Scramble to make foods GE-free

By ANNE BESTON environment reporter

Food companies are rushing to meet new standards regulating genetic engineering.

The rules, which come into force in two years, say any product with more than 0.1 per cent genetically engineered content will have to be labelled as agreed by the Australia New Zealand Food Authority (Anzfa).

A Herald survey of the makers of 36 standard food items reveals that many companies are investigating their suppliers to find out if any ingredients they use are genetically modified.

Poultry giant Tegel has given itself a deadline to bring genetically engineered ingredients below the Anzfa threshold by next September.

Tania Watson, product and development manager at Griffins, acknowledges consumer resistance to genetically engineered food.

She said the company would substitute non-GE additives or ingredients, even though tests overseas had proven that GE foods were safe.

Food companies have moved a long way from their "neither confirm nor deny" policy after one of the biggest consumer backlashes of recent times.

In the middle of this year, major manufacturers were refusing to say whether their products contained GE ingredients.

But in our survey, every manufacturer and importer - except one - made an effort to answer our questions.

Auckland clinical nutritionist Professor Cliff Tasman-Jones, who works with the New Zealand Nutrition Foundation, said consumers had reason to be concerned about GE foods but the technology was probably here to stay.

"The genie is already out of the bottle. If I have any criticism of the food companies, it's that they moved ahead too fast - they didn't keep us informed."

He thinks most GE foods are safe, but does not believe that manufacturers can guarantee they all are.

And he sees problems for the proposed labelling rules. The kind of information consumers are looking for could be in the small print.

"You can only put so much information on a label, and with all the other consumer information, shoppers might just give up."

Green Party MP Sue Kedgley, who has campaigned strongly against genetic engineering, is critical of food companies.

"It's been sneaked into the food chain, and consumers don't like that."

Despite moves by major food manufacturers and importers to allay consumer concerns, she believes it will be a long time before GE foods are completely safe.

"At the moment, the only way you can be GE-free is to buy organic."

But an associate professor of nutrition and health at Massey University in Palmerston North, Brian Jordan, is convinced that consumers are not at risk.

He says GE foods "have to be safe. All the companies that produce these products tested them much more than conventional products."

Ms Kedgley disagrees. She believes GE foods have not been tested rigorously enough.

"It's not just a consumer rights issue, it's a health issue. If someone has an allergic reaction, we need to be able to trace it back to the source."

Professor Jordan believes that the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification, due to report back to the Government next June, is probably the right approach for New Zealand.

"Some countries have gone full-steam ahead, particularly developing countries such as China."

"Foods not only have to be safe, consumers have to be assured they are safe. That's what I hope the royal commission will achieve."

The commission's brief is to investigate the issue of gene science in food and in animal and crop experiments. It reconvenes in Wellington next month after a recess.

What's in that food?

Herald Online feature: the GE debate

GE lessons from Britain

GE links

GE glossary