Consumer Protection Law Commons^™

A Bittersweet Deal For Consumers: The Unnatural Application Of Preemption To High Fructose Corn Syrup Labeling Claims, Josh Ashley

Journal of Food Law & Policy

The recent rise of consumer consciousness regarding the health qualities of foods and beverages has become something akin to common knowledge. Reflecting this rise, studies reveal that labels regarding the health qualities of a food are more likely to increase sales. And among the health labels consumers prefer, labels describing the product as natural top the list. One website reports that according to a recent study, 31.3-percent of respondents thought that "100% natural" was the best description to read on a label, compared with only 14.2-percent who thought that "100% organic" was the best description. "All natural ingredients" was the …

Cheaters Shouldn't Prosper And Consumers Shouldn't Suffer: The Need For Government Enforcement Against Economic Adulteration Of 100% Pomegranate Juice And Other Imported Food Products, Michael T. Roberts

Journal of Food Law & Policy

In the modern global food system - marked by the trade flow of a variety of food products and ingredients from multiple locations in the world - economically motivated adulteration has emerged as a growing menace that threatens the health and wellbeing of consumers, the economic livelihoods of honest purveyors of food in the global marketplace, and the integrity and viability of national food regulatory systems. Economic adulteration is a form of cheating that includes the padding, diluting, and substituting of food product. Although this cheating is rooted in past food systems, the new paradigm for economic adulteration - a …

Will Consumers Be In The "Dark" About Labels On Genetically Engineered And Modified Foods?, Hilary Nat

Journal of Food Law & Policy

In the 1900s, the United States began to sell genetically engineered foods. One of the first genetically engineered foods sold in the United States and approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was the Flavr Savr tomato. The tomato's genetic structure was modified to prevent softening which allowed it to ripen after being picked. In the United States, statistics demonstrate that 92% of com, 94% of soybeans, and 94% of cotton sold is genetically engineered. In addition, it is estimated that 75% of the processed foods sold in supermarkets around the United States contain ingredients that are products of …

A New Age Of Evolution: Protecting The Consumer’S Moral And Legal Right To Know Through The Clear And Transparent Labeling Of All Genetically Modified Foods, Halie M. Evans

Journal of Law and Health

The United States government, until recently, did not require the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). On July 29, 2016, President Barack Obama signed into law the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS). This law directs the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to create regulations that require manufacturers to disclose certain bioengineered products on food labels. On December 20, 2018, the USDA released the final regulations for the NBFDS, which requires food manufactures, importers, and certain retailers to ensure bioengineered foods are appropriately disclosed. The final regulations include provisions that will leave the majority of GMO derived foods unlabeled. …

Time For Change: Stepping Up The Fda's Regulation Of Dietary Supplements To Promote Consumer Safety And Awareness, George Kennett

Journal of Law and Health

People are often looking for that quick fix when it comes to their health. With dietary supplements so readily available on the market, the public assume that they have been through rigorous testing. Dietary supplements are not tested as much as consumers believe. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not initiate the same type of testing and analysis for supplements as it does for food, drink and medication. Given that people are now choosing supplemental meal replacements and the like, as opposed to whole foods, regulations drastically need to be stepped up in an effort to emphasise public safety. …

Genetically Modified Plants Used For Food, Risk Assessment And Uncertainty Principles: Does The Transition From Ignorance To Indeterminacy Trigger The Need For Post-Market Surveillance?, Katharine Van Tassel

Katharine Van Tassel

In the context of GM foods, a genetic modification changes the biochemical cross-talk between genes, creating genetic material that has never existed before in nature. This novel genetic material can create unintended health risks, as seen with the case of the GM peas that contained a novel and unexpected allergenic protein and primed test mice to react to other allergens.6 The bottom line is that the scientific acceptance of the existence of the networked gene establishes that the FDA’s presumption that GM plant food is bioequivalent to traditional plant food is no longer scientifically supportable and that a new system …

Regulating In Uncertainty: Animating The Public Health Product Safety Net To Capture Consumer Products Regulated By The Fda That Use Innovative Technologies, Including Nanotechnologies, Genetic Modification, Cloning, And Lab Grown Meat, Katharine A. Van Tassel

Katharine Van Tassel

This Article will use nanotechnology as an example that highlights how regulation based on novelty rather than hazard achieves the proper balance between protecting public health while encouraging innovation through the animation of the public health product safety net. In Part II, this Article starts by explaining what nanotechnology is and the remarkable growth of its use in everyday consumer products. It then summarizes the steadily increasing number of studies that suggest that there are likely to be serious health risks associated with the use of nanotech consumer products. Next, it explains how the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] is …

The Introduction Of Biotech Foods To The Tort System: Creating A New Duty To Identify, Katharine Van Tassel

Katharine Van Tassel

This Article examines the question of whether an unsuspecting consumer who dies from an allergic or toxic reaction to an undisclosed biotech ingredient in food can recover damages through the tort system. The surprising answer is that recovery is very unlikely. This Article outlines why this is the case, then evaluates the merits of several potential solutions to this problem including the possible creation of a common law 'duty to identify' biotech ingredients in food.

This Article is arranged as follows. First, a brief primer on the nature of biotech foods is provided. For the reader unfamiliar with the regulatory …