NOSB Fall 2016 Meeting Results: Carrageenan Disallowed; New GMO Technology Banned; Jury Out on Organic Aquaculture

Source: Wikimedia Commons

NOSB Fall 2016 Meeting Results: Carrageenan Disallowed; New GMO Technology Banned; Jury Out on Organic Aquaculture

Source - Presence Marketing December 2016 Newsletter

The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) voted 11-3 to disallow the controversial ingredient Carrageenan in certified organic products at its biannual public meeting held November 16th to 18th, 2016, in St. Louis, Missouri. 

Carrageenan, a food additive derived from a type of red seaweed and commonly used as a thickener, emulsifier and/or stabilizing agent in processed foods such as chocolate milk, soy milk, cheese, yogurt, ice cream, deli meats and other products, has been subject to intensifying debate in the organic industry. Larger organic producers have maintained that Carrageenan is safe, while consumer groups including the Cornucopia Institute petitioned NOSB to remove the ingredient, asserting that Carrageenan is linked to gastrointestinal inflammation and is a possible carcinogen. As a result of the vote, Carrageenan will no longer be allowed in certified organic products beginning in 2018. 

Also, while traditional genetic engineering (GMO) methodologies are prohibited in organic production, NOSB voted to officially prohibit newer technologies that have emerged since the original national organic law was passed. NOSB added biotech methods including CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, mutagenesis and synthetic biology to the excluded methods list, along with guiding principles and criteria to be applied in the evaluation of new technologies. 

In further testing the waters for hydroponically grown certified organic products – another organic “hot button” issue – NOSB voted to delay a decision on the issue, referring any recommendation on hydroponics back to a subcommittee until the spring 2017 meeting. In 2010, the NOSB made a recommendation to ban hydroponics, as the original definition of organic, written in 1995, included the word “soil,” while a revised definition written in 2002 omitted “soil” and used “biological practices” instead, reports Max Goldberg in Living Maxwell. 

USDA has allowed some certifiers to certify hydroponically grown produce including tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, eggplant and other products, while other certifiers do not because of a lack of guidance from the USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP), says the Cornucopia Institute. Mexico, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, and 24 European nations all prohibit hydroponic vegetable production – where plants are grown in water with their roots in nutrient systems instead of soil – to be sold as organic in their own countries, reports Living Maxwell. 

The next NOSB meeting will take place April 19th to 21st, 2017, in Denver, Colorado.

*This content was originally published in the Presence Marketing December 2016 Newsletter.

Engaging Via Blogs Helps Meet Consumers Where They Are: An Interview with Steve Hoffman

Nutra Ingredients USA - News / Markets

Author - Hank Schultz

Engaging Via Blogs Helps Meet Consumers Where They Are

Interacting with consumers through blogs continues to become an important part of marketing plans in the dietary supplement and functional foods industries. “Companies and brands have to meet their customers where they are, and that’s increasingly online in communities of their own choosing,” says Hoffman. Consumers are starting to put their trust in new voices throughout the blogger community, and that trust is critical to the ongoing relationship between consumers and bloggers. Steve Hoffman, CEO of Compass Natural, continues to expand on his thoughts surrounding industry and media relations throughout the following article, along with details of the upcoming ShiftCon event this December in New Orleans. 

Click here to read the full article!

Source: Nutra Ingredients USA - News / Markets

GMO Roundup: Whole Foods Market, Pope Francis Top GMO News

Photo: Compass Natural

GMO Roundup: Whole Foods Market, Pope Francis Top GMO News
Source - Presence Marketing November 2016 Newsletter                                              
Author - Steve Hoffman

Whole Foods Market Updates Progress on GMO Transparency

To mark national Non-GMO Month in October, Whole Foods Market released a progress report on the retailer’s GMO labeling policy. First announced in 2013, “We are well on our way to providing GMO transparency for the food we sell by our self-imposed deadline of September 1st, 2018,” writes President and COO A.C. Gallo in a company blog published on October 10th. While QR codes are a labeling option in the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Law, signed by President Obama on July 29th, 2016, “This is absolutely unacceptable for our policy,” Gallo writes. Also, in a modification of its original announcement, made to align with the new federal law, says Gallo, Whole Foods Market will not require suppliers to label ingredients derived from animals fed GMO feed; that is, a food product that contains a meat or dairy ingredient but does not contain any other risk ingredient will not be subject to a labeling requirement. Whole Foods Market requires all non-GMO claims on products sold in its stores to be verified by approved third-party verification programs including the Non-GMO Project, NSF True North and USDA Certified Organic (and equivalent international programs.) “Part of our current focus is working closely with suppliers and manufacturers to help meet our GMO Labeling Policy,” Gallo writes. 

Pope Francis Questions GMO Crops, Urges Action on Climate Change

Pope Francis called into question the role of GMO crops in his annual message on World Food Day on October 16th, reported Catholic Culture Magazine. In a letter to the head of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the Pope said, “There is a growing number of people who believe they are omnipotent, or able to ignore the cycles of the seasons and to improperly modify the various animal and plant species, leading to the loss of variety that, if it exists in nature, has and must have its role.” Pope Francis contrasted the “wisdom of rural communities” with “the logic of consumerism and production at any cost, a logic that, cloaked in good justifications, such as the increasing population, is in reality aimed solely at the increase of profit.” In his message to the FAO, the Pope also said, “Genetic selection of a quality of plant may produce impressive results in terms of yield, but have we considered the terrain that loses its productive capacity, farmers who no longer have pasture for their livestock, and water resources that become unusable? And above all, do we ask if and to what extent we contribute to altering the climate? Not precaution, then, but wisdom: what peasants, fisherman and farmers conserve in memory handed down through the generations and which is now derided and forgotten by a model of production that is entirely to the advantage of a limited group and a tiny portion of the world population. Let us remember that it is a model which, despite all its science, allows around eight hundred million people to continue to go hungry.” 

Adjusting to Demand, Cargill Announces First Non-GMO Project Verified Ingredients

As demand for non-GMO food rises, Cargill has obtained Non-GMO Project Verification for three of its food ingredients, including erythritol, cane sugar and high oleic sunflower oil. Annual sales of Non-GMO Project Verified products increased from $348.8 million in 2010 to more than $19 billion as of March, 2016. According to Packaged Facts, demand for non-GMO products is expected to grow 12% annually through 2018. With nearly 2,800 Non- GMO Project Verified brands sourcing ingredients to comply with the standard, food and beverage industry demand is outpacing supply, said Cargill in a statement. “Consumer demand for non-GMO food and beverages is growing, and Cargill is responding,” said Mike Wagner, Managing Director for Cargill Starches and Sweeteners North America. “We’re delighted to work with the Non-GMO Project, the leading verifier of non-GMO products in the United States. Their distinctive trademark is the most recognized symbol for non-GMO products in the country.” Collaboration with Cargill, one of the largest food companies in the world, is an opportunity to increase the availability of non-GMO foods to consumers, said Megan Westgate, Executive Director of the Non-GMO Project. “The Non-GMO Project’s mission is to preserve and build sources of non-GMO products, educate consumers, and provide verified non-GMO choices. Achieving this mission requires participation by companies of all sizes, including supply-chain leaders like Cargill that can provide large-scale availability of non-GMO food ingredients,” she said. 

Okanagan Gains Approval for Third GMO Apple Variety, But Will It Be Labeled? 

British Columbia biotech company Okanagan has gained U.S. approval for its genetically engineered, non-browning Arctic Fuji variety. The Fuji apple joins the non-browning GMO Golden Delicious and Granny Smith varieties developed by Okanagan, using a new gene editing technology known as CRISPR/Cas-9, a technology that labeling proponents fear will not be subject to labeling disclosure under the new federal GMO labeling law, which requires only older, recombinant genetic engineering technology to be labeled. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of USDA granted the non-browning Arctic Fuji approval in late September, reported Food Safety News on October 5th. As part of the review process, the agency sought public comment on the genetically modified organism (GMO). By the mid-September deadline, 626 comments had been filed with APHIS, with those against approval outnumbering those in favor by about 10 to 1. Among those commenters opposed to the GMO apple was the Center for Food Safety, which attached a letter signed by more than 25,000 of its members opposing the apple, reported Food Safety News. Okanagan says it plans next to seek approval for genetically modified Gala apples. 

UVA Study: GMO Crops Increased Use of Herbicides on U.S. Farms by 28% 

In one of the longest studies ever conducted of genetically engineered crops, researchers found that GMO crops increased the use of herbicides on U.S. farms by 28%, reported Organic Authority. Researchers at the University of Virginia examined data over a 14-year period from 5,000 soybean and 5,000 maize farmers in the U.S. The GMO soybean and maize farms each comprised two GMO varieties – one pest-resistant variety, and one herbicide- tolerant variety. The researchers found that while the use of insecticides decreased by about 11% on GMO farms due to the pest-resistant varieties of the crops themselves, use of herbicides, mainly glyphosate marketed by Monsanto as Roundup, increased by more than twice as much due to herbicide- resistant GMO seeds. “In the beginning, there was a reduction in herbicide use,” said University of Virginia economist Federico Ciliberto, who led the research team. “But over time the use of chemicals increased because farmers were having to add new chemicals as weeds developed a resistance to glyphosate.” 

Canadian Groups Call on Competition Board Over Bayer-Monsanto Merger

Bayer AG’s proposed $66-billion, all-cash deal to acquire Monsanto will face a number of political and antitrust hurdles over the coming months, as well as consumer unease in the U.S. and abroad around the consolidation of multinational agriculture, chemical and biotech corporations and the future of food production. The Monsanto-Bayer deal, which would be the largest-ever all-cash acquisition, faces intense and lengthy regulatory processes in the U.S., the E.U. and elsewhere, reported Reuters. In Canada, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, a farmer’s group, and the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, a group of 17 non-GMO organizations, separately submitted comments to Canada’s federal Competition Bureau to review the possible implications of Bayer’s pending takeover of Monsanto. “Our position right now would be for the Competition Bureau to really...examine what the impact is going to be and making sure that there’s fair pricing and competition in the marketplace, Ron Bonnett, President of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, told CBC News. "This merger could further increase the price of seed, decrease choice in the marketplace for Canadian farmers, and stifle research and development," said the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network’s submission to the Canadian Competition Bureau, reported CBC News in late September.                  

China Vying for Control of GMO Technology

In the past month both the New York Times and Bloomberg News have focused on China’s ambitions to become a major player in genetically modified food. However, at the same time Chinese consumers have become increasing suspicious of GMO foods. Food safety issues continue to plague China, and there is widespread belief that GMOs are a foreign conspiracy against Chinese health, reported Bloomberg News. Yet, one of China’s state-run companies, ChemChina, is vying to acquire Swiss agricultural biotech giant Syngenta for $43 billion, which would make it China’s largest foreign purchase ever, reported the New York Times. China is increasing spending on research and development and supporting a nascent domestic industry that it hopes can someday become China’s answer to Monsanto and DuPont. In a 2013 speech, Xi Jinping, the country’s president, said, “We can’t let big foreign companies dominate our GMO crops market.” According to the New York Times, Chinese officials see GMO science as a way to bolster production in a country where large-scale farming is still uncommon – a legacy of the Communist Revolution, when land was stripped from landlords and given to peasants – and better feed its growing and increasingly affluent population on its own. 

The New GMOs 2.0: Will They Be Labeled? 

Silenced genes, edited genes, algae engineered to produce compounds that taste like food: new genetically modified organisms (GMOs) made with these experimental techniques are making their way to your dinner plate. It’s the next wave of genetic engineering, or GMOs 2.0, reports Stacy Malkan, Co-Director of US Right to Know and author of Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry. In a Huffington Post interview featuring Consumers Union Chief Scientist Dr. Michael Hansen, Malkan warns that vague wording in the new federal GMO labeling law opens the door for industry pressure on the USDA to exempt many – possibly even most – GMOs from labeling at all. Read Stacy’s article, GMO 2.0 Foods Coming Your Way: Will They Be Labeled?, here. 

What to Know About Facebook Advertising

Source: Wikimedia Commons

What to Know About Facebook Advertising
Author - Alexandra Gardner

Facebook recently changed its organic search reach and now provides an extra roadblock to businesses looking to expand their social marketing. Currently, for every post made through Facebook, the total reach is only 2-3% of your total followers. This means to expand your reach and your marketing efforts, you need to pay Facebook.

A Few Things to Consider When Posting

Whether you are a large-scale company with a huge advertising and marketing budget or a bootstrapping entrepreneur with only a couple of extra dollars to spend, how you spend your money and when can make a huge impact on your market reach. It is not always necessary to pay for every post but it is important to create engaging and relevant content to your follower base.

1.     Keep it Original - When paying for posting, promote your own content and content that is helpful to your audience. It does not benefit you to pay for someone else’s work to be shared.

2.     Have a Goal in Mind - Utilize the paid posting features to increase your email list or to steer visitors to your website. Have a desired outcome and intent to maximize the effect of your posting with a clear call to action.

3.     Time it While it’s Relevant - Time your paid posting for when it can be the most beneficial to you and your company such as: company events, promotional giveaways, sales or press releases.

Now for the Paid Part

Do you know the difference between boosted posts and promoted posts? Most don’t and they are the key to understanding how to increase your social media marketing with paid advertising.

Boosted Posts – Are easy, accessible and managed right from your Facebook page without having to go into Ads Manager. It does not provide as much customization as promoted posts but does allow you to control budget, audience and duration of boosted posting.

Promoted Posts – Very similar to boosted posts but are accessed and customized through Facebook Ads Manager. The promoted posts option not only allows you the customization of boosted posts but also allows for bidding and budgeting options. This form of paid posting is more complicated and requires more work but offers a wider range of control over who sees your ad and how you pay for it.

How Do You Know it’s Working?

From Facebook, go to your page’s Business Manager. The Business Manager is where you manage your paid advertising and can view tracking and metrics. A successful paid or boosted post will have an increase in page likes, post reach and engagements. Looking at the percentage increase over time and from post to post is a great indicator of the success of your social media tactics and how well your audience is receiving your message.

Conclusion

Paid posting is important, whether you want to keep it simple with boosted posts or have more control over customization with promoted posts, both are needed to access a wider market and as a result increase your social media marketing efforts. Even if you only have a small budget to work with on a monthly basis, paid advertising can be the difference between reaching a 1,000 people on a post to 10,000 when done correctly.

Learn More

http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/facebook-boost-posts-promoted-posts/
https://thedigiterati.com/boost-facebook-post-or-separate-ad/
https://www.facebook.com/business/help/547448218658012

CBD CONSUMER PRODUCTS SALES UP 1,710%

CBD CONSUMER PRODUCTS SALES UP 1,710%, PRIMARILY FROM NATURAL RETAIL CHANNEL

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Savvy CBD marketers are finding success in the traditional independent natural products retail channel despite regulatory hurdles.

Source - Hemp Business Journal
Author - Steven Hoffman, Compass Natural Marketing

As the world awakens to the benefits of consumer products made with phytocannabinoid hemp extracts rich in cannabidiol or CBD, traditional independent natural products retailers are seeing the most success as sellers of these products.

So, too, are the manufacturers serving the natural channel that are committed to quality, efficacy, sophisticated marketing, and strict compliance under the Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act (DSHEA).

New Hope Network’s Expo West (2015) drew 70,000 people and Cannabidiol and other hemp related products were on full display for sale and sample.

In addition to states where cannabis is legalized, since 2014, 17 States including conservative states in the South and Midwest have legalized CBD, the non-psychoactive cousin to cannabis’ active ingredient, THC, prompting independent natural products retailers across the country to carry dietary supplements, personal care products, hemp oil-infused beverages and snacks, and other CBD-fortified products at the behest of their healthy lifestyles customers.

In fact, for independent retailers competing in today’s market where mainstream supermarkets are commanding an increasing market share of natural and organic product sales, the CBD consumer products market represents a brand new growth category, and an opportunity for independent natural retailers to distinguish their stores from the competition.

“There is real interest and awareness among customers in the natural channel who have heard about the benefits of CBD and what hemp products can do in terms of a therapeutic effect in dietary supplement form and also in products applied to the skin for muscle aches and inflammation,” said Sarah Shebanek, Wellness Buyer for Alfalfa’s Market, an independently owned natural products retailer with stores along Colorado’s Front Range. Alfalfa’s carries CBD brands including CW Hemp, Restorative Botanical, CBDRx, BlueBird and others.

This story is featured in full in our CBD Report.

“Looking across channels at the 52 weeks ending August 7, 2016, we see  phytocannabinoid products containing the ‘Primary Functional Ingredient’ with $1,344,646 in sales, up 1,463.63 vs. YA (year ago), on an admittedly very small base. Almost all of those sales (97%) are coming from the Natural Channel,” said David Winter, Director of Business Development for market research firm SPINS. The firm, a Nielsen partner that specializes in the natural and organic products channel, named CBD oil as one of the ingredients to watch in its 2016 Trend Watch report.

“I am extremely excited about this new product category opening up,” said Peter Brodhead. “Word of mouth is driving the market. People are getting good results and telling others about it,” said the independent retailer, who, with his wife Janie, has owned and operated Brighter Day Natural Foods in historic downtown Savannah, GA, since 1978. The Brodheads themselves take CBD supplements to help with sleep, and their store offers customers a variety of dietary supplements and whole-plant extract products, along with educational CDs filled with peer-reviewed information and third-party literature that Peter and his staff burn themselves to give away to interested customers.

“We have just touched the tip of the iceberg of the potential of what this category can offer people. As a retailer, I love when people get results; it changes the quality of their lives. That’s what drives me and my business,” said Peter, who noted that Brighter Day’s CBD product offerings, including a variety of products from CV Sciences (formerly Cannavest), feature hemp oil extracts containing “every known compound found in the entire hempstalk…and at price points that make it easy for consumers to try out,” he added.

Engredea Editor Todd Runestad, who has been following the CBD market closely for natural products media leader New Hope Network, publisher of Nutrition Business Journal, Natural Foods Merchandiser and Engredea, and producer of Natural Products Expo East and West, the world’s largest natural and organic products trade expositions, observed,

“If retailers are going to do this right, they will approach CBD like any new dietary supplement. Be diligent about stocking quality products – ask the same questions of any supplement company to make sure they meet the quality standards you provide your customers. There is a tremendous opportunity for one-on-one education, and to bring the beneficial properties of CBD to the masses”

For manufacturers seeking to avoid the scrutiny of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), “Make quality product that matches the label, and don’t make disease claims. Above all, follow the letter of the law,” Runestad advised.

Want to know more about cannabidiol and the natural products channel?  Purchase the full CBD Report here

Source : Hemp Business Journal- Market Intelligence, The CBD Report

Supplement Law Makers Brace for Federal GMO Labeling Law

Supplement Law Makers Brace for Federal GMO Labeling Law

Source - Originally published in Natural Products Insider September 2016
Author - Steven Hoffman, Compass Natural Marketing

“In short, the GMO labeling law could drive larger supplement companies to want to compete in the Non-GMO market.

    —Bethany Davis, Director of Public Affairs, MegaFood, and Communications Officer, Coalition for Supplement Sustainability

President Barack Obama signed a federal GMO (genetically modified organism) labeling bill, the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard Act, into law this past summer, pre-empting Vermont’s GMO labeling bill and any other state from passing similar measures. USDA, which is charged with implementing and administering the new law, has two years to figure out how to do just that.

Meanwhile, in addition to food manufacturers, makers of dietary supplements will be closely following how the law will impact their labeling.

Dietary supplements, too, are subject to GMO ingredients. For example, in many nutritional supplement products, soy lecithin is a common ingredient that may be derived from GMO soy. Same for ingredients derived from corn, 90 percent of which is genetically engineered. Such corn-derived ingredients as maltodextrin, citric acid and cornstarch are often included in nutritional supplements as binders, fillers, excipients, etc. Commercial-grade vitamin C is often processed from GMO corn; vitamin E is similarly derived from GMO soy. Gelatin in gel caps may come from cows given GMO feed over a lifetime. The list goes on, and considering the number of ingredients in any given multivitamin, disclosing for GMOs is a potential migraine headache for supplement manufacturers.

The choices for food and supplement manufacturers are outlined in the law: disclose in plain English the presence of GMOs on the package; or instead of plain English, manufacturers can opt for a toll-free number or a digital QR code on the label that consumers with smart phones can scan to find GMO disclosure information on a manufacturer’s website. (Of note, under the new law, USDA Certified Organic foods and supplements will be able to make a non-GMO claim on the label without being subject to any testing for GMO contamination.)

Even FDA Is Critical

However, critics—including FDA—say the law is so full of loopholes that many GMO-derived ingredients will be exempt from labeling, as will any ingredients derived from newer gene editing GMO technologies.

“According to Obama’s own Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the [law will] exempt most current GMO foods from being labeled at all," said Andrew Kimbrell, Director of the Center for Food Safety. “The FDA further commented that it ‘may be difficult’ for any GMO food to qualify for labeling under the bill."

Additionally, “[Oil] made from GE (genetically engineered) soy would not have any genetic material in it," FDA commented in response to the new law, which only covers products that contain “genetic material." “Likewise, starches and purified proteins would not be covered," FDA said. Those three ingredients, exempt under the new federal GMO labeling law, are some of the most widely used ingredients when it comes to GMOs in foods, reported Triple Pundit.

“We see the new GMO labeling law as discriminatory and fatally flawed," said Megan Westgate, executive director for the Non-GMO Project. “No one can argue that we all have a right to know what’s in the food we’re eating and feeding to our families. That’s what the mandatory labeling movement is all about, and the violation of this simple right to know is what makes the passage of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure law so reprehensible."

“In light of the lack of transparency outlined in the new law, we will continue to work with our participants to provide the highest standard for non-GMO verification and GMO avoidance," Westgate said. “The Non-GMO Project is the only independent, third-party program that requires on-going testing of ingredients that are at high-risk of being genetically modified. The bottom line is that this new law does not directly impact the Non-GMO Project or the right of companies to use the Butterfly label on verified products."

Supplement Makers Face Choices

“What’s interesting is that the Vermont GMO labeling bill excluded dietary supplements," said Bethany Davis, director of regulatory affairs for supplement maker MegaFood, and communications officer for The Coalition for Supplement Sustainability (CSS), a trade association dedicated to maintaining independently verifiable and transparent standards across the dietary supplement supply chain. “It appears based on what we know so far, that the federal bill includes them and that supplements will be subject to disclosure," she said.

“In the natural channel, a desire to offer non-GMO lines of product has been present for years," Davis continued. “What will be interesting to observe going forward is whether this federal bill will expedite food, mass and drug channel players' interest in offering non-GMO lines as well. We have already seen some evidence that this is the case. In short, the bill could drive larger supplement companies to want to compete in the non-GMO market."

Davis added, “The challenges with respect to this bill include getting the technology right (we aren't convinced QR codes are an effective way to communicate with consumers on this issue) and ensuring that the standard is meaningful. We would like to see the standard help consumers discern whether ingredients were made from GMO crops, not just whether or not there is GMO protein or DNA in the finished product. We are aligned with FDA on the concern that in its current language, the bill would let lots of processed ingredients made from GMO crops be exempt from labeling simply because testing may show a negative result because there is no viable material to test in highly processed ingredients."

Davis also encouraged companies to get involved in how the law is implemented. “MegaFood plans to work with our trade associations and with CSS to participate in comment periods and town halls related to this bill. The goal is, of course, for folks to be able to discern what’s in their food—and supplements! CSS will continue to offer guidance for companies that want to use absence claims and offer non-GMO lines that are verified by a third party," she concluded.

Time to Go Organic?

“We had hoped to see a different kind of law than what Congress just passed on the view that consumers are clearly asking for more information about the foods they eat," said Loren Israelsen, president of the United Natural Products Alliance (UNPA), in a podcast interview with Jon Benninger, vice president, global health and nutrition network, Informa Exhibitions. Originally founded in 1991 by eight Utah-based dietary supplements companies, UNPA now boasts more than 100 members globally.

“The food industry was mainly concerned with two things. One was a proliferation of state laws that would require different labeling in different states. That’s a legitimate concern," Israelsen said. “The other reason was that any labeling that would say ‘contains GMOs’ is not good for business," he opined. “But now, rather than a mandatory standard there is a standard that will create several ways on the label to identify GMO ingredients. I imagine we will see litigation and extended rule making, as FDA and USDA apparently do not agree on some of the fundamentals. We’re probably looking at five years, realistically, not counting any litigation.

“Our position continues to be that mandatory labeling of the presence of GMOs is what consumers want, and we believe that is in the best interest of the industry for purposes of clarity," Israelsen continued. “In a way, I hope that the industry transcends the administrative part of the law and does not get caught up in trying to figure out, ‘Well, how do we put a QR code on the label?’ One element I find really interesting was the last small section of the bill saying the USDA Organic seal will be considered sufficient as a claim of non-GMO. If I were running a company and I were not organic, I would do all I could to understand how to move in that direction," he said.

Looking for more on GMO labeling and consumer expectations? Steven Hoffman will be discussing the latest on federal and state labeling initiatives in the panel discussion “GMOs: Today’s Challenges, Tomorrow’s Opportunities" on Thursday, Oct. 6, at SupplySide West 2016.

Steven Hoffman (steve@compassnatural.com) is managing director of Compass Natural, providing brand marketing, PR, social media and strategic business development services to natural, organic and sustainable products businesses.

Food Manufacturers Brace for New Federal GMO Labeling Law

Photo: Compass Natural

Food Manufacturers Brace for New Federal GMO Labeling Law
Source -  Presence Marketing September 2016 Newsletter
Author -  Steve Hoffman

Now that President Obama signed a federal GMO labeling bill into law on July 29th , as flawed as the new law is, U.S. food manufacturers will soon have to decide how they want to deal with mandatory GMO ingredient disclosure as the USDA develops labeling rules within the next two years.

The choices for manufacturers are outlined in the law: disclose in plain English the presence of GMOs on the package; or instead of plain English, food manufacturers can opt for some as yet undeveloped symbol, a toll-free number, or a digital QR code on the label that consumers with smart phones can scan to find GMO disclosure information on a manufacturer’s website. Or, food makers can opt for newer GMO technologies as they become available. Why? Because the new law very narrowly defines “bioengineering” and doesn’t include any of the new gene editing technologies; only older GMO technologies, which are already being phased out, are required to be labeled under the bill.

“According to Obama’s own Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the [law will] exempt most current GMO foods from being labeled at all. The FDA further commented that it ‘may be difficult’ for any GMO food to qualify for labeling under the bill,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Director of the Center for Food Safety. Additionally, “[Oil] made from GE (genetically engineered) soy would not have any genetic material in it,” FDA commented in response to the law, which only covers products that contain “genetic material.” “Likewise, starches and purified proteins would not be covered,” FDA said. Those three ingredients, exempt under the new federal GMO labeling law, are some of the most widely used ingredients when it comes to GMOs in foods, reported Triple Pundit, and yet they will not have to be labeled. © 2016 Presence Marketing, Inc. 19 Food News, Policy and Research Update –

Time to Go Organic? Or, food manufacturers can opt for Certified Organic, or Non-GMO Project Verified products.

Given the myriad loopholes built into the new GMO labeling law, for healthy lifestyles consumers – and the manufacturers that serve them – the Certified Organic and Non-GMO Project Verified seals have just become more important than ever. “As the USDA clarifies what the law requires, Organic Valley is going to work with the agency to ensure organic is protected and that we have the strongest labeling possible under the law. We think the QR code is a dishonest approach to providing transparency to consumers. Ultimately, Organic Valley, as an all-organic company, doesn’t use GMOs and so our interest in this issue stems from wanting consumers to have accurate information about their food,” said Anne O’Connor, Director of Public Affairs for Organic Valley in La Farge, Wisconsin, in an exclusive interview with Presence Marketing/Dynamic Presence. “The law clarifies that the USDA organic label ‘shall be considered sufficient to make a claim’ of non-GMO. This is important because for the first time ever, a law is declaring organic as non-GMO,” she said. “This clarification is in addition to the added benefits of organic which include no synthetic pesticides, (including herbicides), no antibiotics, no added hormones, and other environmental considerations such as manure management and composting to protect our clean water resources.

The Non-GMO Project addresses just one of these issues: whether or not a product was produced with or contaminated by GMOs. There is obvious confusion around each of the label’s claims,” O’Connor added. Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing brand marketing, PR, social media, and strategic business development services to natural, organic and sustainable products businesses. Contact steve@compassnatural.com.

In addition to selling only Certified Organic products, Organic Valley created its own non-GMO label it adds to its product packaging, something it will continue to use, noted O’Connor (see illustration). For Robert Agnew, Senior VP at Bob’s Red Mill, Milwaukie, Oregon, a leading manufacturer of natural and organic whole-grain foods, “We don’t offer any products that are bioengineered, so we won’t have to change our current labeling,” he said. “For many years we have required all of our suppliers to certify their products are produced without bioengineering. Bob’s Red Mill has a very loyal customer base, and many, if not most, of our customers are concerned about bioengineered foods. Along with working with the Non-GMO Project, we have implemented our ‘Sourced Non-GMO Pledge,’” he said. “Historically, there is much value to both the Certified Organic and Non-GMO Project Verified programs, as evidenced by public awareness and commercial viability. For us, we will continue to offer our ‘Sourced Non-GMO Pledge’ and offer organic products. We will be following developments closely and work with our lawmakers as things move along because the law is so new with changes on the horizon,” Agnew noted in an interview with Presence Marketing/Dynamic Presence. “Our consumers are the types that value certification of non-GMOs to reassure them they’re getting the highest-quality ingredients,” Jonathan Davis, Senior VP of Los Angeles-based bread maker La Brea Bakery, told the Washington Post. The company has always sought non-GMO ingredients, he said, and it plans to be completely non-GMO by the end of this year.

A Conundrum for Conventional Manufacturers?

Ellia Kassoff, CEO of Leaf Brands, Newport Beach, California, maker of Hydrox cookies and other conventional cookie and confectionary products, expressed concern about how the public will react to GMO food labels. “It does create this negative feeling with the customer, and I don’t know if the majority of customers in the U.S. fully understand the benefits or non-benefits of GMOs,” he told the Washington Post. “In some cases it’s hard to acquire non-GMO ingredients and sell a product at a price where consumers will buy it,” he also said. “If Hydrox cookies were reformulated to be GMO-free, a package would cost 50 cents more than Oreos, the cookie’s biggest competitor, Kassoff estimated. Madison Heights, Michigan-based Kar’s Nuts received Non-GMO Project certification for its line of Second Nature snack products, reported the Washington Post. However, company President Nick Nicolay said some of the ingredients in its Kar’s brand of snack products do contain GMOs. Yet, finding replacements would drive up his costs, he said. “It’s a little unrealistic for us at this time,” he told the Post. However, going completely non-GMO is something he said the company will consider in the future. Going against the non-GMO grain, one manufacturer, Soylent, says its protein and carbohydrate beverages are “proudly made with GMOs,” on its website. According to the Washington Post, the Los-Angeles-based company favors labels that give details on how GMOs are used so consumers can be well informed about what they’re eating. “Sim

WhiteWave sale high-water mark for Colorado’s natural food industry

By ALDO SVALDI | Denver Post
Commentary by Steve Hoffman

PUBLISHED: July 7, 2016 at 7:30 pm | UPDATED: July 8, 2016 at 4:17 am

Danone SA’s $10 billion purchase of WhiteWave Foods Co. is a big deal — not just because of the hefty price tag, but because it could make Denver and Boulder a center for the organic and natural foods industry not just nationally, but globally.

“This is a vote for lifestyle change going forward by a major player. I am delighted that the vision is embraced,” said Steve Demos, the Boulder entrepreneur who launched what eventually would become WhiteWave Foods back in 1977.

Demos, motivated by a belief that food needed to have a lighter environmental impact, borrowed $500 and initially made tofu in a bathtub. Paris-based Danone on Thursday agreed to pay $56 a share for WhiteWave, which works out to $10 billion after subtracting $2 billion of debt.

The acquisition is the second-largest ever for Danone, which has a market value of $39 billion and sales in more than 130 countries. But the story goes beyond an international dairy giant snapping up one of Denver’s largest public companies in market value.

Plant-based milk sales are growing at 11 percent a year, organic milk sales are rising 8 percent, and conventional milk sales are increasing at 1 percent a year, the companies noted in a conference call on the acquisition.

Consumers increasingly want alternatives, and the WhiteWave purchase, which should wrap up by the end of the year pending shareholder and regulatory approvals, gives Danone a faster way to offer those.

“One of the big systemic risks the global economy faces is use of pesticides and herbicides. WhiteWave is a prime example of a solution and people prefer the solution to the risk,” said Garvin Jabusch, chief investment officer at Green Alpha Advisors in Boulder, which owns shares in the company.

Danone, the company behind yogurts Activa and Oikios and bottled water brands Aqua and Evian, will become a dominant player in dairy alternatives and double its U.S. sales via the acquisition, which it is borrowing cash to finance.

Danone offered to pay a 24 percent premium above WhiteWave’s average stock price the past 30 days. It is paying 26.2 times earnings versus the just under 15 times earnings that dairy firms typically command, Bloomberg calculates.

Jabusch argues that Danone must believe it can expand the reach of WhiteWave’s various brands quickly, and he doesn’t think the French giant will mess with the model that made the company successful.

“What I do see them changing is leveraging their marketing machine and advertising muscle to expand WhiteWave’s reach,” Jabusch said. “It represents a huge opportunity for growth. WhiteWave’s biggest challenge will be adding production capacity.”

But the combination isn’t without its critics. Some shareholders want a higher price, and the advocacy group Food & Water Watch is urging regulators to give a thumbs down on the grounds it will reduce competition.

“These mega-deals consolidate corporate power in the hands of only a few giant food companies, in turn limiting choices for consumers while raising retail prices,” the group said in a statement.

Another concern is whether Danone’s corporate culture will dilute the environmental ethic that drove the creation of various WhiteWave brands and stifle future innovations. WhiteWave is known for spinning out dozens of new products a year, many from its lab in Broomfield. One of the latest offerings is a new banana-based milk.

“Danone is not an organic company. They are a dairy corporation that owns organic brands. Prove me wrong. Show me that you are on a mission to feed the world and save the world,” said Steven Hoffman, managing director of Compass Natural in Longmont.

Boulder-based Celestial Seasonings pioneered the herbal tea market, launching Colorado’s natural foods movement in the process. But after years under a corporate umbrella, Celestial has lost its cutting edge, allowing more innovative rivals to erode its market share, Hoffman said.

Still, Hoffman isn’t concerned that Boulder and Denver will cease to be an innovation hub for the natural foods industry. New companies continue to pop up even as more established ones get gobbled up.

“It continues to shed a light on the Boulder-Denver market. We are an incubator. We are truly an epicenter for these products,” Hoffman said.

When Dallas-based Dean Foods acquired a much smaller White Wave Inc. back in 2002, it paid slightly less than $300 million. WhiteWave was best known then for its Silk line of soy milk. Dean Foods in 2004 purchased Niwot-based Horizon Organic Holdings in 2004, adding organic milk to WhiteWave’s plant-based offerings.

In August 2012, Dean Foods spun off WhiteWave in a $391 million initial public offering, providing the Denver-based company a currency to make numerous acquisitions, including the $600 million buyout in 2014 of Earthbound Farms, America’s largest grower of organic produce.

Now, Danone is willing to pay $10 billion for WhiteWave, and has the distribution muscle to put its products on stores shelves across the globe.

“This is a heck of an endorsement,” said Demos, who no longer holds an interest in the company, but stills view it as a the child he raised.