The Center for Food Safety and the Seikatsu Club Consumers Cooperative have joined to jointly decry the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) recent determination that genetically engineered (GE) salmon produced by AquaBounty Technologies, Inc. is as safe to eat as conventional salmon and will have little effect on the environment. At the time of FDA’s announcement, the Center for Food Safety vowed to file a lawsuit against the agency. “FDA’s decision to approve this GE salmon was irresponsible and unlawful and it will have global repercussions,” said George Kimbrell, a Center for Food Safety attorney. “We are honored to join with our colleagues in Japan in opposing GE fish and the Aquabounty salmon. Together, we will work to stop its expansion in order to preserve our native fisheries and protect the markets so many depend on around the world.” According to the consumer groups, Japan imported $2 billion worth…
Tag Archives GMO
Environmental activist Erin Brockovich uses the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) recent determination that genetically engineered salmon is safe for human consumption and requires no labeling as such to rally consumers into action against genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in a December 1, 2015, opinion piece in Time. “The biotech industry and the FDA have hijacked not only our basic rights as consumers, but also our fundamental human rights in the face of corporate monopolization of our food supply,” Brockovich said. “They are jeopardizing our health and the environment more than ever before. When will the government agencies put in place to protect us stop servicing the bottom line of corporations?” Brockovich briefly reviews the findings of various agencies and organizations worldwide, ultimately imploring readers to “help spark a larger conversation about the food we are eating in this country” by voicing their GMO-related concerns to federal lawmakers. Issue 586
In conjunction with its decision to approve the first genetically engineered (GE) animal for human consumption, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published final labeling guidance for foods derived from GE crops and draft labeling guidance for GE salmon. Titled “Voluntary Labeling Indicating Whether Foods Have or Have Not Been Derived from Genetically Engineered Plants,” the final guidance document seeks to assist “food and feed manufacturers that wish to voluntarily label their plant-derived food products or ingredients (for humans or for animals) as having been made with or without bioengineering.” In addition, the agency’s draft labeling guidance—“Voluntary Labeling Indicating Whether Food Has or Has Not Been Derived From Genetically Engineered Atlantic Salmon”—describes the preferred labeling terms for products marketed as containing or avoiding transgenic salmon. Emphasizing that such labeling should be “truthful and not misleading,” the agency recommends that manufacturers wishing to identify their products as not derived from GE ingredients use…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released its determination that genetically engineered (GE) salmon produced by AquaBounty Technologies, Inc., is as safe to eat as conventional salmon and will have little effect on the environment. Containing genes from Pacific Chinook salmon and ocean pout that accelerate growth and maturation, AquAdvantage® salmon is the first GE animal approved for human consumption. After spending more than a decade reviewing data on food safety and environmental impacts, the agency apparently concluded that (i) “the inserted genes remained stable over several generations of fish,” (ii) “food from the GE salmon is safe to eat by humans and animals,” (iii) “the genetic engineering is safe for the fish,” and (iv) “the salmon meets the sponsor’s claim about faster growth.” FDA also found that the multiple containment measures taken by land-based production facilities are sufficient to prevent the fish from mixing with wild populations.…
Citing citizen petition and federal court requests for the agency to define “natural” for use in food labeling and determine if food products containing genetically engineered ingredients and high-fructose corn syrup may be labeled as “natural,” the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is soliciting information and comments about use of the term in the labeling of human food products. More specifically, FDA seeks responses to questions that include the following: (i) Should the agency define natural through rulemaking? (ii) Should the agency prohibit use of the term in food labeling? (iii) If the agency defines natural, what foods should be permitted to bear the term? (iv) Should certain production practices, e.g., salting, irradiating, be considered in defining the term? (v) Should natural be applied only to “unprocessed” foods? (vi) Should the way an ingredient is produced or sourced affect whether a product containing that ingredient be labeled natural? and…
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected as moot an appeal for reconsideration brought by the Shaka Movement in an effort to reestablish a ban on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) approved by voters in Maui County, Hawaii. Robert Ito Farm v. Cty. Of Maui, No. 15-15641 (9th Cir., order entered October 23, 2015). A federal court invalidated the statute in June 2015, finding that the ban exceeded county authority to impose fines. The unsigned appeals court opinion offered no further discussion beyond that the “motion to dismiss this appeal as moot is granted.” Additional information about the lower court’s ruling appears in Issue 571 of this Update. Issue 583
Russia has imposed a moratorium on the use of genetically modified organisms in domestic food production. Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich reportedly made the announcement during a biotechnology conference in Kirov on September 18, 2015. Russia’s action follows similar moves by France, Germany and Scotland. See Reuters, September 18, 2015. Issue 580
A California woman has filed a putative class action against Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. alleging that, despite advertised claims to the contrary, the company’s restaurants do not serve food free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Gallagher v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., No. 15-3952 (N.D. Cal., filed August 26, 2015). The complaint asserts that although the company advertised in April 2015 that it would remove GMOs from its food, “Chipotle serves meat products that come from animals which feed on GMOs, including corn and soy. Chipotle’s tacos and burritos are also usually served with sour cream and cheese from dairy farms that feed animals with GMOs.” In addition, Chipotle sells soft drinks made with GMO corn syrup, the complaint notes. Colleen Gallagher seeks to represent a California class to obtain damages and an injunction for alleged violations of the state’s consumer protection statutes. Chipotle became the first fast-casual chain to disclose…
The Center for Food Safety (CFS) has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) alleging that the agency has routinely failed to respond to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for records related to genetically engineered (GE) crops. Ctr. for Food Safety v. Animal & Plant Health Inspection Serv., No. 15-1377 (D.D.C., filed August 25, 2015). CFS asserts that APHIS has unlawfully delayed its responses to at least 29 FOIA requests or appeals related to its decision to withdraw proposed regulations that would update existing management of GE crops. “APHIS has a track record of irresponsible and inadequate regulation of GE crops,” CFS Staff Attorney Cristina Stella said in an August 25, 2015, press release. “In the absence of thorough government oversight, public access to information about these crops becomes all the more critical. This lawsuit is necessary to stop…
A Florida federal court has granted preliminary approval of the settlement reached in a class action alleging that Kashi falsely advertised its products as “All Natural” despite containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Eggnatz v. The Kellogg Co., No. 12-21678 (S.D. Fla., order entered September 4, 2015). The court certified the class for settlement purposes and approved the $3.99 million settlement fund and terms of the agreement, which includes the removal of “All Natural” from Kashi products that contain the contested ingredients. The final approval hearing is set for January 2016. Additional details on the settlement appear in Issue 568 of this Update. Issue 578
