Why is Campbell Soup suddenly supporting GMO labeling?

Campbell Soup has broken with an industry trend to resist GMO labeling. Instead, the soup company now supports labeling efforts and has promised to work independently for a solution if federal legislation for labeling is not passed.

J. David Ake/AP/File
Cans of Campbell's soup are photographed in Washington, Jan. 8, 2014. Campbell Soup said it supports federal legislation that would establish a national labeling standard for products containing genetically modified ingredients. About three-quarters of the company's products have GMO ingredients.

On Friday, Campbell Soup confirmed that it supports mandatory national labeling of food containing genetically modified ingredients (GMOs).

The world’s largest soup manufacturer says it will withdraw its opposition to mandatory labeling of foods made with GMOs. The issue of GMOs in food has caused widespread debate in the United States and beyond and prompted bills in various states to require labeling.

"We have always believed that consumers have the right to know what's in their food," CEO Denise Morrison wrote in a post that was published online by Campbell.

Campbell Soup has long opposed localized efforts by states to require GMO labeling, fitting in with other industry giants, like PepsiCO Inc, Kellogg Co, and Monsanto Co that have spent millions to defeat state labeling bills. Proposed bills in Oregon, Colorado, Washington, and California have been defeated; however, Vermont became the first state to pass a bill requiring labeling of product including GMOs in 2014. That law goes into effect in 2016. Maine and Connecticut have passed similar laws but both of those have stipulations that they will not go into effect unless other states do the same.

Campbell’s long opposition to GMO labeling requirements has stemmed from fears of a patchwork of state-by-state regulations that could prove confusing and costly. Industry groups are trying to preempt those efforts by working toward nationwide federal legislation to make GMO disclosure voluntary, public health lawyer Michele Simon told the Associated Press.

If a federal labeling standard isn’t established, Campbell has said it will work independently and voluntarily to disclose the products where GMOs are present.

The food industry says about 75 to 80 percent of foods contain genetically modified ingredients, with much of it originating from the corn and soybean crops grown in the United States and found in most foods. Roughly 75 percent of Campbell’s products contain some GMOs.

Some proponents of GMO-labeling legislation, like the Vermont Right to Know GMOs Coalition takes the stance that GMO ingredients are unsafe, citing a lack of testing. Despite it’s switch to GMO-labeling support, Campbell maintains that GMOs are safe.

In her Friday statement, Ms. Morrison said that Campbell is in “no way disputing the science GMOs or their safety.” Instead, she cited changes in approach due to GMOs becoming an important issue for Campbell consumers. 

The soup maker’s belief in GMOs safety is supported by FDA approval and testing of GMOs.

The soup company, which also owns Pepperidge Farm cookies and Prego pasta sauces, said in July it would stop adding monosodium glutamate (MSG) in its condensed soups for kids and stop using GMOs in its organic soup line for children.

This report includes material from The Associated Press and Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why is Campbell Soup suddenly supporting GMO labeling?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today