Circana recently published the results of a consumer survey relating to acceptance of pork from genetically modified hogs.  The study comprised 5,000 subjects from eight industrialized nations with a questionably high response rate of 96 percent. In this case, consumers were requested to provide an opinion as to whether they would purchase pork from genetically modified hogs, thereby reducing potential antibiotic use. Overwhelmingly (94 percent) of consumers were willing to purchase pork from gene-edited hogs with a proviso that the process would offer tangible benefits to consumers and that appropriate transparency including packaging would be maintained. This said, interpretation of survey results are highly dependent on the framing of questions and selection of participants.

The study presumably relates to the biotechnology introduced by UK-based Genus plc.  This company pioneered deletion of the CD163 gene by applying CRISPR to produce piglets resistant to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS).  Genus plc has applied to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for approval of the gene-deleted strain of hogs since CRISPR is regarded inexplicably by FDA bureaucrats as an “investigational new drug”.  It is anticipated that the Agency will expedite approval since CRISPR involves deletion of genetic material not involving insertion of novel genes.  It is noted that acceptance of genetically modified salmon by the FDA required decades before the Aqua Bounty® strain of salmon was approved since the technology involved introduction of genes from other salmon and marine species.

The response of potential consumers to the hog study has relevance to possible gene modification of chickens to enhance growth and livability and in the short term for gender sorting of egg-production strains.  NRS Poultry Sustainability and Transformation Inc. in association with scientists at the Volcani Institute in Israel has developed a unique genetic approach to identifying and eliminating cockerel chicks.  Dr. Yuval Cinnamon affiliated to the Institute and founder of NextHen has promoted the ‘Golda’ approach to eliminating male embryos in-ovo. 

The technique involves application of CRISPR-CAS9 to a sequence of the z chromosome, a co-determinant of gender in chickens.  Males carry the zz chromosome and females are zw.  The construct developed by NRS with intended commercialization by NextHen requires insertion of promoters adjacent to the 5’HA end of the sequence and insertion of a lethal gene adjacent to the 3’HA end.  Lethality is activated by exposure to light of a highly specific blue wavelength.  The construct must be inserted into the pure line C strain to pass the altered z chromosome to the grandparent C-line hen.  The female of the parent level (CD) will therefore carry the modified z chromosome.  The male line AB parents are normal in all respects.  At the parent level CD females carrying the modified z chromosome mated to AB males produce pullet chicks with a normal z and w chromosomes.  Eggs from the mating are subjected to blue light that is optogenic in its action on the z chromosome carrying the lethal gene.  This results in inhibition of development of male (zz) embryos since they carry the lethal trait on the z chromosome acquired from the CD parent female (zw).  Female embryos carry an unaltered z chromosome and therefore hatch normally.

The NRS/NextHen approach to eliminating male chicks is elegant, based on establish scientific principles and offers advantages with respect to cost, practicality and rate of implementation.

Despite the obvious advantages, primary breeders have demonstrated no inclination to adopt the system and have instead applied currently available alternatives to identify eggs bearing male embryos. 

From a scientific perspective, commercial pullet chicks are not genetically modified, but the system relies on insertion of a construct into the pure C line.  There is obvious concern that opponents of intensive livestock production will cite the application of genetic modification to demonize not only the specific Golda hen but will extended deprecation to all commercial egg production.  Neither of the two leading primary breeders wishes to be first to adopt the technology given the “tainted GMO association.” For the NRS/Volcani/NextHen technology to become a reality, it will be necessary to confirm that consumers will accept the highly technical assurance that the commercial level chick is not genetically modified.  In the case of the Genus PRRS-resistant hog the technology involved deletion of a gene applying CRISPR. The survey revealed that approximately half of U.S. consumers evidently are aware of gene editing. 

It is possible that China may adopt the technology given their volume of production and with Governmental support of GMO, justifying application.  China is rapidly developing pure lines and has aspirations to be independent of major primary breeders located in the E.U. and the U.S. for domestic needs and export.

There is no obvious benefit to consumers from applying the genetic approach to eliminating cockerels given that non-GMO alternatives are commercially available and are currently in use.

For the NR technology to become a practical reality the first hurdle will be for one or more of the primary breeders to enter into a strategic alliance with the developers and incorporate the z chromosome construct into the pure C line.  The second challenge will be to convince consumers and regulators that the pullet chicks are effectively non-GMO.  Since the issues are interwined the commercialization of the GM technology is an example of the “chicken-or-the-egg” paradox. 

Editor’s Comment:

The GM approach to in-ovo elimination of cockerels was reviewed in the November 18^th 2021 edition of EGG-NEWS.  The fact that there has been no commercial adoption of the technology in more than four years suggests that acceptance of the genetic approach is highly unlikely, notwithstanding its potential.

The recently released Dietary Guidelines for Americans for 2025-2030 discourages consumption of “processed foods”.  The emphasis on protein including eggs is a vindication for our industry that has undergone unjustified criticism over cholesterol content in past decades.

The question now arises as to what constitutes “processed foods.”  Various definitions have been applied but without consideration of the implications for the manufacturers of packaged products.  Applying the broadest descriptor, “processing” includes any alteration of a food from the natural state through heating, pasteurizing, mixing, milling, freezing or canning.  Within reason, these processes are essential to manufacture food products, preserve nutrient quality or to make them available to consumers.  With respect to additives, some preservatives have been shown to be both beneficial and innocuous.  Many ‘unpronounceable additives’ disfavored by purists are in fact nutrients and contribute to or are essential to health.

In a move to reject all additives in pursuit of a clean label, activists motivated by either naïve sincerity or outright mendacity risk throwing out the baby with the bath water.

According to a report sponsored by the Private Label Manufacturers Association by market research company Circana, dollar sales for private label products attained $282 billion in calendar 2025.  This was a 3.3 percent increase over the previous year and compares to the growth in national brands of 1.2 percent.

Unit sales of private label brands grew 0.6 percent. In contrast, national brand unit sales fell by an equivalent amount.  The segment with the highest dollar sales among private label products comprised refrigerated items with a 6.1 percent increase followed by beverages at 4.8 percent, frozen items that increased by 2.4 percent and general foods at 1.6 percent.

Peggy Davies, president of the Private Label Manufacturers Association noted a shift in consumer priorities primary based on cost and availability with an appreciation by consumers that private label products offer equivalent quality and health properties compared to national brands.

Notwithstanding the growth in private brands, Eggland’s Best continues to grow in both sales volume and maintains price in a fluctuating market for generic eggs. This is based on substantiated nutritional claims, with health implications and supported by a marketing program incorporating mainstream and social media.

Funeral services for the late Dr. Stanley Herbert Kleven were held on Friday January 23^rd.  Dr. Kleven, born June 24, 1940 was associated throughout his career with the University of Georgia Poultry Disease Research Center. 

He was recognized as an international expert in avian mycoplasmosis including detection and control of Mg and Ms.  He was the co-author of over 200 peer-reviewed articles and served as a major professor for 17 doctoral-level graduates and a larger number of students earning the Masters degree. 

Over his distinguished career Dr. Kleven provided leadership in the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Association of Avian Pathologists, the World Veterinary Poultry Association and the National Poultry Improvement Association.  He received the AAAP Special Service Award in 2002 and was inaugural inductee in the Hall of Honor in 2016.

He will be sadly missed for his scientific acumen, collegiality, mentorship and contributions to the industry.

The following were elected to executive positions on the Board of Directors of USPOULTRY during the 2026 IPPE:

• Bill Griffth, Chief Operations Officer for Peco Foods was selected as the Chairman

• Dr. Alice Johnson of Butterball LLC was elected Vice-chair

• Kevin McDaniel of Wayne-Sanderson Farms as named Treasurer

• John Wright of Fieldale Farms was elected Secretary

• Jonathan Cade of Hy-Line International will serve as the Immediate-past Chairman

In commenting on the slate of officers, Nath Morris president of USPOULTRY stated, “With the
experience and guidance these officers bring to our organization, the future of USPOULTRY is in excellent hands and I look forward to their leadership in helping to shape our organization over the next year.”

The USDA Cage-Free Report covering January 2026, was released on February 2^nd 2026.

The report documented the complement of hens producing under the Certified Organic Program to be 21.0 million (rounded to 0.1 million), up 70,000 hens or 0.3 percent from December 2025. The number of hens classified as cage-free (but excluding Certified Organic) and comprising aviary, barn and other systems of housing apparently increased by 2.2 million hens or 1.9 percent from December 2025 to 121.8 million, attributed to expansion, transition from conventional cages and repopulation of depleted flocks.

Extensive depopulation was carried out as a result of HPAI through January and February 2025 (31 million), but with lower intensity in March (0.2 million) and April (1.0 million) and a single large complex in Arizona during May (3.8 million). Losses reemerged during late September in a caged-bird complex in Wisconsin (3.1 million hens and 250,000 pullets). Additional depopulations occurred in October, (2.2 million); November, 0.5 million; December, (0.2 million); January (1.5 million) and February (1.4 million).

Average weekly production for Certified Organic eggs in January 2026 was up 1.0 percent percent (rounded) compared to December 2025 with a high average weekly production of 83.9 percent. Average weekly flock production for cage-free flocks other than Certified Organic was up 2.5 percent in January 2026, with a high average hen-month production of 82.6 percent. Seasonally placed flocks in anticipation of periods of peak demand increase the availability of cage-free and organic eggs, reflecting pullet chick placements 20 weeks previously.

There is no adequate explanation for the elevated production rates recorded other than the high proportion of young hens reaching peak placed in anticipation of December demand. It is also assumed that almost all cage free flocks are in the first cycle of production with negligible molting contributing to the high average in hen-week values compared to caged hens.

The categorization of U.S. flocks according to housing system for January was unavailable among the assumed 295 million producing hens. The breakdown will be provided when data is released.

Losses attributed to HPAI in 2025 comprised:-

Caged flocks, 24.8 million representing 8.4 percent of a nominal 290 million producing hens

Cage-free flocks, 17.6 million representing 5.9 percent of the national flock

Organic flocks, negligible, >0.1 percent

 *October and November data was not released to compile Q4 average

On January 2^nd 2026 USDA recorded the following National inventory levels expressed in 30-dozen cases (rounded) with the change from December 2025 as a percentage of the total quantity of eggs:-

Commodity shell eggs of all sizes. 1,395,000. (-3.0%)

Commodity breaking stock. 360,800. (-0.4%)

Specialty eggs. 32,400. (+4.9%)

Certified organic eggs. 81,100. (-4.5%)

Cage-Free eggs 438,600. (-1.1%) equivalent to 1.6 days production

*Essentially a meaningless value

Negotiated nest-run grade-ready cage-free price for January 2026 averaged $0.43 per dozen, down $0.45 per dozen (-51.7 percent) from $0.88 per dozen in December 2025, reflecting a disturbance in balance between demand and supply.

The January 2026 advertised U.S. featured retail price for Large White cage-free eggs over 1,429 ‘Lower 48’ stores in five regions (NW, NE, SW, MW and SC.) was $2.54 per dozen. This compares with 1,657 stores featuring cage-free Large White in December and reflects fewer promotions as the year has progressed, consistent with lower demand and increased production. The January 2026 advertised U.S. featured retail price for Large Brown cage-free eggs over 957 stores in five regions was $3.45 per dozen with a range of $1.99 per dozen in the NW region to $4.08 per dozen in the MW region. The average promotional shelf price was only 2 cents per dozen above December 2025 for this category

The recorded average gradeable nest run price of $0.43 per dozen for brown and white cage-free combined plus a provision of $0.60 cents per dozen for packaging, packing and transport, resulted in a theoretical price of $1.03 per dozen delivered to CDs. The average advertised promotional retail prices of $3.45 per dozen for Brown and $1.46 per dozen for white represented retail margins of 235 percent for featured Brown and 146 percent for White respectively. Fewer promotions were offered for Brown compared to White-shelled cage-free by stores reflecting the balance between supply and demand for the two broad categories. Margins are presumed higher for non-featured eggs including pastured and other specialty eggs at shelf prices attaining in excess of $8.00 per dozen in high-end supermarket chains. Retailers are maximizing margins especially on Certified Organic, free-range and pastured categories restricting the volumes of sales, of all categories ultimately disadvantageous to producers and consumers.

Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is a bellwether on consumer spending and the willingness of customers to purchase food and household items in bulk and splurge on big-ticket items including appliances, electronics and furniture. On February 4^th Costco reported sales for January 2026 covering the four-week period ending February 1^st. Sales attained $21.33 billion, up 9.3 percent from the value of $18.51 billion during the corresponding month in 2026.

Same store sales (excluding fuel and foreign exchange) increased 6.8 percent for the U.S.; 8.2 percent for Canada and 2.7 percent for the International warehouse segment.  Overall, same-stores sales advanced by 6.4 percent and E-commerce was 33.1 percent higher. International sales were impacted by the advent of the Lunar New Year that was 19 days later than in 2025, beyond the January cut-off. Sales in this segment were depressed by an estimated 4 percent.

Costco advanced in after-hours trading on February 4^th after release of the data to $988.50. COST intraday market capitalization was $434.5 billion on February 4^th. The share has traded over a 52-week range of $844.06 to $1078.23.

Costco Wholesale Corporation operates 924 warehouses with 634 in the U.S.; 114 in Canada; 42 in Mexico with the remainder in nine other nations.

New World Screwworm (NWS Cochliomyia hominivorax) has seriously disrupted importation of livestock from Mexico to the U.S., directly impacting the cost of beef to consumers.  The infestation that emerged in Guatemala and spread to and then within Mexico imposes a threat to livestock producers in the U.S. states bordering our southern neighbor. On recognition of the problem surveillance and control measures were initiated emphasizing the need for cooperation among USMCA regulators.

Decades ago, the problem of NWS was resolved by releasing irradiated sterile male flies that effectively suppressed and then eliminated populations of the parasite.  Applying a “mission accomplished” approach without the necessary surveillance by our southern neighbors resulted in an inevitable reoccurrence of infection.  To address the current situation, USDA has reactivated irradiation facilities to produce and distribute sterile male flies that will be effective but over time. 

The USDA has issued a request for proposals to upgrade surveillance and control measures. Projects, even if funded and implemented will not have any immediate impact on the current emergency.  Secretary Rollins is justified in her comment, “We know we have tried-and-true tools and methods that defeat this pest, but we must constantly look for new and better methods and innovate our way to success”.

The lessons that should be heeded include:

• Constant surveillance is necessary for early detection of the parasite
• Irradiation facilities should be maintained with availability of trained personnel to rapidly respond to outbreaks.
• Cooperation with neighboring nations coupled with financial support will ensure that effective surveillance and control measures are maintained.  This is difficult to achieve in an atmosphere of hostility generated by U.S. policies relating to tariffs and immigration that detract from mutual understanding and collaboration.

At the end of the day nature ignores national boundaries and has an immense capacity to adapt to changes in the environment. These include socio-economic factors and global warming that facilitate the northward movement of pests and vectors of pathogens affecting human, animal and avian populations.

USDA intends to relocate workers from the Washington DC region to five regional hubs.

In written responses to the announced initiative, only five percent of those were in favor with 82 percent expressing direct opposition and concern.

We have seen this movie before.  Within months into the first term of President Trump, key statisticians and economists were relocated from Washington DC to Kansas City, resulting in a significant number of retirements and resignations from both the ERS and NASS.  This effectively weakened both agencies and deprived the USDA of personnel with experience and institutional knowledge.  The 2017 uprooting was predicated on reducing cost and moving personnel closer to their constituencies.  This was utter nonsense since high-level economists need to interact with their colleagues in other Federal agencies and departments, Congress, industry associations and academia concentrated in the DC area. They are involved in research on policy and planning and do not function as extension agents. Subsequent evaluation of the exercise confirmed that relocation actually cost money rather than effecting savings.

Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced in July that 2,006 employees would be relocated to five regional hubs in Raleigh, NC; Kansas City, MO; Indianapolis, IN; Fort Collins, CO and Salt Lake City, UT.  The current justification is again to “match USDA workforce with available financial resources” and also to “bring USDA closer to its customers”.

The funding restraints are essentially artificial and the assertion by Stephen Vaden, USDA Deputy Secretary that “it makes the most sense to get the large number of our employees to places where they can have the quality of life that they deserve on a government salary” is ingenuous.  The same sophistic justification of moving workers closer to the communities they serve is as unrealistic in 2026 as it was in 2017. The proposed relocation will again initiate resignations and retirements over and above the damage caused by DOGE. In the long run this throwback initiative will be to the detriment of current employees, farmers, consumers and ultimately taxpayers.