A class-action lawsuit filed in California this summer, claims Nestlé USA misled consumers with a “No GMO IngredientsTM” certificate of approval on its packaging. (See the two examples above.)(
“According to the proposed class action suit filed this summer, neither a ‘non-profit group’ nor a ‘neutral third party’ bequeathed the above certificate of approval, but rather it was Nestlé itself. What’s more, the suit alleged, Nestlé USA ‘intentionally mimicked the appearance of independent verifiers’ seals such as the Non-GMO Project,’ and many ingredients in its products come from GMOs (genetically modified organisms).
The suit quoted FTC guidelines that state, ‘It is deceptive to misrepresent, directly or by implication, that a product, package, or service has been endorsed or certified by an independent third party.’
The named plaintiff, Jennifer Latiff, is a resident of Oxnard, California who is said to have purchased certain Nestlé products bearing the ‘No GMO IngredientsTM’ seal, including: Lean Cuisine Marketplace frozen dinners and Coffee-Mate Natural Bliss creamer. Latiff filed her lawsuit July 27 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division.”1
(I have absolutely no proof of this but I wouldn’t put it past them to have put that seal there in the hopes of people purchasing the items blindly. I bet they figured consumers were too stupid or lazy to actually look and too lazy to do anything about it. Guess that backfired on them.)
RELATED STORY:
According to current, U.S. law, it is illegal to treat a food derived from an animal who has consumed feed produced from or containing a GMO, “to be considered a bioengineered food.” No, it makes no sense at all but that’s the current law. So, perhaps this lawsuit will force the count to rethink its antiquated thinking on GMO’s.
The Non-GMO Project has a much more stringent (and safe) definition of what constitutes a GMO and Nestlé isn’t bound to that standard meaning the company can use ingredients derived from animals fed genetically modified feed. And their webpage even explains that they do not believe that ingredients derived from animals fed with GMO feed are GMO’s themselves.
RELATED STORY:
As far as the similarities with the logos? It seems very clear that the one on the left is attempting to make itself look similar, borrowing the same base colors of green and blue and projecting a feeling of clean nature. But how a judge sees that is anyone’s guess.
I think the takeaway is that unless we force the court to deal with these issues unless we all continue to speak up and demand better food for ourselves and our families, no one else is going to.
Nestlé has downplayed the lawsuit calling it “baseless” as the third party SGS (Geneva, Switzerland-based inspection, verification, testing, and certification service provider) actually verified their process for manufacturing products that claim an absence of GMOs. They said, “Our product labels that declare the absence of GMO ingredients are accurate, comply with FDA and USDA regulations, and provide consumers with information to help them make informed purchasing decisions.”2
RELATED STORY:
If you trust the “Non-GMO Project Verified mark- the one with the butterfly- then only choosing products with that seal is your best and safest way to be sure of what you are getting. I’ve been saying this for the last three years but we are getting closer every day and until we are there, you still have to read your labels.
Shop smart! XO- Erin
Source:
