Consumers Call For GMO Labels; Farmers Cite Lower Pesticides, Less Erosion

About half the states, including Wisconsin, have introduced bills that require genetically modified foods be labeled. In addition, there’s an effort to get a large Wisconsin grocery chain to label such products. Despite this, genetically modified crops remain popular with farmers.

It’s been 18 years since genetically engineered crops became commercially available. Their use by U.S. and Wisconsin farmers is widespread. UW-Madison agronomy Professor Joe Lauer cites three reasons mentioned in a recent USDA report.

“First, it saves farmers time being able to produce crops. Second, it’s reduced the amount of insecticide applied. Then third, the pesticides that are used on the crops are relatively benign compared to what they were 20 years ago,” Lauer said.

Consumers remain largely unaware that such products as cornmeal, vegetable oil and sugar are derived from genetically engineered crops.

Recently, however, consumer pressure has prompted General Mills to offer non-GMO Cheerios. Whole Foods will label its store brands and environmental advocacy group WISPIRG is asking a Wisconsin-based grocery, Roundy’s, to do likewise. Additionally, a bill by Madison Rep. Chris Taylor (D) would prevent grocers from selling genetically engineered food without explicit labels.

What effect will this have on consumer behavior? It could go either way, according to Robert Streiffer, associate professor of philosophy and bioethics at UW-Madison. He says it could stop some consumers from buying GMO food, and therefore prompt farmers to plant fewer GMO crops.

“Other people think labeling will help with consumer acceptance,” Streiffer said. “That is, once they see these ingredients are prevalent—that they’re approved, that they’re in products people have been eating for years without any noticeable problems—that they’ll find that comforting and sort of get over some of their worries. So actually, it might enhance consumer acceptance.”

Regardless of what consumers think about GMO food, how much it costs often determines what ends up in the grocery cart. The USDA report indicates even consumers who say they want non-GMO products may not be willing to pay more for it.

Agronomy professor Joe Lauer says numerous animal studies show GMO crops are safe. WISPIRG’s Eric Prudent, though, says at least some of those studies may be suspect.

“A large number of GMOs, the patents, actually make it illegal to do independent research on them. So the studies that are coming out are being paid for by big agribusiness, by the companies that make these GMOS and so it’s hard to believe that’s an unbiased study,” Prudent said.

Potential health concerns aren’t the only factor shaping public opinion. GMO crops have an impact on the environment and in Lauer’s opinion, a good one. He says soil erosion has been greatly reduced because herbicide resistant crops allow less soil tilling. Farmers don’t have to plow weeds under; they can spray them along with emerging crops.

“We can kill all the weeds that may come along and produce a much more environmentally friendly crop than it was 30, 40 year ago,” Lauer said.

So-called “super weeds” have emerged since the use of GMO crops. Lauer says they might have developed anyway and that GMOs actually may have kept herbicide resistant weeds in check.

“In fact, there’s some speculation among weed scientists that the number of super weeds would be even more than what we’ve currently got,” Lauer said.

The USDA report blames super weeds, in part, on overreliance of a popular, broad spectrum herbicide. (glyphosphate/Roundup). Insect resistance to GMO crops so far is low. But the report says it’s not clear whether this first generation of genetically engineered seeds will benefit farmers indefinitely.