It hasn't been a good week for Monsanto and the rest of the biotech industry.
Just three days ago, Mexico banned genetically engineered corn. Citing the risk of imminent harm to the environment, a Mexican judge ruled that, effective immediately, no genetically engineered corn can be planted in the country. This means that companies like Monsanto will no longer be allowed to plant or sell their corn within the country's borders.
At the same time, the County Council for the island of Kauai passed a law that mandates farms to disclose pesticide use and the presence of genetically modified crops. The bill also requires a 500-foot buffer zone near medical facilities, schools and homes -- among other locations.
And the big island of Hawaii County Council gave preliminary approval to a bill that prohibits open air cultivation, propagation, development or testing of genetically engineered crops or plants. The bill, which still needs further confirmation to become law, would also prohibit biotech companies from operating on the Big Island.
But perhaps the biggest bombshell of all is now unfolding in Washington state. The mail-in ballot state's voters are already weighing in on Initiative 522, which would mandate the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Knowing full well that 93 percent of the American public supports GMO labeling, and that if one state passes it, many others are likely to follow, entrenched agribusiness interests are pulling out all the stops to try to squelch yet another state labeling effort.
This time, however, things aren't going quite as planned. On Wednesday, Washington state Attorney General Bob Feguson filed a lawsuit against the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA). The GMA, a lobby for the junk food industry, has been by far the largest donor to efforts to defeat the labeling initiative. The lawsuit alleged that the GMA illegally collected and spent more than $7 million while shielding the identity of its contributors.
The source of the money has now been exposed, and it turns out to be Pepsico, Coca-Cola, NestleUSA, General Mills and a few other junk food companies. The lawsuit revealed that GMA leadership held a series of secret meetings to plot how to perpetrate a money laundering scheme and illegally hide member donations from Washington state voters, in direct violation of campaign disclosure laws.
Unlike the junk food companies that feared consumer backlash, Monsanto hasn't even bothered to hide the more than $4 million the company has given to the "no" campaign. In fact, GMA, Monsanto and a handful of other corporate donors have now broken a state record by pouring more than $17 million into their effort to stop Washington's GMO labeling ballot initiative.
Voting is already underway in Washington, and the final ballots will be cast on November 5. The "yes" side is ahead in the most recent polls, but supporters of the right to know fear that a barrage of heavily funded and misleading ads could sour voters to the initiative.
They remember that just last year, California's Proposition 37 was well ahead in the polls until Monsanto and its allies spent more than $46 million on their campaign in the Golden State.
All this label fighting and money laundering leads to some very significant questions. Why are Monsanto and the junk food industry willing to spend many tens of millions of dollars every year trying to keep you in the dark about your food? What doesn't big food want you to know? And what are they afraid might happen if you did?
Monsanto tells us that their products are about the best thing to come along since sliced bread. For years they've been promising that GMOs would reduce pesticide use, increase yields, reduce water consumption, and offer foods that are more tasty and more nutritious.
I wish they were right.
But in the 20 years since GMO crops first came on the market, studies have found that they have led to higher pesticide use, and no meaningful improvement in flavor, nutrition, yield or water requirements. Instead, what they've created are plants that are engineered to withstand massive dosing of toxic herbicides, and plants that function as living pesticide factories. Monsanto's Bt. corn, for example, is actually registered with the EPA as a pesticide.
With concern about GMOs growing fast, and with the public being pummeled with vast amounts of misinformation, there is a tremendous need for clear, accurate and reliable information about GMOs. In response, the 100,000+ member Food Revolution Network and the Institute for Responsible Technology are co-sponsoring a free online GMO Mini-Summit. From October 25-27, some of the top GMO experts on the planet will be providing insights and clear calls to action in this teleseminar that is also being broadcast without charge on the Internet. Monsanto probably isn't too happy about the prospect of tens of thousands of people getting informed and mobilized. But if you love life, safe food, and the truth, then you might want to check it out.
And if you want to lend a hand to getting out the vote in the state of Washington, you can sign up to volunteer here.
Nobody knows what's going to happen in Washington between now and November 5. But from Mexico, to Hawaii and to the 64 nations that already have GMO labeling, this tide just might be turning.
Maybe we, the people, do get a say in what we know, and what we eat, after all.
Ocean Robbins is co-author of Voices of the Food Revolution, and serves as adjunct professor for Chapman University and CEO and co-host (with best-selling author John Robbins) of the 100,000+ member Food Revolution Network. The GMO Mini-Summit starts October 25. Find out more here.
France confirms it will continue ban on GMO corn, despite council ruling 8/9/2013 - It has been confirmed that France will extend its moratorium on the cultivation of Monsanto's genetically-modified (GM) MON810 corn within its borders, despite a recent ruling by the French Council of State that the longstanding ban violates European Union (EU) law. As reported in a recent AFP article...
Monsanto and GMO lies revealed 8/9/2013 - In May 2013, two million people in over 50 countries expressed outrage over Monsanto's desire to own the food supply through genetically-altered (and patented) seeds that threaten all life on this planet. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are when a plant or animal has been genetically engineered...
14-year-old teen GMO activist schools ignorant TV host on human rights, food labeling 8/4/2013 - Her name is Rachel Parent, and she's suddenly an internet sensation for her cool-headed debate about GMOs on a popular Canadian TV show. (She's also the founder of the Kids Right to Know GMO Walk.) As you'll see in the video below, Rachel calmly argues for the basic human right to know what's in our...
Consumer alert: Most common vitamins, including children's vitamins, found to contain GMOs 7/30/2013 - A Natural News investigation reveals that an alarmingly large number of multivitamins and individual nutrient vitamins are formulated with ingredients derived from genetically modified corn. This is the "dirty little secret" of the vitamin industry, but it's not one the mainstream media will touch...
Groundbreaking investigation reveals Monsanto teaming up with US military to target GMO activists 7/29/2013 - A hard-hitting investigative report recently published by a prominent German newspaper has uncovered some shocking details about the tactics being used by chemical giant Monsanto in assuming control of global agriculture. According to this thorough analysis, Monsanto appears to be aggressively targeting...
Survey: only 15% of farmers would eat GMO food 7/27/2013 - The British survey was funded by Barclays Bank and done in collaboration with Farmers Weekly. Only 15% of farmers polled said they would eat GMO food. Talk about a blanket rejection. It can't get much clearer than that. Obviously, these backward farmers want to protect their own health. Who ever...
Eight telltale signs you've eaten toxic food 7/22/2013 - What you are about to read may come as a major shock to your brain, especially if you read the newspaper, flip through popular magazines often, or pay any attention to the advertisements on television. What you are about to read may seem too simple to be true, and it's exactly what the FDA (Food and...
New technology capable of better detecting GMOs in food, animal feed and seeds 7/21/2013 - European scientists have come up with a new technology that is allegedly better able to detect the presence of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) in food, animal feed and seeds. As published in the open-access journal PLoS ONE, a new study out of Slovenia explains how the new technology, known as...
Millions against Monsanto: On the Road to Victory 7/19/2013 - "The harder they come the harder they fall, one and all." Jimmy Cliff, reggae classic After enjoying a year of maximum profits, record stock prices, the defeat of a major GMO (genetically modified organism) labeling campaign in California, pro-industry court decisions, and a formidable display of...
GMO labeling initiative continues full-speed ahead toward victory: How are you supporting the movement? 7/18/2013 - Despite its recent defeat in the most populous state in the country, Proposition 37 in California, the bill that would have mandated the labeling of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), has spurred nationwide interest in passing "right to know" legislation. And just within the past few weeks, there...
The secret's out: Monsanto is Big Ag's top spender on lobbying, spending nearly $8.7 million annually on seed patents 7/14/2013 - There is a reason why America's primary system of agriculture today centers around the cultivation of unsustainable genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) grown in a monoculture format and heavily sprayed with toxic pesticide chemicals. As revealed by the government transparency group OpenSecrets.org,...
First ever non-GMO meat and egg product label hits the market 7/11/2013 - Healthy shoppers in Northern California are getting the first taste of certified biotech-free meat and egg products at the grocery store, thanks to the valiant efforts of the Non-GMO Project in successfully convincing the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to allow certified non-GMO labels to be...
Anti-GMO online rally goes global: Join the cause by uploading your video on July 24 7/7/2013 - The recent March Against Monsanto rally, in which millions of people from all corners of the globe joined together on May 25, 2013, in protest of the genetic vandalism of our food supply, was a huge success. But in order to eventually attain real change and reform, and rid the food supply of transgenic...
UK government bans GMOs from its own Parliament restaurants while telling public to embrace genetic poisons 6/29/2013 - Since the mid-to-late 1990s when genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) were first being thrust onto the market by governments working in lockstep with the biotechnology industry, the U.K. Parliament has effectively barred their use in all food items served to government officials at Parliament restaurants,...
Over $30M spent last year on lobbying to keep GMOs hidden in foods 6/27/2013 - Guess who spends the most money lobbying on agricultural lobbying? If you answered, "Monsanto," you're correct. Most of their efforts, of course, are focused on lobbying for GMOs -- to keep them legal and keep them hidden in foods. Do you know how much money Monsanto spent on lobbying in 2012? The...
Monsanto hypocrisy: GMOs supposedly identical to natural crops on safety, but unique for patent enforcement 6/26/2013 - The biotechnology industry has pulled a fast one with regards to the legitimacy of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). Straddling both sides of the fence, multinational corporations like Monsanto continually claim that their GM monstrosities are "substantially equivalent" to natural crops when it...
China approves three new GMO seed varieties for import 6/22/2013 - Just days after we reported that China had blocked several illegal shipments of both genetically-modified (GM) corn and transgenic corn seeds coming from the U.S., it is now being reported that China has since approved three other GMO varieties for legal import. Defying what was believed by some to...
How the Farm Bill could undermine the future of GMO labeling by individual states 6/21/2013 - The Republicrats in the U.S. Congress have once again betrayed their constituents by voting down an amendment to the upcoming Farm Bill that would have openly recognized the right of individual states to choose whether or not to label genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). And even though the federal...
More countries abandon GM seeds, crops in response to widespread public disapproval 6/18/2013 - Two more countries have taken a bold stand against genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), according to new reports. The South American nation of Venezuela is currently in the process of crafting legislation to bar transgenic seeds and crops from entering the country, while biotechnology giant Monsanto...
Connecticut legislature passes nation's first ever GMO labeling bill 6/17/2013 - The state of Connecticut has officially made history by passing the nation's first ever bill requiring that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) be properly labeled. After amending an earlier version of House Bill 6527 as it was originally passed by the House, the Senate overwhelmingly voted in favor...
Genetic pollution: When GMO salmon escape into the oceans, there will be no boycotting Franken-fish 6/16/2013 - How soon will the Franken-fish "escape" or be purposely (but secretly of course) released into the oceans of the world? How soon will this eel-like salmon, over-loaded with hormones and DNA from other fish, and an utter health disaster and world wide ocean "eco-disaster" become public knowledge and...
Comprehensive research database offers global picture of harm caused by GMOs 6/16/2013 - The researchers involved with the recent landmark study proving that exposure to genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) and Monsanto's Roundup herbicide causes serious organ damage and cancerous tumors have developed a new web-based tool to help spread the word about the many dangers of GMOs. A global...
Your spiritual right to GMO labeling 6/14/2013 - As you already figured out, I try to find out all I can about how callous, impersonal, selfish, greedy and uncaring about people Monsanto is. So, I'm cruising the internet and I come across an article that put Monsanto's complete disregard for people's spiritual/religious perspective about eating. The...
Chipotle becomes first US restaurant chain to voluntarily label GMOs 6/13/2013 - The recent decision by Whole Foods Market to label all genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) sold in its stores by the long-off date of 2018 looks silly and almost meaningless compared to the right-now policy of fresh food chain Chipotle, which is officially the first and only major U.S. food supplier...
Boycott these Monsanto-pandering factory 'food' companies and help drive GMOs out of the food supply 6/13/2013 - If Americans are truly serious about making real progress in the fight against genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), then we are going to have to take things to the next level by voting with our wallets, and boycotting every single factory food company that continues to secretly use GMOs in its products....
Attack of the GMO drive-through 6/12/2013 - There are at least three of them off every major highway exit in America, maybe a mile or two after you see the billboards and those popular sign symbols that make road trippers "trip" on their health and eat corn and soy toxic nightmares all prepared hot, cheap, fast and conveniently. Welcome to the...
GMO feed turns pig stomachs to mush! Shocking photos reveal severe damage caused by GM soy and corn 6/12/2013 - If you have stomach problems or gastrointestinal problems, a new study led by Dr. Judy Carman may help explain why: pigs fed a diet of genetically engineered soy and corn showed a 267% increase in severe stomach inflammation compared to those fed non-GMO diets. In males, the difference was even more...
Ninety percent of U.S. tobacco is GMO; hey smokers, you're smoking pesticide! 6/10/2013 - Smoke herbicide and pesticide all day and what do you get? You get a recurring hangover that seemingly needs a new blast of nicotine to quell or "dissipate," but in actuality, the only thing the nicotine does is stave off the headache, the nervousness, the anxiety, the "chemical hangover," and after...
It's on! Farmers begin suing Monsanto over genetic pollution of wheat crops 6/5/2013 - The next wave of farmer backlash against Monsanto has just been unleashed by Ernest Barnes, a wheat farmer in Morton County, Kansas. He filed suit this week in the U.S. District Court in Wichita, Kansas, alleging that Monsanto's genetic pollution has financially damaged himself and other farmers. Barnes'...
The Monsanto tipping point has been reached: We shall overcome global food injustice (GMO) 6/4/2013 - Monsanto is now in full retreat against a global grassroots rejection of its poisons and lies. The company is backpedaling on every front now, even admitting defeat in Europe and now trying to focus its last, desperate efforts on the United States and Brazil. But even in the Americas, Monsanto is...
Europe rejects GMO crops; kinder gentler America seeks labeling 6/4/2013 - It's a scandal. Monsanto has just announced it's giving up on most of Europe: people there don't want GMO food. In America, the struggle is for labeling GMOs. This is some kind of "fairness doctrine." Let the US consumer decide what kind of food to buy. Choice. It's the American way, right? No,...
South Korea joins Japanese ban on U.S. wheat imports after shocking GMO contamination announcement by USDA 6/2/2013 - News about the GMO contamination of U.S. wheat crops seems to be spreading faster than the GMOs themselves. On Friday, South Korea joined Japan in announcing a halt on imports of U.S. wheat due to the USDA's recent announcement that commercial wheat grown in the USA is contaminated with Monsanto's genetically...
The Top Ten Technologies: #8 Computer / Human Interface Systems Emerging technology is not the answer to the world's social and economic problems Breakthrough Food Technology Process Protects Foods With Thin Film Made From Natural Ingredients; Replaces Plastic Wrap Augmented Reality Technology Promises Breakthroughs In Education And Cognitive Potential Suppressed Health Technology Revealed on the next NaturalNews Talk Hour
Farmers:
Monsanto: The world's poster child for corporate manipulation and deceit
WHO:
Whole Foods caught in GMO marketing deception, false advertising - here's the proof
Fuel:
Top Superfood Formulator Living Fuel Earns NaturalNews Recommendation for "Living Fuel Rx" Product Line
Oil:
Cod Liver Oil: The Number One Superfood
Oils:
Raise Your Immunity Frequency With Essential Oils to Beat the Common Cold
Vegetable:
New "Juice Feasting" Emerging as Phytonutrient-Rich Disease-Fighting Nutritional System
Grassroots:
Grassroots support for NaturalNews grows; your help needed to protect alternative health information from censorship attacks
Growing:
Research adds weight to growing pains in children (press release)
Snacks:
Consume healthy snacks for weight loss
Consumers:
The great direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising con: how patients and doctors alike are easily influenced to demand dangerous drugs
Vegan:
Top seven vegan sources of protein
Food:
The Honest Food Guide empowers consumers with independent information about foods and health
Foods:
Whole Foods caught in GMO marketing deception, false advertising - here's the proof
Meat:
Processed Meat Unsafe For Human Consumption; Cancer Experts Warn of Dietary Dangers
Research:
Human medical experimentation in the United States: The shocking true history of modern medicine and psychiatry (1965-2005)
Bloomberg News Sunday, October 27, 2013 (Published in print: Sunday, October 27, 2013)
Monsanto Co. and DuPont Co., among the biggest makers of bioengineered crop seeds, are persuading Washington state voters to change their minds about a proposal to require labels on genetically modified food.
The companies are backing an anti-labeling campaign with $18.1 million – twice that of advocates for a ballot measure next month.
The labeling proposal had a 45 percentage-point lead among registered voters five weeks ago that has narrowed to 4 points since opponents began advertising, the independent Elway Poll showed last week.
“This is a David and Goliath fight,” said Trudy Bialic, a spokeswoman for PCC Natural Markets based in Seattle. Store shelves are lined with tags – “Non-GMO Project verified product” – on products from canola oil to granola bars, to reassure those who fear or distrust genetically modified organisms. “There’s no way we can compete with the resources of Monsanto, Dow and DuPont.”
Washington joined 26 states with proposals this year to mandate such labeling or to prohibit genetically engineered food, according to the Center for Food Safety, a nonprofit environmental advocacy group. If voters approve Initiative 522, Washington would be the first to require labels. While Connecticut and Maine have passed labeling laws, they won’t take effect until more states do likewise.
PCC, whose nine stores make it the largest consumer-owned natural food retail co-operative in the U.S., donated $423,174 to support the proposal. “Vote Yes on 522!” is at the top of its website and signs urging support are posted in store windows.
Monsanto, the world’s biggest seed producer, contributed $5.1 million to oppose the measure as of Oct. 2, according to MapLight, a nonpartisan research organization based in Berkeley, Calif. That compares with $1.53 billion that the St. Louis-based company spent on research and development in the year that ended in August, when sales reached $14.9 billion.
DuPont’s Pioneer, the seed unit of the Wilmington, Del.-based company, is the second-biggest corporate contributor, at $3.6 million, according to MapLight. Dow Chemical Co. based in Midland, Mich., gave $621,000.
Monsanto and DuPont, the second-biggest seed company, sell corn and soybeans that have been genetically engineered to withstand weedkillers such as Roundup. They also make corn modified to produce an insecticidal protein that allows farmers to fight pests without applying more chemicals.
The two companies were the top donors in a $46 million drive last year to defeat an effort to require labeling in California. Supporters were outspent 5 to 1.
Advocates of the Washington initiative have collected $9.1 million, mainly from health and natural food companies, according to MapLight. The biggest contributor is closely held Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, the maker of organic cleansing products and lotions in Escondido, Calif., at $2.6 million.
The Organic Consumers Association, a Finland, Minn.-based advocacy group, is second at $800,091. Mercola.com, a vendor of vitamins and nutrition products based in Hoffman Estates, Ill., gave $500,000.
The Washington measure would require labels for most raw agricultural commodities, processed foods, seeds and seed stocks produced using genetic engineering. The World Health Organization definition is any organism whose genetic material has been changed in a way that doesn’t occur naturally, including through introduction of a gene from another organism.
In September, support for the referendum was ahead of opposition, 66 percent to 21 percent. After advertising on the issue began, support fell to 46 percent, with opposition rising to 42 percent, according to the Elway Poll.
The survey of 413 registered voters was taken Oct. 15-17 and has a margin of error of 5 percentage points.
The battle over genetically modified food comes as organic sales are expanding at more than three times the pace of total U.S. packaged foods, rising 10 percent to $29 billion in 2012, according to a Bloomberg Industries analysis.
Agriculture companies argue that Washington’s initiative would be costly and misleading to consumers, and isn’t needed.
“Complicated and unnecessary labeling regulations would unfairly hurt Washington farmers, food producers and grocers, cost taxpayers millions, increase food prices and give misleading information to consumers about the safety of the products they know and trust,” Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, a Monsanto spokeswoman, said in a statement.
Jane Slusark, a Pioneer spokeswoman, and Garry Hamlin, a spokesman for Dow AgroSciences, referred questions to the No on 522 Coalition.
“It provides us incomplete, inconsistent and inaccurate information,” Dana Bieber, a coalition spokeswoman, said in a telephone interview. “If it’s about the right to know, the proponents went ahead and exempted 70 percent of food that’s even sold in the state.”
The measure would boost food costs as much as $520 per year for a family of four from 2015 to 2019, according to a report last month by the Washington Research Council, a Seattle-based, business-supported organization. Farmers and food manufacturers would incur $264 million in costs to begin complying with the measure, the report said. The proposal exempts food served in restaurants.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association, a Washington, D.C.- based group that represents companies such as ConAgra Foods Inc. and Kraft Foods Group Inc., has raised the most to defeat the Washington effort, at $7.7 million, according to MapLight.
Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson sued the association last week, saying it illegally collected and spent the funds while shielding the identities of its contributors.
The association set up a Washington state political committee and reported the source of its funds on Oct. 18, Janelle Guthrie, Ferguson’s spokeswoman, said by e-mail. The industry group still faces a penalty, she said.
“While the GMA made the requested disclosures, there must be sanctions for violating the law and the case will move forward as filed,” Ferguson said.
The Food and Drug Administration supports voluntary labeling by food manufacturers indicating whether their products have been developed through genetic engineering, according to the agency’s website.
Scientific bodies from the American Association for the Advancement of Science to the World Health Organization have concluded that genetically modified foods on the market are no riskier than conventional foods.
Still, there are doubters.
“I like to know what I’m eating,” Theresa Witherspoon, a 49-year-old Seattle housewife said in an interview outside the PCC store. “I’m not particularly interested in consuming things that have an unknown effect on your body.”
Witherspoon, who said her sister died of stomach cancer, said she plans to vote for the initiative.
“I’m not putting anything in my body that’s going to potentially adversely affect me,” Witherspoon said.
GMO food-label vote may have consequences in Congress
If Washington voters ratify Initiative 522 next week, the biggest changes may go beyond the state’s grocery shelves. Reverberations also may reach Washington, D.C.
By Kyung M. Song Seattle Times Washington bureau Originally published October 29, 2013 at 8:58 PM | Page modified October 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM
WASHINGTON -- If Washington state voters ratify Initiative 522 Tuesday, the biggest changes may go beyond the state's grocery shelves, where food products that contain genetically engineered ingredients would be labeled as such.
Reverberations also may reach Washington, D.C.
It's been 14 years since U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., first introduced legislation to require labeling for genetically engineered (GE) foods. Now, initiative supporters and pro-labeling lawmakers see the Washington vote as a potential catalyst for federal regulations.
Passage of I-522 is "the best chance we have to put the issue in play in Congress," said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., lead author of a mandatory-labeling bill, the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act.
DeFazio's bill and a companion Senate version reintroduced by Boxer are languishing in committees.
Lawmakers in 24 states have introduced bills that would require labeling or banning genetically engineered foods.
Two other states, Maine and Connecticut, have passed labeling laws, but the rules won't go into effect unless surrounding states also adopt mandatory disclosure.
Colin O'Neil, director of government affairs for the Center for Food Safety, a Washington, D.C., group that helped write I-522, said proponents are pursuing labeling laws at the state level but with nationwide disclosure as the ultimate aim.
"Our long-term goal has always been that all consumers have the right to know," he said. Foes of labeling, including Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, do "not want a patchwork of state standards."
Thomas Helscher, a spokesman for Monsanto, the St. Louis-based biochemical giant that helped bankroll the record-setting contributions in the effort to defeat the Washington state initiative, declined to comment on the company's post-I-522 strategy.
If Congress passes a labeling law, it would countermand a position held since 1992 by the Food and Drug Administration that foods made with genetically engineered ingredients are not "materially different" from conventional foods and that labeling is unwarranted.
Eating such foods has yet to be shown to be unsafe. Rather, labeling proponents are pushing the measure on grounds of transparency and unknown long-term health and environmental consequences.
Right to know resisted
The FDA has long resisted such consumers' right-to-know arguments as basis for policymaking on food labels, said Fred Degnan, the agency's former associate chief counsel for foods and for enforcement.
Instead, the FDA's approach is to follow the science and to reserve required labeling to essential information consumers need to make informed choices, he said.
One test is whether the information is of "material consequence." So in addition to listing ingredients, net weight and nutritional information, companies must label products that contain corn or wheat gluten, for instance, to warn consumers with allergies. Another test is whether processing methods or other factors lead to material changes in flavor, shelf life or other product characteristics. So imitation cheese must be labeled as such if it contains less protein or essential vitamins and minerals than the regular kind. Same goes for juices made from concentrates, and milk and cream pasteurized at ultrahigh temperatures.
By the same reasoning, the FDA in 1993 ruled that no special label was needed for milk from dairy cows fed with Monsanto's synthetic growth hormone.
The milk from so-called rBST cows, the agency said, was no different from those from animals free of hormones.
Degnan, now a partner in the FDA and life sciences practice group for the law firm King & Spalding in Washington, D.C., said the agency has really only once singled out a processing method for mandatory labeling.
That's for foods treated with radiation to reduce spoilage.
The FDA's rationale did not involve health concerns over irradiation, but that the technique may alter taste or shelf life.
Degnan believes the FDA's stance on GE labels is consistent with its handling of another controversial ingredient, the fat-substitute olestra.
From 1996 to 2003, manufacturers had to print a boxed statement on fat-free Pringles and other foods containing olestra that said the ingredient may cause cramping and loose stools.
The FDA dropped that requirement after concluding olestra caused only a minor increase in digestive troubles but created confusion among consumers who erroneously thought the substance interfered with absorption of certain vitamins and minerals. Gaining support
Boxer rejects the FDA's notion that genetically engineered foods are largely indistinguishable from conventional foods.
When she introduced her first labeling bill in 2000, she was the sole supporter. Her bill today has 13 co-sponsors. And 45 House members have signed on to DeFazio's bill.
At an appearance in California in May at the headquarters of Clif Bar, an energy-bar company and labeling supporter, Boxer pointed to the growing support among her colleagues as a sign of "growing momentum for action."
She made that comment six months after California voters rejected Proposition 37, a GE labeling measure similar to Washington's.
Boxer's office notes manufacturers already must divulge many ingredients and additives -- from aspartame to trans fats to high fructose corn syrup -- and that genetically engineered ingredients shouldn't be exempt.
But I-522 imposes one big difference: GE foods would carry a label on the front -- not the back -- saying "partially produced with genetic engineering" or "may be partially produced with genetic engineering."
Critics of labeling say such display would feed consumers' fears. Others disagree.
Degnan, the former FDA official, wrote in a 2007 essay on GE labeling that the agency historically has avoided clutter on food packages by granting real estate only for information that's truly essential.
"The food label would be an entirely different entity from what it is today if the FDA had acted otherwise," he wrote.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
