It’s easy to see why Monsanto would be so eager to use this term. The term “bio” is used to denote organic foods in many European countries, and consumers who look out for the “bio” label at the grocery store could easily confuse “biofortified” foods as being the complete opposite of what they truly are and end up buying the very thing they were trying to avoid in the first place. Indeed, the EU has raised an objection on the grounds that the term would confuse Europeans, and several EU counties have been vocal in supporting a more restrictive use of the term.
Even in the U.S., where the term “organic” is used instead, many people would construe this label as something positive, especially given its implication that a food has additional nutrients.
Creative labeling nothing new when it comes to unhealthy food
If Monsanto is successful, it will hardly be the first time that something undesirable masqueraded as something far more appealing. For example, consider the term “biosolids,” which are used to grow non-organic crops. On the surface, it sounds like something relatively innocuous, but it’s actually a euphemism for “
human sewage sludge” – a nicer way of saying that the food is grown with feces and other disgusting things we flush down the toilet.
Then there are the
sneaky ways of hiding sugar on food labels by calling it names like evaporated cane juice, organic brown rice syrup, barley malt, or dried oat syrup.
Decoding food labels already requires a sharp eye and extensive knowledge of the deceptive marketing tactics used by food companies, and a move like this will only muddy the waters even further. We can only hope the objections from the EU and others will be successful in preventing this from going any further. Even if their attempt fails, however, it’s clear that Monsanto has no intention to stop trying to trick consumers using every means possible.
(Read more)