When Whole Foods announced it will require all of the products on its shelves to have their GMO contents labeled by 2018, the company framed it as an issue of transparency. ย “People have the right to know what is in their food,” said Whole Foods co-CEO John Mackey, quoting the favorite catchphrase of GMO labeling activists. Unfortunately, GMO labeling is likely to achieve exactly the opposite of transparency.
First, itโs worth noting that thereโs nothing altruistic about the storeโs new policy. Roughly half of consumers say they believe GMO labeling is desirableโthatโs a significant business opportunity for food retailers. Or in the words of Businessweekโs Susan Berfield, โTransparency is something worth paying for these days.โ Whole Foods also has a public image to fix. The Organic Consumers Association pointed out, in response to last weekโs announcement, that
Whole Foods came under fire last year when the company dragged its feet in supporting Proposition 37, Californiaโs Right to Know GMO Labeling citizensโ initiative. In October, CEO John Mackey confirmed in a blog post that Whole Foods stores knowingly sell Monsantoโs genetically modified corn, without labeling it.
For clarityโs sake, the FDA only approves labels that address a foodโs safety concerns, nutrition content or physical properties. There is no scientific evidence that GMO labeling harms consumers or differs from organic or โnaturalโ foods in any way, and so the FDA has ruled that GMO labeling mandates would be an unnecessary expense that would only result in confused customers. โSimilar to informing [consumers] about whether a fruit or vegetable was hand- or machine-picked, telling them only that a product was โgenetically engineeredโ conveys no useful information,โ writes former FDA official Henry Miller.
Share this article
Instead, GMO labels convey exactly the wrong information. Anti-GMO activist Mike Adams from Natural News gleefully writes that Whole Foodsโ new policies will drive thousands of food manufacturers to seek out new non-GMO supply chains because โTo carry an admission of GMOs on your label is to commit brand suicide. It’s the equivalent of saying, โThis product is intentionally formulated with poison.โโ
In the U.S., GMOs are part of nearly everyone’s daily staple diet. For uneducated consumers, a GMO label is akin to putting a skull and crossbones on a product. Perhaps those consumers will be persuaded to buy โnaturalโ GMO-free products, and pay twice as much for exactly the same product. For groups that are shelling out huge amounts of money to make GMO labeling mandatoryโincluding the Organic Consumers Association, PCC Natural Markets, and Natureโs Pathโthatโs exactly what theyโre hoping for. ย It would be a return on investment.
