The mayor of Kauai County, Hawaii, has vetoed a bill that sought to restrict pesticide use by agricultural companies developing genetically modified (GM) crops on the island. The bill would have required biotechnology crop companies to disclose what pesticides they use and established no-spray zones around schools, residences, medical facilities, roads, and waterways. Although the provision that aimed to restrict the growing of GM crops was eventually removed, seed companies that operate on Kauai reportedly said that the measure would disrupt their operations. Calling the bill “legally flawed,” Kauai County Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. purportedly agreed with the intent of the bill but argued instead for a study of the environmental and health impacts of pesticide use on the island. “We can and will find legal means to address these important health and safety issues,” Carvalho said in a statement. Critics reportedly claim that biotech crops contribute to extensive pesticide…
Tag Archives GMO
Washington state voters have reportedly rejected a ballot initiative that would have required front-of-package labeling for genetically modified (GM) food products, seeds and other agricultural commodities. According to the Washington Secretary of State, 53 percent of voters ultimately opposed the initiative, which was hotly contested by consumer advocates, food companies, physicians, and farmers in the months preceding the November 5, 2013, general election. Opponents of the initiative argued that GMO labeling would not only increase household food prices by as much as $400 per year, but would expose small farmers to “shake-down, bounty hunter law suits” as well as burdensome regulations. “This is a clear victory for Washington consumers, taxpayers and family farmers across our state,” said “No on 522” campaign spokesperson Dana Bieber in a November 5 statement. “Washington voters have soundly rejected this badly written and deceptive initiative.” Meanwhile, major grocery retailers purportedly plan to continue their efforts…
A recent New York Times article focused on advances in synthetic biology has claimed that the exponential growth in genetically modified (GM) yeast applications “could revolutionize the production of some of the most sought-after flavors and fragrances,” including vanilla, saffron, patchouli, and stevia. According to the October 20, 2013, article, food, cosmetic and pharmaceutical companies seeking plant extract alternatives are increasingly turning to GM yeast and other micro-organisms “cultured in huge industrial vats” to synthesize vanillin, valencene, nootkatone, and other chemicals as byproducts of the fermentation process. Proponents of this technique have not only argued that the yeast-made flavorings are less expensive to manufacture than their plant-based counterparts, but that the end result is a natural ingredient because it originates in a living organism. “The need for natural is a key driver,” said Ahmet Baydar, director of research and development at International Flavors and Fragrances, which reportedly hopes that yeast-made…
Los Angeles city council members Paul Koretz and Mitch O’Farrell have reportedly introduced a motion that would call on the city attorney to “prepare and present an ordinance which would prohibit the growth of genetically modified (GM) crops within city limits. Specifically, the ordinance should prohibit each [of] the following practices related to the growing of GM crops within city limits: the planting of GM seeds; the sale of GM seeds by vendors; the sale of any seeds that could potentially be contaminated by other genetically modified organisms (GMOs); the sale of GM fruit trees and plants.” The motion notes that 52 percent of “LA County residents voted in favor of Proposition 37, which would have required labeling on raw or processed genetically modified food products offered for sale to consumers.” It also raises questions about the safety of consuming GM foods and risks to the environment, including honey bee…
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has ordered the transfer of five cases brought by wheat farmers who allege economic injuries due to lower wheat prices, import restrictions and increased production costs after genetically engineered (GE) wheat was discovered in an Oregon farmer’s field; pretrial matters will be heard by a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court in Kansas. In re Monsanto Co. GE Wheat Litig., MDL No. 2473 (J.P.M.L., decided October 16, 2013). According to the court, the actions involve common questions of fact, and centralization in Kansas “will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. All actions share factual questions arising from Monsanto’s conduct with respect to the development and field testing of genetically-engineered [sic] ‘Roundup Ready’ wheat from 1998 through 2005, and the alleged discovery of the Roundup Ready herbicide-resistant gene in wheat plants on an Oregon…
A federal court in California has denied the request of General Mills, Inc. to stay the proceedings in three putative class actions alleging that it misleads consumers by promoting various products as “100% Natural” given ingredients that are genetically modified or highly processed, such as high-fructose corn syrup, high-maltose corn syrup and maltodextrin. Rojas v. General Mills, Inc., No. 12-5099 (N.D. Cal., order entered October 9, 2013); Bohac v. General Mills, Inc., No. 12-5280, and Janney v. General Mills, Inc., No. 12-3919 (N.D. Cal., orders entered October 10, 2013). So ruling, the court rejected the defendant’s request that it apply the primary jurisdiction doctrine, finding that (i) the issue of whether a reasonable consumer would be misled by the company’s product promotions was within the court’s purview, and (ii) it did not appear the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was inclined to decide anytime soon what the term “natural” encompasses. In Rojas,…
The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) recently heard argument on the Center for Food Safety’s motion to transfer to a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court pending lawsuits against Monsanto Co. involving the genetically modified (GM) wheat that appeared in an Oregon farmer’s conventional wheat field and briefly disrupted exports to some of the nation’s trading partners. In re Monsanto Co. Genetically Engineered Wheat Litig., MDL No. 2473 (J.P.M.L., motion argued September 26, 2013). The center requested that suits filed in Idaho, Kansas, Oregon, and Washington be transferred to the Eastern District of Washington. Additional details about the Kansas litigation appear in Issue 486 of this Update.
While continuing to deny that its labeling and marketing for Truvia® sweetener products misled consumers, Cargill has apparently agreed to settle a putative nationwide class action alleging consumer fraud and breach of warranty. Martin v. Cargill, Inc., No. 13-2563 (D. Minn., preliminary agreement filed September 19, 2013). The plaintiffs claimed that the products are not “natural” because they contain “highly processed” ingredients or those derived from genetically modified organisms. Under the agreement, the company would create a $5 million fund for cash refunds and vouchers on selected Truvia® products. The company has also agreed to modify product labels that will refer consumers to its website where it will explain in some detail how the erythritol in Truvia® is produced. Cargill has agreed not to oppose attorney’s fees and expenses of $1.59 million. Any residual funds remaining in the settlement fund would be distributed to the National Consumer Law Center and…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Agricultural Marketing Service has announced an October 22-24, 2013, public meeting of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) in Louisville, Kentucky. The meeting will address “several petitions pertaining to changes to the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances, including several substances for use in aquaculture, streptomycin for use to control fire blight in pears and apples, and glycerin,” in addition to featuring updates from the NOSB subcommittees on Compliance, Accreditation, and Certification; Crops; Handling; Livestock; Materials; Policy Development; and Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). In particular, the GMO Ad-Hoc Subcommittee will discuss how to ensure and enforce the genetic purity of seed used in organic crop production. NOSB will accept written public comments on the meeting agenda and registrations for oral public comments by October 1, 2013. See Federal Register and NOSB Press Release, September 5, 2013.
A federal court in California has denied the motion to dismiss filed by J.M Smucker Co. in a putative class action alleging that it misleads consumers by labeling four of its Crisco® oil products as “All Natural” because they are purportedly made with genetically modified (GM) corn, canola and soy crops and because they are highly processed. Parker v. J.M. Smucker Co., No. 13-690 (N.D. Cal., order entered August 23, 2013). Finding that the amended complaint met the plausibility pleading standard, the court ruled that the plaintiff had standing to pursue claims as to products she had not purchased because they were sufficiently similar. In the court’s view, “They are all the same kind of product. They all have highly similar labels. Plaintiff alleges the same actionable conduct as to each of them.” The court also rejected the defendant’s contention that the claims were preempted in light of the Food…
