For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Genetic Engineering page and our Millions Against Monsanto page.

Anti-GMO activists have reacted with fury to leaked proposals by the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) to develop federal rules governing GMO labeling that would pre-empt state-driven initiatives.

The pro-labeling movement went into overdrive on Tuesday after POLITICO referred to a ‘discussion draft’ it has obtained from an unnamed source summarizing the GMA’s proposals.

Judging by the content, the un-dated five page summary – seen by FoodNavigator-USA – was written last fall. However, the GMA has not commented on how it differs from later drafts (which it will not release):

According to the document:

1. PRE-MARKET NOTIFICATION – The GMA proposal would require developers of new bioengineered foods to notify the FDA 120 days before they are due to hit the market explaining why they think they are ”

as safe as a comparible traditional food“. The FDA would then review the data and issue a letter of no objection if appropriate. Existing GM foods would be ‘grandfathered’ in. Currently, the notification process is voluntary.

2. VOLUNTARY LABELING – The GMA proposal would authorise the FDA to develop regulations for the voluntary labeling of bioengineered ingredients. It would also allow manufacturers to voluntarily make claims about the absence of GMOs under a new FDA-regulated certification and verification process. However, firms would not be allowed to state or imply that a food is more or less safe because of the presence or absence of GMO’s

As part of the review process the FDA would also be able to stipulate if it thinks labels are needed ”

to protect health or safety, or prevents labels from being false or misleading based on any material difference between the bioengineered food and the comparable traditional food“.

However, it goes on to stress that the use of bioengeering ”

does not by itself constitute a material difference“.