Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 > GMW:_Report_takes_aim_at_FDA > " GM_WATCH " <info > Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:28:18 +0100 > > GM WATCH daily > http://www.gmwatch.org > --- > " The report supports the argument that the [u.S. > Food and drug Administration's] process is worth > less than a rubber stamp. The process makes no > sense. The company makes all the decisions. The FDA > cannot request or conduct its own specific > scientific studies. In the end, it's just a > recording mechanism for the biotech industry's > approval of itself. " > --- > VIEWPOINTS: Report takes aim at biotech foods > By Todd Leake > Grand Forks Herald, Editorial > Sun, Aug. 22, 2004 > http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforksherald/news/opinion/9464244.htm > > EMERADO, N.D. - We are eating genetically engineered > foods that could do us serious damage in the long > run. > > A recent report from the National Academy of > Sciences revealed gaping holes in the regulation and > safety testing of genetically engineered foods. This > should give us pause, considering we in the United > States have been producing GE crops, such as > soybeans, corn and canola, that wind up in many of > the foods that we put on the table. > > The academy, a science advisory body chartered by > Congress, prepared the report for the federal > agencies that regulate biotech crops and foods. The > report says that those agencies and the Food and > Drug Administration are falling behind the times and > are not keeping up with advances in science. > > It says they are not capable of spotting unplanned, > manmade, adverse changes brought about in biotech > foods or determining the human health effects of > those changes. It concludes that we need more > rigorous premarket testing and post-market > surveillance. > > This is what many other countries in the world have > told the United States for years and is why they > regulate, restrict or ban the importation of GE > crops and foods from the United States. > > The FDA's current regulatory process is a voluntary > consultation between the biotech company that > produced the genetically engineered crop or food and > the FDA. Biotech companies voluntarily submit > information of their choosing, and the FDA may ask > questions about the material. > > The FDA does no independent testing or analysis and > makes no independent finding. The determination is > based on the companies' own findings of safety and > nutritional assessment. The FDA has no authority to > deny or restrict the release of GE crops. > > The report supports the argument that the FDA's > process is worth less than a rubber stamp. The > process makes no sense. The company makes all the > decisions. The FDA cannot request or conduct its own > specific scientific studies. In the end, it's just a > recording mechanism for the biotech industry's > approval of itself. > > The FDA's process does not determine safety of GE > foods. It does not conduct independent, > science-based tests. In fact, in a recent St. Louis > Post-Dispatch story, a FDA spokesperson was quoted, > " A safety declaration is not something we make " in > regard to the review of GM crops. > > Nevertheless, the FDA determined that Monsanto > corporation's Roundup Ready wheat to be > " substantially equivalent " to conventional spring > wheat in late July, even though Monsanto shelved > Roundup Ready wheat, stating that there was > worldwide market resistance to it. Even so, this > step toward the commercialization of GE wheat does > not go unnoticed and does nothing to promote the > reputation or market share of North Dakota spring > wheat worldwide. That doesn't do North Dakota's > economy any good, either. > > Our overseas customers know the FDA's process does > not assure safety. They will continue to refuse any > GE wheat. North Dakota wheat growers' export markets > remain in jeopardy unless the North Dakota > Legislature protects our markets and farmers from > untimely release of any GE wheat by passing > legislation giving North Dakota the power to say if > and when GE spring wheat would be grown. > > Until this issue is dealt with at the federal level, > North Dakota has to stick up for itself because > nobody's going to do it for us. > > Unfortunately, decision-makers in both Washington > and Bismarck have tried to turn this issue on it's > head by insisting that if a GE crop has not been > proven harmful by FDA it must, therefore, be safe. > This is what decision-makers and pro-biotech wheat > organizations, supported by biotech dollars, have > touted as the buzz phrase " sound science. " > > When all is said and done, when it comes to science, > I'd rather listen to the National Academy of > Sciences. > > Leake is an Emerado farmer and member of the Dakota > Resources Council. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.