Tag / Labels

by Frank Maduri

Supermarket Shock: GMO Labeling & Consumers

Some of the major food companies such as Campbell’s and General Mills among others, have begun the process of labeling some of their products with disclosures relative to genetically modified ingredients. In your local grocery stores, depending on what state you live in, you may have also seen similar product labeling.

The label on the packaging will have a disclosure with a statement such as: “contains genetically engineered corn” or “made from genetically engineered soybeans”, or “contains genetically modified ingredients”. The surprising component to this scenario was that with all the reporting and commentary writing I have done regarding the subject of GMOs and the need for stricter food labeling, and knowing that this was actually going to appear on products on the shelves in stores: my wife, friends and colleagues, as well as myself all were still shocked by it.

We were all shocked by the appearance of the words on the box of cereal or the can of soup that we have purchased regularly over the years. The words, seeing them in print, make it that much more impressionable and have a pronounced impact. I wrote about this in a previous article on GMO labeling for the site known as Medium where I explored the potential consumer reaction and subsequent ramifications for the food industry.

One of the potential responses that was mentioned in other news coverage on GMO labeling of food products was most troubling to consumer packaged goods company executives: the shock value to the shopper. This shock factor with shoppers was also detailed in articles regarding the financial segment’s valuation of Campbell Soup Company stock after they determined that the consumer reaction would adversely impact product sales.
It is certainly a shock for many consumers to see the widespread presence of GMOs in the food supply. Then, there are other consumers who are more knowledgeable and shop at health food type stores and websites to obtain locally sourced, GMO free products.

There are still others, and that will encompass a huge group of consumers, that know and understand the fact that GMO corn, sugar beet, and soybean are the most prevalent supply in American domestic food products. We do not have much choice because of the expense of buying alternative products that are GMO free to feed multiple people or a family. The cost factor associated with removing GMO containing products from our respective diets is not feasible when coupled with other rising standard of living costs.

It is my opinion, and I am in agreement with the analysts’ data from the financial valuation on Campbell Soup, that there will be some shoppers that will be so shocked by the GMO labeling that they will put the product back on the shelf and make another product choice. Then there are other consumers who will see the label and purchase the product anyway in a state of resignation to the fact that GMOs are part of our current food supply chain.

The fact remains that the seed used to grow the staple crops such as corn, wheat, soybean, and sugar beet are genetically engineered. There is not enough non-GMO seed to support more than a fraction of the amount of food needed in production for our population. This is the inherent problem with sourcing sustainable “clean” food products.

The debate over whether the food labeling should be done federally or on a state-by-state basis will only cease when the federal authorities make a final determination. In the event that labeling guidelines become mandated by law, then this shopper shock will only become more intense because it will effect such a large amount of products in our stores.
In my own perspective, I have had the most difficulty with reading it on boxes of breakfast cereal. I think it is the understanding that for several years I have been eating cold cereal for breakfast, and that basically all of them contain some sort of genetically engineered ingredient. There is something very stark about coming to that realization.

In the end analysis, as the labeling of the GMO or genetically engineered ingredients becomes more commonplace I am interested to see whether this “shopper shock” will wear off, similar to the initial “sticker shock” we might get on a price of a higher ticket item. In many cases, over time, we become desensitized to many external factors within our human condition. I am interested to see if this will be another example of that type of behavioral response.

In the interim, we as consumers will continue to get jolted whenever we pick up a can of soup or a bottle of juice and find that it contains genetically engineered ingredients. We, as consumers, will continue to try to drive the progress towards the “right to know if it is GMO”. We will continue to have conversations with people we may have only just met, in one of the last places to do so in an increasingly isolative and online shopping obsessed society: in the aisle of the local grocery store. In that case, if nothing else, at least we are talking about something.

by Frank Maduri

Know If It Is GMO: Campbell Soup Label Disclosure

It has been about a week and a half since The NY Times and other mainstream news sources reported that Campbell Soup Company has announced that it will disclose on their product labeling all genetically modified or genetically engineered ingredients across every entry in all their product lines. I have reported on the GMO labeling issue in the past, especially with the situation in California, where all the huge food companies joined together to defeat that proposed ballot initiative.

 

This choice by Campbell’s Soup at this time will certainly apply pressure to other food industry players to comply in disclosing their GMO containing products. In the process, the federal government will also be under scrutiny, particularly the FDA, to initiate fundamental and substantive progress on a labeling requirement system for genetically modified ingredients in consumer food products.

 

The component of the decision by Campbell Soup that is significantly newsworthy is the size and scope of the amount of products it covers. This food industry giant has several brands encompassing the full range of the grocery channel from Prego sauces, Swanson broths, V8 beverages, and Pepperidge Farms bakery products.

 

The iconic Campbell’s Soup brand alone has an enormous amount of products especially with the line extensions of recent years to add lower sodium and gluten free soups for an increasingly health conscious American consumer. The reality of the consequences for this move sent shockwaves through the food industry and through the Wall Street analysts who evaluate the factors which will potentially impact a given publicly-traded corporation such as Campbell.

 

In some of the media reports I researched, it was noted that some investment analysts believe that this choice toward full disclosure by Campbell’s is going to “scare the consumer” when they pick up a can of soup and read that it contains genetically engineered ingredients. These same reports indicate that a drop in sales which will cause a chain reaction to a decrease in revenue will cause a drop in the stock price. The competition in the soup aisle and the other grocery aisles could stand to benefit from this decision by Campbell’s.

 

The move to full disclosure of these ingredients will serve as a stark dose of reality to the average American consumer of just how widespread the use of genetically engineered products is within the food supply currently. The average consumer may, at that point, start to question whether the competition in the aisle also contains GMO ingredients. The impact of this decision on the sales of healthier trending grocery outlets such as Whole Foods, Wegman’s, or Trader Joe’s remains to be seen.

 

Furthermore, this decision will inevitably shift the focus onto the fact that the key ingredients in many of our food products: corn, soybeans, and sugar beets are all genetically engineered. The alternative sources of these staple commodities which are grown currently in conditions that are organic or GMO free are produced in nowhere near the quantities needed to sustain the entire food supply. The global farming system could not produce those crop yields of GMO free food ingredients if they wanted to because the seeds are genetically modified and the soil of so much farmland is contaminated with pesticides and chemicals such as Roundup.

 

Green Mountain Debate

 

Vermont passed legislation on the state level requiring food sold there to have a full disclosure of genetically engineered ingredients on every product label. This is thought to have been the driving factor behind the decision by Campbell’s Soup Company to make the change to their labels across the board.

 

The legislation passed in the Green Mountain State also brought about renewed vigor in the food industry regarding the debate over the GMO disclosure laws. One side of this discourse feels that the food industry should be insulated from having to disclosure this information fully, yet another group feels that the disclosure should be limited in scope. Further still, a third faction of this argument believes that the federal government needs to pass legislation that supersedes the state government level activity on this issue.

 

In fact, I believe that the motivation behind Campbell’s Soup and their decision to fully disclosure the GMO ingredients in their respective products is to push the federal government to adopt a coherent policy for the entire industry. This new label disclosure by a major player such as Campbell’s “moves the needle” on the conversation with the federal government and food industry leaders. When asked about the motivation for the decision in an interview with the NY Times, Campbell Soup Company CEO, Denise Morrison, explained that the consumer has “the right to know” if a product contains genetically modified components.

 

In the view of the food industry players involved, most of them would rather deal with a federal mandate on how to label GMO ingredients than the alternative, which is to deal with each individual state passing their own procedures relative to the labeling of these ingredients. The rationale behind this viewpoint is due to the fact that changes to any food product label are expensive and time consuming for the food companies involved.

 

A system for GMO disclosure which is reliant on the legal activity of 50 separate state governments that could come up with 50 different procedures or sets of requirements for a label on a food product is a recipe for disaster. It will dominate the time for numerous departments in the respective food company, it will drive up labor costs because the labels will have to be switched out during the production runs depending upon which state the product is being distributed to, and it will increase the cost to the consumer as well.

 

Conversely, the federal system would allow for one universal change to the label of a given product which would be effective across the country and be far more efficient for everyone involved. However the system has to be done in the right way, it should be cohesive and inclusive so that circumvention is not attainable. Some consumer advocacy groups linked to the “no GMO” movement have voiced concerns that the federal system may provide loopholes for the food industry to get around fully disclosing the specific genetically engineered ingredients in their products.

 

The argument could be made that this situation is not a clear victory for the “no GMO” movement because we still have no federal mandate on a universal labeling system, the state level legislation is still active which forces those groups who are advocating for “right to know if it’s GMO” to fight separate lobbying battles in each state, and the bottom line is that the GMOs are still in our food we will just be told what they are exactly.

 

This choice by Campbell’s is clearly an indication of the strength of the healthy eating and wellness trends in the American consumer landscape. In the months to come it will be interesting to see which companies within the consumer packaged goods industry will follow suit with label disclosures on GMO ingredients.

 

In my professional experience in the food industry working with product line extensions across a variety of segments and dealing with label declarations, Campbell Soup Company was bold in this move and correct in their assessment that we need a federal system for GMO disclosure. A state-by-state format for this type of consumer labeling situation is a nightmare scenario for all parties involved. The need for a decision by federal regulatory entities needs to become a high priority in 2016, the American people and the food industry need it to happen sooner rather than later.

 

The next round in this fight is to eliminate GMOs which is an entirely different challenge with its own set of issues.

 

 

(Frank J. Maduri is a freelance writer and journalist with a professional background in marketing for the food, pharmaceutical, and healthcare industries. He has experience with food and beverage line extensions for national consumer products brands involving compliance with federal and state labeling requirements.)