A Fresh Veg Blog

Why We Removed the Non-GMO Logo

October 2017

Did you know that October is “Non GMO Month”? So it’s quite fitting that we have great news to share. News that very few people seem to know about: just how few GMO vegetables and fruits are commercially available!

We are fortunate to live in time where we can make so many food choices for ourselves. To buy organic vs. conventional; fresh vs. frozen vs. canned; local vs. global. We do not live in an area where extreme drought is causing starvation, or where epidemic disease has wiped out the ability to grow certain crops. We live in a world where we want it yesterday, fresh, year-round (imagine no salads in January!), looking and tasting perfect.

That being said, our director of corporate marketing and one of the owners at Mann’s – Gina Nucci – has written today’s post in order to dispel some of the myths and rumors swirling around GMO and non-GMO foods, particularly fresh produce.

My first point: The only GMOs commercially available in the U.S. are the following crops: soybeans, corn (field and sweet), papaya, potato, canola, cotton, alfalfa, sugar beets, summer squash and an apple (Artic).

Graph from gmoanswers.com

My second point: There are no GMO crops grown in Monterey County, California

All of our vegetables are non-GMO. Broccoli, cauliflower, kohlrabi, Brussels sprouts, green beans, sugar snap peas, iceberg lettuce, romaine lettuce, etc.  We have gone through the process of getting some Non-GMO Verified since consumers want to know and ask us weekly. We felt a third party certifier would be beneficial. However, with the proliferation of the Non-GMO Verified logo being used on products with no GMO possibilities, we felt an opportunity to educate our consumers, beyond just adding the ‘logo’ to our package.

GMO’s have become a very hot topic of late due to the wide variety of products with ingredients containing GMO crops. For example, corn is a GMO product that is included in a wide range of foods: whole kernel products (corn on the cob, canned/frozen niblets, popcorn, livestock feed, tortillas, corn chips, taco shells, pozole, etc.). Then there are the corn fractionalized products: dry milled (grits, flour, hominy, germ) & wet milled (steep water, gluten feed, gluten meal, starch products [sweeteners]).  I am not going to talk about these much – they are extremely complex and most likely the primary reason the Non-GMO Verified Project came to existence in the first place. People want to know what’s in their food. I get it. As a mom to three young boys, I completely understand.

But for now, when we are talking about vegetables and fruit available in your local grocer’s produce section – this is what we will be drilling down on. This is what we can educate consumers on for now: the fact that there are no GMOs in lettuces, berries, broccolis, cauliflowers, celery, kale, kohlrabi, carrots, sugar snap peas, etc.

What is a GMO?

When people refer to genetically modified organisms – GMOs – they are referring to crops developed through genetic engineering, a more precise method of plant breeding. Genetic engineering, also referred to as biotechnology, allows plant breeders to take a desirable trait found in nature and transfer it from one plant or organism to the plant they want to improve, as well as make a change to an existing trait in a plant they are developing.

Mann’s Broccolini was created using a traditional hybridization process.

What’s the difference between GMO and Hybrid seeds?

For hybrid seeds, plant breeders use cross-pollination between plants. This usually takes place in green houses or the open field. With traditional breeding, thousands of genes get tossed together, requiring breeders to keep recrossing the plants to eliminate the undesirable traits. Mann Packing grows two very popular hybrids: Broccolini®, a cross between gai-lan and broccoli; and Sugar Snap Peas, a cross between a snow pea and an English pea. The traditional hybridization process takes years. It took breeders eight years to create the Broccolini seed, and twelve to come up with today’s sugar snap. Read our blog post about the birth of Broccolini here.

Genetic engineering, or biotechnology (GMOs) gets right to the point: breeders select the traits they want from an analysis of the plant’s genetic information and move them directly into the genetic code of the plant. Boom.

Why are there GMO’s?

There are many reasons that GMOs were created. One being to develop crops with pest resistant traits, and/or crops that are resistant to low-cost, environmentally safer herbicides. These crop varieties mean fewer and/or less troublesome chemicals are needed to control various crop pests.

GMOs have also been developed to improve nutritional content. For example “golden rice” (not yet on the market) contains higher vitamin A content to reduce blindness in impoverished communities. Other GMOs have been developed to extend the shelf life of fruits and vegetables and to reduce food waste. Additionally, future GMOs could reduce drought susceptibility and improve nutrient uptake by crops.

For non-food use, GMOs may include plants or animals producing pharmaceutically important proteins for the creation of new vaccines. Gmoanswers.com is a great website for extensive information about the how’s and why’s of GMOs around the world.

Are GMOs Safe?

The American Medical Association, National Academy of Sciences, World Health Organization and the European Commission have all given approval to eat GMOs. There is extensive research showing that GMO products are safe to consume, just as there is overwhelming research showing that it is better to eat your vegetables – GMO corn included – than not.

What is the Non GMO Verified Project?

The Non-GMO Project is a nonprofit organization committed to preserving and building sources of non-GMO products, educating consumers and providing verified non-GMO choices.  They believe everyone has a right to know what’s in their food and deserves access to non-GMO choices.

Our Single Cut lettuce lineup

Why did Mann’s decide to use the logo in the first place and why are we removing it?

With our Fresh Leaf Farms rebrand and re-launch of our Single Cut™ Lettuces, we thought it would be beneficial to use the non-GMO verified logo on the packaging. This was the first time we had ever used it, and we were attempting to appeal to millennial customers who are demanding much more transparency about where their food comes from than previous generations.

When we prepared our packaging for Canada, we were told that we could not use the non-GMO verified logo there, because there are no GMO lettuces. This made us think deeper about the logo’s use and the perpetuation of food fears. The fact that we were also seeing the logo used on water, sea salt and – no joke – kitty litter made the decision an easy one.

What’s next?

We are removing the Non-GMO Verified logo from our packaging. We still list ‘non-GMO’ on some products, but that is also under review. We have our FAQs to share online letting consumers know that all of our vegetables are non-GMO, some still verified via the Non-GMO Verified Project. However, we will do our best to educate our consumers on the facts about GMO products and just how few there actually are in our Mann’s veggie world!


  • Dawn says:

    Sorry to hear this. Thanks for letting us all know that you could care less about what We, The People have been DEMANDING for YEARS now (GMO labeling). Since Mann’s is in DEFIANCE of what WE ALL DEMAND, GMO LABELING, I will no longer buy your products! Whom ever made this BAD decision, I hope that they get FIRED! People WILL vote with their $$.

    • Loree Dowse says:

      Hi Dawn – we absolutely agree with consumers’ right to know what they are buying, which is why we want to help educate people about GMOs and the lack of them in our products. — Loree

    • Stacy Penny says:

      Dawn, as a person, I’d like to DEMAND that you STOP trying to act like CAPS are frightening and that ALL people somehow want what YOU want.
      I will vote with my $$, by supporting companies like Mann’s who refuse to buy into fear mongering and scientific illiteracy. Thank you Mann’s!

    • Mart says:

      Calm down Dawn – they’re simply removing the label from products for which there is no GMO equivalent.

    • Eric Bjerregaard says:

      Yes Dawn, I will vote with my money for this company that recognizes the truth. there is no inherent risk for currently approved GE crops . that is not present in all Crops. Since you refuse to learn and demand ignorance. You will be left behind as more progress is made.

    • Richard Bennett says:

      Dawn, why don’t you read the whole post from beginning to end? The label you think you want is meaningless.

    • Eric Bjerregaard says:

      Yes, I will vote with my dollars for this company that has rejected deceptive advertising and fear mongering.

    • Andi says:

      Dawn – you should know that there are no GMOs in Mann products because there are only a small number of products that are GMO even in commercial production. Label or not, that is the fact. Education is better than fear.

    • I Ignorance is not always bliss.

      Sheeple get caught following the loudest trending bark or buzz word of the month/year; GMO-Free, Organic, Gluten-Free, etc., without knowing what they are truly getting on the bandwagon for… it’s always good to have an open mind AND educate yourself using that rare thing called common sense.
      My husband is a “plant doctor” specializing in the health and viability of our abundant agriculture/produce grown in the #SaladBowlCapitalOfTheWorld, he concurs with Mann.

    • Victoria says:

      Dear Dawn,

      First of all, please read the post entirely. Read it again and again if you need to. You’ve clearly missed the point.

      Secondly “could care less” is actually the opposite of what you mean. (Or what I think you mean since it’s difficult to read poor grammar and so much inappropriate capitalisation). When a person *could* care less it means that they care quite a bit. By definition they must do since they state it is possible for them to care less than they do.

      The irony is that you are, in fact, correct. This company could care less. They clearly care enough to want to distance themselves from false labelling and from the perpetuation of food myths. This is akin to the idiocy of labelling a bag of peanuts with “contains nuts”. What you “the people” are apparently demanding is that you are excused of taking any responsibility to learn what foods may, or may not, be GMO; by demanding that everything be labelled regardless of whether or not it is even possible. I’m sorry but perhaps you the people should spend more time educating yourself about what you eat (and brush up on your grammar whilst you’re at it) and less time making ludicrous demands.

    • Cokeen says:

      Dawn! Mann’s is removing GMO labeling because they don’t use veggies with GMO in them! You are over thinking this…..relax will ya.

  • John Hanson says:

    I was disappointed to hear about removal of the NON-GMO logo, and more disturbed by the comments about improved nutrition. Humans are notoriously arrogant, and frequently fail to recognize unintended consequences. Directed Hybridization is very different that the Trans genetic work that is going on. would you want to be responsible for the extinction of bird species caused by Vitamin A poisoning from Golden Rice? I appreciate that for the moment, the vegetables used do not have a GMO option, but GMOs are not required, and I will be researchng those products that stick to transparency and no use of GMOs.

    • Loree Dowse says:

      Appreciate the feedback. Transparency is important to us as well – it’s actually why we made the decision we did. — Loree

    • Eric Bjerregaard says:

      G. R. has no vitamin A. It has a precursor, beta carotene. “Beta-carotene is a non-toxic form of a precursor of vitamin A. Yellow maize is rich in this substance but other seeds are notoriously deficient in vitamin A precursors. When ingested, the body turns what it needs into vitamin A and the rest passes out of the body unchanged. ” http://spesfeed.com/2014/04/the-10-things-you-should-know-about-feeding-your-birds/ Hybridization produces changes that are unknown and thus not able to be safety tested. thus the GE work results in known changes that are safety tested and also results in a less risky new variety.

    • Andi says:

      So birds are more important than actual human children who going blind from Vitamin A deficiency? And yes, genetic modification is different than hybridization. It is more precise and safe.

    • JB Robertson says:

      “the extinction of bird species caused by Vitamin A poisoning from Golden Rice?”

      This is utter nonsense, where did you read this?

      • Serra says:

        Heaven forbid we could ‘allegedly’ wipe out a bird species from Vitamin A Poisoning! To hell will all those children suffering from blindness, malnutrition and premature DEATH, we should think about the birds!

  • Patricia Odoerfer says:

    October 13, 2017 at 12:19 pm
    I prefer to pay the extra few cents to have the non GMO label. I am aware what foods are GMO at present, however than can alway change any day such as Aquabounty Salmon being sold to experiement on us Canadians. (Creepy, therefore I have boycotted Salmon altogether as they refuse to label it) I like to have freedom of choice. Did you say our goverment did not “allow” you to print non – gmo on lettuce labels ? How sickening. Please continue to label if you can or at least email me that it is grown without GMO’s of any sort so that I can have peace of mind. Thanking you in advance

    • Loree Dowse says:

      Hi Patricia – we will always have information available on our website regarding the GMO status (or in our case, non-status) of our products. Feel free to drop us a line any time if you have questions. Best,

    • Eric Bjerregaard says:

      Almost all foods are modified. Only the method is different. Some that you eat were modified using radiation and these are not labeled. Enjoy those more risky foods that you have been unaware of. 🙂

    • Robert Wager says:

      May I ask you why you want to boycott a salmon with a salmon gene that allows the producer to grow the salmon on ~1/2 the amount of feed. This GE product takes pressure off the wild salmon population. we do not protect wild salmon by eating them.

    • Mike says:

      So basically people who believe the lies that the Non-GMO Project is spreading about modern crop technologies are really disappointed that Mann’s is refusing to mislead its customers.

    • JB Robertson says:

      In Canada, there is a specific provision in the Food and Drug Act that “prohibits the labeling, packaging, treating, processing, selling or advertising of any food (at all levels of trade) in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive to consumers or is likely to create an erroneous message regarding the character, value, quantity, composition, merit or safety of the product.”

      I am very glad that the Canadian government requires HONESTY in advertising.

  • Ivan Bigg says:

    Well-explained. Corn is still sweet after sitting in the fridge for two weeks and that is a good thing, whether it’s through hybridization or genetic manipulation. People in underdeveloped countries just want to EAT and get protection from diseases–and if GMOs give them a better life, good for everybody!

    • Kevin Folta says:

      Ivan, the sweetness of sweet corn is not a GMO thing. It comes from a gene variant called shrunken2 (sh2), a mutation found decades ago here in Florida by a breeder named Emil Wolf. That gene, bred via traditional means, is still the foundation of today’s sweet corn, and new mutations have been identified that enhance the sh2 effect even more.

      The GE traits installed provide protection to ear worms and tolerance to herbicides. A lot of sweet corn production (like here in FL) does not use GE traits because the high-value off season corn goes to Europe. Instead they use applications of pesticides to control ear worms, which I personally feel moves us in the wrong direction. If you have a gene that control the problem it should be favored over chemistry. My two cents.

      Learn more about the Emil Wolf here: http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/45/1/181.full

  • Brian Cieslar says:

    Since there have been no health issues from eating GMO foods, labeling makes no difference to me

  • Ann says:

    Very informative. I often wonder if folks who refuse genetically modified food would stand by their principles if they had a health problem could only be cured by genetic modification.

  • Ann says:

    I often wonder if folks who will not eat a genetically modified foods would stick to their principles if they had health issues that could only be treated with genetic engineering.
    Excellent article. I plan to share.

  • Shelby says:

    This biologist will be buying Mann’s whenever possible!

  • Patty says:

    Great job and thank you for taking time to educate consumers. I am so tired of fear-based marketing & that’s why I avoid the Non-GMO label at all costs. I support science & the companies that support it. As the wife of a farmer who proudly grows GMOs, thank you.

  • Angela Jones says:

    Thank you Mann’s for being an industry leader in this respect. Providing knowledge and education for consumers is the classy decision and the best way forward if we are going to feed a growing population in the safest and most sustainable way. Please continue to avoid the meaningless ‘absence’ labelling and fear marketing that is so rife in today’s advertising.

  • Clay Weddle says:

    Thank you Manns!! Facts, not fear!

  • Brandon says:

    I am ecstatic that a company has listened to the scientific community and the data and reviewed their labeling policies. I’m hoping others will follow, but at the moment I specifically look for your brand as I want to support scientifically literate businesses.

  • James Huber says:

    I’m glad to see this. The Canadian government had the good sense to mandate that the non-GMO label can only appear on something for which there is a GMO variant on the market. This is a good, common sense, non fear-marketing decision. Thank you for sticking up for science and common sense.

  • Patty T. says:

    I appreciate a company that prefers to market with actual fact. It is much easier (and often more profitable) to play on consumers’ fears. Let’s face it. Fear-mongering works. But it also can be harmful. It has been found, I believe, that more and more people with limited incomes have been eating less fruits and vegetable because they cannot afford the additional expense of “organic” produce. So because of a baseless fear that has been instilled, they are not giving their children a balanced diet.

    Many of us applaud the integrity of your company and its employees for not giving this fear-mongering credence. Thank you.

  • Alexander White says:

    Thanks for making a science based decision and not allowing the scaremongering to take over.

  • Richard Bennett says:

    Good move, the non-GMO label is a scam that does not signal a healthy, safe, or ethical product. I applaud you for taking a step to educate consumers.

  • Philip Hamm says:


  • Emily Swartz says:

    Thank you for standing up for science! GMOs are not scary if you understand them and your explaination is spot-on! We should not label things when there is only 1 available option-it is confusing otherwise. You have GAINED a new customer as I avoid buying products labels non-GMO that don’t need to be! Thank you for your marketing clarity!

  • Kim says:

    Well, I’ll be a dissenting voice here- thanks for standing with science! I personally will be going out of my way to purchase your products, as I appreciate your company not trying to cash in on fear mongering marketing strategies that assume the consumer doesn’t actually understand much about genetic engineering.

  • Heather Kessler says:

    Thank you! For a long time, I have had to stop purchasing products when that little butterfly sticker showed up on something that couldn’t be gmo. I refuse to pay more for the same thing. It is refreshing to see honesty in packaging and I hope more companies follow your lead. I’ll be looking for the Mann name in my markets and look forward to supporting your business. Thanks again for standing up for facts and science over silly marketing!

  • Rod Bednaryczk says:

    I just wanted to thank you for this. You guys rock. Honesty and transparency is exactly what we need more of in this world. Not ignorance and fear mongering that non gmo labels create. Thank you sooo much.

  • Robert Wager says:

    There is so much fear from so many myths about GE crops and derived foods. If you are interested may I recommend a few articles.

    “Planting the Future” by the European Academies of Science Advisory Council 2013

    Unhealthy Fixation
    The war against genetically modified organisms is full of fearmongering, errors, and fraud. Labeling them will not make you safer. SLATE

    Not all science created equal: The genetically engineered crops story
    Robert Wager

    All are free on-line


    Robert Wager
    Vancouver Island University
    Nanaimo BC

  • Eric Bjerregaard says:

    As GE derived foods are as safe as any. There is no fact based reason for labeling of any kind. Should a seller of such desire to voluntarily label. That is up to them. To use the nongmo label for products that have no GE varieties available is deceptive as it insinuates that there is a risk involved with GE. Congrats to this company for standing against the pressure from those who oppose the facts for what ever ideological reason/excuse they are using.

  • Scott says:

    Glad to hear one company is at least willing to stand up for the truth and educate consumers rather than cave to fear based labeling.

    Are your products available in Oregon?

  • Clare says:

    Very brave of this company to go against the trend of all the bad information in the grocery store. Non-GMO salt!

    I do also think it’s false marketing to label something as ‘non’ when the alternative doesn’t exist. You’re the first company I know of to actually tell their customers the reality of this!

    I also personally don’t buy non-GMO Project labeled products as part of support for science, so you’ve gained at least one customer.

  • Jason says:

    Thanks for not exploiting fear and ignorance. Having worked in agriculture a little, the Non-GMO Project is the most ridiculous, pointless, and unethical company I’ve ever seen. We’ll be looking for your guy’s products from now on.

  • John Flaherty says:

    Well Done Mann’s. Facts over fear and science over propaganda.

  • Jess says:

    Thank you for this. I am a fan of GMO products, but most products, as you stated here, do not have a GMO version so it is ridiculous to label them non-GMO. I appreciate you trying to stay transparent with the facts. I will specifically look for your products in store to give you my business.

  • Dan Thomson says:

    Thank you so much for rising above the current trending demand and just being sensible and honest. This is a balanced and well-written statement on your part, and I greatly appreciate the sanity of your new approach. When I see how the “Non-GMO” label is applied to products for which there either is no GMO version or for which one could never exist (salt) it leads me to view such a label as more a fear-inducing marketing move than true transparency. You have earned a new customer and proponent. Thank you.

  • Mike says:

    I applaud Mann’s for removing the misleading and pointless non-GMO label. They clearly really care about their customers!

  • Kevin Folta says:

    Your decision to remove the label is a great step in honest transparency and a fair and improved dialog about food. To label something Non-GMO when there is no GMO version is deception. Remember, the Non-GMO Project makes many non-scientific claims, and it does not take much reading (or look at their history) to realize that they are an anti-technology corporation, making money off of fear.

    With innovations like gene editing (CRISPR, TALEN, etc) now curing human diseases and being added to food innovations, these technologies will greatly augment our ability to make better foods for more people, with profits for farmers and better environmental sensitivity. It is critical that we maintain the precision in language to enjoy the benefits of the next generation of innovations.

  • Hannah says:

    It’s refreshing to see a company being transparent about their labeling decisions. I think it shows integrity that you chose not to include the non-GMO label on products that have no GMO counter part.

  • Caroline says:

    Fantastic news! I’m so aware of all the fear mongering and blatant false advertising around food that sometimes grocery shopping makes me angry…

    Thank you for removing Mann products from the food noise…

  • gmobullsheet says:

    Your links to “extensive research” refers to a blog written by David Tribe, of “Academic Review” which was revealed to be a Monsanto front group in court documents. Your understanding of genetic engineering is laughable as is your research–which is the reason I will avoid your products. The trait inserted into plants were not found in nature– herbicide resistance for example, was discovered in bacteria growing around Round Up Herbicide waste tank and it was inserted along with flawed promoter (CAMV) and a nonterminating terminator, backbone DNA into a plant that has more genes than humans do. There is no evidence that these laboratory plants were tested — proteomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics are not pubished by producers while independent studies find expression of unintended allergens and elevated levels of polyamines (putresceine and cadeverine) in corn. Safety testing is an absurdly superficial, short term using horrible science standards. If you want to support Monsanto for whatever reasons, just say so–instead of miseducation the pubic with obvious propaganda. Your flagrant science illiteracy & propagation of Monsanto propagandameans you don'[t deserve consumer support.

    • JB Robertson says:

      “– herbicide resistance for example, was discovered in bacteria growing around Round Up Herbicide waste tank”

      haha wow, citation needed.

    • Kasey Morrisey says:

      You might be interested to know that herbicide tolerance is a trait first created and commercialized via traditional breeding. More than a DECADE before genetic engineering did the same thing. (1984 to be exact) And to date, there are more herbicide tolerant crops varieties on the market from traditional breeding than from genetic engineering.
      You can look up some of the more common varieties by searching for Clearfield crops by BASF. But there are also other varieties, including produce like lettuce and cauliflower.
      Also, if you’d like to learn why these traits are so beneficial to farmers and the environment you can #AskAFarmer.

  • Rob England says:

    Thank-yoi for standing up for science and reason. The forces of antiscience are strong. You are doing a fine thing. Ignore the hysterical response.

  • Richard says:

    Mann. Thank-you for your integrity. Removing the disingenuous non-GMO label is a step in the right direction. I hope you will completely end your relationship with the Non-GMO Verified Project. They prey on consumer’s unjustified fears.

    Unfortunately, the legislature in the US has ignored the science you outlined in your piece and has passed a national GMO labeling law. The USDA is currently working out how that labeling will be done. Complying with that law is all you need to do to provide such unnecessary information. I say unnecessary because noting which breeding technique was used to create the food crop tells you nothing about its safety or nutrition.

  • David says:

    Thank you for not buying into pseudoscience fearmongering BS. I will start looking for your products immediately

  • Julia says:

    Thanks for a well informed run down that is based on facts and not fear. It’s more and more rare to read something that meets that criteria on the internet…


  • Kristene says:

    Hooray! Thanks for this common sense approach and for explaining it so well. Thanks also for not contributing to the growing culture of fear around food. YOu have gained a customer and I will tell my friends!

  • Adam says:

    Thank you very much in helping to combat scientific illiteracy. I know it would be easier to just slap the logo on everything than to help educate people. I hope this helps some minds to look at things a little more critically.

  • Chester says:

    Good to hear about a company trying to educate the public vs give in to the fear! Not sure any of your products are available in Hawaii but I would gladly purchase them if they are. I think the percentage of people who once understanding the facts would still not buy your products is small, but the anti-GMO activists are quite loud. It’s sad really as I see this very much tied into general anti-science dogma propagating our country/world as of late.

  • Katie says:

    That’s so awesome that you’ve removed the non-gmo label (aka, the scientifically illiteracy verified label). Hoping one day you’ll carry some gmo products, but for now, I’ll still be on the look out for your brand anyway since you seem to the be the very few that actually look into the issue instead of blindly follow trends.

    Katie, graduated with honors in a genetics major.

  • CG says:

    Not a lot of companies have the courage to do this. I believe the non-GMO project label just propagates misinformation and scares people away from many healthy choices. I actively avoid products that use it. I think there are an increasing number of consumers, like me, who are tired of all the fear-based marketing. I’m glad to see a company take a stand and promote health instead of fear. Awesome job, Mann’s.

  • A Salinas resident says:

    Well said and explained. I salute Mann Packing for clearly defining and labeling or not labeling, in regards to non GMO products. All crops are not subject to GMO’s, and labeling everything as non GMO only adds to the overemphasis on the good and the bad with the use of GMO’s in breeding and in our food chain. Unfortunately the non GMO labeling has become a marketing ploy in many situations, instead of providing sound information to consumers

  • Alison Malis says:

    Well done! I will certainly purchase your products now that the needless fear-mongering about GMOs has been dropped by your company. I would never pay extra to have that ridiculous label, but I might pay more just to support companies who see beyond the unscientific hyperbole. Congratulations.

  • Jessica says:

    Thanks for removing the label. I will now actively seek out your product to buy as a way to say thanks for standing up for science.

  • Annabel says:

    This post is a breath of fresh air and well done. The uniformed, unscientific propagation spewing of the anti-GMO crowd is tiresome. Vitamin A poisoning of bird species from Golden Rice? Cite the proof otherwise it’s just more anti-GMO noise.

  • Joni Kamiya says:

    This is great news that you’re standing with evidence and educating consumers. As a daughter of a Hawaii papaya farmer, we are thrilled with your decision.

  • Rachel says:

    As a Registered Dietitian who #standsforscience, I can’t express how much I appreciate and support your decision to educate consumers and not just focus on money making. Spreading fact and not fear surrounding food is so important to me (as well as my job) and I’m overjoyed to finally see a food company get on board with that mindset. Thanks for your courage and bravery!

  • Natalia says:

    very good decision! Congrats!

  • Fenix says:

    Thanks for your smart, educated and sane decision! Those of us who understand appreciate your choice.

    Van Fenix, RN, EMTP/B

  • Justin Couron says:

    Thank you for not giving in to fear mongering and misinformation. Even if you disagree with GMO usage its extremely disingenuous to put a Non-gmo label on a product when there are no GMO versions of said product. Thank you Mann’s for taking a science based stance on food advertising and transparency.

  • John says:

    Great news. Thanks for not exploiting the ignorance of gmo fear mongering !!
    Ps. Love the sugar snap

  • Marla says:

    Thank you for helping dispel food fears.

  • Jon Davis says:

    Thank you very much! I am a genetics teacher who is training students to use modern plant breeding and biotech methods to improve seeds to boost crop yields around the world. This sets off a virtuous cycle of economic development from the grassroots up. I advise my students to focus on sustainability as well as food security. For all those reasons, I am troubled when my students see the non-GMO label almost everywhere, even though the scientific consensus is that transgenic foods are safe. Farmers around the world should have access to all crop varieties, especially those GMOs that reduce insecticide use, promote conservation tillage, are resistance to bacterial and viral disease and are bio-fortified with nutrients like vitamin A. THANK YOU!

  • George says:

    Thank you for removing the completely unnecessary label. The science is clear: GMOs are safe (I would argue safer than food produced by conventional breeding methods). I would actually rather buy GMO broccoli if it would be available. Anyhow if you stick the non GMO label to the products then stick a non cross-pollinated label, non mutated due to radiation label and so on (the latter two methods are allowed for organic framing :/). Science have given us a better, healthier and environmentally friendlier food. Why not take advantage of that? 🙂
    Thank you Mann, I will no longer boycott your produce now.

  • JB Robertson says:

    Astounding to read these comments where people are getting upset that they are NOT being misled. Unreal.

    Thank you for trying to educate some folks Manns, looks like there is a long way to go to repair the damage the (organic industry funded) Non-GMO project has done.

  • Steven Lubick says:

    Thanks for your commitment to rational thinking and for showing a willingness to embrace beneficial advancements in science.

    You’ve earned a new customer!

  • Patricia Farano says:

    Interesting article and I applaud Mann’s for not labeling product as non-GMO when it doesn’t need to. I do hope your education efforts are beneficial and that consumers learn. My concern is that another product that is labeling Non GMO will grab the attention of those less knowledgeable. Hoping that doesn’t happen!

  • Adam says:

    I applaud you for what you’ve done and siding with the science. One the other hand; having read the comments here, I am very disappointed. Some people are just completely unwilling to change their mind. Unwilling to consider any information that challenges their beliefs, regardless how strong the evidence is. I used to be all about organic foods only. When I took the time to understand the science, I felt a bit silly and quickly revised my beliefs. GMOs and biotechnology have my full support.

  • Fred says:

    Excellent! Thank you for your article and your efforts to educate and inform the consumer. I support your decision. I believe the slogan “What’s in our food” is meaningless as a justification for labeling a breeding technique. And the non-GMO label, like all labels, is a simple-minded, thought-less way to draw attention to nutritionally insignificant differences. In this case, they make it easy to demonize a technology, specifically, and to demonize conventional, science based agriculture, in general, while telling us nothing about what we are eating. Kudos to you. I will look for your products in the supermarket.

  • John says:

    There is a strong odor of legalese in your article. What is the difference in modifying a plant using the genes in the pollen, or extracting single genes and injecting them into another gene pool (oh, you told us that – the time it takes to modify the plant)? The starving people scare, is the foundation of plant manipulation. It is also one of the foundations of the eugenics religion. This is not to scare people, but to educate them. These practitioners believe that the earth is over-populated, therefore, along with trying to increase food production, they are also involved in reducing human population to a manageable level. Famous eugenicists are Margret Sanger, and Adolph Hitler, and many others you wouldn’t believe. That number varies from eugenics church to church, but the final indicator for them, that this tenant of the religion is fulfilled, would be no more starvation in the world. That day will never come. The fact is, the earth produces 10 times the food necessary to feed her population. The people that are starving are victims of logistic, not food shortage. Here are some examples: people in Ethiopia were starving because of a man-made drought. They are nomadic people, and could have moved to remedy the problem, but man also imprisoned them with war, and force them to migrate across barren land. People in the Appalachians starved, because the geography would not support farming, and their only livelihood was snatched from them through the sudden collapse of the coal industry. The US Government founded today’s welfare industry, in an attempt to save those people, so it was geography, topography (lack of roads), and poor government economic, that contributed to their plight. In southern Arizona, people starve as late as recently, because they live between the border and a Reservation. During the present epidemic of illegal drug and human trafficking and migration, there are no roads, and the government has no plans to build or restore roads to that area, no stores, and no way to grow enough food for the people. By the way, that GMO corn you were talking about, is killing them with complications, causing Indians to have the shortest life expectancy of any group of people in America! Thus, they starve in a land of plenty. The agencies you sited that claim GMO’s are safe, and what constitutes GMO, and what does not, have a dog in the hunt, so they are not qualified to give a non-biased opinion. They also know, as you should, that there is no way for humans to prove whether they are lying or not, unless we are botanical engineers, and can do our own laboratory research on our food. People with absolute power should be feared. No one raises fears for fun, there is a reason to fear people who want complete control over all the food in the world. If there is nothing to fear, it will take care of itself. The truth is, most people don’t care, even if the fear is proven. More people than not, will read this article, believe that you are lying, and shop as usual anyway. To verify and print GMO on your foods, cost more money. If you save money you increase profit. This is the real reason companies make such decision. You don’t have to be a biomolecular engineer to figure that out …

    • Loree Dowse says:

      Hi John – appreciate your feedback, but no legalese or eugenics motivators here. We are simply trying to educate our customers about GMOs in general as well as how they pertain to the particular products we sell. Best, Loree

  • Ronda says:

    Thank you Mann’s for your willingness to stand with science and engage your customers in the knowledge that GMOs are safe and many of the items you sell do not have a GMO counterpart.

    I also want to thank the dietitians, teachers, and community members for commenting and supporting biotechnology. Farmers need your voice to help amplify the great work being done in agriculture today.

  • Cas says:

    Found this article after searching up non-gmo logos to learn to recognize them, and I must say, this is quite informative! If nothing else at least I can see both sides of the issue. Blew my mind. Thanks a lot!

  • Jasmine says:

    As a scientist who gets physically pained everytime I see a “Non-GMO Verified” sticker on things with no GM variant (even things like salt!!) Thank you for this.
    When as much of the population has such a weak understanding of what GM crops are and entail, much less their safety, labelling ends up falling into fearmongering far more than informing.

  • Brittany says:

    Thank you for doing this. the non-GMO labels are a bit out of hand on things that have no GMO counterpart in existence (like you said, kitty litter and also salt). I hate purchasing items with the non-GMO labels when I know it’s just a fear-based marketing tactic on the item. Education is a much better choice!

  • April says:

    Thank-you, Mann’s! I deeply respect your ethics in advertising and your efforts to educate the uninformed!.

  • James William says:

    You’ve made a customer for life. Thank you for your honesty and for actually caring about your customers, instead of just pretending to care.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Follow Mann's on Instagram at @VeggiesMadeEasy