Welcome to 2022 and the shiny new federal labeling rule that will require manufactures to disclose when foods are BIOENGINEERED! Sort of….
The new law essentially replaces a patchwork of state regulations regarding the labeling of genetically modified foods and food products. Unfortunately the law is sure to create confusion and make it burdensome for some consumers to know if the foods they eat contain GMO ingredients.
Bioengineered is the new term for genetically engineered (GE) ingredients and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Bioengineered plants or animals essentially have an inserted gene that came from a laboratory. The idea is to make the host plant or animal more resistant to disease or pests or to increase nutritional value.
Labels that declare “contains bioengineered food ingredients” means at least one food ingredient includes DNA from the laboratory produced gene(s).
So…it should be simple right? People who wish to avoid eating GMO and GE products should just say no to bioengineered labeled products on their grocery shelves.
Expect it ain’t that simple.
First off food manufactures don’t necessarily have to put “contains bioengineered food ingredients” on the label. In fact many probably won’t. USDA has decided an electronic QR code or a note to receive a text message will suffice. Small companies can stay on the right side of the law with either a website or phone number.
But that’s not the worse of it for those who wanting to avoid GMOs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture made “highly refined” ingredients exempt — … things like high fructose corn syrup and soybean oil both which are derived from wait for it …GMO crops. And of course some apples, eggplants, papayas, pineapples, potatoes and salmon can contain GMOs.
And if that isn’t troublesome enough, other GMO labels – notably the USDA Organic and NONGMO Project Verified – will remain.
And in case you are wondering, food service establishments and restaurants get a full pass on the new rules.
The debate of whether GMO foods are safe to eat has raged for decades. And even though the World Health Organization and American Medical Association concluded GMOs are safe, we should have empathy for those who prefer to avoid such foods. And obviously that’s where the law fails. Transparency is far less than 100%.
That’s in part the point of a lawsuit working its way through the federal courts filed by the Center for Food Safety. The CFS contends USDA in mandating labels with the word “bioengineered” and prohibiting use of GMO and GE labels is at its root will confuse and make it difficult for comsumers to make shopping decisions:
“Despite that instruction and the overwhelming support from stakeholders to allow continued use of the far more well-known “GE”/ “GMO” terms, in its final rule USDA instead excluded “GE” and “GMO,” prohibiting them from use in the on-package text or symbol labeling, only allowing use of the term bioengineered. That decision was arbitrary and capricious, contrary to the Act’s plain language and the APA and failed to fulfill the Act’s fundamental purpose of informing consumers. It is antithetical to the Act’s purpose because it will confuse and mislead consumers.”
The CFS also contends the new rules will discriminate against more than 100 million Americans without smartphones or cell service.
USDA must respond to the CFS claims by mid-February. After that the United States Beet Sugar Association, the American Sugar Beet Growers Association, and the American Farm Bureau Federation will weigh in on the debate. Then it’s back to the CFS counter-reply due in late March.
It’s probably not likely the courts will rule that USDA will need to go back to the drawing board. But here’s hoping something can be tweaked to improve transparency for folk wishing to avoid GMOs.
About Dave Dickey
Dickey spent nearly 30 years at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s NPR member station WILL-AM 580 where he won a dozen Associated Press awards for his reporting. For 13 years, he directed Illinois Public Media’s agriculture programming. His weekly column for Investigate Midwest covers agriculture and related issues including politics, government, environment and labor. His opinions are his own and do not reflect Investigate Midwest. Email him at email@example.com.
Type of work: