Imperial Party forum

thomas davison

Two in three shoppers demand GM product labels in embarrassing consumer backlash for government against 'Frankenstein foods'

By Sean Poulter

PUBLISHED: 12:01, 9 January 2013 | UPDATED: 15:24, 9 January 2013

Environment Secretary Owen Paterson claimed the benefits of GM crops went beyond the food chain

Environment Secretary Owen Paterson claimed the benefits of GM crops went beyond the food chain

Two in three shoppers are demanding that meat, milk and eggs from farm animals fed a GM diet should be labelled, according to an official study.

The results make clear that families feel that clear labelling is the only way they can choose whether they want to support controversial �Frankenstein Food� farming or not.

The research findings, published by the Food Standards Agency (FSA), are a major embarrassment for the government.

The new food and farming secretary, Owen Paterson, is in the middle of a major public relations exercise designed to convince families to support GM farming and food.

He recently dismissed consumer concerns as �humbug� and �complete nonsense� while boasting that much of the nation�s meat comes from animals fed on genetically modified grain imported from overseas.

The minister suggested the public were perfectly happy to accept this and that the UK should now open the door to a wider take up of GM farming and food.

However, the new official research carried out by the Government�s own agency makes clear that most consumers had no idea that British farm animals are being reared on a GM diet.

After they were told, the vast majority � 67per cent - said packs of meat, milk and eggs should be labelled to spell this out on the label.

The result puts pressure on Mr Paterson to either accept or reject the view of the vast majority of consumers.

The Government has been the chief cheerleader in Europe for the adoption of GM farming and food. Ministers have recently agreed new cash support for GM research alongside Mr Paterson�s PR initiative to win over sceptical shoppers.

Separately, Mr Paterson�s department is pressing the European Commission to slim down its GM regulatory regime to make it easier and quicker for biotech companies to get permission to begin commercial growing.

GM advocates insist that opponents are in some way anti-science and ignorant. It is argued that if they are educated about GM techniques that any objections will fall away.

In fact, past studies funded by the Government have revealed that the more consumers learn about the technology the more sceptical they become.

At the same time, large farm scale trials conducted in the UK demonstrated that the industrial farming techniques associated with GM production were harmful in terms of wild plants, insects and farmland birds.

The latest FSA research project looked specifically at attitudes to labelling and found putting GM information on pack is seen as important �in order to give consumers the right to choose�.

The research team found that most people had absolutely no idea that pigs, young beef cattle and chickens on British farms are given a GM diet.
The new official research carried out by the Government�s own agency makes clear that most consumers had no idea that British farm animals are being reared on a GM diet (file picture)

Official research says most consumers had no idea that British farm animals are being reared on a GM diet (file picture)

They concluded: �Once made aware of its use in UK food products, participants typically considered that foods containing animal products derived from GM feed should be labelled.�

They added: �Two-thirds of respondents considered it very or quite important that it is written on a label if the food itself or ingredients in the food are from a genetically modified plant or the food product is from animals that have been fed genetically modified plants.�

Currently, the only major national food chain to keep GM out of the diet of the animals on its farms is Marks & Spencer. They are also banned by organic farmers.

The Soil Association has long campaigned for food products derived from animals given a GM diet to carry labels to provide better information to consumers. Some stores in Europe label food from animals that are not raised on a GM diet.
Families feel that clear labelling is the only way they can choose whether they want to support controversial 'Frankenstein Food' farming or not (stock pic)

Families want clear labelling to choose whether to support 'Frankenstein Food' farming or not (file pic)

Its policy director, Peter Melchett, said: �These research findings are a major blow to Owen Paterson�s GM policy. The FSA figures show a large majority of consumers believe GM food labelling is important.'

It said: �The world�s population is growing which means people will need more food and there will be a greater demand for water, energy and land.

�GM is one of the tools in the box that could help us tackle these challenges.

'But our top priority is safeguarding human health and the environment so any decisions on GM would have to be based on rigorous scientific evidence.�

The FSA indicated that it would not support the public�s call for more comprehensive GM labelling, arguing it was unnecessary and would be too difficult.

�This was simply a fact finding exercise for us to feed into the discussion,� said a spokesman.

�There is no discernible difference between food produced from animals fed GM feed and those fed non-GM feed.�

Defra runs national GM policy, however it said it had no responsibility for GM labelling and would not comment on the issue.

It said: �The world�s population is growing which means people will need more food and there will be a greater demand for water, energy and land.

�GM is one of the tools in the box that could help us tackle these challenges. But our top priority is safeguarding human health and the environment so any decisions on GM would have to be based on rigorous scientific evidence.�

[email protected]

Sorry. You are a mere 67% of the country. This clown, Peterson, is only following orders from Brussels, and therefore, you will do as you are told.

"arguing it was unnecessary and would be too difficult" - This is from someone employed by YOU. Regardless of the GM labeling issue people should be asking how anyone who purportedly represents you could be so rude, arrogant, and ignorant of the wishes of the people who employ them. also, the shopper needs to speak out and go directly to the supermarkets to say "You are the sellers of the products. What is YOUR policy?". if they do not support the labeling of GM foods then go shop elsewhere. Amazing how some simple pressure works.

GMO corn has been found to create massive tumours in rats. Google gmo corn tumors. These people are playing God for profit. Why do you think Cancer rates are going up all around the world? It is all these insults to the human body, gmo, pesticides, radiation, mobile phones, sweeteners, pharmaceuticals, smoking, power lines etc. We have the same body we had thousands of years ago, the body simply doesn't know how to handle these new things, and all that money and profit blinds people to the truth, just like with smoking, they will go to the bitter end claiming there is no link. Watch it all unfold with GMO. In California they just had a vote (Prop 37) on whether all GMO should be labelled, and industry lobbying meant that they don't have to label it! Insane. I pity anyone in America, you are literally being used as a lab rat, complete with massive tumours. And you know the powers that be in the UK want this for us too, we are just their cattle, to be milked then slaughtered.

It was the same with margerine, they said it was safe but it wasnt, now look at the amount of illness caused by it but not to the wealthy they would not touch it only real butter and proper food for them, we PLEBS are to eat the rubbish and die young to save on the pensions and if that fails, liverpool care path.