One of the most debated elements of the mandatory GMO labeling law signed by President Obama last summer is the inclusion of a scannable barcode, like a QR code, on product labels. Since the bill was discussed in Congress, there has been a persistent disagreement regarding the adequacy of the barcode. Some argue that many consumers lack the technology or the know-how to utilize these codes, while others assert that scannable codes are accessible to most Americans and can provide detailed information that cannot fit on a product package. A study assessing this labeling system was reportedly progressing well and was expected to be completed by July. Just a month prior, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst with the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, informed attendees at a food labeling conference in Washington, D.C., that the department had collaborated with Deloitte to ensure the study’s timely completion. However, nearly three months later, the study has yet to be made public, even if it is finished.

Regardless of the stance on the QR code issue, this study represents a crucial step in the implementation of the law. The Center for Food Safety strongly opposes the use of QR codes for disclosure, citing statistics indicating a significant number of consumers who do not own smartphones or are unfamiliar with scanning QR codes. Conversely, the study is equally important for those who support QR codes and other scannable technologies, as well as for individuals who hold neutral opinions. A critical concern is whether the USDA will meet the deadline to finalize the law’s regulations by July 2018. Huberty emphasized in June that, although delayed, the government was still on track. The only public engagement since then was the department’s release of a list of questions for food producers in late June. Given that some states have implemented their own GMO labeling laws, failure to meet the deadline could lead to a fragmented system of labeling laws across the country.

Beyond GMO labeling, this study will also benefit the broader industry. As these labels gradually emerge throughout the food system—through initiatives like the SmartLabel program supported by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and on genetically modified products such as Arctic apples—it’s essential to understand consumer reactions to the technology and whether they effectively utilize it. If further enhancements are necessary, including improved education on how QR codes function or better internet connectivity for grocery shoppers, stakeholders may need to engage in these efforts promptly. Additionally, as consumers explore various food products, including those fortified with calcium citrate d 315 200, understanding their preferences and interactions with labeling technology will be crucial for the industry.