Cargill: We’d like the government to develop a federal standard for non-GMO
As for GMO and non-GMO labeling standards, the lack of consistency between different countries - and even within the US - is confusing manufacturers and consumers alike, said Cargill's Dr Giroux.
In the EU, for example, if a yogurt contains milk from cows fed GM feed, it's still considered to be non-GMO and would not have to carry a GMO label. In the US, however, it would not be considered non-GMO according to the criteria set by the more stringent Non-GMO Project standard.
And then there is the 'GMO-free' vs 'non-GMO' issue, he said.
In a literal sense, many highly refined food ingredients that are derived from genetically engineered crops are technically 'GMO-free' in that there is no detectible GM material (protein, DNA etc) left in the final product, which may be chemically indistinguishable from counterparts made from conventionally bred crops.
But they are not considered 'non-GMO'.
And this is very confusing for consumers, because right now in the US, everybody is picking and choosing the non-GMO standards - and the terminology - they adopt on pack, he said.
“We’d like the government to develop a federal standard for non-GMO labeling.”
