NEWS FROM THE UK
1.Consumers demand honest GM labelling of meat and milk
2.Public wants labelling of all GM food
3.GM 'still seen as Frankenstein food'
4.FSA GM Dialogue Must Put Citizens First
---
---
1.Consumers demand honest GM labelling of meat and milk
Daily Mail, 26 November 2009
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230995/Consumers-demand-honest-GM-labelling-meat-milk.html
Shoppers are demanding better labelling of meat and milk from animals fed on a GM diet.
A Food Standards Agency focus group says consumers need to be told when any 'Frankenstein Food' process is used.
Shoppers are kept in the dark about the majority of meat and milk in supermarkets which comes from animals on a GM diet.
The agency published the details of the demand for honest labelling ahead of a public information and consultation exercise on the future of GM farming and food.
No genetically modified crops are grown in the UK, but millions of people are eating food from animals raised on GM every day.
The focus group found misgivings about GM and its impact on health with both those in favour and those with doubts on GM saying it was important for consumers to be told what they are eating for dinner.
---
---
2.Public wants labelling of all GM food
The Ecologist, 26 November 2009
http://www.theecologist.co.uk/News/news_round_up/369542/public_wants_labelling_of_all_gm_food.html
UK citizens are confused by the current publicly available information on GM foods and want clearer facts made available in shops and supermarkets
There is widespread support for compulsory 'GM' labelling on all food produce in the UK, according to new research.
A survey, commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA), found consumers were confused by current labelling and wanted more information to be made available on GM food.
'People reported that the labelling of some foods as "non-GM" or "GM-free" had led them to believe that GM ingredients were widely used in other products,' said the survey's findings.
There was support for the development of a GM food range in shops similar to organic ranges or a traffic light system with products labelled according to whether they contained no GM material, GM derived ingredients (such as animals being given GM feed) or GM ingredients.
The research, conducted by the National Centre for Social Research, involved interviews with 30 people and will be used to advise the FSA's new GM Dialogue Steering Group, set up to start a public debate on GM food.
Overall, the study revealed that public knowledge of GM foods was varied. For example, respondents remained largely unaware of the extent to which GM food is already available both in the UK and internationally.
Support for GM was also varied and the survey said, 'transparency and consumer choice' were the key priorities for people of all attitudes towards GM foods.
Responding to the survey, campaign group GM Freeze said it was wrong for the FSA to be conducting research into changing people's views on GM crops.
'The FSA is supposed to be at arm’s length from government and act in the interest of food safety on behalf of UK citizens,' said GM Freeze campaigner Pete Riley.
'Exploring "the circumstances in which people change their views" on GM is a step too far - the FSA appears to be doing the work of the Government, which does not always coincide with the wishes of UK citizens,' he said.
Useful links
Public attitudes to GM food
http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2009/nov/gmreport
---
---
3.GM 'still seen as Frankenstein food'
Sophie Goodchild, Health Editor
Evening Standard, 25 November 2009
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23774938-gm-still-seen-as-frankenstein-food.do
GM food is still seen as "Frankenstein" science and causes huge splits in opinion, a survey showed today.
The snapshot poll commissioned by the Food Standards Agency revealed concerns about long-term health and environmental impacts of genetically modified products.
It showed some people believe labelling should be extended to meat and milk from GM animals.
GM supporters say they are aware of risks associated with "engineered" food but believe it benefits the Third World.
The survey of 30 people will be presented today at the first meeting of the GM Dialogue Steering Group, was set up by the Government to improve information on the issue.
Ministers say there is no scientific case for a blanket ban.
Proposed uses of GM food are assessed on a case-by-case basis and GM products are not widely available in British supermarkets.
The survey was carried out for the food agency by the National Centre for Social Research.
---
---
4.FSA GM Dialogue Must Put Citizens First
GM Freeze, 25 November 2009
*/Survey raises concerns about political nature of latest research and new public "dialogue"
GM Freeze has expressed deep concern as to why the FSA should ask the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) [1] to "explore the circumstances in which people change their views" on GM crops.
This was one of the objectives of research published today by the FSA ahead of the first meeting of the Steering Committee for the FSA's GM public dialogue.
Commenting Pete Riley of GM Freeze said:
"The FSA is supposed to be at arm's length from government and act in the interest of food safety on behalf of UK citizens. Exploring "the circumstances in which people change their views" on GM is a step too far - the FSA appears to be doing the work of the Government, which does not always coincide with the wishes of UK citizens.
"The results to the NatCen research highlighted that the public is skeptical about GM food for a variety of reasons and want clear labels so they can choose whether to buy products made using GM technology, including meat, dairy products and eggs, which are currently not labelled in the UK. If Government and political parties want to know how to change public opinion, they should pay for the research themselves and not involve the public’s food safety watch dog. They have made an serious error in judgment in asking NatCen to explore this area, and the FSA should now not be part of the new public dialogue.
"The GM Dialogue will look at a very small part of the food chain - GM - which has already been done several times, most recently by NatCen’s research. So why bother again? And why not look at other vital issues such as food security? The GM Public Dialogue is about the wrong issue, organised by the wrong body, and we see no justification for more public money being spent on this. If it goes ahead, the Steering Committee must be allowed to conduct it free of government influence and interference."
ENDS
Calls to Pete Riley 07903 341065
Notes
1. See http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2009/nov/gmreport