Mother Earth News_December_2016_2017

6 MOTHER EARTH NEWS December 2016/January 2017

Green Gazette By Shelley Stonebrook

Nine out of 10 U.S. consumers want to know whether

their food has been derived from genetic engineering. And

after many impassioned years of fighting for a national

standard for labeling genetically modified (GM) foods,

these consumers are finally getting what they’ve

been asking for. Or are they?

In August 2016, President

Barack Obama signed a bill into

law to establish a “National

Bioengineered Food Disclosure

Standard.” The legislation, co-

written by Republican Senator

Pat Roberts of Kansas and

Democratic Senator Debbie

Stabenow of Michigan, does

require the establishment of

national guidelines for label-

ing GM foods, but it falls

short of the transparency many

were pushing for.

A key element to this trans-

parency problem is that instead

of labels being required to actually

read “made with genetically modi-

fied ingredients” or “contains geneti-

cally modified ingredients,” a pack-

age may simply be adorned with

a QR code, one of those blocky,

black-and-white symbols that can

only be scanned and read with a

smartphone. This means a smaller

percentage of the public will get the information, because not

everyone will scan the code — and, of course, not everyone

owns a smartphone.

What counts as a “genetically modi-

fied food” under the new law? The bill

says the product must actually contain

genetic material that’s been modified,

but doesn’t necessarily include prod-

ucts made from that modified mate-

rial. For example, high-fructose corn

syrup made from GM corn wouldn’t

require the label. Additionally, even if

livestock spend their lives eating feed

packed with GM ingredients, the meat and dairy produced

from that livestock also won’t require a label.

The new law invalidates other more robust labeling laws

previously passed via state legislation. For example, Vermont

recently passed the gold standard of GM labeling laws, and

food companies were just releasing packaging with the GM

label around the time the national legislation was quickly

pushed through. The national law supersedes any state law,

making the Vermont law null and void

pending appeals.

“Consumers have already begun

to see GM labeling disclosures

on many familiar food packages

as companies have prepared

to comply with Vermont’s

groundbreaking law,” said

Gary Hirshberg, chairman of

Just Label It, an organization

that advocates for GM label-

ing. “In recent months, we

have seen real-world examples

of how clear, on-package label-

ing can work for both con-

sumers and the industry. It is

my hope that food corporations

reject high-tech gimmicks,

such as QR codes, and stick

with the simple, nonjudg-

mental disclosures we have

already seen popping up on

shelves across the country.”

Worldwide, 64 other countries

require food manufacturers to label

genetically modified ingredients.

Legislation has been defeated in the United States in several

instances, including California and Oregon’s ballot measures.

In those races, Monsanto and Big-Ag-friendly organizations,

such as the Grocery Manufacturer’s

Association, have invested heavily in

efforts to defeat those measures.

The new national law has come

under so much scrutiny that some

organizations are promising to take

legal action challenging its con-

stitutionality. To follow updates

related to this issue, check out

http://www.JustLabelIt.org.

Meat and dairy that are Meat and dairy that are Meat and dairy that are

produced from livestock produced from livestock produced from livestock

fed GM ingredients won’t fed GM ingredients won’t fed GM ingredients won’t

require a label or QR code.require a label or QR code.require a label or QR code.

Conscientious consumers sans smartphones may

soon be out of luck, because new GM-labeling laws

allow QR codes to be the sole form of labeling.

WWW.RARESEEDS.COM; TOP: ISTOCK/JIM PRUITT

ISTOCK/ZERBOR

p 6-8 Gazette.indd 6 10/6/16 3:17 PM