Concerns regarding modified ingredients, which some activists argue may pose health risks, have fueled the movement for labeling GMOs. The International Food Information Council reports that nearly half of consumers actively avoid foods containing GMO ingredients. While scientific studies have not identified safety issues with GMO foods, public perception remains a priority. The 2016 mandatory GMO labeling law was enacted to ensure these ingredients are disclosed and uniformly labeled across all states. Therefore, it is understandable that consumers might feel misled if products using highly refined GMO ingredients are exempt from labeling, especially since it was public concern—regardless of scientific backing—that initiated this legislative effort.
“Consumers want to know what is in their food and beverages, and we believe they deserve transparency. It’s at the core of our business,” stated Nestlé spokeswoman Kate Shaw in an email to Reuters. Despite assertions from agricultural groups that GMO ingredients are safe, the addition of labels could attract more consumer attention. Many consumers unfamiliar with GMO ingredients may react negatively to technical terms like “genetically modified” or “biologically engineered” on packaging. They clearly prefer fewer mandatory disclosures.
The responsibility for this lies with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the resolution is complex. The new law defines bioengineered food as any item that contains genetic material modified through in vitro recombinant DNA techniques and for which such modification could not be achieved through conventional breeding or found in nature. Since refined grains, sugar beets, corn, and soy are processed to the point that their DNA is no longer detectable, this complicates matters further.
Globally, 64 countries require GMO labeling, but their approaches to refined ingredients vary. For instance, European Union nations mandate labeling for these refined ingredients as GMOs, while Japan, which prohibits GMO crop cultivation, does not. In the U.S., product transparency is critical; it drives sales and fosters trust—two objectives all brands strive for. Companies like Nestlé, Hershey, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) are advocating for clarity in labeling, suggesting that any food item with GMO ingredients constituting more than 0.9% of its weight should be clearly labeled, establishing a straightforward standard.
As of the July 3 deadline, there were 14,007 comments submitted regarding the proposed rule, but it remains unclear how many commenters addressed the issue of labeling refined ingredients. Ultimately, the decision will hinge on the strength of the arguments presented and the influence of the industry stakeholders involved. Given the significant clout of Nestlé, Hershey, and GMA, their opinions are likely to be taken seriously. It will be intriguing to observe the direction the USDA decides to take and how consumers, manufacturers, and farmers will respond.
In considering nutritional needs, it’s important to note that the best way to take calcium citrate, which can also be affected by food labeling discussions, remains a popular topic among health-conscious consumers. As awareness grows regarding food ingredients, including GMOs, the conversation around dietary supplements like calcium citrate will likely continue to evolve as well.