Summary of USA Polls on
Labeling GE Foods

The Center for Food Safety, 660 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 302, Washington
DC, 20003

Phone: 202-547-9359 Fax: 202-547-9429

E-Mail: Website:

FEBRUARY 1, 2002)

A Work Product of the Center for Food Safety - Washington, DC

Below is a compilation of poll results concerning genetically engineered
foods listed in chronological order:

* 90% of Americans said foods created through genetic engineering
processes should have special labels on them (Rutgers University' Food
Policy Institute study, November 2001)

* 90% of American farmers support labels on biotech products if they are
scientifically different from conventional foods and 61% support labels on
biotech products even if not scientifically different.
(Farm Foundation/Kansas State University, survey of farms throughout the
U.S., September 2001).

* 93% of Americans say the federal government should require labels
saying whether it's been genetically modified, or bioengineered. "Such near
unanimity in public opinion is rare" (ABC poll, June 2001).

* 75% of Americans say it is important to them to know whether a food
product contains genetically modified ingredients. (Pew Initiative on Food
and Biotechnology poll, March 2001).

* 86% of Americans think that the government should require the labeling
of all packaged and other food products stating that they include corn, soy
or other products which have come from genetically modified crops
(Harris Poll, June 2000).

* 79% of Americans said it should not be legal to sell genetically
modified fruits and vegetables without special labels (USA Today, February

* 86% of Americans want labels on genetically engineered foods
(International Communications Research, March 2000)

* 81% of Americans think the government should require genetically
engineered food products to be labeled. 89% of Americans think the
government should require pre-market safety testing of genetically
engineered foods before they are marketed, as with any food additive. (MSNBC
Live Vote Results, January 2000).

* Over 80% of Americans support the right of the European Union and Japan
to require the labeling of genetically engineered food imported from the
United States. (Univ. of Md. Center for the Study of Policy Attitudes, et
al., November 1999).

* 92% of Americans support legal requirements that all genetically
engineered foods be labeled. (BSMG Worldwide for the Grocery Manufacturers
of America, September 1999).

* Almost 70% of Americans think the U.S. government should require more
extensive labeling of ingredients in genetically engineered food. (Edelman
Public Relations Worldwide in Bloomberg News, September 1999).

* 81% of American consumers believe GE food should be labeled. 58% say
that if GE foods were labeled they would avoid purchasing them. (Time
magazine, January 1999).

* 93% of women surveyed say they want all GE food clearly labeled.
(National Federation of Women's Institutes, 1998).

* 93% of Americans who responded to a Novartis survey agree that GE foods
should be labeled as such. 73% of those agree strongly with the position.
(Novartis, February 1997). 25% say they would be likely to avoid labeled GE

* 84% of 604 New Jersey residents polled want mandatory labeling of GE
fruits and vegetables, 60% would consider buying fresh vegetables if they
were labeled as having been produced by genetic engineering and 76% favor
farmers voluntarily putting labels on their produce that say the items were
not genetically engineered. (USDA, July 1995).

* 94% of 1,900 consumers polled believed that milk should be labeled to
distinguish milk from rbGH-treated cows, 10% of milk drinkers say they buy
their products from non-treated cows and more than 74% of consumers say they
are concerned about the possible discovery of negative long-term effects on
human health associated with rbGH. (USDA, March-June 1995).

* 92% of 36,000 polled say they want GE food labeled, with a 94%
pro-labeling response from women and a 84% pro-labeling response from men.
(Vance Publishing, in Food R&D, February 1995).

* 81% of 8,000 subscribers to PRODIGY Internet service think that milk
containers should be labeled to indicate whether or not the milk comes from
cows treated with rbGH. 92% of women; 78% of men (PRODIGY Internet company,
March 1994).

* 88% of respondents favor mandatory labeling from rbGH-treated cows, 9%
oppose mandatory labeling and 3% are unsure (St. Norbert College and Wisc.
Pub. Radio, February 1994).

* 85% of those polled think that labeling of GE food is "very important"
(USDA, 1992).

* In an FDA sponsored survey in 1992, 8 state attorneys general asked the
FDA to require mandatory labeling of all GE foods.

* 77% of North Carolinians polled feel that producing more nutritious
food is the most desirable use of genetic engineering, 80% of those polled
say too little regulation of GE poses serious health risks to humans, and
67% feel that GE will give large scale farmers an unfair advantage over
small scale farmers (July 1989).

* Labeling of dairy products from rBGH-treated cows was favored in all
the following studies:
* University of Wisconsin (68%) 1990
* Dairy Today (81%) 1989
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute (85%)1990
* University of Missouri (95%) 1990
* Johanna Dairy (98%) 1989

Home | News | Organics | GE Food | Health | Environment | Food Safety | Fair Trade | Peace | Farm Issues | Politics
Español | Campaigns | Buying Guide | Press | Search | Donate | About Us | Contact Us

Organic Consumers Association - 6771 South Silver Hill Drive, Finland MN 55603
E-mail: Staff · Activist or Media Inquiries: 218-226-4164 · Fax: 218-353-7652
Please support our work. Send a tax-deductible donation to the OCA

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.