National Post (National Edition)
Canadians divided on whether we should eat GMO foods.
Canadians deeply split over the safety of genetically modified food. But we eat it
If there’s one clear finding that emerges from a new study on genetically modified food in Canada, it’s that Canadians are confused about it.
A survey of consumer attitudes about genetic engineering plantbased and animal-based foods released Thursday finds that the majority of Canadians — 56.3 per cent — believe genetically modified (GM) food is thoroughly tested before it reaches consumers, compared with just 16 per cent who disagree.
But at the same time, Canadians are deeply divided on the safety of genetically modified plants, animals and food products, according to new data from Dalhousie University.
The survey of 1,049 Canadians found that 37.7 per cent believe GM food is safe to consume, while 34.7 per cent believe it is not safe to eat and 27.6 didn’t have an opinion on its safety. Thirty-five per cent of those surveyed said the health effects of GM food are fully understood, while 44 per cent said they disagreed.
People were the least clear about what they are buying from the supermarket. While 28.4 per cent of respondents said they had bought a plant-based GM food in the past, 19.4 per cent say they had not, and a whopping 52.2 per cent said they were not sure if they had or hadn’t. When it came to genetically modified animals, the uncertainty level was even higher, at 55.5 per cent.
That’s despite the fact that 90 per cent of all crops grown in Canada are genetically modified and an estimated 75 to 85 per cent of the food available for sale has at least one GM ingredient, said Sylvain Charlebois, dean of management at Dalhousie University and lead author of the study.
“The likelihood that you have never eaten something genetically modified is very low,” said Charlebois, who believes consumers’ confusion about bioengineered food likely stems from the fact that labelling of GM products and ingredients is not mandatory in Canada, only voluntary.
In Europe, where consumers have been more wary about genetic modification of plants and animals, European Union legislation requires food with more than 0.9 per cent of GM ingredients to be labelled as such in retail stores.
“People who are supportive of biotechnology would argue that there is little risk (from GM food), and it’s true — from a food safety perspective, the science is very clear,” said Charlebois, who believes GM food should nevertheless be labelled.
The survey found that 88.6 per cent of respondents said GMO food and ingredients should be labelled as such in Canada.
“I’m not against biotechnology, I’m against not being transparent towards the consumer,” Charlebois said. “From a social and economic perspective, it would be interesting to appreciate the currency of genetic engineering at retail. At the end of the day, you are really giving choice to the consumer. I would like to see how much people are wiling to pay for GM salmon compared to the conventional salmon. If it was half price, I would be curious to know how many people would opt for that salmon.”
U.s.-based Aquabounty Technologies has been selling its GM salmon, which grows twice as fast as standard salmon, in Canada since Health Canada approved its sale in 2016. Several large retailers, including Loblaw and Metro, have said they would not sell the fish at their fresh counters. Charlebois said large retailers would not be able to know whether the GM fish is being used by outside manufacturers in packaged or frozen foods, or in pet food.
Ultimately, the study reveals that consumers care most about grocery prices in a list of ranked priorities related to the food they buy, followed by factors such as nutrient content and familiarity with the product. Gm-free was ranked sixth in the list.