however, might not be subject to the same requirement.
The Campbell labels contain a simple statement that is as prominent as other nutritional information: “Partially produced with genetic engineering.” Consumers then are referred to the company’s WhatsInMyFood.com website for more specifics. About 75 percent of Campbell’s products contain soy, canola, corn or sugar beets — among the most common GMO crops.
Read full, original post: What Campbell’s bold new GMO plan means for the food label wars
