Pesticides and food: It’s not a black and white issue

Special 6-part series starting on

FIRST ARTICLE: Has pesticide use decreased over the last 40 years?

Farmer to FDA: Get rid of misleading ‘non-GMO’ and other fad food labels

| | October 18, 2018

If you’ve made a grocery run at any point in the last few months, you may have noticed the proliferation of labels on your favorite products:

All natural! Non-GMO! Organic! Gluten-free! No MSG! Cruelty-free!

I’m surprised they still find room on the packaging to name the product. Many people don’t realize that all these labels aren’t actually there to inform consumers — many of them are actually misleading us and harming farmers in the process.

The problem has become so acute that FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb is asking for input from various stakeholders on how to reshape food labeling in this country. Gottlieb has been extremely receptive to the growing complaints about how the nation’s food labels serve to confuse consumers. The FDA’s development of a Nutrition Innovation Strategy gives me hope that we could finally see some changes.

Related article:  New York PTA's proposed bans on GMOs, milk from rBST-treated cows flunk science

Commissioner Gottlieb, as a farmer’s daughter and a consumer, here are my suggestions.

I want to see an end to the disparaging and slanderous comments from the organic industry. We regularly see organic marketers employ gimmicks meant to scare consumers away from conventionally produced options.

Read full, original article: FDA Should Curb Misleading Food Labels

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Click the link above to read the full, original article.

2 thoughts on “Farmer to FDA: Get rid of misleading ‘non-GMO’ and other fad food labels”

  1. I use the non-GMO Project logo as a quick indication of what NOT to buy at the grocery store. Here’s a quick trip down Marketing Lane:
    1. The non-GMO Project is a for-profit company set up by the “organic” food sector. Its purpose is to create a list of raw food commodities that are either known to be currently sourced from biotechnology (soybeans, field corn for example), prospectively sourced from biotechnology (citrus for example), or even contemplated to possibly be sourced from biotechnology at some time in the future.

    2. The non-GMO Project company identifies all consumer packaged products that contain any of the above listed food commodities.

    3. The non-GMO Project company cuts deals with the retailers, meaning the big-box grocery store chains, playing one off against another. It’s a marketing tactic called pumping up “consumer awareness”. If you are in the retailing game (which all big-box grocery stores are), you want to be on the cutting edge, you want to accentuate consumer awareness about the products you are peddling, obviously at the expense of the other grocery store chains down the road. The deal is to have the grocery stores put pressure up the supply chain to the producers of the food products (the big names in the food processing and packaging end of the business) to not use any of the above listed biotech raw food commodities in their products in the future. If the producer agrees, they are required to put the non-GMO Project logo on every package of product that they might sell to that particular grocery store chain in the future. If you, as a producer, don’t agree, well, too bad, you as a producer get second-tier shelf space at the retail level….or maybe no shelf space at all.

    4. The retailer pays the non-GMO Project company a chit (a small fee) for every package of product bearing the logo that leaves their store. It’s all tracked via the electronic SKU number (barcode) that gets scanned at the check-out counter.

    5. The cost of this whole scheme gets passed along to the customer—- that means you, me, and everybody else who buys a food packaged with the logo on it. In other words, YOU and I pay the salaries of the non-GMO Project if we buy any product bearing the logo.

    It’s nothing more than a marketeering scam. It works only in uber-affluent societies where people have no clue about how their food is produced, then passed down the supply chain to the sucker who has more money than brains.

Leave a Comment

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend