Producing Transgenic Plants

1
Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
Pat Byrne Department of Soil Crop
Sciences Colorado State University
2
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.

3
US adoption of transgenic crops the big 3
80
Cotton
60
Soybean
Percent of acreage
40
20
Corn
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
4
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• Tomato (1995-97, then withdrawn)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
5
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).
6

• 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.

7

• 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.

8

• 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.

9

• 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.

10

• 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.

11

• 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.

12
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

13
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?

14
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.

15
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?

16
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
17
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 gt 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.

18
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.

19
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
20
Proposed FDA policy for voluntary labeling
We do not use ingredients produced using
biotechnology.
This product contains cornmeal that was produced
using biotechnology.
21
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.
22
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.
23
For more information on GE crops
www.colostate.edu/programs/lifesciences/Transgenic
Crops/