GMOs

From Stigma to Selling Point: The Future of GMOs in Produce

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 13:21:19 GMT

The Packer’s Sustainability Insights 2025 survey of growers, retailers and consumers found when it comes to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) or bioengineered produce, while the majority of growers indicate they’re ready to embrace them, consumers are more hesitant.

Sustainability Insights surveyed approximately 500 consumers on their fresh produce purchases and perception of GMOs. When asked: Do you consciously avoid buying products that are genetically modified? Sixty-five percent said yes, and 35% said no. When those who indicated avoiding GMOs were asked what their primary concern was in consuming a genetically modified fruit or vegetable, “chemicals” was the most frequently used word.

Nathan Pumplin, CEO of Norfolk Healthy Produce, the company behind the Empress Purple Tomato, a bioengineered tomato “packed with antioxidants,” says confusion is still holding some consumers back.

“On the consumer side, I think there is still confusion about what a GMO is,” he says. “Asking about a generic GMO is much different than asking about a specific product like a Pinkglow pineapple, Arctic Apples or the Empress Purple Tomato” — all of which are bioengineered.

“When you ask consumers, do you consciously avoid buying products that are genetically modified, I’m not surprised at all that 65% of them say yes. I might expect that number to be even higher,” he says. “But I also would be really interested to then look at their purchase behavior and what they bought over the last month or two in the grocery store. What percentage of them bought foods that have genetically modified ingredients? The answer would be over 95%.

“We also know there is a strong say-do gap between how people answer survey questions and what their eating and purchase behavior is,” he adds.

USDA estimates that up to 80% of all processed foods contain GMOs or GMO derivatives. Given that, Pumplin says unless consumers are buying organic exclusively, they’re already consuming bioengineered food from center store.

“GMOs are purchased way more than non-GMOs, if you look at food in general,” he says. “So, it’s a strange way that we’ve framed GMOs within produce.”

Pumplin says the reason there are fewer GMOs in produce than center store is twofold.

“One, it’s difficult and costly to develop new produce varieties, and the prize wasn’t there,” he explains. “So, the companies that were developing GMOs said, ‘Okay, we’re going for corn, we’re going for soy because other crops don’t make enough money, and it costs us a lot of money to develop them.’”

Pumplin says the second challenge is there haven’t been many GMO products in produce that are differentiated in the eyes of the consumer.

“It’s kind of the chicken or the egg,” he says. “People are not going to develop GMO produce items if there’s not a market for it, and there’s not going to be a market for it if people aren’t developing new products.”

Pumplin says that’s the cycle Norfolk is trying to break with the purple tomato.

“We had to be extremely frugal, extremely cost conscious, as we brought the product to market,” he says. “We had to do it step by step, engaging more and more consumers and heavily engaging with the supply chain all the way along to demonstrate that it’s worthwhile getting out to market.”

Growers Are More Receptive

Another key to breaking the chicken or the egg cycle, Pumplin says, is to offer growers more innovative bioengineered solutions in produce that are disease resistant, use fewer resources to grow and offer more flavor, nutrients and other benefits.

Sustainability Insights surveyed nearly 75 growers, revealing 54% of growers consider GMOs a sustainable solution. And while 80% said they do not currently offer a GMO product, 54% said they would consider a GMO product in the future.

The survey, fielded June and July 2025, included growers across the continental U.S., with 1,324 average acres farmed per respondent and over two-thirds of farmers surveyed over the age of 45.

“It’s interesting the disconnect with growers, where 54% are open to growing a GMO product but currently only 20% offer a biotech product,” Pumplin says. “This suggests that growers don’t yet have enough products and opportunities offered that meet their needs. Meeting that demand is a primary driver for our company.”

Premium Perception

Pumplin was on the USDA Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee a couple years ago, when the group gathered in Washington, D.C.

“There was a presentation from the organic certification group, and their big thing was: How do we catch cheaters? Organic is a premium label, and we need to make sure that everything that has an organic label really is organic,” Pumplin recalls. “Then bioengineering came up and [the presenter] said here’s the rules about bioengineering, and here’s how we make sure that anything that is bioengineered has the label on it.

“I raised my hand and said there’s kind of an interesting contrast here,” he continues. “So, what if I have a product that’s not bioengineered, and I put the bioengineered label on it? Will I get in trouble? She laughed and said: ‘Why would anyone ever do that?’ Like that’s the craziest thing. It just shows you that the thinking has been that organic is a premium and bioengineered is a warning.”

The Norfolk Healthy Produce CEO says he’s convinced that’s about to change.

At last month’s International Fresh Produce Association Global Produce and Floral Show in Anaheim, Calif., The Packer spoke with Pumplin at the Red Sun Farms booth where he was sampling the Empress Purple Tomato.

“It’s been nonstop people coming to the booth to sample the purple tomato,” Pumplin said. “It’s received so much attention, and not a single person has said: ‘This is a GMO, I’m not trying it.’ This is our fourth IFPA. The first year we heard: ‘I don’t know. Is it OK?’ Now they’re asking where they can buy purple tomatoes.”

Pumplin says the quantity of purple tomatoes the company brought to IFPA for sampling would usually have lasted two days, but this year they were gone in less than a day.

“I guarantee within five years from now people are going to be competing for developing the new leading GMO produce items once it’s clear that the supply chain will accept them,” he says. “And the supply chain will accept them because the vast majority of consumers want these products.

“I also fully believe that within a few years, bioengineering will be seen as a premium label, and people will reach for bioengineered the same way that they go to organic because it fits their value system,” he adds.

Positive Messaging

Today’s produce consumer is constantly changing and evolving, and Pumplin says it’s time for the industry to change as well.

“In the produce industry, so much of what we do is what we’ve done in the past, and we don’t really want to change it,” he says. “It’s just not possible anymore for the industry to be so — I don’t want to say stuck in the past — but just resistant to innovation, because the customers have moved on, and the industry has not.”

At this intersection of innovation and education, there’s opportunity.

“There haven’t been scientists telling positive stories about GMOs in a way that’s relatable to people,” Pumplin says. “It’s just been a massive gap. We need more engagement, and that message needs to get through to every produce consumer.”

Your next read:
Are Consumers Finally Ready to Embrace GMOs in the Produce Aisle?

Growers, Retailers, Consumers Share Top Sustainability Priorities

Growers Double Down on Sustainability as Key to Profitability

How the Purple Tomato is Changing Consumer Perception of GMOs

Fri, 12 Sep 2025 15:45:05 GMT

Eating the rainbow has become easier and more flavorful in recent years, especially when it comes to anthocyanins — the purple pigment that’s in blueberries, blackberries, red grape skins, eggplant and now — thanks to genetic modification — the purple tomato.

Nathan Pumplin is CEO of Norfolk Healthy Produce, the company behind the Empress Purple Tomato, a bioengineered tomato made by adding two genes from snapdragons. These tomatoes are a rich source of antioxidants because the purple pigments are in the whole tomato, not just the skin.

“They’re really good for people’s health, and most of us don’t eat nearly enough anthocyanins,” Pumplin says.

But the trained molecular biologist, who has worked for nearly 20 years in R&D and commercializing new types of plants that solve problems, says bringing a GMO purple tomato to market has not been without challenges.

“The first GMOs were really marketed to farmers, and the innovative farmers said: ‘OK, there’s these new GMO crops, do I want to use them?’ And they very quickly saw: ‘Wow, this solves a lot of problems for me. Yes, I want to adopt them,’” he says. “What was forgotten was that it was food being produced and sold to consumers, and consumers never had an opportunity to engage with GMOs in the food system.”

“There were people who felt the food supply was playing God in the lab by adding DNA to create new varieties, and no one had asked them if they wanted to opt in or opt out,” Pumplin continues. “I think a lot of people felt like they were treated like guinea pigs. Their opinions and their values weren’t respected when those first crops launched. And that’s a huge problem.”

Adding to the challenge is the reality that most consumers don’t know what a GMO is, making education critical to driving demand for the purple tomato.

The Empress Purple Tomato is a stunner in a variety of dishes from appetizers to salads.

(Photo courtesy of Norfolk Healthy Produce)

“What’s really gratifying is that we find, generally, 80% to 90% of people in the U.S. want this product,” Pumplin says. “They know it’s a GMO, and they get a chance to ask questions like: ‘Well, don’t all GMOs have pesticides?’ And we can say: ‘No, there’s no pesticides on these. And they have the opportunity to ask a lot of questions, and then the vast majority of people say, ‘OK, I really want this.’”

While Pumplin says backlash against GMOs halted innovation and new product development for years, now he sees things coming full circle. And as consumers are hungry for the new, the flavorful and the nutritious, the fresh produce industry has innovated with the help of GMOs in some exciting ways.

“Now we have some breakthrough products, and so I’m really proud to say, our purple tomato — which is marketed in grocery stores right now under the Empress brand — is doing extremely well,” he says. “We also have the Pinkglow pineapple from Del Monte on the market. We have the Arctic Apple, which is growing and doing very well in a lot of segments.”

“I think we’re on the brink of a widespread recognition within the industry that this is something that consumers are no longer afraid of,” he adds. “They simply want a better product. They want something they can afford. They want something that their kids will eat. They want something that’s nutritious, that’s beautiful, that tastes good, all of that.”

But while today’s consumer might be ready for the better, purple tomato, Pumplin says it’s the produce industry that needs to catch up on GMOs.

“There’s just simply so little fear among the broad consumer base right now, and also such a desire for new and better products,” he says. “A big part of my messaging is to try to make sure that folks in the produce industry, these key decision-makers, understand where their consumers are.

“Because I think that’s actually the biggest gap right now. Consumers have moved on, and a lot of the decision-makers in the industry, haven’t caught up to where the consumers are,” he says. “They think the consumers are still 10 years ago, afraid of GMOs, and that’s not true anymore.”

Are Consumers Finally Ready to Embrace GMOs in the Produce Aisle?

Thu, 04 Sep 2025 06:16:56 GMT

Consumers know it’s important to eat a rainbow of fresh fruits and vegetables, however, they often fall short of meeting this important nutrition goal, especially when it comes to anthocyanins — the purple pigment that’s in blueberries, blackberries, red grape skins, eggplant and purple potatoes.

But what if the industry made it easier for consumers to get these crucial antioxidants in their diets by offering new and flavorful ways to consume them?

Enter Nathan Pumplin, CEO of Norfolk Healthy Produce, the company behind the Empress Purple Tomato, a bioengineered or genetically modified organism tomato “packed with antioxidants.”

“They’re really good for people’s health, and most of us don’t eat nearly enough anthocyanins,” Pumplin says.

The trained molecular biologist with a doctorate in plant biology has worked for nearly 20 years in research and development and the intersection of R&D and commercialization of new types of plants that solve problems.

What are the advantages of a problem-solving plant? Pumplin says they can offer a host of benefits from being grown using less fertilizer and less pesticides to being naturally resistant to diseases and other added sustainability benefits.

As CEO of the Davis, Calif.-based company, Pumplin is focused on developing better purple tomatoes and engaging with the supply chain — right down to the consumer — to introduce them to a tomato that he says not only has nutritional benefits and tastes great, but shelf-life advantages as well.

Origin of GMOs’ Image Problem

But bringing a GMO purple tomato to market has not been without challenges.

The Packer’s Sustainability Insights 2025 report, set to drop Sept. 22, asked some 500 consumers across the country if they actively avoided GMOs. Those who indicated they did were asked why. The leading response was “chemicals.” Another survey respondent replied: “Frankenfoods are not what God intended us to consume.”

What sparked these misconceptions and negative sentiment around GMOs?

“To me, it’s very, very clear. And here’s kind of my simple understanding: When there’s any new technology that comes out — say, the first smartphones — there’s a very small set of people who start to use those new products and those are the innovators — the early adopters.”

Then there’s the middle of the curve who wait and see, and those who will resist adoption altogether, he says.

“When the first GMOs were launched, they were really marketed to farmers, and the innovative farmers said, ‘OK, there’s these new GMO crops, do I want to use them?’ And they very quickly saw, ‘Wow, this solves a lot of problems for me. Yes, I want to adopt them.’ And then sort of the middle of the [curve] farmers also very quickly adopted,” says Pumplin.

The first customers of GMOs were farmers and, in several years, the majority of the country’s corn and soy acreage was GMO, he says.

“What was forgotten was that it was food being produced and sold to consumers, and consumers never had an opportunity to engage with GMOs in the food system,” says Pumplin.

GMOs became widespread in the food system for years, and while some were comfortable with it, others felt betrayed, he says.

“There were people who felt the food supply was playing God in the lab by adding DNA to create new varieties and no one had asked them if they wanted to opt in or opt out,” says Pumplin. “I think a lot of people felt like they were treated like guinea pigs. Their opinions and their values weren’t respected when those first crops launched. And that’s a huge problem.

“One of the things I’m trying to do with our company is engage in a dialog with consumers about why we think this is a better tomato,” he continues. “We made it with biotechnology, but it’s not better because it’s biotechnology.”

Breakthroughs on the Brink

As consumers are hungry for the new, the flavorful and the nutritious, the fresh produce industry has innovated with the help of GMOs in some exciting ways.

GMOs have allowed for some “breakthrough products,” says Pumplin, pointing to Norfolk’s Empress Purple Tomato that is in grocery stores now and “doing extremely well.” Other examples include Fresh Del Monte’s Pinkglow Pineapple and the Arctic Apple.

“We have a lot of crops that people don’t know are GMOs — like all the papayas that come from Hawaii and a lot of the sweet corn on the market. A lot of these have been improved with biotechnology, and I think we’re on the brink of widespread recognition within the industry that this is something that consumers are no longer afraid of,” he says. “They simply want a better product. They want something they can afford. They want something that their kids will eat. They want something that’s nutritious, that’s beautiful, that tastes good — all of that.”

Several years ago, Norfolk conducted a nationwide consumer study asking if presented with the purple tomato product concept, would they be interested in trying it?

“Eighty percent of them were interested to extremely interested in trying the product,” says Pumplin. “And there were only 10% of consumers who said, ‘Nope, I don’t want to at all. I’m not there yet with GMOs.’”

But retailers who have been at the forefront of the GMO conversation with consumers for years may have lingering doubts.

“They say, ‘Well, you know, I get 10 questions a year asking if a product is GMO and it makes me nervous.’ And yet, what they don’t hear is the millions of people who say, ‘We want something better and we’re not afraid of biotechnology,” says Pumplin. “There’s sort of this silent majority.

“There’s just simply so little fear among the broad consumer base right now, and also such a desire for new and better products,” he continues. “And a big part of my job is to try to make sure that folks in the produce industry — these key decision-makers — understand where their consumers are, because I think that’s actually the biggest gap right now. Consumers have moved on, and a lot of the decision-makers in the industry haven’t caught up to where the consumers are.”

Education is Key

While Pumplin sees consumers becoming increasingly open to trying and embracing the purple tomato, education is critical to continuing to move the needle.

“We know that most consumers don’t actually know what a GMO is,” Pumplin says. When consumers go to their local grocery store, they’re looking on the packaging for shortcuts to identify products that are aligned with their values and how they want to feed their families. He says labels like “non-GMO,” “pesticide free” and “organic” become cues for the consumer to determine what’s good, what’s bad and what they can trust.

“If you ask consumers what they think is good, they’re taking cues from the packaging and marketers, who are taking cues from other marketers, and so we have this interesting kind of reinforcement system of what’s good and what’s bad, but it’s not actually connected to the food science,” Pumplin says. “It’s not connected to the supply chain. It’s not connected to a lot of what’s good for us.”

When Pumplin has the opportunity to engage with consumers and answer their questions about the purple tomato, that can be an eye-opening moment for many shoppers.

“What’s really gratifying is that we find, generally, 80% to 90% of people in the U.S. want this product,” Pumplin says. “They know it’s a GMO, and they get a chance to ask questions like, ‘Well, don’t all GMOs have pesticides?’ And we can say, ‘No, there’s no pesticides on these. They say, ‘Well, GMOs are sprayed with Roundup, right?’ We say, ‘This has nothing to do with Roundup.’ And they have the opportunity to ask a lot of questions, and then the vast majority of people say, ‘OK, I really want this’”

The Empress Purple Tomato, which has been reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration and USDA and fully has the green light to sell the product in the U.S., indicates bioengineered on the label, and there’s a QR code that goes to the Norfolk website that shares the science behind the tomato, says Pumplin, who adds that the Empress Purple Tomato will soon be available in Canada as well.

GMOs and the Future of Food

What role does Pumplin see GMOs playing in the future of fresh produce and the broader food system?

“I want to make sure it’s clear that GMO is not a silver bullet. It’s not going to solve all the problems out there,” he says.

But Pumplin does see GMOs as a complement to the traditional plant breeding that’s been conducted for thousands of years and continues to innovate, as in the case of easy peel mandarins, he says.

“What we need to do is continue excellent plant breeding for certain cases. And if we can sprinkle on biotechnology that can help us get more nutrients and disease resistance [against something like] the brown rugose virus, which is a major upheaval in tomatoes, and if we were allowed to use biotechnology, we could combat it much more efficiently, much quicker, much more sustainably and in a way that we know is safe,” he says. “These are the kind of use cases that if we can change public opinion and key decision-makers’ opinions about these technologies, that’s going to be to the benefit of everyone.”

Arctic apple’s rising production allows for foodservice growth

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:10:01 GMT

Interest from foodservice operators is growing for fresh-cut slices of the genetically engineered nonbrowning Arctic apple .

Okanagan Specialty Fruits Inc. , Summerland, British Columbia, exhibited the fresh-cut slices for the first time at the Produce Marketing Association’s Foodservice Conference and Expo July 27 in Monterey, Calif.

“It was exciting for us to exhibit at the PMA Foodservice show for the first time and to give attendees the opportunity to experience the orchard freshness of Arctic Golden fresh slices,” J.F. Gamelin, director of sales for Okanagan Specialty Fruits. “Arctic apples’ nonbrowning trait offers a key benefit to the food service industry — including less prep, less waste and better taste.”

The Arctic apples have a 28-day shelf life, compared to the 18- to 21-day average in the industry, according to a news release from the company, offering a “just-picked” eating experience.

The fresh-cut Arctic slices have multiple uses for foodservice operators, including fruit trays, salads and charcuterie, according to the release.

The company plans to offer 40-ounce bags of sliced golden and granny smith varieties to foodservice customers, and 100-count cases of two-ounce packages.

“For the first time, this year’s anticipated Arctic apple crop volume will support expanding into foodservice,” Neal Carter, president, said in the release. “We’ve been extremely busy planting in the orchards.”

The company estimates Arctic production at eight million pounds for the 2019-20 season, Carter said, with increased production for future seasons.

Okanagan Specialty Fruits plans to increase its retail availability as well, according to the release.

Related stories:

FDA approves bioengineered Arctic Fuji

GM Arctic apples heating up at retail

Okanagan Specialty Fruit names sales director

US Approves 2 Types of Genetically Engineered Potatoes

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:03:33 GMT

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has approved commercial planting of two types of potatoes that are genetically engineered to resist the pathogen that caused the Irish potato famine.

The approval announced Friday covers Idaho-based J.R. Simplot Co.'s Ranger Russet and Atlantic varieties of the company’s second generation of Innate potatoes.

The company says the potatoes will also have reduced bruising and black spots, enhanced storage capacity, and a reduced amount of a chemical created when potatoes are cooked at high temperatures that’s a potential carcinogen.

“We obviously are very proud of these,” said company spokesman Doug Cole.

The potatoes next must clear a voluntary review process through the Food and Drug Administration as well as get the OK from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The company says it expects those approvals in January with the potatoes entering the market next spring.

The two varieties join a third variety with the same traits called the Russet Burbank that has already attained approval from the Agriculture Department and FDA, with EPA approval also expected in January.

The company said the potatoes contain only potato genes, and that the resistance to late blight, the disease that caused the Irish potato famine, comes from an Argentinian variety of potato that naturally produced a defense.

Late blight continues to be a major problem for potato growers around the world, especially in wetter regions. Company officials say the new types of potatoes will bring 24-hour protections to farmers’ fields and reduce the use of pesticide spray up to 45 percent.

The reduction in bruising, Cole said, could reduce waste and increase by 15 percent the top-quality potatoes coming out of fields, which sell for more than bruised potatoes.

Cole said the new varieties of potatoes can be kept in cold storage longer. Conventional potatoes can turn a dark color when cooked after they were kept cold for too long. The enhanced cold storage could have significant ramifications for the potato chip industry by reducing trucking costs, Cole said.

The company’s second generation of Innate potatoes follows the first generation that has been selling to consumers for more than a year. Those potatoes, marketed under the White Russet label, have reduced bruising and reduced potential carcinogens when cooked, but not resistance to late blight or enhanced cold storage.

Cole said about 40 million pounds of the first generation potatoes have been sold to consumers in more than 35 states. He said that’s about 1 percent of all potato sales. Of the 40 million pounds, he said about two-thirds went to produce sections of stores.

There is no evidence that genetically modified organisms, known as GMOs, are unsafe to eat, but for some people, altering the genetic code of foods presents an ethical issue. McDonald’s has rejected using Simplot’s first generation of Innate potatoes for its French fries.

The food industry has also faced pressure from retailers as consumer awareness of genetically modified foods has increased. Retailer Whole Foods has said it plans to label GMO products in all its U.S. and Canadian stores by 2018. A company spokeswoman declined to comment over the phone on Monday, and the company didn’t immediately respond to an emailed question from The Associated Press about whether it would consider selling the potatoes in its stores.

Simplot has been fighting back with a public relations campaign this year and two female athletes.

Kristin Armstrong, a Boise resident and three-time Olympic gold medalist in cycling, touts the nutritional values of the White Russet potatoes.

To demonstrate resistance to bruising, mixed martial artist and former UFC women’s bantamweight champion Holly Holm recently used her skills on a hanging bag of White Russets. The company said the potatoes survived and proved hard to bruise.

U.S. Farmers: GMO Crops Help Reduce Inputs and Enhance Conservation

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:03:37 GMT

ST. LOUIS, Dec. 15, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- The majority of U.S. farmers and ranchers indicate biotechnology and GMO crops as an important solution in helping raise crops more efficiently, according to new survey results released today from the U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance (USFRA) and National Corn Growers Association (NCGA). With technology shaping today’s farms, GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are one tool in a farmer’s toolbox to enhance production and grow and raise our food supply more sustainably.

Over 280 farmers across the United States were surveyed about their attitudes toward GMO crops. They were asked to weigh in on a range of topics regarding the impact of GMO technology on the environment, pesticide use, and yields, among others.

Findings conclude that farmers believe biotechnology helps raise crops more efficiently, and that the environment and sustainability practices will suffer if GMO technology utilization is reduced in crop production in the future. Seventy-eight (78%) percent of farmers foresee increased environmental impacts—including an increase in water usage and application of pesticides—if GMO seeds were not to be available to them as a choice in crop production.

When asked about farmers’ ability to lessen their environmental footprint, 98 percent of those polled ranked GMO seeds at the top of their list. Additional survey findings include:

Pesticide Use/Crop Inputs: When asked about the reason for using biotechnology when raising crops, most farmers indicated GMO seeds allow them to minimize pesticide/herbicide usage (87%).
Sustainability: Three quarters (78%) of farmers also expressed being able to engage in advanced farming practices, such as conservation tillage. Another two-thirds (64%) of farmers also believe GMO seeds allow for efficient management of resources, specifically, fuel, time and less wear-and-tear on their equipment.
Yields: Many farmers believe GMO seeds produce a higher yield (69%). This finding may also have an impact on why many farmers believe GMO seeds work best for their particular farm and region in enhancing productivity (65%).

“With GMOs and advances in agricultural technology, we’re utilizing our resources much more precisely today and have pinpoint accuracy when applying fertilizer, nitrogen and chemical applications. This is especially important on my farm in the Chesapeake Bay watershed,” said Chip Bowling, vice chairman of USFRA and third-generation farmer. “The farmers’ perspective in the survey findings are a direct indication of how important genetic engineering technology is for the environment and our food supply, and how it benefits farmers and consumers alike.”

This most recent farmer survey follows USFRA’s September 2016annual Perception Benchmark Study, which measured consumer opinions about agriculture, including attitudes toward environmental sustainability, GMOs and technology. Approximately half of the Consumer Food Connectors, or men and women surveyed between the ages of 21-65 (with no personal connections to farming), attributed increased yields and increased efficiency to the use of advanced technology on farms and ranches. While technology on the farm was perceived positively, only 11 percent of this group found GMOs favorable.

“As an organization that supports all farmers and their choice to plant and grow conventional crops, genetically modified crops, organic crops, or any combination, we believe in sustainability and technology to continually improve our farms for future generations,” said Randy Krotz, USFRA CEO. “Our research shows the continued need for agriculture to inform today’s consumer about the merits and benefits of GMOs and other technologies, while dispelling any misconceptions about negative impacts to human health and the environment.”

The survey was conducted online from October 11-26, 2016, among a sample of 282 farmers, 18 years of age and older, living in the U.S. The margin of error for this study is /-5.84 % at a 95% confidence level. Of the 282 farmers polled, 92% have been using GMO seeds for 10 or more years, and grow a variety of crops, including corn, soybeans, alfalfa, wheat and cotton.

To view an executive summary of the survey, visit http://www.fooddialogues.com/press-release/gmo/u.s.-farmers-ranchers-alliance-national-corn-growers-association-gmo-farmer-survey .

Krotz: Foul-Mouthed 'Mr. Seed' Sells With Scares

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:03:11 GMT

Note: The Clif Bar Family Foundation recently established Seed Matters “to improve the viability and availability of organic seed to ensure healthy, nutritious and productive crops.” Its current marketing campaign centers around an animated video where the spokesman, “Mr. Seed,” spends a five-minute foul-mouthed tirade against GMOs.

In the rebuttal below, Randy Krotz, CEO of U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance, explains why so-called “scare marketing” like this damages the industry and what farmers and ranchers should do in response.

---

It saddens me to say that the organic food industry has reached a new low. U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance has always been an organization that promotes and encourages diversity in food production practices, but we find ourselves speechless, mouths hanging open. The atrocity of the Seed Matters video created for the Clif Bar Family Foundation, and the messages within, have crossed the line.

In an attempt to scare the public about GMO crops, the video uses unrealistic imagery (think skeletal fish, seeds on steroids) to promote an organic agenda. The website of the film’s creators ( http://thebutlerbros.com/work/mr-seed/ ), states the main character, Mr. Seed “educates people about seed issues and the benefits of organic seed.” But Seed Matters actually perpetuates some of the greatest myths of agriculture using a foul-mouthed character and inappropriate imagery. The main purpose of the video is supposedly taking a stance on biotech and its ability to feed the world. The mark really couldn’t have been further missed.

There are millions of people who work in the agricultural industry around the world. At a time when we should be united for the common good of feeding the world, we are fighting instead, using unethical and non-factual propaganda as the weapon. Food companies are using junk science driving people away from sustainable practices like GMOs to manipulate consumers for the sole purpose of market gain. The bottom line is: no matter your approach to farming, or how you view various farming practices, the outright demonization of conventional agriculture and family farms is despicable.

I have toured Clif’s small, organic farm in the highly erodible hills of northern California and participated in multiple events where Clif Company representatives presented myths against conventional agriculture to rooms full of eager listeners. I was always respectful in my approach and communications. As an individual and as part of this organization, we listened and we engaged in dialogue in an attempt to illustrate our support for their farming practices. But agriculture as a whole cannot be tolerant any longer.

Too many times conventional agriculture takes the white hat approach while food companies like Chipotle and Clif, strike with negative retorts in the form of videos and cutting words. This video, and several others, are not just attacking how we farm; they are personally insulting science, agronomic research and all farmers who choose to implement modern farming practices such as GMOs.

So what are our next steps? In an ideal world, we would drive for consumers and agriculturalists alike to see through these scare tactics and abandon these products all together. Our approach might be effective for a short time, but in reality, this voice is not one we will be able to stop. There will be more videos painting farmers, ranchers and our methods of food production in an ominous manner.

We need a long-term solution. It’s time for all of agriculture to come together and respond as a collective and united force, not just those that are part of our organization. This video (and several others) directly and falsely impact consumer opinions about how we grow and raise food, which in turn, directly impacts the present and the future for farmers and ranchers. It unjust and raises unrealistic fears about the food we grow and the health of it.

I encourage each and every one of you reading this to Be Offended. Be Disgusted. Be Angry. And even Be Hurt and to react loud and clear. Our livelihoods are being criticized and it is time to respond.

Grower of GM Arctic apples sold to biotech company

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:25:16 GMT

Okanagan Specialty Fruits Inc. , Summerland, British Columbia, the grower and marketer of bioengineered Arctic non-browning apple varieties, has been purchased by TS Biotechnology Holdings LLC.

TS Biotechnology is an affiliate of Third Security LLC, a venture capital firm led by R.J. Kirk, executive chairman of Intrexon, Okanagan Specialty Fruit’s (OSF) previous owner. Intrexon is a biotech company.

Intrexon, Germantown, Md., the owner of OSF through Intrexon Produce Holdings Inc., announced Jan. 2 it planned to sell the apple grower and other non-healthcare assets. The transaction closed Jan. 31, according to a news release.

“R.J. Kirk is a powerful champion of our Arctic apples and we are thrilled to continue our partnership with him at Third Security,” Neal Carter, OSF founder, said in the release. “Collaboration with Third Security will facilitate our continued success as we further expand into retail and foodservice, enhancing our ability to deliver more apples in more places.”

OSF is focused on expanding the Arctic apple’s reach into new marketplaces.

“The success of OSF’s Arctic apple is ground-breaking for the produce industry and for bioengineering science,” Kirk, founder and CEO of Third Security, said in the release. “We are excited to add OSF’s innovation and passion to our portfolio.”

OSF sells sliced Arctic Granny and Arctic Golden apples. It also markets ApBitz, dried apple snacks. The company has received approval to market Arctic Fujis as well. While the company has marketed whole Arctic apples at retail in the past, a company spokeswoman said they are not available whole anymore.

Related stories:

Fresh Summit: an educational platform for Arctic apples

Arctic apple’s rising production allows for foodservice growth

Maker of Arctic apple acquired

Ex-GMO Foe Mark Lynas Defends Commercial Agriculture

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:00:05 GMT

A flurry of critical online comments led Mark Lynas to take a hard look at genetically modified crops starting in 2008. Lynas, a British author of three books on climate change, had written an editorial opposing GMOs in The Guardian newspaper .

He decided to research the subject and in the process, he says, learned that he had held an “anti-science” view for too long. It contradicted the intensive research he’d done on climate change using scientific sources.

“People, I think, are stuck between the myth of the anti-GM campaigners and the PR sales pitch of the GM corporations, and people need independent inquiry,” Lynas says.

The author is again at the center of heated Internet discussion after comments he made Jan. 3 to the Oxford Farming Conference.

“For the record, here and upfront, I apologize for having spent several years ripping up GM crops,” Lynas said during his introduction to that talk. “I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid-1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonizing an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.”

07 Mark Lynas from Oxford Farming Conference on Vimeo .

In its first week online, the speech was viewed a quarter of a million times.

Lynas says he’s been accused for years of being in the pocket of major agribusinesses such as Monsanto thanks to remarks like those. But he insists that his main focus right now is to turn down all speaking invitations he’s received, particularly those from corporations. He says he has never requested nor received any funding from GMO companies, and he characterizes as a “smear campaign” a 2011 Guardian report claiming agribusiness company EuropaBio wanted him to be among its ambassadors.

“I don’t want to be a spokesperson for industry,” Lynas says. “They can speak for themselves.”

What most surprises Lynas is that it took him this long to change his views on genetically modified crops. He attributes his initial resistance to peer pressure and the circles of people with whom he associated.

Lynas has been an environmentalist for as long as he can remember. He covered environmental issues for his college newspaper and got involved in activism, defending the countryside against road-building. He also targeted GMO crops in conjunction with Monsanto’s release of Roundup Ready Soybeans in 1996 .

“I was the lead organizer in the first and probably only office occupation of Monsanto the UK,” Lynas says. He organized buses, got inside the building with other activists and “caused havoc.” At other times–day and night–he helped destroy genetically modified test sites with crops such as corn and sugar beets. Sometimes they wore biohazard suits in full view of police and cameras.

As they saw it, Lynas says, they were preventing contamination and the spread of genetic pollution. He associated with a variety of loosely affiliated people, from anarchists to environmental activists and others.

But since 2008, Lynas says, he has come to realize that GMOs present opportunities. It troubles him that some people think modern industrial agriculture is fundamentally a bad thing. Without this system, he says, the world couldn’t support seven billion people. People today are better fed than ever before, and the idea that organic farming could produce the same results is an illusion.

“It’s kind of a worldview issue, which I really think needs to be challenged,” Lynas says. Other misconceptions about GMOs include myths about food safety, and the mistaken notion that they cause cancer and negatively affect health in other ways.

“You can do a Top 10 list of these myths and debunk them very easily,” he says.

Lynas attributes those views to two factors: The naturalistic fallacy (the idea that nature is good and artificial is bad) and left-wing anti-corporate ideology. “Monsanto has become almost the devil incarnate for these people,” he says. In his view, Monsanto is just another company with good and bad attributes.

The public has a responsibility to educate itself, he says. What’s more, it’s clear more research needs to be done on GMOs. Developing crops that don’t need applications of pesticides and fungicides and improving the efficiency of nitrogen use are among the areas where Lynas sees potential. In all cases, the goal should be to make the food production system more sustainable.

“For me, the speech I made was a sort of cry from the heart,” Lynas says. “I just got sick of the amount of misinformation.”

7 Agriculture Headlines Not To Miss, June 20

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:00:13 GMT

1. Spies in the Furrows

When two Chinese spies went low-tech to steal high-tech plants, their actions eventually helped peeled back the curtain on industrial espionage in agriculture, and few doubt the paper trail leads straight to the top levels in Beijing. ( Motley Fool )

2. Rat Smells a Cig

Twelve percent of the tobacco trade is smuggled across international borders each year. What to do? Send in Giant African Pouched Rats and their phenom schnozzes. They’ve already been tested successfully in landmine detection. ( takepart )

3. Golden Banana Agoniste

Created by Australian scientists, a vitamin A rich, GM banana is ready for human consumption trials. And no matter the outcome, no matter the potential for saving millions of lives across the world, there will weeping and gnashing of teeth from the anti-GM crowd. ( The Independent )

For more, see 7 Agriculture Headlines Not To Miss, June 18

4. Water Salvation Shot from a Slingshot

Forget the Segway. One of Dean Kamen’s other inventions called the “Slingshot” may offer water salvation to millions across the globe. Kamen’s invention (10 years in the making) can purify 250,000 liters of the nastiest water around: sewage, saltwater, or chemical wastewater. ( Popular Science )

5. Cattle Rustlers and AK-47s

Hundreds of rustlers stealing a few thousand cattle in a single run with AK-47s? Apparently not the stuff of fiction in Kenya. ( VICE )

6. A Pig’s Life

What’s the best way to give a pig life before killing it? ( Gizmodo )

7. Switching from Milk to Beer

What to do when the dairy barn isn’t producing a profit? Turn it into a brewery. ( The Record News )

From the vault:

7 Agriculture Headlines Not To Miss, June 18

7 Agriculture Headlines Not To Miss, June 16

7 Agriculture Headlines Not to Miss, June 13

GM Arctic apples heating up at retail

Tue, 15 Nov 2022 07:44:29 GMT

EASTERN WASHINGTON — For a company that took 21 years to release its first product to consumers, Okanagan Specialty Fruits Inc. is moving rapidly with expansion plans.

The biotech company’s genetically modified non-browning Arctic Golden apple slices were available in about 400 midwestern grocery stores a year ago, followed by Arctic ApBitz dried apple snacks this March, exclusively through Amazon.

In an Oct. 1-3 educational trip sponsored by Okanagan Specialty Fruits (OSF), the company invited 10 trade media, bloggers and dietitians to hear about the company’s plans to expand, as well as educate consumers on the process to turn off the enzyme that causes fruit to brown.

Company co-founder and president Neal Carter and other OSF employees led the group through education sessions and orchard and nursery tours. Attendees agreed to withhold the location of the acreage due to security concerns from activists, but OSF was candid in its bold plans for expansion.

Those plans include:

Adding fresh-cut Arctic Grannys to retail availability, and releasing golden and granny smith ApBits to retailers (whole apples in both varieties will be in 2-pound bags);
Expanding production — OSF is harvesting on 60 acres this season and plans to have 180 acres in production next year and 560 in 2020;
Expanding planted acreage — there are about 600 acres of Arctic variety trees, with another 800 planned for next year;
Opening the first phase of a massive facility in Royal City by the end of 2019. The 100,000-square-foot initial phase will grow to about 1 million square feet by the mid-2020s, with pre-grading lines, slicing lines, dehydration equipment for ApBitz and lines for packing whole, fresh Arctics;
More varieties — The company has received approval to grow non-browning fujis from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (waiting on Food and Drug Administration’s OK) and is working on gala approval; and
Licensing growers in other areas, including the Southern Hemisphere. OSF is working with authorities and a potential growing partner in Argentina.

Carter said the company is focusing on retail products, with attention to a size optimized for slicing equipment. As production ramps up, foodservice sales will focus on high-end operators, positioning the sliced apples as a premium product.

The “sliced-first” policy affects how many whole Arctics will be available each season. Apples that are too small or large for slicing equipment will be sold as whole fruit or used for the dried ApBitz.

“It’s all part of our commitment to sustainability and reducing food waste, along with offering consumers more healthy snacking options,” said Denise Everett, communications specialist with OSF.

“Apple consumption, per-capita, has been declining for the last 25 years,” he said. “We need to do something different in the apple business, and to make apples more convenient.

“Enzymatic browning is always an issue,” Carter said. “… We thought if we could turn off that enzyme, it could change the whole business.”

Jennifer Armen, OSF vice president, said the applications of the technology are numerous, and not just limited to apples. But in that category, she sees fresh-cut apples in baking kits. She uses the analogy of fresh-cut carrot products, from crinkle-cut, to coins and shredded cuts.

“We actually envision that Arctic apples can lend themselves to the same diversity in the apple space,” Armen said. “… I can’t wait til we have the supply to bring to the market in the fall a grab-and-go apple crisp (baking kit).”

Whole Foods backs off mandatory GMO labeling

Tue, 15 Nov 2022 07:45:39 GMT

Whole Foods is pulling back on its plan to require GMO labeling for all foods in stores by September.

The Austin, Texas-based company announced the mandatory initiative in 2013 , and a letter sent to suppliers in mid-May by A.C. Gallo, chief operations officer, said Whole Foods’ plans are on hold.

Gallo referred to the proposed Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard proposed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as a contributor to the company’s decision.

“As the USDA finalizes the federal regulation in the coming months and the food industry assesses the impact, we do not want our policy to pose further challenges for you and your businesses,” the note said.

“While the proposed rule speaks to requirements for disclosing a bioengineered food, it is silent on requirements for making an on-label non-GMO claim. Given the uncertain details of the regulation, we do not expect the verification of non-GMO claims on existing banded products by the previously communicated Sept. 1, 2018 deadline.”

Gallo said this is not a permanent cancellation of the initiative.

“Once there is a better understanding of the final federal regulation, we will be able to provide further updates and timelines.”

CPMA speaker says shift from No GMO to Know GMO

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 05:26:01 GMT

VANCOUVER — Arguing for the need to shift the consumer conversation from “No GMO” to “Know GMO,” author and agriculture advocate Rob Saik said the ability for agriculture to feed the world may be at stake.

Speaking during the Canadian Produce Market Association’s conference and expo on April 25, Saik titled his presentation “Will agriculture be allowed to feed 9 billion people?” He grew up on a farm in Alberta and became active speaking out on the issue a few years ago.

Many consumers have a romanticized view of agriculture that doesn’t make room for advances in agriculture technology, he said.

“I believe the non-science movement is the greatest threat to global food security today,” he said. “We have to begin shouting in the darkness.”

The question is not whether agriculture can feed 9 billion people, but whether agriculture will be allowed to, he said.

For example, genetically engineered golden rice has high levels of Vitamin A that would help reduce childhood blindness in developing countries, he said. If widely used, he said golden rice could prevent hundreds of thousands of children from becoming blinded from vitamin deficiency every year. Greenpeace has opposed Golden Rice and fear-based public policy has prevented its spread, which Saik calls a moral tragedy.

“Fanaticism is causing global suffering,” he said.

The industry, he said, needs to fight back to retain control of the conversation. Arguing that all fruits and vegetables have been genetically modified by conventional breeding over the decades, Saik said people should avoid “GMO” and start using the term “genetically engineered” food.

“We will need all the tools in agriculture’s toolbox, including genetic engineering, to maintain global food security with a population of 9, 10 or 11 billion people,” he said.

Saik also was critical of marketers who use certified Non-GMO labels issued by the Non-GMO Project.

“This is a fear-based marketing campaign,” he said. “If the best your marketing people can do as a strategy is to say, ‘Hey, let’s slap a non-GMO project (label) on your produce when there is no genetic engineered alternative — if that’s the best they can do — fire them,” he said.

Saik directed the audience to his Know GMO website.

USDA Extends Comment Period on Roundup Ready Alfalfa

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 02:18:59 GMT

USDA announced today it was extending the comment period for the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) on Roundup Ready alfalfa by 15 days to March 3. The comment period was to have ended today. No reason for the extension was given.

USDA has also held public meetings on the EIS in Nevada and Nebraska earlier this year. A final meeting will be held in Riverdale, Md., February 24.

For more details on the extended comment period and the February 24^th meeting, click here .

John Phipps: The New Technology Helping Cool the GMO Debate

Tue, 20 Jun 2023 13:59:09 GMT

The public apprehension over Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) has slowly dissipated as an abundance of non-GMO offerings have been made available to consumers. One major concern was the transference of genetic material between species.

These transgenic mutations made some consumers uneasy, but they also made GMOs detectable. Soon simple and rapid tests could make sure if corn was GMO or not. Such detectability is crucial.

Compare this situation to organic, for example, where the only criterion was essentially the word of the producer, backed by paperwork, inspections, and other oversight – not a laboratory test. Science has moved on.

Using a genetic engineering tool with the handy name of CRISPR/Cas9, breeders can now alter genes without using transgenic material. This is essentially the same method as conventional plant breeding only capable of targeting a specific gene segment instead of waiting for an identical natural mutation to occur and be sorted out.

CRISPR results are identical to results from conventional breeding. Without outside material involved it is impossible to differentiate from conventional and CRISPR results.

While food activists may still object, recent scandals in the organic food industry suggest trying to discriminate against CRISPR products will be impossible or at least worse than the current shaky organic verification regimes. It would also make no sense or calm any fear.

Gene alterations occur constantly from natural causes such as background radiation, gene replication errors, and traditional breeding, evidenced by the importance of pedigrees for breeding livestock.

When this genetic tool first began getting attention, I wrote about it in Top Producer. I was a little too enthusiastic six years ago about when the first fruits of this work would show up in supermarkets.

It is happening now, and one of the first foods to be improved is sadly, mustard greens. The new varieties are less bitter, I guess, but then I’m far from a salad aficionado.

My hope is we could finally solve some more pressing vegetable issues – like shippable tomatoes with August-garden juiciness and flavor. Meanwhile consumers may be, knowingly or not, storing one of the most advanced scientific discoveries in their refrigerators.

In other words, we’ll be putting CRISPR in the crisper.