Comments on: What’s up with food and nutrition in 2010?

By: Top 10 Links of the Last 3 Weeks: 12/25/09 – 1/7/10 (1/8/10) | Top 10 Links of the Last 3 Weeks: 12/25/09 – 1/7/10 (1/8/10) healty| Top 10 Links of the Last 3 Weeks: 12/25/09 – 1/7/10 (1/8/10) > | healty foods | healty diet | healthy food

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:32:15 +0000

[...] FDA warns Nestlé – Juicy Juice misbranded! How Many Extra Calories Cause Weight Gain? What’s up With Food and Nutrition in 2010? Three solid quickies from Marion Nestle. The Juicy Juice thing is [...]

By: What’s up with food and nutrition in 2010?

What’s up with food and nutrition in 2010? — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 11:22:59 +0000

[...] Slow Food USA blog points to Marion Nestle’s list of food issues to watch in 2010. Among the top ten are food safety regulations, meat, and sustainable agriculture. This entry was [...]

By: Top food issues for the next decade : Cooking Gadgets - Your kitchen on steroids. Cooking Gadgets by Cyndi.

Sat, 23 Jan 2010 13:31:25 +0000

[...] Some top issues, she believes, will be carry-overs from the aughts: hunger, food safety, and childhood obesity. To these, she adds advertising and food industry practices, including the meat industry and agri-business. I recommend reading her whole post: What’s up with food and nutrition in 2010? [...]

By: Karl Haro von Mogel

Karl Haro von Mogel — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:15:47 +0000

Re: Anastasia, Yes I noticed that, too. I wonder if a certain labeling organization is aware of this?

By: Sunday News Bites | BODA Blog

Sunday News Bites | BODA Blog — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:02:35 +0000

[...] TRENDS FOR 2010. Marion Nestle, nutritionist extrordinaire, predicts the ten most pressing food issues for 2010. Hunger, childhood obesity, and food regulations top of the [...]

By: Anastasia

Anastasia — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:18:42 +0000

“companies that want to say they are NOT using GM ingredients can only do so if they … publish a disclaimer that there isn’t any difference between GM and GM-free ingredients.”

Where does this have to be published? I haven’t seen any such disclaimer on labels that say things like “GM Free”.

By: Karl Haro von Mogel

Karl Haro von Mogel — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:12:19 +0000

Marion, thanks for responding to my comment. I seem to recall that part on the the FDA website on how they advise against labeling, so I do agree that they discourage labeling. I can also understand from their perspective that they have tons of labels to evaluate to figure out what labels are misleading people and what aren’t and that they would not like to have to get into regulating GE labels when they stem more from social rather than scientific reasons.

I hope that in the future then, that you will consider describing it as discouraging labeling while also requiring it in certain circumstances. Otherwise your readers will almost certainly get the wrong impression about the current policy.
Thanks!

By: Marion

Marion — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:57:41 +0000

@Karl: You are of course strictly correct. Companies using GM ingredients are perfectly free to say so. But companies that want to say they are NOT using GM ingredients can only do so if they (1) prove that none of the ingredients are GM, and (2) publish a disclaimer that there isn’t any difference between GM and GM-free ingredients. The entire point of Monsanto’s lobbying the FDA NOT to require labeling (which I witnessed first-hand as a member of the FDA’s Food Advisory Committee) was to make sure that food companies would not disclose GM ingredients. The FDA ruling effectively discourages disclosure, but that’s not the same as prohibition, except in practice.

By: Karl Haro von Mogel

Karl Haro von Mogel — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:17:02 +0000

Earlier, I left a comment asking about a statement that you made in your New Years SF Chronicle column. Naturally, I wouldn’t expect that every comment gets answered, but I think this issue is important because it also appeared in print and it is the second time I pointed it out on your blog. You said:
“The FDA’s 1994 decision to prohibit labeling of GM foods continues to haunt the food biotechnology industry.”

My understanding of the FDA’s 1992 (not 1994) decision is that there was no prohibition of labeling GE foods, in fact, they even outlined several instances in which it must be labeled, such as if there is a nutritional difference, for example. The FDA decided that it would not require GE labels if it didn’t significantly alter the food, which is very different from prohibiting such labels. Do you agree?

Here is the FDA page describing this:
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/ucm059098.htm
And the 1992 document, in more detail:
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/Biotechnology/ucm096095.htm

By: Paul Hughes

Paul Hughes — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:09:08 +0000

Local Food & Urban Ag Predictions for 2010

http://calgaryfoodpolicy.blogspot.com/2010/01/2010-local-food-urban-ag-predictions.html