‘GMO-free as a quality feature’ is the headline of Martina Munz, a member of the National Council and initiator of the food protection initiative at the 15th Migros Consumer Conference on 4 September 2024. The launched the day before, demands that all forms of genetic engineering in food must be declared: ‘Anyone who brings genetically modified organisms into circulation must [...] label them as such,’ according to the text of the initiative.

Mutations caused by radioactivity and chemicals

‘The two most important conventional genetic engineering techniques in plant breeding are classical mutagenesis and transgenesis,’ according to a statement by the Federal Council announcing a special law for new breeding methods in Switzerland. Indeed, radioactivity or chemicals can trigger a huge number of random mutations in the genetic material, the details of which are unknown. And: such mutagenesis techniques have been used in plant breeding for over 50 years and are constantly being further developed.

In July 2018, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) also ruled that mutagenesis using radiation or chemicals results in a ‘genetically modified organism’ (GMO). Since then, such plants have also been considered ‘genetic engineering’, but are nevertheless exempt from all the provisions intended for them. In particular, neither the EU nor Switzerland requires their labelling. Mutagenesis through radiation or chemical mutation are ‘legally permitted genetic engineering techniques’ in the EU and Switzerland.

This is an unpleasant truth for all those who reject genetic engineering.

Consumers are mostly unaware that genetic engineering has been used for decades, even in products advertised as ‘GMO-free’. Numerous plants, such as almost all durum wheat varieties, have been created using this breeding technique. This affects over 3000 varieties, including some that are grown in organic farming.

The situation is quite different, however, with new methods such as the CRISPR/Cas gene scissors. Although they are based on individual, precisely known mutations, they are subject to an absolute moratorium in Switzerland and even research is restricted.

The myth of GMO-free

The co-initiator of the popular initiative ‘For GMO-free food (food protection initiative)’, Martina Munz, made no secret of this at the Migros consumer conference: «In my view, mutagenesis is genetic engineering and should be regulated as such». Accordingly, conventional mutagenesis should also be labelled as genetic engineering. Accordingly, this ‘permissible genetic engineering’ is also a thorn in the side of die-hard opponents of genetic engineering. In fact, the text of the proposal for the food protection initiative follows precisely the definition that, according to the ECJ and the interpretation of the Swiss authorities, also includes classical mutagenesis: ‘Genetically modified organisms are organisms whose genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur under natural conditions by mating or natural recombination’. The text of the initiative thus calls for labelling of all genetically modified organisms – including those produced by classical mutagenesis.

However, classical mutagenesis using radioactivity or chemicals has not yet been mentioned in the high-profile campaigns against genetic engineering. It is easier to keep quiet about the ‘scandal’. After all, we are no longer afraid of something we have been eating for a long time. Furthermore, it would be difficult to find majorities in favour of now declaring thousands of proven foodstuffs as GMOs – or even to label them with the radioactivity or chemical warning symbol.

Agriculture between science and marketing

The Charta Quality Strategy for Swiss Agriculture insists that Swiss agriculture should refrain from ‘the use of genetically modified organisms’. The long-standing moratorium on genetic engineering suggests the same in popular parlance. How can this be reconciled with the fact that genetically modified plants have been thriving on Swiss fields and plates for years?

One answer to this question is provided by the ORF programme Eco Spezial entitled: Agriculture between science and marketing. Since man has been breeding, he has been modifying the DNA of his seeds. However, without prior technical knowledge, our cultivated plants also appear to be ‘given by nature’. Ultimately, it is the consumer who decides which marketing claims are effective. Consumers often respond to statements that emphasise naturalness and reject technology.

One thing is clear: the myth of ‘GMO-free Swiss agriculture’ is untenable from a scientific (and legal) point of view. When myths collapse, it can be painful for those who have cultivated them. And it comes at an inconvenient time for initiators who have to admit that their demand for labelling affects the food we consume every day...