International Organizations Agree

Most health organizations agree that Genetically Engineered foods should be labeled and/or more thoroughly tested.  

1. American Public Health Association(APHA) :  “APHA declare its support that any food product containing genetically modified organisms be so labeled.”   http://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=250
*
2. British Medical Association, “Governments should ensure that non-genetically modified foods continue to be widely available and affordable to consumers, and that GM foods are labelled in a consistent and understandable manner.”  and “The precautionary principle should be applied in developing genetically modified crops or foodstuffs, as we cannot at present know whether there are any serious risks to the environment or to human health involved in producing GM crops or consuming GM food products. Adverse effects are likely to be irreversible; once GMOs are released into the environment they cannot be subject to control. It is therefore essential that release does not take place until the level of scientific certainty is sufficient to make the risk acceptable.”
*
3. Public Health Association of Australia : “GM foods should not be assessed as safe to eat unless they have undergone long-term animal safety assessments utilizing endpoints relevant to human health and conducted by independent researchers.”, “The labelling system should be improved to the standards desired by consumers, so that consumers can easily identify foods containing ingredients originating from GM animals and plants, and from animals fed GM feed.”, “There are no surveillance systems set-up to determine the effects of GM foods on health, and no-one is paid to look in existing surveillance systems for problems.” and, “The precautionary principle should be applied in developing GM food as it is not certain whether there are serious risks to the environment or to human health involved in producing or consuming GM foods or their products.”    http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/policy/GMFood.pdf
*
4. National Environmental Health Association(NEHA) : “NEHA declare its support for the “understandable” labeling of any food product that contains GMOs, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any labeling program not exempt soy oil and soy derivatives such as lecithin”  http://www.neha.org/position_papers/positionGMOs.htm
*
5. Chartered Institute of Environmental Health(CIEH) : “there are no robust techniques available to monitor the impact of genetic engineering in the food industry or on health or on the environment.  Genetic engineering should not be used in the production of human food or animal feeding stuffs or released into the environment until such techniques are in place.”   http://www.cieh.org/uploadedFiles/Core/Policy/CIEH_consultation_responses/Response_GM_final.pdf.
*
6. World Health Organization(WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization(FAO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) co-sponsored WHO, FAO and UNEP report involving 900 participants and 110 countries from all regions of the world :
The safety of GMO foods and feed is controversial due to limited available data, particularly for long-term nutritional consumption and chronic exposure. Food safety is a major issue in the GMO debate. Potential concerns include alteration in nutritional quality of foods, toxicity, antibiotic resistance, and allergenicity from consuming GM foods. The concepts and techniques used for evaluating food and feed safety have been outlined (WHO, 2005b), but the approval process of GM crops is considered inadequate (Spök et al., 2004). Under current practice, data are provided by the companies owning the genetic materials, making independent verification difficult or impossible. Recently, the data for regulatory approval of a new Bt-maize variety (Mon863) was challenged. Significant effects have been found on a number of measured parameters and a call has been made for more research to establish their safety”
“There is little consensus among the findings from the assessments of economic and environmental impacts of GMOs.”  – Global Report  http://www.unep.org/dewa/Assessments/Ecosystems/IAASTD/tabid/105853/Default.aspx/
“In regions or countries that choose to produce GMOs, regulation should be based on the precautionary principle and the right of consumers to have an informed choice, for example through labeling” -translation from Spanish  “En regiones o países, que elijan producir GMO, la regulación debería basarse en el principio de precaución y el derecho de los consumidores a tener una elección informada, por ejemplo a traves del etiquetado.” – LAC SDM (Latin America and Caribbean)   http://www.unep.org/dewa/Assessments/Ecosystems/IAASTD/tabid/105853/Default.aspx/
*
7. CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION(CMA) : “the CMA support accurate labeling requirements for foods, including genetically modified foods, by appropriate regulatory agencies.”    http://labelgmoscv.wordpress.com/2012/01/31/california-medical-associations-current-policy-statement-supporting-the-labeling-of-gmos/
*
8. European Commission : “labelling should include objective information to the effect that a food or feed consists of, contains or is produced from GMOs. Clear labelling, irrespective of the detectability of DNA or protein resulting from the genetic modification in the final product, meets the demands expressed in numerous surveys by a large majority of consumers, facilitates informed choice and precludes potential misleading of consumers as regards methods of manufacture or production.”  http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/animalnutrition/labelling/Reg_1829_2003_en.pdf
*
9. Technical Expert Committee (TEC) : “TEC recommends a ten year moratorium on field trials of Bt transgenics in all food crops(those used directly for human consumption)” http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/content/365248/interim-report-of-the-supreme-court-technical-expert-committee-in-gmos-pil/
Over 250 scientists support this committee.  http://indiagminfo.org/?p=649
*
10. Viennese Doctors’ Chamber : “The release of transgenic species in nature must still be strictly opposed as the results can neither be estimated nor reversed.”  http://www.wallstreet-online.de/nachricht/6412156-genetically-modified-maize-doctors-chamber-warns-of-unpredictable-results-to-humans
*
11. Illinois Public Health Association : “lack of labeling denies health professionals the ability to trace potential toxic [1] or allergic reactions [2] [3] [4] to, and other adverse health effects [5] [6] [7] from, genetically engineered food”  http://www.ipha.com/Public/ContentArticle.aspx?type=Policy_Resolution
*
12. American Nurses Association : “the American Nurses Association supports the public’s right to know through support of appropriate food labeling, including country-of-origin and genetic modification and of nutritional information for food served in institutions, restaurants and fast food chains: and be it further” http://www.nursingworld.org/MemberCenterCategories/ANAGovernance/HODArchives/2008HOD/ActionsAdopted/HealthyFoodinHealthCare.aspx
*
13. Indiana State Medical Association : “Lack of labeling denies health professionals the ability to trace potential toxic1 or allergic reactions2,3,4 to, and other adverse health effects5,6,7 from, genetically engineered food”  http://www.ama-assn.org/assets/meeting/2011a/tab-ref-comm-e-addendum.pdf
*
14. American College of Physicians : “the Board of Regents supports legislation and/or federal regulatory action which requires all foods containing genetically engineered ingredients to be clearly labeled.”
“the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine (ACP-ASIM) strongly encourage the study of the long-term impact of genetic engineering on the food supply and human health.”
*
15. Irish Medical Association : “this AGM calls for full and proper labeling of foods, which either contain genetically engineered ingredients or have been produced using genetically engineered technology, irrespective of whether these foods are substantially equivalent to existing foods or not” – General Motion #29 passed by the 1997 Irish Medical Association Annual General Meeting
*
16. Australian Medical Association (AMA) : “Genetically modified foods have been developed and introduced without regard for full and independent safety evaluation, or full and adequate public consultation or rigorous assessment of health impacts.” – Australian Medical Association, Public Health Association, Australian Consumers’ Association, ‘Grave fears that gene food lables will be denied to consumers’, Media Release, 29 July 1999.  http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp9900/2000RP08
*
17. Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment(CAPE) : “CAPE has grave concerns about the environmental release of genetically modified (GM) crops and products; we call for the immediate suspension of all such releases”   http://www.cape.ca/resources/documents/gmo_statement.html
*
18. American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) : “because GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health and are without benefit, the AAEM believes that it is imperative to adopt the precautionary principle”
*
19. European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER) : “no epidemiological studies in human populations have been carried out to establish whether there are any health effects associated with GM food consumption. As GM foods are not labelled in North America, a major producer and consumer of GM crops, it is scientifically impossible to trace, let alone study, patterns of consumption and their impacts. Therefore, claims that GM foods are safe for human health based on the experience of North American populations have no scientific basis.”  http://www.ensser.org/increasing-public-information/no-scientific-consensus-on-gmo-safety/
*
20. Dignity Health : “Our desire is to have things labeled so that we can make the best decision on what foods to bring into our hospitals,” “The more information we have, the better decision we can make about what to buy.”  http://www.carighttoknow.org/faith_leaders_for_the_win
*
21. Physicians and Scientists for Responsible Application of Science and Technology : “Commercial application of genetical engineering for production of foods cannot be scientifically justified and carries with it unpredictable and potentially serious consequences.”  http://psrast.org/
*
22. Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility (PSRG) / : “the application of genetic engineering biotechnology, in particular the release overseas into the environment of genetically engineered organisms, has proven at best uncertain and at worst seriously damaging. We maintain that it is imperative to keep genetic engineering biotechnology in strict containment in the laboratory.”  http://www.psgr.org.nz/press-releases/32-general/85-press-release-doctors-and-scientists-call-for-a-rethink-of-regulation-on-genetically-engineered-food-87
*
23. Health Care Without Harm : “Health Care Without Harm joined as a partner to the Just Label It campaign, which has petitioned the FDA to legally require that genetically engineered (GE) foods be labeled. Americans have a basic right to know what they are eating and the right to make informed choices about what they eat.”  http://www.healthyfoodinhealthcare.org/issues.engineeredfoods.php
*
24. Healthy Food in Health Care program : Healthy Food in Health Care program encourages health care providers to purchase foods free from genetically engineered (GE) ingredients as much as possible, to source from suppliers that demonstrate a strong commitment to non-GE foods, and to support local farmers that favor sustainable practices.”  481 Hospitals signed the Healthy Food in Health Care Pledge  http://www.healthyfoodinhealthcare.org/signers.php
*
25. Council For Responsible Genetics : “Governments should require mandatory labeling of foods produced by or containing genetically engineered organisms (GMOs)”    http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=118
*
26. Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) : “Tell Congress It’s Time to Label GMOs”   http://pcrm.org/health/action-alerts/health-and-nutrition-action-alerts
*
27. Irish Doctors’ Environmental Association :“the health risks of introducing genetically modified animal feed and agricultural crops into the food chain need to be as thoroughly researched as the introduction of drugs produced by GM bacteria into medicine. This is patently not the case.”
*
28. California Nurses Association : “Nurses see people suffering from serious diet-related diseases every day. The potential danger of genetically modified foods is why CNA supports Prop 37.”   http://www.carighttoknow.org/
*
29. American College for Advancement in Medicine : “Americans have a right to know if their foods contain GMO ingredients.”   http://www.acamnet.org/site/c.ltJWJ4MPIwE/b.6194691/k.8F05/Take_Action.htm
*
30. The Independent Science Panel (ISP)  : “GM foods have never passed any required tests that could have established they are safe.”  http://www.i-sis.org.uk/isp/gmgroup.php*
*
31. Union of Concerned Scientists :  “Support food labeling laws that require foods containing GE crops to be clearly identified as such, so that consumers can make informed decisions about buying GE products.”  http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-system/genetic-engineering/
*
32. Arizona Center for Advanced Medicine : “At the very least, we can be wary. We can insist on more long-term studies of the effects of our genetic modification of crops. We can insist that our foods be labeled, so that we can make the choice whether to consume genetically modified foods.”  http://arizonaadvancedmedicine.com/gmo-foods-are-they-safe-look-at-the-evidence/
*
33. Russia’s National Association for Genetic Safety :”It is necessary to ban GMO, to impose moratorium [on it] for  10 years. While GMO will be prohibited, we can plan experiments,  tests, or maybe even new methods of research could be  developed,”  http://rt.com/news/gmo-ban-russian-scientists-293/
*
Groups that support GMO labeling
*
34. Washington State Nurses Association http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#organizations
*
35. American Medical Students Association http://www.carighttoknow.org/healthcaresupport
*
36. Healthcare Professionals for a Safe & Healthy Sustainable Food Supply http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#organizations
*
37. Nutritional Therapy Association : http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#organizations
*
38. Western Washington Physicians for a National Health Program : http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#organizations
*
39. Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments http://justlabelit.org/partners/
*
40. Physicians for Social Responsibility http://justlabelit.org/partners/
*
*
42. Physicians for Social Responsibility, Arizona http://justlabelit.org/partners/
*
43. San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility http://justlabelit.org/partners/
*
44. Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#organizations*
*
45. American Holistic Medical Association http://www.carighttoknow.org/healthcaresupport
*
46. Washington Association of Naturopathic Physicians http://yeson522.com/endorsements/#organizations
*
47. Registered Nurses Association of Ontario www.chac.ca/newsroom/archive/nov18_1999.pdf
*
48. Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions www.chac.ca/newsroom/archive/nov18_1999.pdf
*
49. Canadian Health Coalition www.chac.ca/newsroom/archive/nov18_1999.pdf
*
50. Ontario Health Coalition www.chac.ca/newsroom/archive/nov18_1999.pdf
*