Petition demands US label genetically engineered food

by Robert MacPherson
A test is performed on GMO corn. Supporters and producers of organic foods petitioned the US government Tuesday for mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods, and encouraged consumers to go online and join the cause.

Supporters and producers of organic foods petitioned the US government Tuesday for mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods, and encouraged consumers to go online and join the cause.

The 21 petitioners want the (FDA) to use the full power of the law to ensure that consumers know when they are buying food made with genetically modified ingredients.

"The absence of mandatory labeling disclosures for genetically engineered foods is misleading to consumers," says the 25-page legal petition, drafted by lawyers at the non-profit Center for in Washington.

"The requested actions are necessary to prevent economic fraud, and to protect consumers who are deceived by thinking the absence of labeling means the absence of genetically engineered foods."

To pile on the pressure, organizers launched a website, justlabelit.org, on Tuesday where the American public can "flood" the FDA with a pre-written comment in support of the petition.

"Genetically engineered foods are required to be labeled in the 15 European Union nations, Russia, Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand, and many other countries around the world," the prepared comment says.

"As an American, I firmly believe I should also have the right to know if my foods have been genetically engineered."

Not part of the petition effort, but echoing its message, is a 16-day march from New York to Washington via Philadelphia and Baltimore that is calling for "genuine transparency" and labeling for genetically engineered foods.

It aims to reach the gates of the White House on October 16.

The quest for labeling is likely to be resisted by big names in the , including Monsanto. It scored points in Europe last month when the European Court of Justice ruled that EU member states must notify Brussels before banning genetically modified crops.

Ken Cook, executive director of the Environmental Working Group, a non-profit group that put its name to the petition, told AFP there is overwhelming public support for labeling genetically engineered foods.

"Most of the polls I've seen are 80 to 90 percent and above in favor of labeling," Cook said Tuesday. "There is tremendous public support and it is time to focus (that support) on the FDA."

"The founding principle of the United States is that the consumer is always right," he added, stressing that campaigners are not demanding an outright ban on genetically engineered food.

Producers of organic meat, chicken, dairy products and seeds, and their industry associations including the Vermont-based Organic Trade Association, make up the majority of petitioners.

"These companies are of the view that they can produce very high quality food" without using genetically altered ingredients, Cook said. "There is an economic interest here, but we see this as another way to 'green' the economy."

Responding to questions by email, an FDA spokeswoman told AFP that the agency had not yet "officially" received the petition, but that it expected to do so "shortly."

"Foods derived from plants must meet the same safety and legal standards as foods derived from their non-genetically engineered counterparts," she added.

"Producers and manufacturers are free to include information in product indicating whether their product is or is not produced using genetic engineering, so long as the information is truthful and not misleading."

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Fish or frankenfish? FDA weighs altered salmon (Update)

Sep 20, 2010

(AP) -- Fish or frankenfish? A Massachusetts company wants to market a genetically engineered version of Atlantic salmon, and regulators are weighing the request. If approval is given, it would be the first ...

Consumer groups push for label for modified salmon

Sep 21, 2010

(AP) -- Consumer advocates urged the Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday to ensure that salmon engineered to grow twice as fast as the conventional variety are labeled in the grocery store as genetically ...

Industry backs off food labels after FDA criticism

Oct 24, 2009

(AP) -- A food industry group is voluntarily halting promotion of its nutrition labeling program after federal regulators said such systems may be misleading consumers, officials with the group said Friday.

Recommended for you

Study recommends inmate immunity test

1 hour ago

(AP)—Federal experts are recommending that California test inmates for immunity to a sometimes fatal soil-borne fungus before incarcerating them at two Central Valley state prisons where the disease has killed nearly three ...

Down syndrome teens need support, health assessed

7 hours ago

Young adults with Down syndrome experience a range of physical and mental health conditions over and above those commonly reported in children with the condition—and these health problems may significantly ...

Time out for exercise

8 hours ago

University of Queensland researcher has found that restructuring our daily routine to include exercise can have unexpected effects on health.

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

xznofile
not rated yet Oct 05, 2011
Except for reducing the plant gene pool (& thus overall plant diversity) thus making it ALL dependent on technology and financial backing, I don't see anything wrong w/ GE food itself. If the playing field were level, that is, if consumers had a choice, the costs of GE and non-GE food would even out, and there'd be no incentive to produce it. As it is, it's cheaper to produce GE food, but those savings to the consumer are either hidden, or skimmed off by the producers to benefit from the going price. I mean if they can produce GE soy for $1 a unit as compared to non-GE at $2, shareholders demand the most profit so they sell it at $1.99. That's the same as subsidized domestic competition.