General Mills will begin labeling products nationwide that contain genetically modified ingredients — a "watershed" development, according to one consumer group.
Golden Valley-based General Mills said Friday that since it will be forced by July 1 to begin labeling for GMOs in Vermont — the result of a state law there — it will extend GMO labeling nationwide.
Earlier this week, the U.S. Senate failed to advance a bill that would have outlawed states from passing laws that required GMO labeling on packaged foods. The defeat was a blow to the food industry, which has opposed national and state laws requiring GMO labeling.
"We can't label our products for only one state without significantly driving up costs for our consumers, and we simply won't do that," Jeff Harmening, head of General Mills' U.S. retail operations, said in a post on a company blog Friday. "The result: Consumers all over the country will soon begin seeing words legislated by the state of Vermont on the labels of many of their favorite General Mills food products."
Labeling for genetically modified ingredients has been a contentious topic the past few years. The food industry claims that such labels are unnecessary because GMOs were long ago approved by federal food safety regulators. A growing number of consumers have been suspect of GMOs nonetheless, and GMO-labeling proponents say they have a right to know what's in their food.
"By any measure, today's development is a watershed moment in the fight for more transparency," said Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group. "I applaud General Mills. They're going to disclose the presence of GMOs and give everyone factual information. This is terrific for consumers."
Still, General Mills hasn't altered its support for national legislation that would bar state labeling laws, without requiring national GMO labeling.
"Our position on GMO labeling hasn't wavered at all," Harmening said. "We are fully aligned with the Grocery Manufacturers Association," a big trade group pushing against mandatory labeling in Congress. The association also has filed a federal suit arguing the Vermont law is constitutional.