GMO Food Labels Appear, but the Word Will Be “bioengineered”
By 2020, many genetically engineered products will have to state this on their labels. Earlier this month, the USDA announced its proposal for rules and accompanying logos that cleverly bypassed the GMO labeling controversy by not using the letters GMO at all.
Consumer groups like Just Label It have been demanding GMO labeling for years, although there is no clear reason for that. For example, genetically modified foods are not associated with any threat to human health. (If anyone tells you that the rat cancer study proves otherwise, you can tell them that it was a seriously flawed study and has since been retracted by the journal that published it .) Thus, groups usually say that they are unhappy that there is enough evidence that GMOs are safe, and they just want people to know what’s in their food.
This argument received congressional approval. In 2016, President Obama signed into law the GMO Labeling Act , ending this long-standing struggle between pro-labeling groups and food companies that make GMO-containing foods (which are practically all food companies). The hope and concern was that the GMO warning label would alienate consumers from products with that label. Well, here’s the USDA highlight:
In developing this proposal, [we] took into account that the purpose of the [labeling law] is to provide a mandatory uniform BE food disclosure standard to provide uniform information to consumers. As such, nothing in the disclosure requirements set out in this proposed rule conveys health, safety, or environmental information about BE products as compared to non-BE counterparts.
BE stands for bioengineering, a term that has sometimes been applied to genetically engineered foods, but mostly unknown to most of us. Dictionaries generally define the word “bioengineering” as referring to medicine, although Google has caught and is now directing searches for “bioengineered foods” to the Wikipedia page for genetically modified foods .
The proposed logos go even further and make the bioengineered look attractive. One of the suggested logos – green and leafy – is a universal symbol of environmentally friendly goods for which you have to pay extra. The rest are hinting at emoticons. When combined with the word “bioengineering”, it seems that this is some kind of environmentally conscious European thing. (Indeed, some comments indicate that it could be confused with the European version of the organic label.)
What is bioengineered food anyway?
The USDA considers bioengineered foods to be products that have had their DNA altered in a laboratory if you couldn’t get the same result in a different way. So if you insert a gene for the bacteria into corn, it counts. (Hello Bt corn.) But if you delete a gene or insert a gene of the same species, it doesn’t count. This means that many new methods, such as those based on CRISPR, will not be considered.
By the way, the term “genetically modified” has always been strange. If you breed plants or animals the way we have done for millennia, you are changing their genetics – so this term probably includes all household foods. This is another problem that the bioengineering label gets around.
The USDA Rule also defines the word ” food” . Chewing gum is considered food; pet food no. But the labeling rule excludes certain types of products. Something like corn syrup that has been processed so hard that there is no DNA left is beyond regulation. (Most corn syrup is made from GMO corn.) Foods with meat, poultry, or eggs as the main ingredient are also excluded, so seasoned steak or (depending on the recipe) chicken soup may be excluded.
If you have any opinions on new labels, the good news is that the comment period is open until July 3, 2018. Read the full document here and then click Comment Now! button.