|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Health |
|
Report Finds Genetically Engineered Foods A 'Risky Business' For Kraft (kft) |
Current rating: 0 |
by National Association of State PIRGs
(No verified email address) |
19 Apr 2003
|
Genetically Engineered Foods Pose Unnecessary Financial Risks to Kraft Foods, Inc. and Other Food Companies
Kraft operates one of its largest plants in Champaign, where it is a major employer. Kraft employees and others holding shares of its stock might want to consider changing their positions or writing to Kraft's board of directors about the risky business decision of using GMO ingredients. |
WASHINGTON - April 17 - Kraft Food’s (KFT – NYSE) continued use of genetically engineered foods pose unnecessary financial risk to the company and its investors, according a new report entitled, “Risky Business: Financial Risks that Genetically Engineered Foods Pose to Kraft Foods, Inc. and Shareholders.”
The report reveals that Kraft’s use of genetically engineered ingredients poses risk of product recalls and liability lawsuits, especially with the possibility that biopharm crops—food crops genetically engineered to produce prescription drugs or industrial chemicals—could contaminate Kraft’s products. Other financial risks include loss of competitive advantage, consumer rejection of Kraft’s products, and damage to reputation resulting from increased controversy surrounding these foods.
The report also makes the case that genetically engineered foods do not offer financial benefits to Kraft or marketable benefits to consumers. Genetically engineered crops may even cost more to produce than non-genetically engineered counterparts.
“Continued use of genetically engineered ingredients is a no-win situation for Kraft and shareholders,” stated Kate Madigan, advocate for the state Public Interest Research Groups and author of the report. “Kraft is gambling with controversial ingredients when there is nothing to gain from doing so.”
The financial risks of genetically engineered foods became evident with the StarLink contamination of the food supply in 2000, which is estimated to have cost the food industry billions of dollars. StarLink is a variety of genetically engineered corn that was not approved for human consumption because of concerns that it might trigger allergic reactions. StarLink was first discovered in Kraft’s Taco Bell brand taco shells and Kraft’s brand name has been linked with genetically engineered foods ever since.
“Kraft derives no financial or nutritional benefit from using genetically engineered foods, there is no consumer demand for these products and the massive recall of Kraft products has already proven them to be a liability,” stated Michael Passoff of As You Sow Foundation. “Kraft shareholders have a right to know about the risks their investments are exposed to, especially if these risks can be avoided.”
In response to these financial risks and to the growing consumer demand for non-genetically engineered foods, many U.S. food companies have already removed genetically engineered ingredients from their products, including Frito-Lay, Gerber, McDonald’s, and supermarket chain Trader Joe’s. These manufacturers reported no financial difficulties resulting from the switch and sales increased in most cases as a result.
“Kraft has already removed genetically engineered ingredients from its products in Europe,” stated Rebecca O’Malley, program director for ecopledge.com, an organization that organizes students, consumers, and investors to influence corporate social and environmental responsibility. “These financial risks can be avoided and Kraft knows how to avoid them. The company needs to finish the job and remove these ingredients from the rest of its products.”
According to the report, current FDA regulations do not shield Kraft from liability lawsuits and other financial risks posed by genetically engineered foods.
Link to report on Kraft's rsiky business and further info:
http://pirg.org/ge/GE.asp?id=98&id3=ge&id4=HP& |
See also:
http://www.pirg.org
|
|
Kraft Censors Talk Of Tobacco Connection At Annual Shareholders' Meeting As Pressure Of Tobacco Liability Builds |
by INFACT
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 Apr 2003
|
EAST HANOVER, NJ - April 22 - At Kraft Foods annual shareholders’ meeting, Infact activists representing a Kraft shareholder were refused timely entry into the meeting, preventing the corporate accountability group from addressing shareholders and executives. Last year Infact representatives were the only people to speak directly to Kraft’s tobacco connection at the annual meeting. This year, Infact representatives were held at the door with questionable claims of concerns about their paperwork until the meeting was nearly over. The corporate accountability organization Infact has involved millions of consumers in challenging Philip Morris/Altria to stop addicting new young customers with promotional campaigns like the Marlboro Man, and to stop interfering in public health policy around the world. A major strategy in this campaign is Infact’s growing Boycott of Kraft, the tobacco giant’s food business.
“Kraft’s decision to effectively bar Infact from its annual meeting today was clearly meant to silence criticism about the food corporation’s role in Philip Morris/Altria’s deadly business. With mounting concerns from investors and shareholders about the liability of tobacco, Kraft executives are obviously feeling enormous pressure. Attempts to censor criticism, however, will only backfire. This behavior is completely inconsistent with the ‘commitment to responsibility’ and efforts to ‘meet or exceed evolving societal expectations’ touted in Philip Morris/Altria’s corporate PR touting its recent name change,” says Infact Executive Director Kathryn Mulvey who will be attending the Philip Morris/Altria annual meeting on Thursday of this week.
The recent $10.1 billion verdict in an Illinois class action, followed by legal wrangling over whether Philip Morris USA would be required to post a $12 billion court-ordered bond drove Kraft stock down. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal last week, “Wall Street was worried that Altria would need to tap Kraft to pay the money.” Kraft stock has fallen 25% so far this year while the Dow Jones food-products index is down only 7%.
The full statement that Infact would have delivered at the Kraft annual meeting today is as follows: “Good morning. My name is Mark Longhurst and I’m an organizer with the corporate accountability organization Infact. During my time with Infact, I have attended a few annual meetings, and I have been struck by the pageantry of these events. However, Kraft Foods gives new meaning to the term ‘corporate performance.’
"Everyone in this auditorium is behaving as if Kraft is an independent food company. Yet this corporation is 84% owned by another corporation, known until January 2003 as Philip Morris. Your corporate parent has changed its name to Altria, but remains the world’s largest and most profitable tobacco corporation.
"A recent series of Altria ads poses and answers the question, “What is the role of a parent company? To provide strength and guidance for its family.” Philip Morris/Altria has much guidance to offer-in dubious areas of expertise. A study in this month’s American Journal of Public Health titled ‘Altria Means Tobacco: Philip Morris’s Identity Crisis,’ finds that the name change is the height of a long-term effort to manipulate consumers and policymakers. By making Philip Morris refer only to the tobacco operating companies, the parent is attempting to mask the negatives associated with tobacco-especially for Kraft Foods.
“Those negatives are serious, and growing:
* Promotional campaigns like the Marlboro Man have inspired millions of consumers to join with Infact in pressuring Philip Morris/Altria to stop addicting new customers and stop interfering in public policy. A major strategy in this campaign is a Boycott targeting Kraft.
* Tobacco’s legacy of addiction, disease and death is creating massive legal troubles for the parent corporation-including a $10.1 billion verdict in an Illinois class action and a federal lawsuit seeking $289 billion in damages. As investors worry about liability, Kraft’s stock has fallen 25% so far this year while the Dow Jones food-products index is down only 7%.
* “Next month, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) will be adopted by the World Health Assembly in Geneva. This groundbreaking global treaty, the first to deal solely with a public health issue, will change the way Philip Morris/Altria can operate globally. The final text includes a ban on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (allowing exceptions only for constitutional reasons) and measures to protect public health policy from interference by tobacco corporations, their subsidiaries and allies.
"According to an article last week in The Wall Street Journal, ‘Kraft isn’t likely to get out from Altria’s shadow anytime soon.’ Mr. Camilleri, what parental guidance are you providing to Kraft on how to support Philip Morris/Altria’s image makeover? Specifically, how is Philip Morris/Altria guiding Kraft to influence policymakers around the world on public health issues such as the FCTC?”
Since 1977, Infact has been exposing life-threatening abuses by transnational corporations and organizing successful grassroots campaigns to hold corporations accountable to consumers and society at large. From the Nestlé Boycott of the 1970s and ‘80s to the GE Boycott of the 1980s and ‘90s to today’s Boycott of Philip Morris’s Kraft Foods-Infact organizes to win!
http://www.infact.org |
