A RISING TIDE AGAINST GM FOODS
The genetic engineering industry would
have us critical Europeans believe that
Americans are happy to gobble down
genetically manipulated (GM) foods. This is
not so. The truth is that American
consumers were never asked if they wanted
the stuff. It was simply and quietly put on
their plates — with the complicity of the
US government and so-called regulatory
authorities.
Now, as people begin to realize what has
been going on, they turn out to be as
worried and disgusted as we Europeans. The
debate is just beginning to take root among
the general public, but more and more
critical voices are being raised. The GM
seed companies have managed to persuade
farmers that biotech was "The Future". Now,
farmers are finding the market for their
new crops quickly disappearing and are
getting cold feet.
The points of concern in the USA are
similar to those in Europe. This is not
surprising: people's concerns when it comes
to their families' health and the
environment are pretty much the same
everywhere. The GM companies' enormous
appetites for the control of world food
supplies are another shared worry.
But on the regulatory side, the
situation is quite different. Whereas
European authorities have fairly
consistently come down on the side of
consumers' rights, the US regulatory Food
and Drug Agency (FDA) has acted simply as
the extended arm of the politically
influential biotech industry with the
silent backing of the Clinton
administration. The FDA has, since 1992,
blankly refused to consider either the
testing or labelling of GM foods and
feeds.
Zero Confidence
The FDA has been sued for not performing
its duty to protect the American public's
health and welfare by some thirty NGOs —
consumer, food, agricultural and
environmental organizations. As a result,
the FDA today is on the brink of losing
what credibility it still enjoys in the
eyes of the American public. In 1998, the
agency tried to include GM and food
irradiation technologies in the
government's definition of organic produce.
They were forced to retreat by more than
300,000 disgruntled people and NGOs. There
is a general willingness in the United
States to listen to industry’s pro-GM
arguments about "America's responsibility
to save the world". But even here they are
meeting resistance. Firstly, the track
record to date regarding increased yields
from GM seed is hardly convincing.
Secondly, many Americans recall the mixed
blessings of the so-called Green Revolution
of the 1960s and 1970s: higher productivity
for some growers (though far from all) at
the price of extensive and costly chemical
inputs (with attendant pollution) and
severely reduced biodiversity. Many have
also learned that technology will not solve
problems that are essentially social and
political.
Charly Hultén,
FoE Sweden
THE MAN WHO SWITCHED HATS
|
|
In 1991, Michael Taylor was a
Monsanto executive. It was he who
formulated the US biotech branch
policy on GM agriculture and foods.
The key objectives were "no testing"
and "no labelling".
Some months later, Michael Taylor
left his position at Monsanto and
went to work for the governmental
regulatory agency, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). There he wrote
the US government's position on GM
foods. The key points were "no
testing" and "no labelling".
Is Michael Taylor still with the
FDA today? No, he's not. But he
wasn't fired. He left of his own free
will to go back to Mama Monsanto, to
a well-paid position as director of
the company's lobby base in
Washington DC.
|
|
As told to Charly Hultén by one of
the Center for Food Safety's lawyers
at a rally outside an FDA hearing in
Oakland, California in December
1999.
|
