> I was wondering this. Why can't products say they are free
> of GM. And of course I mean they have actually tested and
> really are free. Or are they "forbidden" to be truthful.
Food processors are very frightened of labeling. First, it is expensive to
segregate commodities. Second, it is not clear what GMO-free really means.
For example, if soybean oil is made from transgenic soybeans, but contains
no DNA or protein, is it GMO-free? What if a conventional load of corn
contains a few kernels of GMO corn? What if you find a RR soybean in your
bag of conventional rice? Also, does GMO include things developed with
molecular techniques that are not transgenic (markers, mutations,
Finally, public opinion seems to be highly unstable right now. Vastly
different responses to surveys occur depending on how questions are worded.
So the value of GMO-free commodities is poorly defined in the market. But
this will change.
Probably, some entrepreneurs will begin marketing "GMO-free" foods at a
premium price, taking labeling into their own hands as it were. To be
reliably free (that is, totally free) of GMO might be pretty expensive. If
labeling is mandated by the government, most everything on the shelf will
probably say: "May contain transgenic material."
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: