Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
JUNE 2016 SEEDWORLD.COM 49 We do know that some consumers may prefer products made without GMO ingredi- ents acknowledges the com- pany.Thats why General Mills offers ... a choice of organic and non-GMO alternatives in most of our major categories in the United States. In effect the national organic certification and labeling standards enable us to reliably offer consumers non-GMO product choices in all 50 states.We believe consumers looking for non-GMO products would be helped by a national labeling standard for non- GMO products as well ... thats why we oppose state-based initiatives. Campbell Soup Company sup- ports a national labeling standard for foods containing GMOs. The company also designed labels for its products in preparation for implementation of the labeling law in Vermont. Campbell believes it is neces- sary for the federal government to provide a national standard for labeling requirements to better inform consumers about this issue says Denise Morrison Campbell president and CEO. The company will advocate for federal legislation that would require all foods and beverages regulated by theFDA and the USDA to be clearly and simply labeled for GMOs. Campbell is also supportive of a national standard for non-GMO claims made on food packaging. Campbell continues to oppose a patchwork of state-by-state labeling laws which it believes are incomplete impractical and create unnecessary confusion for con- sumers Morrison says. Campbell is optimistic a federal solution can be established ... if all the interested stakeholders cooperate. However if that is not the case Campbell is prepared to label all of its U.S. products for the presence of ingredients that were derived from GMOs not just those required by pending legislation inVermont. The company would seek guidance from theFDAand approval by USDA. Campbell continues to recognize that GMOs are safe as the science indicates that foods derived from crops grown using GM seeds are not nutritionally dif- ferent from other foods. The company also believes technology will play a crucial role in feeding the world. Morrison notes that the Vermontlegislation does not include products with meat or poultry because they are regulated by USDA.Under Vermont lawSpaghettiOs original variety guided by the FDA will be labeled for the presence of GMOs butSpaghet- tiOsmeatballs guided by the USDA will not Yet these two varieties sit next to each other on a store shelf which is bound to create consumer confusion she explains. Laws May Add to Confusion Everyone in the food chain from seed producers to growers to food manufacturers and retailers are likely to be confused as they scramble to meet the requirements of one states mandate. The situation will become further chaotic as other states chime in with their own versions of GMO labeling laws. Nearby New York may be the next state to adopt a GMO labeling law. A proposed law there faces stiff opposition from various groups. Maine and Connecticut have already passed GMO labeling laws but they will not be adopted until other states in the region adopt similar legislation. Vermont might have tipped the balance. SW