GMW: First US labeling legislation for GM becomes law in Alaska

[Guest guest]

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

1.First US labeling legislation for GM food becomes law in Alaska

2.Q & A on THE BIOPHARM BILL

 

COMMENT

 

" Alaska has become the first state [in the U.S.] to give its citizens

what 90 percent of Americans want - labels for genetically engineered

foods. We anticipate that this legislation will be a bellwether for other

state efforts to label biotech foods. "

 

This excellent news from Alaska (item 1) follows on from the

achievement in Oregon where a bill (item 2) has been passed by the

Senate there,

demonstrating the high level of concern over GM contamination of food

and the environment.

 

The Oregon bill, which won't have time to go all the way unlike the

Alaska one, would have placed a 4-year moratorium on the growing of GM

biopharm and industrial crops. The issue's visibility has now risen to

the

point where Oregon's governor has asked for a task force to study the

issue and make recommendations for a new policy.

-------

1.First US labeling legislation for GM food becomes law in Alaska

Food Ingredients First, Netherlands

http://www.foodingredientsfirst.com/newsmaker_article.asp?idNewsMaker=8772 & fSite\

=AO545 & next=5

 

" Alaska has become the first state to give its citizens what 90 percent

of Americans want - labels for genetically engineered foods. We

anticipate that this legislation will be a bellwether for other state

efforts

to label biotech foods. It's only a matter of time before all states

move to fill in the regulatory gap left by the Federal government's

failure to require mandatory labeling. "

 

Senate Bill 25 was approved unanimously by the Alaska Senate in March

and the House in early May, and was signed by Governor Murkowski on May

19.

 

Numerous jurisdictions around the country have passed or are working on

legislation to regulate genetically engineered foods in the absence of

U.S. government oversight or restrictions. Often these bills are

intended to protect local farming from biotech contamination or human

health

and the environment. A Rutgers University poll published in November

2004 confirmed earlier findings that nine-out-of-ten Americans (89

percent in the most recent poll) want to have genetically engineered

foods

labeled.

 

Currently, the Food and Drug Administration is reviewing an application

for approval to commercialize genetically engineered salmon developed

to grow much more rapidly that wild salmon.

 

Center for Food Safety (CFS) reviewed the language of the bill and

worked to support its passage. CFS has worked around the country in

support

of labeling legislation for genetically engineered foods and to prevent

genetically engineered fish from invading our oceans and harming human

health.

------

2.Q & A on Oregon's Bill SB 570 -THE BIOPHARM BILL

 

What are biopharmaceutical (biopharm) crops? Theyíre plants genetically

engineered (GE) to produce drugs or chemicals they could not produce

naturally. The bill also covers industrial crops, which are GE plants

that produce industrial or research chemicals or enzymes.

 

What does the bill do? It places a four-year moratorium on any

biopharmaceutical and industrial crops that are grown outdoors or using

food/feed crops (indoors or outdoors).

 

There are two exceptions. The bill would not restrict GE crops

producing chemicals they produce naturally or GE crops producing

chemicals

generally recognized as safe by the FDA. Also, the bill would not

restrict

non-food/feed biopharm crops grown inside in contained, controlled

facilities.

 

Some plants produce chemicals naturally that are used for drugs and

industry. Would this bill affect them? No.

 

Does the bill affect GE plants intended for food? No, only plants

intended for drug or industrial production.

 

What are the problems with biopharm crops?

Human food contamination: Itís virtually inevitable that our food will

be contaminated with drugs or industrial chemicals. Cross-pollination,

especially with corn or canola, spilled seed, unusual weather and human

error all are factors. Biopharm contamination incidents have already

occurred in Iowa and Nebraska in 2002. Moreover, the Union of Concerned

Scientists reported in a 2004 survey that half of the supposedly

non-genetically engineered corn and soybean seeds tested and over 80%

of the

canola seeds had been contaminated. These were not biopharm incidents,

but they demonstrated the pervasiveness of the genetic contamination

problem.

 

The health consequences of biopharm crops already being field-tested

can be serious, including allergic reactions, pancreatic disease, vitamin

B deficiency and asthma. Regardless of severity, Oregon PSRís firm

belief is that people should not ingest any drug at any level without

their

full knowledge and consent.

 

Equally disturbing, we simply donít know what drugs and chemicals are

being grown in many biopharm crops because the biotech firms performing

the tests often maintain the information is confidential. Even

officials at state agriculture departments donít always know what is in

biopharm crops.

 

Environmental contamination: Mammals, birds and insects will feed on

biopharm crops, which could wreak havoc with their systems. Two known

examples are aprotinin, which shortens the life of honeybees, and avidin,

which kills or impairs numerous species of insects. Moreover, ìleakageî

from biopharm plant roots may impact microorganisms in the soil and

water, affecting the entire food chain.

 

Financial liability to farmers and food manufacturers: Both

conventional and organic farmers whose crops are contaminated by

biopharm crops

could face a financially devastating loss. Food manufacturers could see a

repeat of the 2000 Starlink incident, where corn not approved for human

consumption was mixed into the food supply, resulting in massive

recalls and losses of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Q. Since no biopharm crops have been grown in Oregon for almost 10

years, is this a problem? In the past four years, every state bordering

Oregon ñ California, Washington, Idaho and Nevada ñ has had outdoor

biopharm crop testing approved. Oregon is perfectly suited in both

climate

and soil to have biopharm tests and it could happen at any time.

 

Q. Does Oregon have the authority to enact legislation on the planting

of biopharm crops more restrictive than federal regulations? Oregon PSR

has consulted with a number of lawyers and all have offered the opinion

that the federal government has not ìoccupied the fieldî regarding GE

crops. This allows more stringent regulation by states.

 

Significant activity outside Oregon indicates that states or localities

may pass laws restricting GE crops. Massachusetts, Texas and Colorado

all proposed legislation in 2003 restricting biopharm crops and

California took action against GE biopharm rice. Also, the Congressional

Research Service reviewed Vermontís state-wide moratorium bill on all GE

crops in August 2004 and expressed its opinion that the bill would

stand up

to any Constitutional challenge. The opinion is specific to Vermont,

but the issues regarding state authority are similar.

 

Q. Couldnít biopharming be a growth industry for Oregon, creating many

jobs? No one can say for sure, but itís highly doubtful. Itís essential

to be clear on definitions and differentiate between various types of

biotechnology. There have been over 100 pharmaceuticals developed

involving genetic processes employing animal, bacterial and yeast cell

cultures. They are produced in contained, controlled manufacturing

plants.

This technology, not biopharming, has been a successful industry.

 

In contrast, not a single biopharm drug has been approved by the FDA

since testing began in 1991, and only a few industrial chemicals have

been developed. This is mainly because of the difficulties in extracting,

purifying and achieving consistency in biopharm crops. This doesnít

mean that none will ever be approved, but several independent experts

question whether large numbers of people will ever be employed, either on

the farm or in processing facilities. Even counting ALL pharmaceutical

manufacturing, research and development, there are only an estimated

1,500 jobs in Oregon (Source: Ross DeVol et al, Milken Institute - 2003).

 

This should be compared to the estimated 128,000 jobs (Source: Portland

State U. Food Industry Leadership Center ñ 2002) already existing in

Oregon farming, food manufacturing and wholesale firms, many of which

could be affected if food crops were contaminated. The risks far outweigh

highly speculative benefits.

 

Q. Since the USDA decides procedures and rules for biopharm testing,

shouldnít this be handled at the federal level? Oregon PSR, along with

many other concerned agencies, has contacted the USDA on several

occasions urging restrictions on biopharming. We will continue to do so.

However, the USDA still allows open-air field testing and use of food

crops

and is unlikely to change these policies in the near future. Indeed, the

agency has even helped fund biopharm tests. If Oregon wants protection,

we must take action here and now.

 

Q. Who else believes USDA regulations are inadequate? The National

Academy of Sciences, Center For Food Safety, Consumer Policy Institute,

Friends of the Earth, Grocery Manufacturers of America, Sierra Club,

National Family Farm Coalition, Union of Concerned Scientists and many

others. Even Nature Biotechnology, the leading pro-GE journal, has

written

editorials critical of the way biopharming has been handled.

 

Q. What are the main points Oregon PSR is trying to make? Biopharm

crops are not food. They are crops used for drug or industrial

manufacturing, and must be treated as such. If grown, they must be in

contained,

controlled facilities, just like any other drug or industrial production.

Obviously, Oregon PSR favors development of new, beneficial, lower-cost

drugs. We simply believe this can, and should, be done without undue

risk of contaminating our food supply and environment and threatening the

livelihoods of food producers.

 

Contact: Rick North, Project Director, Oregon PSR Campaign For Safe

Food

503-968-1520

hrnorth