slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23

Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 92 Views
  • Uploaded on

Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods. Pat Byrne Department of Soil & Crop Sciences Colorado State University. Labeling of genetically engineered (GE) food may be an issue in Colorado in 2002. Genetically engineered.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods' - edda


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

Pat Byrne

Department of Soil & Crop Sciences

Colorado State University

slide2

Labeling of genetically engineered (GE) food may be an issue in Colorado in 2002.

Genetically engineered

  • Sen. Ron Tupa (Boulder) may re-introduce a mandatory labeling bill in the Colorado legislature during the current session.
  • A citizens initiative effort is planned for summer of 2002.
slide3

US adoption of transgenic crops:

the big 3

80

Cotton

60

Soybean

Percent of acreage

40

20

Corn

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

slide4

Other transgenic crops on the market

  • Canola
  • Papaya
  • Summer squash
  • Potato (but not for long)
  • Tomato (1995-97, then withdrawn)
  • Sweet corn (approved, but not grown)

X

slide5

Impact at the supermarket

Although the number of GE crops is small, the impact is huge: an estimated 60-70% of processed foods in grocery stores include at least one GE component (mostly corn or soy).

slide6

Pro-labeling argument

  • Consumers have a right to know what's in their food, especially concerning products for which health and environmental concerns have been raised.
  • Anti-labeling response
  • Labels on GE food imply a warning about health effects, whereas no significant differences between GE and conventional foods have been detected.
slide7

Pro-labeling argument

  • Surveys have indicated that a majority of Americans support mandatory labeling.
  • Anti-labeling response
  • Most surveys have not included information on the cost of labeling. A recent Canadian study estimated a 9-10% increase in food prices.
slide8

Survey results from Colorado

  • (Drs. Sue Hine and Maria Loureiro)
  • 437 supermarket shoppers in four Front Range communities were surveyed in fall of 2000.
  • 78% supported labeling of GE foods.
  • However, consumers were not willing to pay a premium for labeling.
  • Those most likely to favor mandatory labeling were female, older, and considered themselves less well informed about biotechnology.
slide9

Pro-labeling argument

  • For religious or ethical reasons many Americans want to avoid eating animal products, including animal DNA.
  • Anti-labeling response
  • No plant products currently on the market include animal DNA.
  • Those who wish to buy non-GE food already have an option: to purchase certified organic foods, which cannot include GE ingredients.
slide10

Anti-labeling argument

  • The U.S. food system infrastructure (storage, transportation, and processing facilities) could not currently accommodate the need for segregation of GE and non-GE products.
  • Pro-labeling response
  • 22 countries have announced plans to institute some form of mandatory labeling. The U.S. could follow their lead in handling the logistics of product separation.
slide11

Anti-labeling argument

  • If labeling is done at all, it should be legislated at the federal level, given our national / international food supply.
  • Pro-labeling response
  • Sometimes issues need to be started at the state or local levels, before the federal government pays attention, e.g., standards for certification of organic foods.
slide12

Issues in labeling of GE food

  • Mandatory or voluntary labeling?
  • Mandatory for both GE and non-GE foods
  • Voluntary for both GE and non-GE
  • Mandatory for GE, voluntary for non-GE
slide13

Issues in labeling of GE food

  • What constitutes a GE food product?
  • Which technologies included as GE?

Generally, limited to transgenic techniques, but some legislation might include breeding techniques in use for decades.

  • All ingredients or just major ingredients?
slide14

Issues in labeling of GE food

  • What threshold level -- 0% 1%? 5%?

Different countries have adopted different values.

  • Products of livestock fed transgenic feed?

No evidence of transgenic DNA or protein has been found in meat, milk, or eggs.

slide15

Issues in labeling of GE food

  • What language to use on a label?

Genetically modified

Genetically engineered

Bioengineered

Product of biotechnology

Product of modern biotechnology

May contain genetically engineered ingredients?

Information on why genetic engineering was

done, e.g., for insect resistance?

slide16

Issues in labeling of GE food

  • How to verify claims?

Content-based verification: Test for physical presence of foreign DNA or protein.

Analogy: vitamin content of foods.

Process-based verification: Require detailed record-keeping of seed source, field location, harvest, transport, and storage.

Analogy: shade-grown coffee.

“Traceability”

slide17

Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

Colorado Citizens’ Initiative, 2000

  • GE organism is one that has been altered at the molecular or cellular level by means including but not limited to recombinant DNA techniques.
  • If any ingredient is > 0.1% GE material.
  • If GE inputs were used in production.
  • Livestock products if animal was fed GE material or treated with GE hormones or drugs.
slide18

Current FDA policy requires that GE food be labeled if

  • It has a significantly different nutritional property.
  • It contains an allergen that consumers would not expect to be present.
  • It contains a toxicant at levels beyond acceptable limits.
slide19

For other cases, FDA proposes voluntary labeling

X Virtually all commercial foods have been genetically modified.

Not genetically modified

X “Free” implies zero, which is difficult to verify.

GMO free

slide20

Proposed FDA policy for voluntary labeling

We do not use ingredients produced using biotechnology.

This product contains cornmeal that was produced using biotechnology.

slide21

Proposed FDA policy for voluntary labeling

This product contains high oleic acid soybean oil from soybeans developed using biotechnology to decrease the amount of saturated fat.

“High oleic acid soybean oil” is mandatory. The rest is voluntary, and considered acceptable by FDA.

slide22

Proposed FDA policy for voluntary labeling

X May be misleading

This cantaloupe was not genetically engineered.

But,

This cantaloupe, like all cantaloupes on the market, was not genetically engineered.

slide23

For more information on GE crops:

www.colostate.edu/programs/lifesciences/TransgenicCrops/