Non-GMO Project label doesn’t mean product is non-GMO, Canadian Food Inspection Agency says

Non GMO Labelling

After forcing some companies to change their labels over complaints of the Non-GMO Project Verified seal, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) now says the “butterfly” label does not imply a non-GMO claim.

The regulatory enforcement change came last year, after complaints poured in from across the country regarding products that featured the Non-GMO Project Verified label, but didn’t meet the Canadian definition of a genetically modified organism (GMO). Some complaints were also filed when the label appeared on products where there are no genetically modified or engineered options on the market.

cfia logo…

It all comes down to a national standard in Canada that says if there aren’t genetically-engineered varieties available for a product’s ingredient(s), you can’t label it as non-GMO without a descriptor. For example, since there are no GMO oranges on the market, a non-GMO claim would have to state something along the lines of “like all oranges, these oranges are not a product of genetic engineering.”

…

University of Waterloo microbiologist and professor Trevor Charles made the original complaint against the company for the grape tomatoes label. He says the company’s claims are false and the label is just a marketing tactic. “The CFIA should have an issue with this label,” Charles says. “The marketers want to differentiate themselves when there is no difference at all.”

Read full, original post: CFIA now says Non-GMO Project Verified doesn’t mean non-GMO

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Supplement Rain Wellness Illustration
Viewpoint: Bedeviled by “toxic inflammation”? How wellness grifters turn this scientific gray zone into a supplement jackpot
Wave Crest Over Red Cross
Viewpoint: Here are the election-inspired Trump administration healthcare policy reversals expected in the coming months
Aerial Sprayer Over Gradient Fields
Farming, food, and chemicals: Post-midterms, the MAHA alliance between Democrats and MAGA Republicans is bruised but not cowed. What comes next?
Teal Hexagon Technology Icons
4 key ways the Blue Wave will upend science policy
Confident Doctor in Clinical Setting
More than 80% of ‘pro-science’ candidates were swept into office. Will they have a policy impact?
Stacked Protest Signs on Concrete Ledge
Voters hate AI data centers, yet they are crucial to establishing a critical technology. So what’s next?
Protect-Womens-Sports-at-the-Capitol
Blue, purple and red states passed or reaffirmed bans on trans females competing in women’s sports
Microscopic IVF Egg Injection
With technical barriers to human embryo editing falling, ethical concerns escalate
Democratic Donkey Plowing at Sunset
Viewpoint: Democratic tsunami: As the red tide recedes, here are the most likely shifts in food and agricultural policy
Screenshot-2026-11-05-at-1.20.54-PM
$7.35 billion PFAS settlement: 3M to pay people who blame health problems on ‘forever chemicals’ phased out of firefighting foam for more than 20 years
glp menu logo outlined

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