People are talking

Why all GE foods
should be labeled

Frequently asked questions

Q. What is Measure 27?
A. Measure 27 is a proposed statute, initiated by Oregon citizens, that will appear on the fall 2002 Oregon statewide ballot. The measure 'Requires Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods (As Defined) Sold or Distributed In or From Oregon."

It is a people’s initiative that would require that additional information appear food labels to allow consumers to know if a food item contains more than one tenth of one percent of genetically engineered material by weight of the product. It would apply to foods sold or distributed in bulk containers or packages at wholesale and retail, as well as foods exported by Oregon farmers and food manufacturers to other states. It would not apply to foods served in restaurants, in cafeterias, at sporting events, or the like.

Q. Why is labeling important?
A. Surveys repeatedly have shown that an overwhelming majority of Americans want genetically engineered foods to be labeled. Many people want these new and controversial foods to be labeled because there is a great deal of debate over their health and environmental safety. Given the great controversy genetically engineered foods have engendered, people want to be able to decide for themselves whether they will purchase them for their families. This is especially important considering that two-thirds of foods on supermarket shelves have been genetically altered.

Q. Do other countries have labeling laws?
A. Yes! Many other countries believe their citizens have the right to know what’s in their food, and have adopted labeling laws – including all 15 countries of the European Union. In addition to the EU, here’s a list of countries that have labeling laws on the books or pending approval, or that have banned imports of genetically modified foods: Algeria; Australia and New Zealand; Brazil; China; Czech Republic; India; Indonesia; Israel; Japan; Republic of Korea; Latvia; Mexico; Norway; Paraguay; Philippines; Poland; Russia; Saudi Arabia; South Africa; Switzerland; Taiwan; Thailand; Yugoslavia.

Q. Who's supporting Measure 27?
A. The primary organizations supporting Measure 27 Oregon Concerned Citizens for Safe Foods and Yes on 27. Numerous other environmental and agricultural organizations, and business and religious leaders, are joining in the effort. But really, this is a people’s initiative, as evidenced by the more than 100,000 people who signed petitions to get the measure on the ballot. Nationally, 93 percent of Americans say they want genetically engineered foods to be labeled, according to an ABC News poll.

Q. Who's behind the opposition to Measure 27?
A. The opposition to Measure 27 is a collection of corporate special interests, including St. Louis-based Monsanto, the largest company involved in genetic engineering. Monsanto’s hometown newspaper, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, says Monsanto “and its allies in the biotech and food industries have set a spending target of $6 million for the campaign against the labeling initiative….That’s 40 times the $150,000 the pro-labeling forces say they will spend.” It’s also more than the amount Oregon’s U.S. Senate candidates typically spend in an election! The battle over Measure 27 is a David vs. Goliath struggle pitting the Oregon people against very wealthy and very powerful corporate special interests.

Q. The opposition says consumers don’t need to worry because farmers and scientists have been genetically modifying foods for nearly 100 years. How is this different?
A. What the opposition is referring to is hybridization. For example, you can cross a tangerine with a grapefruit and make a tangelo – both are from the citrus family. But you can’t cross an orange with an apple through simple hybridization. However, such barriers can be crossed with genetic engineering, otherwise know as recombinant DNA splicing. And the barriers they are crossing are often much greater than through simple hybridization. For example, they have put a gene from a fish into a tomato. We haven’t been doing that for 100 years! The measure specifically excludes traditional farming practices such as breeding, conjugation, fermentation, hybridization, etc. from labeling requirements.

Q. Are genetically engineered foods unsafe?
A. Nobody really knows because these foods are not required to be safety tested by the Food and Drug Administration. However, there is ample evidence to suspect that they might cause allergies and other health problems. Genetically engineered foods contain added factors not found in normal food such as antibiotic resistant marker genes and gene “promoters.” Many contain novel proteins never before consumed by humans. Essentially, the American public is participating in a giant feeding experiment. Europeans are not eating genetically engineered foods because they are required to be labeled in the European Union (EU) countries. Most EU food manufacturers and restaurants decided to eliminate genetically engineered ingredients from their products in 1998. In 1999, the British Medical Association recommended that they not be sold until safety can be proven.

Q. Will passing Measure 27 into law make my food more expensive?
A. The opposition is trying to scare you into believing prices will go up. Don't be fooled by their propaganda. In every country where labeling laws have been passed, the prices have remained the same. Food manufacturers know that consumers will not buy their products if they are labeled as containing genetically engineered ingredients. Therefore they start using non-genetically engineered ingredients in their products to avoid the labeling requirements. As a result, boxes do not need to be reprinted and added packaging expenses are not required.

Q. Well, what about the added expense of farmers having to segregate the genetically engineered crops from the regular crops? Won’t that cause the price to go up?
A. Farmers already have to segregate genetically engineered crops from regular crops because many nations around the world have already enacted labeling laws – including the European Union countries, Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand and others. American farmers and grain dealers want to sell to these countries, so they are already segregating their crops. Again, the opposition is simply trying to scare you into thinking the prices will increase.

Q. If Measure 27 passes into law, will companies quit selling their foods in Oregon?
A. This is yet another scare tactic being used by the opposition that is false and misleading. Don't believe their propaganda! Companies will use non-genetically engineered ingredients in their products rather than lose the income from Oregon. The food industry knows they are losing the global battle over labeling genetically engineered foods. They have already had to set up separate production methods for selling non-genetically engineered products. Plus, they are well aware that once Oregon enacts labeling requirements, California, Washington, Colorado and many other states will rapidly move forward with their own initiative ballot measures to require labeling. And federal labeling legislation called the "Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act" is moving through the U.S. Congress. Companies are not going to stop selling their products in Oregon. They are going to provide non-genetically engineered versions.

Q. If Measure 27 passes, will the courts rule that it is illegal for a state to pass such a law?
A. There are no laws on the books that pertain to this. It may be challenged in the courts. But we stand an excellent chance of winning. Historically, courts have favored such “truth in labeling” state laws when there are concerns over human and environmental health and safety. That is why opponents of this statewide "truth in labeling" law avoid publicly questioning whether Measure 27 is legal.

Q. What is genetic engineering?
A. Genetic engineering is the process of artificially tampering with an organism’s DNA. Through genetic engineering, scientists insert the gene of one organism into another in an effort to replicate characteristics in the receiving organism. So, for example, genetic engineers have added genes from the flounder to tomatoes in an attempt to give tomatoes a longer shelf life. The long-range health effects of genetically engineered food are not known, because there have been no peer-reviewed studies on human health.

Q. Which foods are genetically engineered?
A. The first large-scale commercial harvest of genetically engineered crops in the United States was in 1996. By 2001 more than one-fourth of American crops were genetically engineered, including 24 percent of all corn; 63 percent of all soybeans, and 64 percent of all cotton. So far, at least 50 genetically engineered crops have been approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, including potatoes, tomatoes, melons and beets. Genetically engineered rice, wheat, cucumbers, strawberries, apples, sugarcane and walnuts are being grown on test sites. Today, genetically engineered ingredients can be found in as many as two-thirds of all items on supermarket shelves – products such as tortilla chips, taco shells, veggie burgers, baby formulas, bread, condiments, cookies, cereals, salad dressings and soda.

Q. What are some examples of the health concerns surrounding genetically engineered foods?
A. Genetic engineering may involve the transfer of new and unidentified proteins from one food to another, with the potential of causing allergic reactions. Without labeling, people with allergies won’t know whether they are eating foods that contain genes from other foods to which they are allergic. In 1996, scientists were stunned to learn that soybeans engineered to include protein-rich genes from the Brazil nut contained the allergenic properties of the Brazil nut. Animal studies had not revealed the allergenic nature of the new soybean.

Genetic engineering may also create toxins harmful to human health. Scientists say genetic engineering may produce new toxins, with potentially devastating results. In at least one case, disaster already has happened. In 1989, a genetically engineered version of tryptophan, a dietary supplement, produced toxic contaminants. Before it was recalled by the Food and Drug Administration, the mutated tryptophan wreaked havoc. Thirty-seven Americans died, 1,500 were permanently disabled, and 5,000 became ill with a blood disorder, eosinophila myalgia syndrome.

Genetic engineering may also lead to antibiotic resistance. Genetic engineers use antibiotic “marker” genes in almost every genetically modified organism to indicate that the organism has been successfully engineered. Scientists believe these antibiotic markers may contribute to the decreasing effectiveness of antibiotics against diseases.

Q. I’ve heard that genetically engineered foods are good for the environment. Is that true?
A. This is an oft-repeated argument of the biotech industry. But when biotech corporations boast that genetic engineering can do wonders for the environment, we would do well to consider the source. After all, some of these companies were behind the development of such deadly pesticides as DDT and Agent Orange. These pesticides, they promised, would help the environment. Instead, they turned into environmental disasters.

Q. What are some examples of the environmental concerns surrounding genetically engineered foods?
A. For one, increased pesticide pollution. Many of the new genetically engineered crops, such as Roundup Ready soybeans, are designed to allow farmers to spray heavier doses of pesticides on their land. These pesticides inevitably will find their way into our water and food supply, endangering humans and wildlife. New Scientist magazine reports that many farmers who have converted to genetically engineered crops use as many pesticides as their conventional counterparts, while some of these farmers now use more pesticides.

Another concern is genetic contamination of the environment. Genetic engineers are designing fish, for example, that grow at four times the normal rate. If these fish escape into the wild, they could probably never be recaptured. They could breed with wild populations and devastate the existing natural balance. Genetically engineered crops already are contaminating non-genetically engineered fields.

Third, modified genes can jump the species barrier. In May, 2000, Professor Hans-Hinrich Katz, a leading German zoologist, released research that shows that genes used to modify crops can jump to other species and cause bacteria to mutate. Katz found that the new gene used to modify oilseed rape had transferred to bacteria living in the guts of honey bees. “These findings are very worrying and provide the first real evidence of what many have feared,” says prominent genetic engineering critic and scientist Dr. Mae-Wan Ho. “Everybody is keen to exploit GM (genetically modified) technology, but nobody is looking at the risk of horizontal gene transfer. We are playing about with genetic structures that existed for millions of years and the experiment is running out of control.”

There are numerous other environmental concerns, including herbicide resistance and the rise of superweeds, risks to biodiversity, damage to the soil and more.

Q. What are some examples of genetically engineered foods that people are worried about?
A. There are many scary “Frankenfoods” that have people concerned. For example, some crops, such as Roundup Ready soybeans, have been genetically engineered to withstand much higher applications of pesticides. Many people are worried about eating foods with greater pesticide content. Genetic engineers have also developed crops that create their own pesticides in every one of their cells. At least with conventionally grown foods, you can wash some of the pesticide residue off of a fruit or vegetable. But with crops that produce pesticides in every cell, you don’t have that option.

Here are some other genetically engineered foods and products on the drawing board that have people worried: fish that grow up to four times the normal speed; lettuce that contains rat genes; animals genetically engineered to produce pharmaceutical drugs; crops designed to produce pharmaceutical drugs; crops engineered to produce vaccines; genetically engineered trees; corn engineered to include contraceptives; chickens that don’t have feathers; and even genetically engineered Christmas trees modified to glow in the dark.

The big fear is that biotech companies are creating an awful lot of changes to our food and our environment without really knowing what they are doing. What happens, for example, if contraceptive corn or corn engineered to produce Viagra escape into the wild?

Q. Aren't genetically engineered foods well researched?
A. The biotech industry claims that genetically engineered foods are the most thoroughly tested foods in the world. But in fact, there have been no peer-reviewed studies on the impact of genetically engineered foods on human health. Genetic engineering is a young, and in many ways poorly understood, technology. Many scientists believe that genetically engineered foods have been rushed much too quickly to market – to boost multinational profits – before adequate testing has been completed to ensure public health. Even many of the Food and Drug Administration’s own scientists question the safety of genetically engineered foods.

Q. Do all leading doctors and scientists agree that genetically engineered foods are safe?
A. No. There is a great deal of controversy over genetically engineered foods in the science and health communities. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, for example, says the FDA "should review and approve the safety of every genetically engineered food before it is marketed. The public deserves a fair, transparent, mandatory premarket approval process, including an opportunity for meaningful public input. Only a mandatory premarket approval process will safeguard the food supply and bolster public confidence in genetically engineered foods now and as the technology matures." Currently, the FDA does not formally approve genetically engineered foods as safe to eat.

The Union of Concerned Scientists is another prestigious scientific group that has many questions about genetic engineering. According to this group, "Scientists are concerned that genetically engineered plants and animals might cause harm to health or the environment. For example, engineered crops might contaminate wild plant populations, exacerbate weed problems, and jeopardize valuable natural resources like Bt toxins. Or engineered fish may substantially alter native ecosystems, perhaps even driving wild populations to extinction. Moreover, some biotech food products may produce new allergens or new toxins."

According to George Wald, M.D., Nobel Laureate in Medicine, Professor of Biology, Harvard University: "(Genetic engineering) faces our society with problems unprecedented, not only in the history of science, but of life on the Earth. It places in human hands the capacity to redesign living organisms, the products of some three billion years of evolution ... Up to now, living organisms have evolved very slowly, and new forms have had plenty of time to settle in. Now whole proteins will be transposed overnight into wholly new associations, with consequences no one can foretell ... Going ahead in this direction may be not only unwise, but dangerous. Potentially, it could breed new animal and plant diseases, new sources of cancer, and novel epidemics."

The British journal Lancet, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world, wrote: "It is astounding that FDA has not changed their stance on genetically modified food ... Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health."

Q. Are there any documented cases of people getting sick from eating genetically engineered foods or products?
A. Yes. As mentioned above, the 1989 tryptophan incident, in which a genetically engineered version of the dietary supplement produced toxic contaminants, led to the death of 37 Americans, and the permanent disablement of 1,500 more.

Or consider the case of Grace Booth, reported in the March 19, 2001 edition of the Washington Post. Booth had just finished eating a chicken enchilada for lunch with co-workers when "she started to feel hot and itchy. Her lips began to swell, she developed severe diarrhea and soon she was having trouble breathing. Colleagues called an ambulance." She was apparently suffering from anaphylactic shock. Five hours later, after being injected with anti-allergy medicine and being placed on an IV, Booth was released from the hospital.

"Booth is among several dozen people nationwide who believe they suffered allergic reactions from eating StarLink corn" in the fall of 2000, according to the Post. "Allergic reactions have been viewed for years as the primary threat to human health posed by genetically engineered foods, which typically have proteins from other organisms spliced into them for various reasons. But the health complaints about StarLink are the first lodged by consumers against an engineered food."

Another important point to remember is that without food labeling, there is no accountability. There may be more examples of health effects from genetically engineered foods that nobody knows about, because without labeling, people don’t realize they are eating genetically engineered foods.