Urgent: Provisions of the Gene Tech Bill are being introduced by stealth.

Frustrated by questions being raised by some political parties which are currently stalling the Gene Technology Bill, government appointed regulators have gone ahead to liberalise the laws around genetic modification in the NZ food system without parliamentary approval. These regulatory changes mirror some of the proposals in the Bill and effectively jump the gun, bypassing the need for parliamentary scrutiny and approval. This gives us a taste of what will happen if the Bill is passed and a single regulator is able to take all decisions about genetic modification.

On 2nd September the Australia NZ Food Standards Code P1055 was updated to change the definition of a genetically modified food. Novel foods produced using so-called 'new breeding techniques' such as some involving CRISPR gene editing are no longer classified as genetically modified (GM). Effectively these novel foods will no longer be identified at any point in their production. Thus they escape any requirement for compulsory labelling, denying the right of consumers to know what they are eating and the possibility of tracing any health effect in the food chain.

This is completely outside the remit the government has from the public. They should not be forcing through changes of this type. This is not even a nanny state provision, there is no public benefit. It is simply a removal of a basic right to know what we are eating and disregards any possible effect on public health.

'New breeding techniques' are defined as any procedure of gene editing which doesn't introduce 'novel DNA'. In other words, if the genes of a plant or animal are removed or rearranged using gene editing techniques, foods produced from this are no longer classified as GM. They are now regarded as equivalent to conventional breeding. The problem with this definition, as we have previously reported, is the fact that CRISPR gene editing results in unintended Double Strand Breaks (DSBs) in the DNA and off target chromosomal rearrangement, both of which can result in altered nutritional profiles and unintended enzymatic actions which can have health effects.

This is one more level of genetic modification which is being introduced into the food chain by stealth. We have discussed others in our article Major Health Alert: the Extraordinary Genetically Modified Invasion of Our Supermarkets by Stealth for example. This article detailed research identifying toxic residual contamination resulting from the widespread use of genetically modified microorganisms as food processing aids. Without strict labelling laws, food companies are reluctant to identify or label any GM content in their products. In some cases NZ food producers are unaware of the origin or nature of GM ingredients they are importing and using during food production. In other cases they know but they are anxious to hide their use.

To illustrate the problem, we phoned cheese manufacturers and asked about the rennets they are using. If cheese rennets are labelled 'animal rennet' they are not genetically modified, but these days few NZ cheeses use this product. Instead cheeses are variously labelled as containing 'rennet suitable for vegetarians', 'vegetarian rennet', 'non-animal rennet', 'microbial rennet', etc. A problem arises because most NZ cheeses are manufactured using GM rennet made by Pfizer called Chymosin, which current labelling laws allow to be labelled using any of the above innocuous sounding terms. GM rennet is a powerful coagulant chemical designed to precipitate solids in solution which for example could affect physiological conditions including blood clotting, migraines, haemorrhoids, and varicose veins.

We found a variety of responses to our phone and internet enquiries. Whitestone cheeses made in Oamaru, Mahoe cheeses in Northland, and Hohepa Cheeses made in Hawkes Bay assured us they did not use Chymosin, instead using microbial rennets made from plants. There are probably others including some imported cheeses that still use natural processes.

Barrys Bay Cheese in Canterbury admitted exclusively using Chymosin. Mainland cheese consistently avoided answering the question so you can safely assume that they are using GM rennet unless animal rennet is specifically identified on the label as it is with their Tasty cheese. There are other cheese manufacturers and it is always best to inquire carefully. Be sure to ask what they are actually using, some people go to great lengths to sound natural even if they are not.

Aside from the ambiguity of labelling, a problem arises because food manufacturers are not obliged to disclose to consumers exactly what they are putting in food. So the cheese manufacturers can simply not respond to any consumer inquiry and escape any censure, as Mainland consistently does.

This problem is not confined to cheese, lax labelling laws are allowing the content of foods and food processing aids to be changed without any alert on labels. To test this we contacted the top two home bread yeast brands Tasty and Edmonds to ask which genetically modified version of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast) are they using, Sc1.0 or Sc2.0? Neither company was able to reply to our question over the phone, nor did they respond to our follow up email. For the record Sc2.0 is more highly modified but the construction of both types raises some serious health questions as we outlined in our article Give Us Our Daily Bread.

As a very wide range of food ingredients are rapidly changing and becoming subject to genetic modification, our labelling laws need to embrace clarity and full disclosure.

Yesterday I almost bought a Harker Herbal product Deep Lung Support to help shake off a persistent post viral cough, but I stopped short when I came across one ingredient labelled 'vegetable glycerine'. I didn't know what that was. So a little research revealed "Vegetable glycerine is made by heating vegetable oils (like palm, soy, or coconut) with water under high pressure and temperature, a process called hydrolysis. This breaks the bonds in the oil's triglycerides, separating the fatty acids from the glycerine. The crude glycerine is then further purified through distillation to create a refined, high-purity product."

Vegetable glycerine is presumably added to the Harker product to help the medicine slip down the throat easily, just be aware that excessive consumption of vegetable glycerine can cause diarrhea, bloating and nausea. In other words, vegetable glycerine is not digestive or nutritive.

However, some deeper research revealed that since 2017 vegetable glycerine can be produced using batch fermentation, typically with specific types of GM yeast and a carbohydrate source. Unbelievably this process is classified as a non-synthetic, biological method of production that results in organic-certified glycerine, which is gaining attention due to consumer demand for natural products????

I called Harker to ask what sort of vegetable glycerine they were using and they answered it was probably derived from soy, something our daughter is allergic to. Harker referred us to their manufacturing plant, Midwestern Pharmaceuticals in Hawkes Bay for more information. Midwestern was very helpful and informed us that their vegetable glycerine was manufactured in Malaysia from either soy or rapeseed. The Certificate of Analysis (COA) did not say if the glycerine they were using was produced using batch fermentation or hydrolysis, so they offered to contact their Malaysian supplier and get back to us in the future. We are awaiting their email reply.

I am not singling out Harker which is a highly regarded family owned NZ company almost exclusively using traditional ingredients, but instead using this example to show how any possible GM origin of foods is currently disappearing as it goes through novel processing and/or crosses international boundaries on its way to NZ. On inclusion in consumer products, the origins and possible GM content or contamination are allowed to be masked by innocuous sounding names and descriptions written on labels. I want to emphasise that following our enquiry Harker has instituted a procedure to identify whether any changes have occurred at their supplier.

All the while, detailed research is showing that Ultra Processed Foods (UPFs) are a global health threat. An article published on November 18th 2025 in the Lancet is entitled Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health. It reviews the evidence about the increase in ultra-processed foods in diets globally and highlights the association with many non-communicable diseases. It concludes:

"The rise in ultra-processed foods is driven by powerful global corporations who employ sophisticated political tactics to protect and maximise profits. Deteriorating diets are an urgent public health threat that requires coordinated policies and advocacy to regulate and reduce ultra-processed foods and improve access to fresh and minimally processed foods."

Instead here in NZ we have a government and a food regulation regime that is determined to reduce transparency and consumer information, allowing newly introduced, highly processed and possibly genetically modified ingredients to escape identification throughout the food chain and on labels. This goes counter to the growing realisation that processed foods and ingredients are a source of serious illnesses including cancers and high rates of chronic illnesses like diabetes.

The Gene Technology Bill is a stand out example of this trend, but even as large sections of the public oppose the Bill for sound scientific and economic reasons, our government along with the Australia and NZ Food Standards Authority is pressing ahead with regulations that obfuscate consumer information and facilitate vast changes to traditional foods without any need to inform consumers. This is frankly extreme and an absolute disgrace. The determination to facilitate these changes by hook or by crook, with or without legislation using regulations, signals a disregard for public health and a desire to facilitate an exploitative global food industry that cares very little if at all about public health.

Gene edited food using CRISPR techniques must not be allowed to enter our food chain unidentified. Traceability and accountability are key pillars of a safe food environment. P1055 needs to be repealed. Write to your MP. Do not allow provisions of the Gene Technology Bill to be adopted by stealth. This is a fundamental democratic right.