GMO Bills Differ On Labeling, But Agree On Pre-empting State Laws
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
H.R. 1599 would create a structure for codifying GMOs in foods and supplements and make labeling voluntary, but opponents say it keeps consumers in the dark while pre-empting state laws. S. 809 and H.R. 1699, meanwhile, would require labeling for genetically engineered products.
You may also be interested in...
NPA’s Wish List For Cosmetics Bill Includes GMPs, ‘Natural’ Definition
In an interview with “The Rose Sheet,” Natural Products Association Executive Director and CEO Dan Fabricant discussed the trade group’s priorities in developing cosmetics legislation while acknowledging that advocates may face an uphill battle in the current Congress.
Supplement Self-Regulation Key To Preventing More Oversight – Heinrich
The supplement industry’s new ally in the Senate, Martin Heinrich, encourages industry to increase self-regulation of energy drinks to avoid opening DSHEA to amendments. He also says national GMO labeling legislation could spare industry from a patchwork of state laws.
P&G Restores Volume Growth In Beauty, Grooming After Pricing Run
Procter & Gamble reports strong consumer spending in the US and Europe after a 3% increase in product pricing over the past year. Dragging on fiscal third-quarter results, sales of SK-II in China fell 30% for the January-March period, while lower incidence of cough and cold impacted Health Care performance.