CHFA survey finds Canadians want transparency on gene editing in food
New research commissioned by the Canadian Health Food Association (CHFA) found that Canadians want transparency when it comes to the use of gene editing in food.
The “National Standard for Voluntary Labelling and Advertising of Foods That Are and Are Not Products of Genetic Engineering” is currently under review. This standard, overseen by the Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB), “guides labelling practices to ensure consumers have the information they need to make informed choices,” notes a press release.
The review currently includes discussions on a proposal to exclude gene editing from the definition of genetic engineering for labelling purposes. If accepted, gene-edited foods could be marketed as "non-genetically engineered," despite gene editing being a form of genetic engineering.
As a result, CHFA commissioned a national survey called “Gene Editing Omnibus Report.” The survey was conducted by Leger from Sept. 5 to 7, 2025 and surveyed 1,624 Canadians with the goal of gaining a deeper understanding of Canadian perspectives on gene editing and food labelling.
The survey found that 66% of Canadians believe gene editing is a form of genetic engineering. Sixty-seven percent of those surveyed say food produced using gene editing should be considered genetically engineered and 71% believe it would be misleading to market gene-edited foods as “not genetically engineered.”
Ninety-one percent of survey respondents believe consumers have the right to know if gene editing is used. Ninety percent believe information should be disclosed on food labels.
When asked why labelling matters, survey respondents noted the ability to make informed decisions (69%) and honesty in food marketing (64%)
"This research confirms what our members already know: Canadians value transparency and expect integrity in food labelling," said Ashley Cornell, director of regulatory affairs and policy, CHFA. "Excluding gene editing from the definition of genetic engineering would compromise consumer trust and undermine the credibility of 'not genetically engineered' claims in the marketplace."
