Unexpected consequences of labeling GMOs: Loss of vitamins, introduction of allergens

| | April 14, 2016

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

1. Labeling is “expensive”.

. . . .No, it’s not just some text on the can. It’s reviewing the supply chain, checking all the recipes, evaluating the logistics, exploring sourcing options, etc. Anyone who tells you it’s just a bit of text has no grasp of this, nor of the $1000/day penalty for getting it wrong. Small producers are acutely aware of how much the changes will cost them . . .Their budgets are far less flexible than those of Big Food. . .

2. Labeling is confusing.

. . .we find that plain SpaghettiOs must carry a GMO label. But meatball SpaghettiOs do not need to. Since they are regulated by different agencies, meat-containing products are exempt. . . .

3. Companies will swap out ingredients.

. . . .

4. Swapping out ingredients raises prices.

We know this from Ben & Jerry, in fact. Interestingly, in early comments on this, B&J said: “Ben & Jerry’s has no plans to raise prices as a result of the transition….” Later we learn, also from the WSJ article: “It took about three years just to remove GMOs from ingredients like cookie dough and caramel, and the new products averaged 11% higher in price.” . . .

5. Changing recipes alters products – in unpleasant ways.

. . . .We’ve watched multiple examples of products losing vitamins as they got their Non-GMO Project status. . . .One company switching away from cottonseed oil has opted for peanut oil: “that switch introduced a new allergen the company had to warn consumers about.” . . . .

6. Some companies will opt out of shipping to Vermont.

Read full, original post: Six real consequences of GMO labeling – you may be shocked by #5!


News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.

Send this to a friend