(NZ)Experiments justified for good of man, GM inquiry told

[Guest guest]

> Experiments justified for good of man, GM inquiry told

> 18 OCTOBER 2000

>

> Experimenting on animals was justified by the beneficial ends for humans,

> AgResearch programme leader Phil L'Huillier told the Royal Commission on

> Genetic Modification in Wellington on Tuesday.

> After putting their submission, the Crown research institute's team of

> experts faced a tough cross-examination from Green MP Sue Kedgley, who

> pressed them repeatedly on ethical issues.

> In answers to questions from Ms Kedgley, Dr L'Huillier said that animal

> ethics laws were followed and adhered to in all experimental work.

> He defended experimental work using the so-called " inactive " gene present

> in the strongly muscled Belgian Blue cattle, hoping to produce leaner meat

> in other breeds.

> He also defended inducing heart failure in sheep in work hoped to prevent

> human heart failures.

> " Do you think that's cruel? " Ms Kedgley asked.

> " It's my personal view it's appropriate to study because of the benefits

> it may have when we apply it to human health, " he replied.

> Asked if AgResearch were faced with entrenched Maori spiritual and

> cultural concerns about inserting copies of human genes into cattle, would

> it cease such research, Dr L'Huillier said: " It's a serious issue. I guess

> at the end of the day we would weigh up . . . the potential health

> benefits to the community " .

> To later questioning from Green co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons,

> AgResearch's biosecurity science leader Stephen Goldson conceded that not

> enough was known about " horizontal " gene transfer across plant species.

> " That's why we're cranking up research, " he said.

> AgResearch's submission argued that genetic technology had the potential

> to lift New Zealand's economic performance and quality of life during this

> century.

> Its " vision " was of New Zealand producing new, finely-tuned agricultural

> and horticultural products, new medical and veterinary treatments,

> providing international leadership in plantation forestry, and developing

> crops ameliorating the effects of climate change by producing crops

> resistant to drought, pests while protecting native flora and fauna.

> It was imperative New Zealand became a developer, not just a user of

> imported genetic technologies, it said.

> Should research or development be unduly limited or restricted, there

> would be " serious consequences " , economically - and in the loss to New

> Zealand of science leaders.

> Any severe restrictions, it said, could also violate international

> obligations of agreements including the General Agreement on Tariffs and

> Trade, the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary

> Measures, the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, the Agreement on

> Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, the Convention on

> Biological Diversity, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the

> Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement.

> In an earlier joint submission Carter Holt Harvey and Fletcher Challenge

> Forests said that while the world's native forests declined, world demand

> for forest and paper products continued to increase.

> Improvements through genetics were expected to help meet the demand - at

> the same time strengthening the ability to sustainably manage forests for

> the benefit of future generations.

> Any risk, the submission said, would be easily managed by companies

> through a regulatory system relying on " comprehensive risk assessments " .

> The stance was supported by the New Zealand Forest Industries Council,

> which also emphasised the importance of making New Zealand's industry

> competitive.

>

>

> --