You are currently viewing archive.bio.org. Head to our home page to check out our fresh new look!

BIO Disappointed in Approps Action to Label GE Salmon

Senate Ag Committee Efforts Will Better Address Transparency

Washington, D.C. (May 19, 2016) – During markup of the FY17 Agriculture Appropriations Bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved today by voice vote an amendment to mandate the identification of genetically engineered salmon as “genetically engineered” or “GE” in the marketplace. 

Senate Ag Committee Efforts Will Better Address Transparency

Washington, D.C. (May 19, 2016) – During markup of the FY17 Agriculture Appropriations Bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved today by voice vote an amendment to mandate the identification of genetically engineered salmon as “genetically engineered” or “GE” in the marketplace. 

Brian Baenig, Executive Vice President, Food and Agriculture for the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), issued the following statement in response:

“BIO is disappointed that the Senate Appropriations Committee has adopted an amendment to require special identification for genetically engineered salmon.

“BIO is opposed to requiring an FDA-sanctioned label for this particular salmon product, and for all foods produced through biotechnology, simply because they were produced through biotechnology. The FDA has repeatedly reinforced its view that biotech foods, including salmon, are as safe to eat as conventionally produced foods, and do not require a special label.

“In a letter sent to Senate Appropriations leadership this week, BIO President and CEO Jim Greenwood points to GMO disclosure and transparency efforts already underway in the Senate Agriculture Committee. 

“As we understand it, the approach under consideration by that committee would apply to foods produced through biotechnology – such as GE salmon – and would provide information to consumers through a marketing disclosure mechanism, and not via a required label that would be perceived as a safety warning and thus would mislead consumers.”