A national poll shows strong consumer support for improved food labeling and more frequent inspections of food-processing facilities. According to food safety advocates, Americans want labels that identify use of genetically engineered or cloned ingredients, as well as expanded country-of-origin labeling. Labels are one of the most effective means to inform the public about the health, safety, origins, and environmental impact of a product.

The public opinion poll, conducted by Consumers Union, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group, shows interest in expanding the information available to consumers on food labels. Dr. Urvashi Rangan, a senior scientist and policy analyst at Consumers Union, said in a statement that the "American public wants to know more about their food, where it comes from, how safe it is, and will vote with their dollars to support highly meaningful labels."

The survey found that by wide margins, consumers are concerned about issues such as harmful bacteria in food, the safety of imported foods, and meat and dairy produced with synthetic growth hormones or genetic engineering. Approximately 95 percent of poll participants wanted clear labels on food products made from cloned or genetically engineered animals. A large majority also agreed that meat and dairy products from cloned animals should be labeled. Nearly 70 percent of respondents believe that cloning of food animals should be prohibited, and nearly six in ten consumers polled are concerned about meat or milk products from cloned or genetically engineered animals.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently proposed allowing foods with genetically engineered ingredients to be sold without labels. The Center for Food Safety estimates that more than 60 percent of processed foods on supermarket shelves — including items such as soda, soups, crackers, and condiments — contain genetically engineered ingredients.

In January, the FDA determined that meat from cloned animals is "virtually indistinguishable" from meat from their conventional counterparts. The Washington Post reported that executives from the nation's major cattle cloning companies have not been able to keep track of how many offspring of clones have entered the food supply. Hundreds of cloned animals have already been produced for breeders in the United States.

Ninety-five percent of those polled agree that processed or packaged foods should be labeled by their country of origin and labels should be available at the point of purchase. Mandatory country-of-origin labeling for meat, fish, produce, and peanuts was implemented on Sept. 30. Several loopholes in the labeling rules remain, such as for processed and mixed-ingredient foods, and survey respondents agree that these loopholes should be closed.

According to Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives for Consumers Union, "If a food safety problem is identified in a particular imported product, as happened with jalapeño and serrano peppers from Mexico earlier this year, then consumers will be able to avoid that product."

Two-thirds of survey respondents thought the FDA should inspect food-processing facilities at least once per month. Only two percent said the FDA should inspect facilities every two or more years. The reality is that FDA inspects domestic food production plants every five to ten years, according to Consumers Union and expert testimony before Congress in July. Despite similar demand for regular FDA inspections of foreign food-processing plants, inspections are even less frequent than at domestic facilities.

The survey also revealed the vast majority of consumers want the government to be able to act quickly in response to a food safety problem with recalls and information to the public. More than 80 percent want the government to be able to quickly and accurately recall food. Almost all respondents agreed (96 percent) that the government should publicly disclose information about schools, healthcare facilities, and other institutions that receive recalled meat. The same proportion of respondents believe that when food safety problems arise, FDA should disclose information on the origin and retailer location of potentially harmful food, as the USDA is currently required to do for meat.

The survey results are being used to counter proposed changes to the organic label requirements for fish. This week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) will meet to decide what the USDA "organic" label should mean for fish. The proposed changes to the definition of organic fish would allow the use of fish food made from wild fish and open net pens. According to food safety advocates, wild fish have the potential to carry mercury and PCBs, which would then contaminate the farmed fish. The potential for contamination would violate the strict standards behind the organic label.

Farmed salmon is the most prominent industry that would be impacted by the proposed organic rule changes. Salmon cannot be raised on a vegetarian diet; thus, critics of the organic fish standard essentially say the whole concept of organic salmon should be put on hold until researchers develop sources of organic feed, rather than lowering the standards of the USDA organic label. Survey respondents agreed by large majorities that fish labeled organic should be produced from 100 percent organic feed like all other organic food animals.

Additional survey findings show that although 73 percent of those polled regard the overall food supply as safe, nearly half (48 percent) said their confidence in the safety of the nation's food supply has decreased over the last several years. A slight majority of Americans (54 percent) feel the government is doing all it can to ensure food safety.

The Consumers Union designed the poll, which has a sampling error of 3.2 percent. The Consumer Reports National Research Center conducted the telephone survey in October, using a nationally representative sample of 1,001 adults.