Biotech’s Own ‘Groundhog Day’
January 26, 2026 As the calendar heads toward February, many people across the country will likely watch the film “Groundhog Day” to celebrate February 2. For those who might be unfamiliar with the movie, it concerns a weatherman getting stuck in a time loop, having to endlessly relive that fateful day in Punxsutawney, PA.
The reason I bring this up is because being caught in an unending cycle seems like an apt metaphor for today’s biotech industry. In this case, the old saying “two steps forward, one step back” applies.
Since their introduction back in the mid-1990s, biotech crops have been roundly criticized by special interest groups. In fact, whole regions of the globe – particularly the European Union (EU) — have lobbied heavily against their use on scientifically unproven grounds that such offerings are unhealthy or dangerous for consumers.
However, in the past few years, it seemed as if this “Groundhog Day” like bias against biotech crops had eased up some. For instance, last year, the U.S. won a highly publicized case against key trading partner Mexico after the latter had rejected accepting any biotech corn grown in the U.S. for importation. This fight lasted for almost one year, but ultimately, the U.S. prevailed on grounds that this widespread ban on biotech corn violated the U.S./Mexico/Canada Agreement.
One step forward for biotech.
Late last year, the EU’s position on biotech crops also seemed to soften. The block of countries announced in October 2024 that it would begin accepting four kinds of biotech crops for use in animal feed.
Two steps forward for biotech.
But earlier this year, a nearly decade-long effort to settle the national debate over biotech labeling in the food industry resurfaced. This issue dated back to a 2016 law designed to block a patchwork of state labeling mandates and provide food companies with alternatives to on-package statements about biotech ingredients. Following a series of court decisions, USDA is being forced to revisit core parts of its disclosure regulations.
This past November, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that USDA wrongly excluded highly refined ingredients such as corn, soybean, and canola oil from the definition of bioengineered foods. The court also rejected the department’s allowance of electronic and text message disclosures, finding they did not adequately inform consumers. The courts dismissed USDA’s position that foods were exempt if no detectable genetic material remained after processing.
The ruling means USDA must revise the rules even though compliance officially became mandatory in June. Legal experts note USDA could still establish a threshold level to determine when a product must carry a disclosure, but that would require additional rulemaking.
One step back for biotech.
In the movie “Groundhog Day,” the weatherman trapped in the time loop eventually does break out of it — after between 10 to 30 years of trying to do so. Hopefully, the biotech industry won’t have to wait quite this long to end its own “Groundhog Day”-like time loop to end.
But we are getting awfully close to this 10-to-30-year time period now.
Subscribe Today For
