WASHINGTON, Sept. 14, 2016 - Under the new GMO law, meat,
dairy and eggs will be exempt from being designated as containing genetically
modified ingredients, but can those products be labeled “GMO-free” even if
they’re from animals that ate feed grown from genetically modified seed?
That’s the question that USDA officials say they are
wrestling with, and there is pressure coming from both sides of the debate.
The National
Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, signed into law by President Barack
Obama in July, prohibits “a food derived from an animal to be considered a
bioengineered food solely because the animal consumed feed produced from,
containing, or consisting of a bioengineered substance.”
The law does not specifically address whether meat, eggs and
dairy can be labeled GMO-free, but USDA officials say they believe the issue
must be resolved as the department works to write the federal rule to implement
the law.
Much of the farming industry believes that there’s no reason
products from GMO-fed cows, swine and poultry shouldn’t be able to carry a
“GMO-free” label. “It’s just not genetically modified, so it should be eligible
for a GMO-free label,” said Dan Kovich, deputy director of science and
technology with the National Pork Producers Council.
Representatives of the organic sector, however, are dead set
against it. Here’s Organic Trade Association CEO Laura Batcha on her group’s
position: “Products from livestock that have been fed GMO feed should never
carry a non-GMO or GMO-free claim.”
Some say she’s relying on the old adage, “You are what you
eat,” which may not be scientific, especially when it comes to livestock.
“We agree with the law as (it was) passed by Congress and
signed by the president – these products are exempt,” said Tom Super, a
spokesman for the National Chicken Council. “It’s like saying I am
genetically modified because I ate an ear of corn last night.”
Kovich said he was unsure how much value there would be in
labeling livestock products as free of genetically modified organisms, but
stressed the point was moot because the organic industry should not have
exclusive rights to the issue.
“GMO-free is not something unique to the organic production
model,” he said. “An organic label is a process-based label. I think this GMO
labeling bill was very clear that it was not process-based, but it is based on
the constituency of the actual product.”
The Food Safety and Inspection Service – the agency with the
responsibility for all labeling issues at USDA – does allow for certain non-GMO
labeling now, but that’s only for products that producers are claiming came
from animals that were never fed genetically engineered feed.
“Labels or labeling may claim that a food or feed
ingredients used in the raising of livestock or poultry is not bioengineered
when the food or feed ingredients have not been genetically modified through
the use of modern biotechnology,” according to a recent FSIS
statement.
Of course, companies that want to use those labels have to prove to the agency through third-party
verification that the cows, pigs or chickens did not eat genetically modified
feed.
But that shouldn’t be necessary,
some industry officials say.
“The law passed by Congress makes clear that the consumption
by farm animals of crops made with biotechnology does not make their milk and
meat subject to a GMO labeling mandate – for the simple reason that the
genetically engineered traits in crops are not present in the resulting
livestock products,” said one dairy industry source who asked not to be named
because of the sensitivity of the unresolved issue. “For the same reason, then,
USDA’s regulations should allow food marketers to use a ‘GMO-free’ label
declaration on milk and meat from animals fed with biotech grains. Since
there is no difference in the milk, there should be no labeling distinction
allowed. There is absolutely no scientific basis for claiming otherwise,
and it would only serve the interests of a small segment of the food industry
that wants to confuse consumers into paying a premium for food products with an
absence claim on them.”
Other industry representatives stand firm that when GMO
crops are involved in any way in the production of food, that food should not
be eligible for a “GMO-free” label.
It’s a question that won’t likely be resolved at USDA
anytime soon because of the polar opposite views in the ag sector, according to
sources inside and outside of the department. While Congress has given USDA two
years to sort it out, some farm groups were optimistic that USDA might be able
to finish the rule before Jan. 20, when the next president takes office.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack crushed those hopes earlier this week in an
address to members of the National Farmers Union in Washington.
USDA will strive to lay a “foundation” for the rule this
year, he said, but it’s going to be up to the next administration to finish it.
#30
For more news, go to: www.Agri-Pulse.com
