Debunking 3 Myths about PLU food codes

 – GMO being only one

Last year in Oregon there was a state initiative to demand labeling of GMO (genetically modified organism) products.  It failed, but only after a razor-thin result which demanded an automatic recount.  Most of the small farmers, along with the environmentalists and health advocates, supported the ban, but did not have the money that some of the big corporations, like Monsanto, had to push their side of the argument.  Before that statewide election, in Jackson County where I live, there was a first–in-the-nation winning vote to outright ban growing GMO in the county, with smaller farmers saying their crops were contaminated by air and wind movements of the GMO elements. (Appeals are just now coming to a close).  This is all meant as an introduction to at least one of the myths (that continues to this day as I search some rather reputable sites and writers) – myths about PLU codes on food.

To start, PLU is the shorthand for “Price Look Up” and was established in the 1990s.  It pertains to fresh produce: fruits, vegetables, nuts and herbs, all which carry either a 4 or 5 digit number.  That is why when you eat your fresh HoneyCrisp apple you need to remove the round sticky label proclaiming #3283.  Sometimes they can be irritating to peel off; I often break the skin of my lovely tomatoes.

In Europe there is growing use of laser labels scored onto the produce, and which they claim is safe, more cost effective, reduces use of paper, and has greater traceability.  Probably of most interest to them is that these laser marks can also carry company logos or brand names AND can’t be switched by dodgy customers wanting to pay a lower price for their bunch of bananas.  Customers seem to be pleased with the change.  The FDA has not yet approved this method in the US.  Their hesitation does kind of beg the question of why they would be afraid of us purchasing laser-labeled products, but have no problem with us eating GMO crops designed by poison-expert companies.  Just wondering.

Three Myths

Let’s debunk 3 myths (or at least inaccuracies) about the labels.  Here is the ‘down and dirty’ about this food issue.

 1.  The PLU codes are there neither for your health and safety nor for your information. They are not there for you as a consumer at all. The codes are not designed to communicate with you. Furthermore, the US government has little to do with it either (other than intervening if they find evidence of purposeful misleading labeling).  The codes are established and maintained by the International Federation of Produce Standards (IFPS) and administered by the Produce Marketing Association (PMA).  Their purpose is to improve inventory control and make check-out fast and accurate by ensuring the correct price for the correct product.  [Perhaps the associations would assert that the advantage to the consumer is that the process helps to keep prices down and track possible contamination.]  Technically the numbers of the codes are supposed to identity the product category, size group, location grown and the method used to grow it.  Thus a PLU code listed as 4318 should identify a cantaloupe of small size, grown in the Eastern US by conventional methods.  But basically the numeric guide is to ensure that the customer is paying the grocer the right price for the item.  It is to benefit the supplier or vendor not the shopper, meaning you.  [If you still want to check a code you can visit http://www.plucodes.com/ and use their search.

 2.  The second myth is that the labels are required. They are not. It is all optional.  Since it is to benefit suppliers and vendors, and it is their industry that devised it, it is their game.  Their game – their rules.  And it is up to them if they are going to play.

3.  Third is that you can avoid GMO foods by checking for a PLU code beginning with the #8. False-False-False. But why?   Like a good urban legend it persists for one very good reason – there is a large kernel of truth to it.  The IFPS (mentioned above) has indeed assigned the #8 (in the 1^st position of a 5-digit code) to designate a GMO product. That is true.  Never saw one?  No, you probably won’t.  If you do find such a label on a GMO product, I’ll eat it.  Well, at least I’ll eat the label – I have a problem KNOWINGLY eating the products.  Evidently manufactures (and growers) don’t want to openly identify their foods as GMO (hence all the money fighting full labeling in places like Oregon or Vermont).  They may defend the safety of the GMOs rightly or wrongly, but still don’t want to fight the stigma.  While just a handful of years ago the fears centered on only a few crops like corn-on-the-cobb, zucchini, squash and Hawaiian papayas, now the crops are ubiquitous and many of us eat them knowingly or not.  The problem is that apparently most of us (like me) would rather not eat them, OR would at least like the choice to decide.  But whether we would like that option of knowledge or not, you aren’t getting it form the PLU code.  Remember it is their game – and they can choose whether to play.
This is because chiropractors firmly believe that disrupted buy tadalafil from india brain signals are the main culprit why a person suffers from these debilitating conditions. In some order cheap viagra http://cute-n-tiny.com/tag/kitten/page/4/ cases it can be individual limbs, but in situations where victims experience Cerebral palsy, everything from the neck down will be paralyzed. The most common forms of the hymen is left is called carunculae myrtiformes. cheap viagra no rx According for the book of Harrison, erectile dysfunction may also be caused by fear cialis professional generic of HIV transmission etc. Since the US government DOES have standards that “certified organic” products cannot include GMOs, anti-GMO activists advise that currently your only solution is to buy organic.  The first number of ‘9’ represents a product organically grown and IS used regularly (mostly because the vendors can get more money for it).  That small Eastern grown cantaloupe I mentioned above would be labeled as 94318 (instead of 4318) when grown organically.  Also since the government regulates the honesty of labels (if brought to their attention), stickers of “non-GMO” or “GMO-free” may be good indicators, even if not directly regulated.

One Last Thought

Some companies (usually smaller ones) are going to great lengths to avoid GMOs and work with farmers who are either certified organic or are non-GMO conventional growers.  If this is a matter you care about you can do three things to provide more confidence about your shopping cart.  Buy Organic.  Support such products by buying locally where you can speak to the farmer (organic or non-GMO conventional).  Or visit this website (with an additional downloadable phone app) to view the ever-growing number of products on the market http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/.   After that, don’t beat yourself up.  Unless you live in an area that ultimately bans the practice, you will probably consume some GMO products.  I won’t comment further, except to say that perhaps in the future there will be a growing number of areas that accommodate both consumers and small farmers or local growers.

A golfer called one of the caddies over and asked,
“I need a caddy who can count and keep the score. What’s 3 and 4 and 5 come to?”
“10” said the caddy.
“Great, you’ll do perfectly!”

[And that may be similar to the accuracy of a PLU code
informing you about GMO products.]