For divergent reasons, activist groups and a few farm organizations are
calling for the mandatory labelling of foods containing genetically modified ingredients – even when they’re nutritionally
identical to traditional products. The participating farm groups assume that if consumers know what’s in food and
are properly informed, then most will readily accept the new technology – and, indeed, purchase genetically enhanced
(GE) products preferentially. But Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, the Council of Canadians and other anti-biotech
groups see mandatory labelling as a means of eliminating GE food items from the marketplace entirely.
European experience shows the latter approach works, with food retailers and manufacturers having chosen to avoid
using GE ingredients entirely (or so they say), rather than risk having their genetically modified food labelled
as Frankenfood by the activists. Farm groups committed to a label-and-inform strategy also seem to overlook the
role of the media, many of whom are not so interested in informing as in fostering controversy. Anyone who has
observed biotech coverage by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation knows that balanced coverage is often a myth.
But lost in all of this has been a fundamental question: if you’re going to label GE foods, then what do you label?
Most advocates say do what the Europeans are doing. But European labelling requirements are targeted almost exclusively
(and conveniently) at genetic enhancements to corn, soybeans and canola – especially those enhanced products coming
from North America. Europeans have carefully excluded their own forms of genetic modification.
Consider European barley, where most varieties are products of mutation breeding caused by heavy bombardment with
nuclear radiation, or chemical mutagens such as mustard gas. Scientific literature shows the mutagens used are
virtually all powerful carcinogens; they create genes which do not exist in nature, and cause other genetic damage
which is not necessarily apparent to the plant breeder. Yet foods and beverages made with this barley are considered
natural in Europe and not subject to genetically modified labelling.
And what about premium whiskey or beer made from European barley? They’re not labelled.
This contrasts with genetically modified corn, soybeans and canola, where the changes involve insertion of known,
natural genes from common garden plants and other food plants, or from safe natural, organic pesticides.
Major Japanese brewers, have recently announced plans to stop using genetically modified corn – but not Japanese-grown
barley – even though mutation breeding has been as prevalent in Japan as in Europe. More hypocrisy.
But the European shell game extends well beyond barley, to many other artificially mutated EU crops – for the Europeans
have been big on mutation breeding – and to many other foods. A large percentage of British cheese is made using
(and contains) a curdling enzyme, chymosin, produced by genetically modified E. coli bacteria. Indeed, one manufacturer
promotes the fact that this is an environmentally friendly substitute for traditional rennit taken from dead calf
stomachs. But this genetically modified food bears no labelling requirement in Europe.
The same applies for many other food additives. Most (if not all) organic acids used as flavour enhancers are from
GE organisms, for example. No labelling required in Europe. The same for aspartame used as a non-caloric sweetener
in thousands of diet drinks and foods, in Europe as in North America. No labelling required.
The list goes on and on.
European governments have no reason to change a labelling practice which now serves as an excellent trade barrier
against North American grain and oilseed imports. The activists are probably not interested either, as it spoils
their scheme of portraying genetic modification as a recent and evil plan hatched by greedy multinational chemical
companies to seize control of world food supply. North American agriculturalists jumping on the European-model
bandwagon have not done their homework.
If foods are to be labelled completely and honestly for their content of genetically modified ingredients – genetic
modification being defined as any form of genetic engineering creating organisms which cannot otherwise exist –
it would include almost all crop species (mutation breeding is used in North America as well, though perhaps not
as extensively as in Europe). It would include most North American cheese, and any food containing synthetic organic
acids, aspartame, and many other common ingredients. Some big-brand-name baby foods, despite the company’s public
proclamations to the contrary, contain genetically modified ingredients. A hint – it’s not in the corn, soybeans
or canola.
It might include livestock products from farm animals treated with antibiotics, such as penicillin, which are the
products of genetically modified organisms as well.
Perhaps the simplest solution would be to label all foods as containing genetically modified ingredients, because
that would be far closer to the truth than the status quo in any country now.
The good news is that this smoke and mirrors has nothing to do with human health. All North American- and European-approved
genetically modified foods are safe to eat...indeed, in some cases – such as genetically enhanced, insect/mould-resistant
corn – safer than regular foods. The bad news is that all of the hype about genetic modification has detracted
from efforts to solve real food health problems – like obesity, and illness caused by natural food poisons – and
how to feed a third-world population growing at several times the population of Canada each year.
1