On Tuesday 17 May, a report that took two years to compile concluded that genetically modified crops do not adversely affect human health. Yet data show that customers want non-GMO foods, and companies will continue to face pressure to introduce non-GMO products to meet demand.
Despite the report's thoroughness, it's not likely to drastically alter consumer opinion, says Darren Seifer, food and beverage industry analyst at NPD Group.
The reason: At the crux of the debate over GMOs is the fact that it’s one largely “based on fear, not logic,” Seifer says.
"Consumers are looking for purity in their food," Seifer says. "Particularly for those that try to find that authenticity in their food, (the report) is not going to phase them."
Non-GMO advocates reiterated that thought. A Los Angeles-based online subscription company that exclusively sells non-GMO food to about 250,000 customers around the country says the report is only the latest in a string — with many conflicting when it comes to their findings.
"We feel like it's too early to know if it's safe," says Gunnar Lovelace, co-CEO of Thrive Market.
Concern over GMO ingredients has grown in recent years, swept along by local ballot measures that proposed requirements for labeling foods with GMOs. Increasingly, the phrase GMO became part of the question about what’s considered safe, healthy and natural food. Sales of foods labeled as non-GMO have gone from $12.9 billion in 2012 to $21.2 billion in the year ended April 30, according to Nielsen.
And yet, most people don’t understand what genetically modified organisms are. In a survey NPD conducted in 2013, when asked to describe in their own words what GMO means based on what they'd heard or read, the most common response NPD got was, “I don’t know.”
Non-GMO products make up a very small portion of the overall food supply. An analysis last month of products in grocery store aisles by data company Label Insight found that non-GMO labels were most prevalent in categories such as diet and nutrition, where just 1.2% of products had the label, and snacks, cookies and candy, where 1.1% of products were labeled non-GMO.
The report is unlikely to have much effect on the businesses that supply farmers or the farmers themselves because they've been strong advocates of the technology all along, says Chad Hart, a professor of agricultural economics at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa.
Still, the issue will keep cropping up, because new GMO traits and crops are always in the pipeline and each new food type will require close study.
