Last week Vermont became the first state to require labeling of foods made with genetically
modified organisms, but the law "is widely expected to be challenged in court by some food and
agriculture companies," Carey Gillam notes for Reuters.
"The law, set to take effect July 1, 2016, would for the first time align at least a small part of the United States with more than 60 other countries that require labeling of genetically engineered foods," Gilliam writes. "And it sets the stage for more than two dozen other states that are currently considering mandatory labeling of such GMO foods." (Read more)
"Other states have pursued similar measures, but Vermont’s law will be the first of its kind," Niraj Chokshi reports for The Washington Post. "Connecticut and Maine passed labeling requirements but with trigger clauses requiring multiple other states to pass labeling requirements before their own go into effect. At least 25 states have considered such legislation, according to a recent report on labeling requirements from the nonprofit Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. And advocates are hopeful they will get a measure on the Oregon ballot this year." (Read more) (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology 2013 map has not been updated to include Vermont)
Food and agriculture companies have been highly critical of such laws. The Grocery Manufacturers Association, which represents cereal-maker General Mills, said Friday "it intends to sue the state to reverse the law," John Herrick reports for VTDigger, an investigative news outlet in Vermont. Attorney General Bill Sorrell told Herrick, "We're expecting to be sued and we'll put the A-team on the case if and when we are sued."
Groups who opposed GMO labeling "say GMO crops pose no risk to human health or the environment; instead, they say the law will only increase food prices and complicate interstate commerce," Herrick writes. The Grocery Manufacturers Association said in a statement: "The government therefore has no compelling interest in warning consumers about foods containing GM ingredients. In the coming weeks GMA will file suit in federal court against the state of Vermont to overturn the law." (Read more)
"The law, set to take effect July 1, 2016, would for the first time align at least a small part of the United States with more than 60 other countries that require labeling of genetically engineered foods," Gilliam writes. "And it sets the stage for more than two dozen other states that are currently considering mandatory labeling of such GMO foods." (Read more)
"Other states have pursued similar measures, but Vermont’s law will be the first of its kind," Niraj Chokshi reports for The Washington Post. "Connecticut and Maine passed labeling requirements but with trigger clauses requiring multiple other states to pass labeling requirements before their own go into effect. At least 25 states have considered such legislation, according to a recent report on labeling requirements from the nonprofit Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. And advocates are hopeful they will get a measure on the Oregon ballot this year." (Read more) (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology 2013 map has not been updated to include Vermont)
Food and agriculture companies have been highly critical of such laws. The Grocery Manufacturers Association, which represents cereal-maker General Mills, said Friday "it intends to sue the state to reverse the law," John Herrick reports for VTDigger, an investigative news outlet in Vermont. Attorney General Bill Sorrell told Herrick, "We're expecting to be sued and we'll put the A-team on the case if and when we are sued."
Groups who opposed GMO labeling "say GMO crops pose no risk to human health or the environment; instead, they say the law will only increase food prices and complicate interstate commerce," Herrick writes. The Grocery Manufacturers Association said in a statement: "The government therefore has no compelling interest in warning consumers about foods containing GM ingredients. In the coming weeks GMA will file suit in federal court against the state of Vermont to overturn the law." (Read more)
No comments:
Post a Comment