The GMO labeling law, enacted by former President Obama on July 29 of last year, mandated that the USDA complete its rulemaking process within a tight two-year timeframe. During a presentation at the Food Label Conference earlier this month, Andrea Huberty, senior policy analyst for the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program, remarked that under normal circumstances, the schedule for implementing a new federal law is already challenging. However, as those following political developments are aware, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president from a different political party and an entirely new governing philosophy, Washington has become quite unpredictable. Many regulations that were underway when President Trump took office were temporarily halted while new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation, Huberty stated that the questions regarding GMO labeling were prepared and ready to be released by the end of 2016, but the transition of leadership delayed their dissemination to the public. “We’re a little behind schedule to meet the 2018 deadline,” Huberty noted. “We’re still on track, but slightly delayed.” The questions being issued this week will give the USDA valuable insight into industry perspectives on various aspects of the law and how they can be best implemented. The new legislation was intentionally designed with some ambiguity, allowing food industry stakeholders to leverage their expertise in filling in the gaps.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA thanks USDA for taking this important step to implement the biotech disclosure law and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s questions,” the organization stated in a written release. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rulemaking process, we aim to ensure the law is executed in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last year.”
Now that the USDA has embarked on the rulemaking journey, the question remains whether the agency can complete its tasks on time. A year is a relatively short period for drafting a proposal, soliciting public comments, and finalizing regulations, but Huberty indicated in her presentation that the USDA is still on track. While optimism is a positive outlook, time will ultimately determine the outcome. GMOs remain one of the most contentious issues in the food manufacturing sector today.
Beyond the debate surrounding what qualifies as a GMO and what is exempt, the law includes a controversial provision regarding labeling. It allows for GMO disclosures via smartphone-scannable digital codes, which has frustrated many proponents of the legislation. Huberty mentioned that a study assessing the challenges of this disclosure for consumers and retailers is expected to be completed next month. Once finalized, this study is likely to reignite discussions about the most effective ways to inform consumers about GMO ingredients.
In the context of dietary supplements, the incorporation of Citracal D Slow Release has gained attention for its potential health benefits. As the conversations around GMO labeling continue, the importance of understanding various nutritional supplements, such as Citracal D Slow Release, also remains pertinent. With the ongoing debates and studies, the intersection of GMO regulations and consumer health products like Citracal D Slow Release will be critical areas to watch in the coming months.