Activists Push for Labeling of Genetically Altered Foods

Underscoring concern over the growing use of genetically engineered ingredients in processed foods, the environmental group Greenpeace released a study Thursday that shows three top baby food and nutritional products contain DNA from genetically engineered corn and soybeans.

The study of eight popular products taken from grocery shelves earlier this year is part of a larger campaign by environmentalists and consumer groups to persuade lawmakers and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to adopt mandatory labeling practices as the European Union did last fall.

Although scientists on both sides of the issue acknowledge there has been no evidence linking genetically engineered food with human health problems, some scientists and activists say they are concerned because there’s been virtually no independent research conducted to prove its safety to humans and the environment over the long term.

“When any ag technology is adopted on a scale as large as this one, there are unexpected consequences which may or may not be manageable,” cautions Charles Benbrook, an Idaho biotechnology consultant and former head of the agriculture board of the National Academy of Sciences. “There’s been an almost complete lack of any serious effort to get on top of these potential problems.”

Proponents of genetically altered seeds say they help increase yields by making crops resistant to pests, colder temperatures and other chemicals.

Of the eight products British laboratory RHM Technologies tested containing soy, corn and potatoes, three contained traces of genetically modified ingredients, including Gerber Mixed Cereal for Baby and nutritional supplements such as Novartis’ IsoSource and Ross Products’ Osmolite, which are used in tube feeding in hospitals.

Greenpeace and consumer groups meeting in Washington planned to present Congress and regulatory agencies with a petition of 500,000 signatures calling for mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food. They say consumers should have the right to decide for themselves whether or not to buy products containing genetically engineered organisms, or GMOs.

However, analysts and academics say, without proof that GMOs pose a significant risk to human health, activists will have a tough time persuading lawmakers and manufacturers to change labeling or ban the ingredients.

“All the food we eat, with the exception of wild game, has been genetically engineered,” says Hank Greely, co-director of Stanford University’s Program in Genomics, Ethics & Society. “It’s interesting as a political issue, but I haven’t seen much that points to any safety concerns.”